Donald Trump’s decisive victory in the U.S. presidential election presents a momentous opportunity for the incoming Republican administration to strengthen its presence across Latin America, particularly in Colombia, its capstone ally in the region. With a clear mandate to return to the White House for a second, non-consecutive term, Trump will no doubt focus on recalibrating U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding Latin America. One of Trump’s biggest challenges will be navigating the complexities of President Gustavo Petro’s administration in Colombia, which, more often than not, is openly critical of the United States’ role in global affairs.
Petro, who has held the presidency since August 2022, has taken steps that seem to contradict the priorities of U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding Israel’s role in the Middle East and the “War on Drugs.” As Americans headed to the polls on Tuesday, Petro remained notably silent on social media, choosing not to comment on the historic election. By Wednesday morning, as Trump’s victory was declared, Petro still had not issued a formal statement congratulating the new president. His early silence in the face of Trump’s return to power stands in stark contrast to the swift congratulations issued by other Latin American leaders, particularly those aligned with right-wing or center-right politics.
Argentina’s President Javier Milei, for example, expressed his congratulations for Trump’s “formidable electoral victory” and pledged support for the Republican candidate’s agenda. Milei’s statement echoed similar messages from right-wing Latin American leaders such as El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele, Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro, and even center-right Uruguay’s President Luis Lacalle Pou. These leaders wasted no time publicly acknowledging Trump’s win and sending him messages of solidarity and backing.
Petro did finally acknowledge Trump’s victory in a social media post on Elon Musk’s “X” in which he states: “The American people have spoken and they are respected. Congratulations to Trump on his victory. The North/South dialogue is still in force and the reality of climate collapse will make it revolve around its solution.” Petro then goes on to affirm that “the only way to seal the borders is with the prosperity of the peoples of the south and the end of the blockades.” Petro’s reference to “blockades” shows his ideological affinity to Cuba and rejection of sanctions on Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro. “The progressive possibility in the US could not applaud the genocide in Gaza,” he concludes.
Petro’s taking on Gaza and U.S sanctions against the dictatorships in Cuba and Venezuela in one social media post reveals his skewed stance with the U.S. and one that could face significant challenges in the coming years. Colombia’s Foreign Ministry – Cancillería – is expected to make a statement on Wednesday congratulating the American people on their peaceful exercise of democracy.
Petro’s divisive rhetoric regarding Israel has deepened tensions between Washington and Bogotá. The Colombian president then took unprecedented steps to sever diplomatic ties with Israel, accusing the country of committing genocide in Gaza. Petro’s stance was made clear during a May 1st Labor Day rally when he declared, “Tomorrow, diplomatic relations with the State of Israel will be severed…for having a genocidal president.” His criticism is always aimed directly at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a close ally of Trump. Petro’s vitriolic, anti-Israel rhetoric led to a halt in security exports to Colombia.
In response to Petro’s actions, Israel’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Israel Katz, called the Colombian president “antisemitic and full of hatred.” This diplomatic breakdown only serves to exacerbate the already fragile relationship between Colombia and the U.S., where Israel remains its “iron-clad” ally. Under a Trump administration, the severing of ties with Israel will put Petro on the receiving end of sharp criticism, especially from conservative heavyweights in Washington who view Israel as an essential partner for global security, including Latin America.
Another major issue that will undoubtedly come under scrutiny is Petro’s handling of Colombia’s drug policy. Colombia remains the largest source of cocaine entering the United States, and its drug trade has long been a key concern for Washington. Under Petro’s watch, however, the approach to coca eradication has shifted significantly. Rather than pursuing aggressive eradication policies, Petro has emphasized alternative development strategies and a more hands-off approach to coca cultivation. This shift in strategy could put Colombia at odds with Trump’s zero-tolerance narcotics agenda and the U.S’s commitment to invest billions of dollars in drug eradication programs under initiatives like the Clinton-era Plan Colombia.
The U.S. remains the largest donor of foreign aid to Colombia, having spent nearly US$14 billion since 1999 to fight drug trafficking. However, as U.S. foreign policy priorities shift – particularly with the ongoing crises in Ukraine and the Middle East – pressure will likely mount on Petro to show results in the war on drugs. Republican lawmakers, such as Florida Senators Marco Rubio and Rick Scott, have made clear their frustration with Petro’s ideological stance on narcotics and appeasement of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro. The Republican-controlled House, in a rebuke to both Petro and the Biden administration, voted in June to slash U.S. aid to Colombia by 50% – a historic cut. This aid could see further reductions unless Petro openly recognizes Edmundo González as the legitimate President of Venezuela and severs all ties with the current regime.
Petro’s handling of coca eradication and his strained relationship with Israel are only two of the key challenges that will define his interactions with Trump’s government. But perhaps more significantly, Petro’s past affiliation with the M-19 guerrilla group – an organization widely regarded by Colombians as a terrorist group – will also face scrutiny in a Washington with a new security agenda. As Petro brazenly vindicates the M-19 and peddles a revisionist narrative to whitewash the organization’s criminal past, under a Republican-led U.S. government, Petro’s involvement in a once-illegal armed group could make him a persona-non-grata in the White House. A White House influenced on Latin American policy by anti-Latin American leftists Milei, Bukele and Elon Musk.
The question for the long term is whether Petro’s presidency will mark a pivot away from close U.S.-Colombian relations. With Trump back in power, Colombia’s relationship with the U.S. could become even more complicated. The Republican Party’s growing influence in the Senate and in foreign policy circles, with key figures like Rubio and Scott leading the charge, suggests that Colombia may be required to choose between continuing to distance itself from Washington or recalibrating its policies to align more closely with U.S. interests.
The Republican victory also breathes new momentum for centrist and right-wing politicians in Colombia to consolidate their position ahead of the 2026 presidential elections. In this shifting political landscape, Petro’s left-wing agenda faces mounting pressure, with the possibility that his policies will be increasingly challenged by a resurgent political opposition. As the Trump administration takes shape, it is clear that Petro’s presidency will be tested like never before. The question remains whether the Colombian leader will find a way to balance his leftist agenda with the realities of U.S. power and influence in the region. For Petro, this could either revitalize U.S.-Colombia relations or mark the beginning of the endgame of his embattled presidency.
