President Donald Trump sent a direct message to the “Great Farmers of the United States,” announcing that as of April 2, 2025, tariffs would be placed on “external” agricultural products. He urged farmers to “get ready” and “have fun” producing these goods.
Trump’s declaration, posted on his Truth Social platform, came just hours before the U.S. imposed hefty tariffs on Canada and Mexico. These tariffs on two of the U.S.’s largest trading partners now threaten to trigger an unprecedented trade war within North America—one that could drive up the cost of living for millions in the United States and across its northern and southern borders.
This momentous decision by the incoming administration to implement punitive measures against Canada and Mexico could soon be followed by 25% tariffs on Colombian-grown products, according to President Trump. These would include the country’s leading agricultural exports: coffee, bananas, avocados, cacao, flowers, and palm oil.
But the consequences of such a trade war could extend far beyond the U.S. and Canada. For Colombia, which relies heavily on its agricultural exports to the U.S. market, the tariffs would have a devastating impact on tens of thousands of workers, particularly women who are integral to the country’s agricultural sector.
In Colombia, women represent a significant portion of the workforce in the flower, coffee, and banana industries, some of the largest sectors in the country’s economy. The flower industry alone accounts for over 50% of Colombia’s flower exports, the vast majority of which are shipped to the United States. These women, often from rural communities, are responsible for the labor-intensive work of harvesting and preparing crops for export.
A 25% tariff on Colombian agricultural products would put their livelihoods at risk, threatening the jobs of tens of thousands of women who depend on the U.S. market. For many of them, the work in agriculture represents not only an income but also an opportunity for empowerment and financial independence in a country where gender inequality remains a persistent challenge.
The tariffs would likely result in increased production costs for Colombian farmers, making their products more expensive and less competitive in the U.S. market. The immediate effect would be a slowdown in exports, followed by a potential loss of jobs for women workers, as companies may reduce their workforce or even shut down operations to cope with the financial burden.
In the flower industry, for example, women often work long hours in the high-altitude greenhouses of Bogotá, cultivating roses, carnations, and other flowers that adorn homes and events across the U.S. On average, these women earn the monthly minumum wage (U.S$330), but their income must also support entire families, making their work vital to the survival of rural communities.
The impact of these tariffs would be felt not only by individual workers but by entire communities in Colombia, where agriculture remains the backbone of the economy. A trade war with the U.S., especially one involving tariffs on consumer exports, could also impact the country’s post-conflict, as many regions heavily depend on legal agricultural exports to substitute the coca harvest. The recent defunding of USAID by Trump also puts at risk social development programmes and crop substitution efforts.
With the Colombian peso already under pressure, the looming tariffs could exacerbate the currency’s volatility, leading to a rapid devaluation against the U.S. dollar. As the peso weakens, the cost of imports would rise, further stressing an economy already grappling with inflation and a security crisis. The devaluation could also make it more difficult for Colombian exporters to compete in global markets, potentially forcing many businesses to scale back operations at home, or look for alternative markets beyond the U.S.
This economic strain could open the door for other global powers, notably China, to expand their influence in the region. China has been increasingly active in Latin America, offering trade deals and investments to countries like Colombia in exchange for access to their raw materials and agricultural products. Should the U.S. shut the door on Colombian exports, China could step in to fill the void, strengthening its economic and political ties to the region at a time when Colombia is seeking new trade partners.
In fact, the pressure on Colombia’s economy and the growing need for alternative markets could lead the country to consider deeper integration into China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which seeks to expand China’s global economic footprint. The BRI could offer new trade opportunities for Colombian products, but it would also align Colombia closer to China’s strategic interests, potentially shifting the balance of power in the region and complicating Colombia’s relations with the U.S.
While U.S. consumers might face higher prices for imported goods, the brunt of the financial burden would fall on the workers who have no control over the tariffs. Women farmers, harvesters, and laborers, who make up a large part of Colombia’s informal agricultural workforce, could be left to bear the weight of a trade war they had no hand in starting.
As the U.S. and Colombia prepare for these potentially seismic shifts in trade policy, the question remains: who will bear the real cost of a trade war, and can the women who fuel Colombia’s agricultural industry continue to thrive, or will they be left in the wake of a devalued currency and at the mercy of illegal armed groups? And with China waiting in the wings, how will the leftist government of President Petro navigate relations, away from social media, with Trump?
