From Ally to Adversary: Petro Tests U.S.–Colombia Ties

Isabella Fernanda Burgos

Colombian President Gustavo Petro at the United Nations General Assembly denounces President Trump 

For decades, Colombia stood as one of the U.S.’s most important allies in Latin America. Today, this relationship is at risk, as President Gustavo Petro reshapes Colombia’s relationship with Washington. After the two leaders clashed, it marked a turning point, exposing the fragility of the relationship. From migration disputes to visa revocations and political retaliation, the partnership seems shakier than ever before.  

The scale of the U.S.’ support speaks for itself: In 2023 alone, $743 million in aid was directed to Colombia, a clear demonstration of Washington’s investments in the stability and development of the country. The two countries, once close partners, have worked on countless efforts such as Plan Colombia and the war on drugs. This said, the U.S. has always been a key political and economic ally for Colombia; however, recent action by Petro may jeopardize this for good. 

Tensions began to build early this year once President Donald Trump returned to Washington. Petro objected to Trump’s deportation flights, accusing him of treating Colombians like criminals, denouncing the inhuman treatment of deportees. In response, the US threatened to impose visa sanctions, tariffs, and visa restrictions as a way of pressuring Colombia into complying with the US’s actions. In that moment, it felt like it might be the breaking point, yet Petro retracted, and a compromise was made. But this standoff, although not defining, marked the start of recurring, and the use of visas and sanctions as political weapons by the US.  

Not long after, on September 26, Petro joined a pro-Palestine demonstration in the streets of New York and urged soldiers to disobey their president's commands, condemning the US’s actions in Gaza. Not only was this a bold diplomatic move, but it also escalated. Then, during the UN General Assembly, he spoke against the current US administration, calling for President Trump to be held accountable for his actions. The US responded by revoking President Gustavo Petro’s visa. By doing so, the United States not only crossed diplomatic lines but also sent a message to Colombia and the world: criticizing Washington comes at a cost. 

Despite the U.S.’s controversial response, Colombia did not stand idly by. Playing into symbolism and defiance, Petro has his officials “self-revoked” their US visa; yet another gesture protesting pressure from the Trump Administration and a demonstration that Colombia will not be coerced by the superpower. This back-and-forth has eroded their stability and made the world question the future of their longtime alliance. The White House recently said they were committed to “close cooperation on a range of shared priorities, including regional security and stability”, even after Petro’s statements on X, where he claimed that a boat the US struck during military operations in Venezuela was “Colombian with Colombian citizens inside”. The White House quickly dismissed his remarks, calling the allegations “reprehensible and baseless”.  

This political ping-pong poses the question of how this tension affects each country. Colombians have been impacted by US visa revocations, delays, and even consular freezes that could affect the Latin American country's stability and international relations. The US, on the other hand, risks something completely different, as the loss of a long-standing ally leaves room for other powers – like China – to swoop in. In recent months, Colombia has strengthened its ties with Beijing through new infrastructure and energy projects, with conversations of expanding trade agreements following. Petro has also begun rebuilding diplomatic relationships with Venezuela, with which the US is greatly at odds. 

These moves from Colombia seem risky and inconsistent with its foreign policy in the past. But reality is much more complex under Petro, with Colombian foreign policy having shifted towards diversifying its alliances, stepping aside from its reliance on Washington. Both countries must now decide whether they will adapt to this new reality or let years of collaboration unravel.  

Washington risks its most strategic foothold in Latin America, while Colombia risks isolating itself from the very partnership that has historically strengthened its democracy and economy. If pride and politics continue to outweigh diplomacy, both stand to lose more than just influence – they risk dismantling a partnership that once stood as an example of US-Latin America Cooperation.