Colombia, long at the epicenter of the global cocaine trade, finds itself at a crossroads as it grapples with the spiraling consequences of drug trafficking and seeks to rewrite the rules of international drug policy. In a year marked by both record-breaking coca cultivation and political turbulence, the nation’s struggle has captured the world’s attention—raising urgent questions about the future of drug control, the balance of power with the United States, and the prospects for meaningful reform.
According to the 2025 United Nations Drug Report, Colombia remains the world’s top producer of coca—the raw material for cocaine—supplying a staggering 67.3% of the global crop. The numbers are sobering: the area planted with coca leaf in Colombia jumped from 230,000 hectares in 2022 to 253,000 hectares in 2023. This represents a 266% surge in cultivation since 2014, as reported by the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime. The country’s dominance in the cocaine market is not just a statistic—it is a force reshaping its economy, society, and international standing.
Economist Daniel Mejía’s forthcoming study, as cited by El País, puts the financial scale of the trade in stark relief: cocaine trafficking generates an average annual revenue of $15.3 billion in Colombia, equivalent to 4.2% of the national GDP. That’s on par with the entire construction sector—a legal pillar of the economy. Yet, as Mejía notes, “These are incomes that do not generate productive capacity, like those generated by coffee or the textile industry. They do not create formal jobs, pay taxes, or contribute to the social safety net. On the contrary, they generate huge costs in security, public health, and infrastructure delays.”
The reality on the ground is even grimmer. Despite decades of control policies—ranging from aerial spraying and manual eradication to prohibition, seizures, and extradition of drug lords—coca cultivation and cocaine production have not only persisted but have expanded unchecked, year after year. The COVID-19 pandemic may have temporarily slowed global trade, but the drug business rebounded with renewed vigor. “The results are based on the measurement of cocaine that manages to leave the country. And they are also supported by the prices that organized criminal groups obtain in the Pacific, the border with Ecuador, and the Caribbean,” Mejía explains.
This illicit wealth, however, is not distributed evenly. Rural sectors involved in coca cultivation capture only about 8% of the income from drug trafficking, leaving a yawning gap between the hardship of coca-growing communities and the prosperity enjoyed by those higher up the chain. The scent of money laundering lingers, especially in mid-sized cities where, as Mejía observes, “one already sees consumption patterns, with luxury vehicles and restaurants, among people with a lot of money and little education.”
The social and security costs are immense. Over the past five years, the presence of criminal gangs like the powerful Gulf Clan has expanded by 82%, while the National Liberation Army (ELN) and dissidents of the defunct Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have increased their footprint by 65% and 141%, respectively. These groups have exploited military withdrawals to tighten their grip on various municipalities, unleashing a wave of extortion, kidnappings, and armed actions that have left civilian populations reeling.
Against this backdrop, President Gustavo Petro’s administration has attempted to chart a new course. Initially, Petro, Colombia’s first avowedly leftist president, advocated a harm reduction approach, emphasizing public health over militarized eradication. His government pushed for progressive reforms abroad, calling for the global legalization of cocaine, removal of the coca leaf from the U.N. narcotics list, and the inclusion of harm reduction measures—like supervised consumption rooms—into international policy debates.
Colombia’s efforts reached a milestone in March 2025, when, during the 68th session of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs in Vienna, a landmark resolution was adopted to review the global drug policy regime. The resolution, introduced by Colombia and backed by 30 member states, established a panel of 19 independent experts tasked with evaluating and recommending changes to the international system. World leaders are set to discuss these recommendations starting in 2026, raising hopes for a potential turning point in how the world confronts illicit drugs.
Yet, the road to reform is anything but smooth. The United States, a key trade partner and aid donor, dealt a significant blow by decertifying Colombia as a drug control partner for the first time in nearly 30 years. U.S. President Donald Trump bluntly stated that Colombia is “failing demonstrably” in its counternarcotics efforts, marking a low point in bilateral relations. While U.S. assistance will continue for now, the move weakens Colombia’s credibility on the international stage and complicates Petro’s reform agenda.
Domestically, Petro’s leadership has faced mounting challenges and criticism. Allegations regarding his own drug use, controversial remarks equating cocaine to whiskey, and a shifting policy stance have all fueled skepticism. Until recently, Petro prioritized targeting drug traffickers through cocaine seizures and negotiations with criminal groups under his “Total Peace” strategy. But mounting pressure—including the kidnapping of 45 soldiers in the coca-producing Cauca department—pushed his administration to revert to traditional methods like crop substitution (offering farmers around $300 per month to replace coca with alternative crops) and even to contemplate resuming aerial spraying with glyphosate, despite a Constitutional Court ban due to health and environmental concerns.
These policy oscillations reflect Colombia’s complex position—caught between progressive aspirations and the hard realities of international and domestic politics. Ana María Rueda, a drug policy expert at Fundación Ideas para la Paz, put it bluntly: “If you’re looking for consistency in Petro’s drug policy, you won’t find it.” The United States, for its part, remains steadfast in its demand for eradication, with little appetite for progressive reforms.
Despite these headwinds, Colombia has emerged as a leading voice in the global debate. Former presidents César Gaviria and Juan Manuel Santos, both now members of the Global Commission on Drug Policy, have advocated for a shift toward regulation and social investment. Santos reflected on his own evolution: “I learned from experience to change my stance from hard line to a more pragmatic stance on drugs. This global war on drugs, and Colombia’s war on drugs, is not working.” He argued that “the market be regulated to strip the cartels of their profits, and that the state uses those resources to implement social policies and prevention policies instead.”
Internationally, Colombia’s push for reform has found some traction. In April 2025, Bogotá hosted the Harm Reduction International Conference, only the second time the event has been held in Latin America. The U.N. high commissioner for human rights, Volker Türk, has repeatedly asserted that the War on Drugs has done more harm than good, while the U.N. Development Program recently highlighted the negative impact of punitive drug policies on development.
Still, the path ahead is fraught with uncertainty. The U.N. panel’s recommendations, to be discussed starting in 2026, could mark an inflection point—but as Laura Gil, Colombia’s former ambassador to Austria and the U.N., cautioned, “We cannot do it alone.” With right-leaning candidates gaining ground at home and no guarantee of international consensus, the fate of Colombia’s bold experiment remains in flux. As Rueda warned, progressive leadership “comes and goes,” and a conservative turn could unravel recent gains.
Colombia’s struggle, then, is not just about the coca fields or the billions flowing through illicit channels. It is about the country’s fight for sovereignty, dignity, and a new vision for a problem that has long defied easy answers. The world is watching closely to see if this time, something truly different can emerge from the turmoil.