As tensions simmer across the Caribbean and northern South America, a flurry of military maneuvers, pointed political rhetoric, and mutual accusations have thrust the region into the international spotlight. The past week saw an escalation in confrontational language and military posturing between the United States, Colombia, and Venezuela, raising concerns about sovereignty, foreign intervention, and the specter of conflict in a region already fraught with instability.
On October 25, 2025, dissident members of Colombia’s now-defunct FARC guerilla group issued a direct warning to the United States, vowing to resist any violations of Colombian sovereignty. The statement came in response to President Donald Trump’s threat to launch ground operations in Latin American countries, a move that has sparked widespread alarm among regional leaders and armed groups alike.
“We are used to fighting and combating whoever we must. We have always been staunch opponents of the American empire,” declared the group’s Central General Staff (EMC) in a message shared with journalists, as reported by AFP. “We will not allow military interventions and violations of Colombian sovereignty.” The EMC, a splinter faction of the original left-wing FARC insurgency, now controls significant cocaine production zones, particularly in Catatumbo near the Venezuelan border. Their leader, Ivan Mordisco, is widely regarded as Colombia’s most wanted criminal, with President Gustavo Petro likening him to the infamous drug lord Pablo Escobar.
Colombia remains the world’s largest producer of cocaine, and the EMC’s grip on key production areas has made the group a formidable presence. The recent rhetoric from Washington has only hardened their resolve. The United States, under Trump’s direction, has ramped up its military footprint in the region, conducting at least ten airstrikes on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. According to U.S. officials, these strikes targeted individuals allegedly involved in drug trafficking. However, critics, including Colombian officials and local observers, have condemned the attacks as extrajudicial executions, arguing that the U.S. has provided no concrete evidence linking the victims to criminal activity.
President Trump’s stance toward Colombia has been nothing short of combative. He has publicly accused President Gustavo Petro of being a “drug-trafficking leader” and imposed financial sanctions on the left-leaning Colombian leader. In a particularly pointed ultimatum, Trump urged Petro to “close” Colombia’s coca fields, warning, “or the United States will close them up for him, and it won’t be done nicely.” Petro, for his part, has been unequivocal in his response. On October 23, he stated that any ground aggression by the U.S. would constitute “an invasion and a breach of national sovereignty.”
The tension isn’t confined to Colombia. Just across the border, Venezuela has been grappling with its own share of U.S.-related pressures. On October 26, the Venezuelan government issued a scathing statement, accusing Trinidad and Tobago of military provocation in coordination with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The spark? Joint military exercises between the United States and Trinidad and Tobago, held in the Caribbean at a time when regional nerves are already frayed.
Venezuela’s Executive Vice President, Delcy Rodríguez, took to her Telegram channel to denounce the exercises. “We are not intimidated by military exercises or war cries. The Bolivarian National Armed Forces will remain alert and mobilized in perfect Popular-Military-Police unity in the face of this extremely serious provocation. Our Republic, heir to Bolívar and Chávez, will always defend its sovereignty, its territorial integrity, and its right to live in peace against foreign enemies and their vassals,” she wrote. The Venezuelan government also claimed to have captured a group of mercenaries allegedly linked to the American intelligence agency, who, according to officials, were plotting a false flag operation in the region.
Meanwhile, a U.S. warship docked in the capital of Trinidad and Tobago on October 26, a move interpreted by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro as an attempt by the U.S. government to “invent a new eternal war” against his country. Trump has accused Maduro of heading an organized crime gang, though he has yet to provide any evidence to support this charge. For his part, Maduro has framed the arrival of the U.S. warship as a direct threat to Venezuela’s peace and sovereignty.
The U.S. Embassy’s charge d’affaires in Trinidad and Tobago, Jenifer Neidhart de Ortiz, sought to downplay the confrontational narrative, emphasizing that the joint exercises are designed to “address shared threats like transnational crime and build resilience through training, humanitarian missions, and security efforts.” She confirmed that the warship would remain in Trinidad until October 30, 2025, for training purposes.
Behind the public statements and military deployments, the region’s leaders are treading a precarious path. Colombia’s President Petro, under fire from Washington and facing threats from both armed dissidents and foreign actors, has sought to assert his country’s autonomy while avoiding outright confrontation. His warning against U.S. ground operations reflects deep-seated concerns about the legacy of foreign intervention in Colombia—a country still healing from decades of internal conflict, much of it fueled by outside interests and the global drug trade.
Venezuela, for its part, has long positioned itself as a bulwark against U.S. influence in Latin America. The government’s invocation of Bolívar and Chávez is more than rhetorical flourish; it is a deliberate effort to rally nationalist sentiment at a time when economic hardship and political isolation have left the country vulnerable. The claim of capturing CIA-linked mercenaries adds another layer of intrigue (and skepticism) to an already complex situation, though details remain scant.
For the United States, the stated goal of combating transnational crime and drug trafficking is complicated by the optics of military intervention and the charged political environment. The airstrikes in Colombia and the naval exercises in the Caribbean may be intended as signals of resolve, but they risk being interpreted as provocations—fuel for the very anti-American sentiment that insurgent groups and governments like Venezuela’s thrive on.
What happens next is anyone’s guess. The region has seen its share of saber-rattling and diplomatic crises, but the convergence of armed dissident warnings, presidential ultimatums, and warships on the horizon feels particularly combustible. The stakes are high, not just for the governments involved but for millions of ordinary people living in the shadow of these geopolitical games.
As the warship remains docked in Trinidad and regional leaders trade barbs, the world watches closely. The coming days will reveal whether this latest round of threats and counterthreats will subside into uneasy calm—or spiral into something far more dangerous.
