On September 27, 2025, the diplomatic relationship between the United States and Colombia suffered a dramatic blow as the U.S. State Department announced it would revoke the visa of Colombian President Gustavo Petro. The move, which comes on the heels of a series of escalating disputes, marks one of the lowest points in recent memory for ties between the two countries—historically close allies, now at odds over issues ranging from drug policy to foreign conflict and public protest.
The spark for the visa cancellation was Petro’s highly publicized appearance at pro-Palestinian protests in New York City. According to footage released by the Colombian presidential office and widely reported by outlets including Bloomberg and RBC-Ukraine, Petro addressed a large crowd through a megaphone, making an impassioned plea in Spanish that was then translated for the crowd: “That is why, from here in New York, I ask all soldiers in the United States army not to point their rifles at humanity. Disobey Trump’s order! Obey the order of humanity!”
The U.S. State Department, in a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), did not mince words: “We will revoke Petro’s visa due to his reckless and incendiary actions.” The department accused Petro of inciting violence and attempting to provoke disobedience among U.S. soldiers, specifically referencing his call for American servicemen to ignore the orders of President Donald Trump. “Earlier today, Colombian president @petrogustavo stood on a NYC street and urged US soldiers to disobey orders and incite violence,” the State Department wrote.
Petro’s administration has so far refrained from issuing an official comment on the visa revocation. Colombian media reported that Petro was already en route back to Bogotá from New York on the night of the announcement, having completed his visit for the United Nations General Assembly.
The incident is the latest in a string of confrontations between the Petro government and the Trump administration. Just weeks prior, President Trump “decertified” Colombia as a partner in the U.S.-led fight against drug trafficking, placing the country in the same category as Venezuela, Bolivia, Afghanistan, and Myanmar. This move was particularly stinging for Colombia, which has long been a cornerstone of U.S. anti-narcotics strategy in Latin America.
The timing of the decertification is notable, coming as Colombia faces the largest surge in cocaine production in its history. According to multiple reports, including those from Bloomberg, Colombia now accounts for the majority of global cocaine production. The Trump administration has justified its hardline stance by pointing to this unprecedented boom, while Petro has countered with arguments about the failure of the war on drugs and the need for new approaches.
During his speech at the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2025, Petro did not hold back in his criticism of the United States. He denounced the war on drugs as a failed policy, called for a criminal inquiry into recent U.S. military strikes on alleged drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean, and condemned American support for Israel’s military actions in Palestine. Petro claimed that more than a dozen unarmed “poor young people” had died in the U.S. strikes, some of whom he suspected were Colombian, a charge Washington denies, insisting the operations were legitimate anti-drug efforts off the coast of Venezuela.
Petro’s outspoken positions have not been limited to U.S. policy. He has emerged as one of the harshest critics of Israel’s actions in Palestine among world leaders. Petro broke diplomatic relations with Israel, accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “genocide,” and imposed a ban on Colombian exports to Israel. In a move that drew further ire from Washington and Tel Aviv, Petro welcomed recent decisions by the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Portugal, and France to recognize the independence of the State of Palestine. Netanyahu, for his part, condemned these recognitions, claiming they sent the message that “murdering Jews pays off.”
The fallout from these actions has not gone unnoticed by political analysts and observers. Mario Carvajal, a political analyst at the consulting firm IDDEA, told Bloomberg, “Petro’s conduct has steered Colombia towards international isolation, placing at serious risk its relationship with a strategic ally.” Carvajal added that the president appears more interested in confrontation and anti-system rhetoric than in the long-term interests of the Colombian state. This sentiment is echoed by many in Colombia’s political and business communities, who worry that the country’s international standing and economic prospects are being compromised.
Indeed, the stakes are high for Colombia, a nation historically dependent on its alliance with the U.S. for security, economic assistance, and diplomatic support. The current rift comes as Colombia prepares for presidential elections in 2026, with many investors and observers predicting a shift to the right and a return to more market-friendly policies. The leftist Petro, who made history as Colombia’s first president from the political left, now faces mounting pressure both at home and abroad.
The diplomatic drama has also spilled over into domestic Colombian politics. Interior Minister Armando Benedetti took to social media to criticize the U.S. decision, suggesting that if any visa should have been revoked, it should have been Netanyahu’s rather than Petro’s. “But since the empire protects him, it’s taking it out on the only president who was capable enough to tell him the truth to his face,” Benedetti wrote.
Meanwhile, the broader international context is shifting rapidly. The recognition of Palestine by several major Western countries has added fuel to the fire of global debate over the Israel-Palestine conflict, with Petro positioning himself as a champion of the Palestinian cause. His actions have won him praise among some left-leaning and anti-imperialist circles but have further alienated Colombia from its traditional allies.
As the dust settles from this week’s events, the path forward for U.S.-Colombian relations remains uncertain. The mutual trust built over decades of cooperation on security and trade is now in jeopardy, and the immediate prospects for reconciliation appear dim. For Petro, the gamble of international confrontation may yield political dividends among his base, but the long-term consequences for Colombia’s global standing are far less clear.
In a world where alliances are constantly shifting and the stakes of international diplomacy have rarely been higher, Colombia’s sudden isolation serves as a stark reminder of how quickly fortunes can change on the global stage.
