The diplomatic crisis between Colombia and the United States takes a new and worrying turn. Trump’s announcement of the withdrawal of financial aid goes against his own objectives in Colombia, experts say.
By Cristina Papaleo
Berlin, October 22 (DeutscheWelle).- Last Sunday the 19th, the American president, Donald Trumpannounced that his Government would end financial aid to Colombiaaccusing President from that South American country, Gustavo Petroof being a “drug trafficking leader” and of “promoting” drug production.
Petrofor his part, who had already redoubled his criticism against Trump since he ordered a military deployment in the Caribbeanwith the attack on boats that they allegedly transported drugsdenied all accusations and described the President of United States (EU) of “rude and ignorant with Colombia“.
Although Trump’s economic advisor, Kevin Hassett, stated on Monday that Washington does not plan to announce an increase in tariffs on that country, at least for the moment, the Petro Government denounced a “threat” of “US invasion” and called its Ambassador in Washington for consultations.
If Trump’s threats to withdraw financial support come true, “that would be a very hard blow for Colombia, especially in the cooperation between the security forces of both countries,” Elizabeth Dickinson, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group (ICG) for Colombia and the Andean region, told DW. And he highlights that “this is a relationship of more than three decades of collaboration between the security forces in the fight against organized crime, both police and military, between the intelligence services and at the judicial level.”
The FTA is suspended de facto and by unilateral decision of the US government. By imposing 10% tariffs, the NAFTA treaty was already violated and the old tariff preferences that made Colombia under US control became null and void. They are broken…
— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) October 20, 2025
Viviana García Pinzón, a security expert and researcher at the Arnold Bergstraesser Institute (ABI), associated with the University of Freiburg, agrees with her, highlighting that, with the US being Colombia’s most important trading partner, “this dependence on the United States in economic terms also involves security, humanitarian aid and development,” she told DW.
In addition to “sending a negative signal about the bilateral relationship, this would affect essential programs of eradication, rural development and strengthening of justice. The loss of these resources could slow down development projects and aggravate economic and diplomatic uncertainty,” economist Luis Fernando Mejía, executive director of the Center for Economic and Social Research FEDESARROLLO, in Bogotá, told DW.
In September, the Trump Administration removed Colombia from the list of countries fighting drug trafficking. After this decertification, it now announces the withdrawal of financial aid, and even the possibility of new tariffs. However, “it is not so much about the money, because with the suspension of USAID there is a 70 percent reduction in the budget projected for 2026, but also about military programs and assistance in other fields that interest the United States much more than Colombia,” said Camilo González Posso, president of Indepaz, in an interview with DW.
Dispute between Colombia and the US, fertile ground for organized crime
“Colombia is having very tense relations with the United States and Israel, its two main weapons suppliers and security allies,” Víctor Mijares, a political scientist at the University of Los Andes, in Colombia, told DW. That would affect the operation of military equipment and, furthermore, “at a time where Colombia is experiencing not only one internal conflict, but many at the same time, in a context of pre-conflict between the United States and Venezuela, which will be felt above all on the border, but also in the rest of Colombia. The situation is quite delicate,” he warned. “This puts the business community, civil society and the Colombian economy under a lot of pressure,” he said.
Canceling financial support “would be an own goal for the United States, because it would be very difficult, or perhaps impossible, for it to achieve its objectives in the region” in the fight against drug trafficking and organized crime, stressed Elizabeth Dickinson, of the ICG.
“If carried out, the withdrawal of support would weaken the State’s ability to maintain a presence in the territories most affected by the conflict and drug trafficking. This would generate power vacuums that could be exploited by criminal groups, affecting security and the implementation of peace agreements. Ultimately, it would benefit organized crime by reducing the operational capacity of the State to confront it,” said Luis Fernando Mejía, of FEDESARROLLO.
Viviana García Pinzón also warns of this: “Whichever way you look at it, these decisions by the United States would strengthen that fertile ground for organized crime, for illegal economies and war economies. The reduction of this aid would contribute to the deterioration of this situation and exacerbate the conditions of violence and insecurity in the country,” she stressed.
Diplomatic tension is used for politics
“After four years in which there was no type of achievement to highlight, where total peace did not reach any port, where the economy was maintained, but there were no major investment projects, where the energy sector is so hit, there is an interest from Petro to convert this situation of tension, and being practically one step away from a diplomatic break with the United States, into content for its electoral campaign,” said Víctor Mijares.
“The United States has a great interest in counteracting China’s growing influence in the region, and that is why it is making these proposals. There is an intention to heat up the atmosphere and create the dilemma that, if you vote for Petro, you are against the United States. And that is absolutely false,” González Posso contrasted. “By using the language they use, both Rubio and Trump are interfering in the elections,” said the Indepaz expert, who insists that the only solution is through diplomatic means, and warns that Trump’s actions could be “counterproductive”, making Colombia lean more towards Europe, China, and even the BRICS.
“Both leaders, with their positions, try to influence the electoral result,” agreed Elizabeth Dickinson, of the ICG. “Trump has been very clear in his preference for the right to win in Colombia,” he warned.
Regarding Petro’s actions regarding Trump’s statements, “Petro has not been strategic in his management of relations with the United States led by Trump, which rejects many of the institutions and formal mechanisms of conducting foreign policy.” Interesting, in that context, is to observe the handling of the relationship by the President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, she points out: “Sheinbaum has been a little smarter in her way of navigating a very complex context, with a rather difficult and challenging leader like Trump,” said García Pinzón.
“Colombian citizens are very polarized,” said Víctor Mijares. “The right is closer to Trump’s position. But since these are two presidents who are very explosive and irresponsible in their communication, through social networks, I don’t think we can think of a homogeneous reaction, neither from the pre-candidates, nor from the Colombian population,” he concluded.
The post Trump shoots himself in the foot if he withdraws aid to Colombia appeared first on Veritas News.
