It was a frustrating night for the roughly 6,000 supporters gathered in Bogotá’s Plaza de Bolívar to hear President Gustavo Petro deliver what many expected to be a fiery, anti-imperialist address.

After waiting for hours in cold, rainy conditions, demonstrators waved placards reading “Yankee Go Home,” “Out Trump,” and “Respect Colombia,” anticipating a confrontational speech aimed squarely at U.S. President Donald Trump following weeks of diplomatic tension.

Instead, when Petro finally took the stage, the tone of the rally shifted abruptly.

The Colombian president opened by announcing that he would not deliver his prepared speech. Rather than launching into the expected denunciation of Washington, Petro told the crowd that his delay was due to a lengthy phone call with Trump — a revelation that visibly stunned the audience.

As Petro spoke about the conversation, the plaza fell largely silent. Each mention of Trump appeared to drain the rally of its energy, replacing chants and applause with uneasy quiet. What had been billed as a mass show of resistance against U.S. pressure became an unexpected account of diplomatic rapprochement.

According to Petro, the call — conducted with simultaneous translation — lasted close to an hour and marked the first direct conversation between the two leaders since Trump’s return to office. “Today I came with one speech, and I have to give another,” Petro told supporters. “The first one was quite hard.”

A source at the presidential palace told El Colombiano that Petro appeared relaxed during the exchange, smiling several times as he spoke with Trump. A photograph of the moment, later shared by Petro, showed him seated at his desk mid-conversation.

Petro said the discussion focused primarily on drug trafficking, Venezuela and other bilateral disagreements. He acknowledged that significant differences remain but argued that dialogue was preferable to confrontation.

“I know that if anyone were to harm me — in any way — what would happen, given Colombia’s history and the level of support we have reached, is that the Colombian people would enter into conflict,” Petro said during the rally. “If they touch Petro, they touch Colombia.”

The remarks were a response to Trump’s recent comments suggesting that a military operation against Colombia, similar to the one carried out in Venezuela, “sounds good.” Petro, however, struck a notably more conciliatory tone on Wednesday, saying Trump “is not foolish,” even if he disagreed with him.

In a further surprise to supporters, Petro stated publicly that Nicolás Maduro was not his ally, claiming the Venezuelan leader had previously distanced him from Hugo Chávez by preventing him from attending Chávez’s funeral.

Shortly after the call, Trump issued a statement on his Truth Social platform confirming the conversation and signalling a thaw in relations.

“It was a Great Honor to speak with the President of Colombia, Gustavo Petro, who called to explain the situation of drugs and other disagreements that we have had,” Trump wrote. “I appreciated his call and tone, and look forward to meeting him in the near future.”

Trump added that Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Colombia’s foreign minister were already making arrangements for a meeting at the White House in Washington.

Petro confirmed that further discussions would be needed, particularly regarding drug trafficking figures, the role of the ELN guerrilla group along Colombia’s borders and Venezuela’s political future. “We cannot lower our guard,” Petro said. “There are still things to discuss at the White House.”

The president also revealed that he had spoken days earlier with Venezuela’s interim leader Delcy Rodríguez and had invited her to Colombia — a disclosure likely to further complicate regional diplomacy.

What was intended as a show of defiance against Washington ultimately became a public demonstration of Petro’s willingness to recalibrate his strategy, leaving his hardline supporters confused and critics questioning whether the president had overplayed the politics of mobilisation — only to pivot, unexpectedly, toward negotiation.

La conversación habría apaciguado una crisis que estalló después de que el presidente de EE. UU. dijo que una acción militar contra Colombia “suena bien”. El mandatario colombiano habló con The New York Times justo antes de la llamada.

The conversation appeared to defuse a crisis that erupted after President Trump said military action against Colombia “sounds good.” President Gustavo Petro spoke to The New York Times just before the call.

El presidente estadounidense indicó que su equipo estaba organizando una visita del mandatario colombiano a la Casa Blanca.

The American president said a White House visit with Gustavo Petro was being arranged by the secretary of state.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has called on supporters to mobilise nationwide on Wednesday to defend “national sovereignty,” sharply escalating a diplomatic crisis with the United States after President Donald Trump said a U.S. military operation against Colombia “sounds good” to him.

The demonstrations are expected to take place in Bogotá’s Plaza de Bolívar, Parque Lourdes in the Chapinero locality, and outside the U.S. Embassy, with parallel protests planned in Medellín (Plaza Mayor), Cali (Plaza de Cayzedo), Bucaramanga (Plazoleta Cívica Luis Carlos Galán), Cartagena (Plaza de San Pedro Claver), Santa Marta (Parque de Bolívar).

The mobilisation follows Trump’s remarks aboard Air Force One on Sunday, when he described Petro as “a sick man” and appeared to endorse the idea of a U.S. military operation in Colombia — dubbed “Operation Colombia” by a journalist — comparable in scope to the operation that led to the arrest of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and wife, Cilia Flores.

When pressed on whether he meant direct military action, Trump replied: “Sounds good to me,” before adding that Petro should “watch his ass.” The White House has not clarified whether the comments reflect official U.S. policy.

A Return to Arms?

Petro responded with a torrent of social media posts and public statements that have alarmed political opponents and business leaders . In some of his strongest language since taking office, the leftist president warned that U.S. military action would plunge Colombia back into armed conflict.

“If you bomb peasants, thousands of guerrillas will return to the mountains,” Petro said. “And if you arrest the president whom a good part of my people want and respect, you will unleash the popular jaguar.”

Petro, Colombia’s first leftist leader and a former militant of the M-19 guerrilla, said he had sworn under the 1989 peace pact never to take up arms again, but suggested that commitment could be reversed if Colombia’s sovereignty were threatened.

“Although I have not been a military man, I know war and clandestinity,” Petro wrote. “I swore not to touch a weapon again since the 1989 Peace Pact, but for the homeland I will take up arms again — even though I do not want to.”

He also warned Colombia’s armed forces against showing loyalty to Washington, saying any commander who prioritised U.S. interests over Colombia’s would be dismissed. The constitution, he said, required the military to defend “popular sovereignty.”

Diplomatic protest lodged in Washington

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry formally raised the dispute on January 4, issuing a diplomatic note of protest to the U.S. government through Ambassador Daniel García-Peña in Washington.

In the letter, the ministry said Trump’s remarks violated basic principles governing relations between sovereign states and amounted to “undue interference” in Colombia’s internal affairs.

“The President of the Republic of Colombia has been legitimately elected by the sovereign will of the Colombian people,” the statement said, adding that any attempt to discredit him was incompatible with international law and the United Nations Charter.

The Cancillería also cited principles of sovereign equality, non-intervention and mutual respect, saying threats or the use of force between states were “unacceptable.”

“Colombia is a democratic, sovereign state that conducts its foreign policy autonomously,” it said. “Its sovereignty, institutional legitimacy and political independence are not subject to external conditioning.”

The crisis has further polarised Colombia’s already fractured political landscape. Former president Álvaro Uribe, a vocal critic of Petro, said Colombia was drifting toward a Venezuela-style confrontation with the United States, though he stopped short of endorsing military intervention.

“What Colombia needs is a change of government,” Uribe told El Tiempo, adding that he trusted Washington’s strategy was “well conceived.”

Petro has cast Wednesday’s demonstrations as a defining moment for his presidency, portraying himself as the defender of national dignity against foreign aggression. He also reiterated the Colombian goverment’s position to cooperate fully with Washington on counter-narcotics and security issues. “You (Trump) took it upon yourself, in an act of arrogance, to punish my opinion — my words against the Palestinian genocide. Your punishment has been to falsely label me a drug trafficker and accuse me of running cocaine factories,” stated Petro hours after the Air Force One declations. “I don’t know whether Maduro is good or bad, or even whether he is a drug trafficker (…) so, stop the slander against me,” he said.

Petro’s critics accuse the president of instrumentalising public rallies to divert attention from Colombia’s deep internal security crisis, and to position himself politically alongside Venezuela’s ousted strongman. They argue that his language of “sovereignty” closely mirrors chavista narratives, warning that the protests risk morphing into an implicit show of solidarity with Nicolás Maduro rather than a defence of Colombia’s territorial integrity.

The White House has not walked back Trump’s remarks, and U.S. officials have so far declined to offer reassurances. On Wednesday morning, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth held a classified briefing with senators on Capitol Hill in which, according to Democratic leaders, their Republican counterparts refused to rule out sending U.S. troops to Venezuela or other countries.

Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer said he had asked for assurances that Washington was not planning operations elsewhere. “I mentioned some cases — including Colombia and Cuba — and I was very disappointed with their response,” Schumer said, adding that the meeting “left more questions than answers” and that the plan for the United States to govern Venezuela was “vague and based on illusions.”

As governments across Latin America closely watch the incoming chavista regime under interim president Delcy Rodríguez, the confrontation between Trump and Petro marks the most serious rupture in U.S.–Colombia relations in over two centuries. For Bogotá — long one of Washington’s closest allies in the region — the escalation has raised fears that incendiary rhetoric and mass mobilisation could push an already volatile situation into dangerous territory.

Editor’s Note: The U.S Embassy in Bogotá has issued a security alert, warning U.S. citizens to avoid large protests “as they have the potential to turn violent”.

President Gustavo Petro said that he had asked the Colombian people to defend him “against any illegitimate violent act.” His defense minister emphasized that security cooperation with Washington continued.

U.S. President Donald Trump escalated rhetoric toward Colombia on Sunday, suggesting that a U.S. military operation against the country — which he said could be dubbed “Operation Colombia” — was a possibility following Washington’s capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump described Colombian President Gustavo Petro as “a sick man” and accused him of overseeing cocaine production destined for the United States.

“Colombia is run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States,” Trump said. “And he’s not going to be doing it very long. Let me tell you.”

When asked directly whether he meant a U.S. military operation against Colombia, Trump replied: “Sounds good to me.”

Trump’s remarks came a day after the United States announced it had captured Maduro in a military operation in Caracas, an unprecedented move that has sent shockwaves across Latin America and raised fears of further U.S. interventions in the region.

Trump said the United States could also consider military action against Mexico if it failed to curb the flow of illicit drugs into the country. He added that Venezuelan migrants in the United States were among the factors considered in the raid against Maduro.

Trump also warned that Cuba, a close ally of Venezuela, was “a failing nation” and said its political future was “something we’ll end up talking about.”

Maduro is currently being held in a New York detention center and is expected to appear in court on Monday on drug trafficking charges. Trump said his administration would seek to work with remaining members of the Venezuelan government to crack down on drug trafficking and overhaul the country’s oil sector, rather than push immediately for elections.

Despite Maduro’s capture, Venezuela’s Vice President and oil minister, Delcy Rodríguez, has assumed interim leadership with the backing of the country’s top court. Rodríguez has insisted that Maduro remains Venezuela’s legitimate president and has denied Trump’s claim that she is willing to cooperate with Washington.

In an interview published by The Atlantic on Sunday, Trump warned that Rodríguez could “pay a bigger price than Maduro” if she failed to cooperate with the United States. Venezuela’s communications ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Petro denounces U.S. threats

Trump’s comments prompted an immediate and forceful response from Petro, who accused the U.S. president of slander and warned that Latin America risked being treated as “servants and slaves” unless it united.

“Stop slandering me,” Petro said, calling on regional leaders to close ranks in the face of what he described as renewed U.S. imperial aggression.

In a series of lengthy posts on X, Petro said the United States had crossed a historic line by bombing Caracas during the operation to capture Maduro.

“The United States is the first country in the world to bomb a South American capital in all of human history,” Petro wrote. “Neither Netanyahu, nor Hitler, nor Franco, nor Salazar did it. That is a terrible medal, one that South Americans will not forget for generations.”

Petro said revenge was not the answer but warned that the damage would be long-lasting.

“Friends do not bomb each other,” he said, likening the attack on Caracas to the Nazi bombing of Guernica during the Spanish Civil War.

Instead, Petro urged deeper regional integration, arguing that Latin America must look beyond alignment with global powers.

“We do not look only to the north, but in all directions,” he said. “Latin America must unite or it will be treated as a servant and not as the vital center of the world.”

In a separate post, Petro issued a stark message to Colombia’s armed forces, ordering commanders to immediately remove any officer who showed loyalty to the United States over Colombia.

“Every Colombian soldier has an order from now on,” Petro wrote. “Any commander of the public forces who prefers the U.S. flag over the Colombian flag must immediately leave the institution.”

Petro said the armed forces were under orders not to fire on civilians but to defend Colombia’s sovereignty against any foreign invasion.

“I am not illegitimate. I am not a narco,” Petro wrote, rejecting Trump’s accusations. “I trust my people and the history of Colombia.”

Colombia’s first leftist president and a former member of the M-19 guerrilla movement also raised the spectre of a return to armed struggle, saying that while he had sworn under the 1989 peace pact never to take up weapons again, he would do so if Colombia’s sovereignty were threatened.

“I am not a military man, but I know war and clandestinity,” Petro wrote. “I swore never to touch a weapon again, but for the homeland I would take up arms once more, even though I do not want to.”

Rising fears of wider intervention

Trump’s warnings to Colombia were not his first. In the immediate aftermath of Maduro’s capture, he said Petro needed to “watch his ass” and suggested that Cuba’s political collapse was imminent.

The comments have heightened anxiety across the region, where governments are closely watching Washington’s next moves following the Caracas operation.

In Venezuela, a state of emergency has been in force since Saturday. A decree published on Monday ordered police to “immediately begin the national search and capture of everyone involved in the promotion or support for the armed attack by the United States,” according to the text.

Caracas remained largely quiet on Sunday, though residents reported a tense atmosphere as uncertainty mounted over the country’s political future and the possibility of further U.S. action.

For Colombia – a key U.S. ally that shares a 2,000-kilometre border with Venezuela, a country the Trump administration has said it will “run” in the aftermath of Saturday’s seizure of Maduro – the remarks mark the most explicit threat of U.S. military action in more than two centuries of diplomatic relations, and an ominous deterioration in already strained ties between Washington and Bogotá.

In remarks aboard Air Force One, President Trump threatened Colombia and its president, described Cuba as “ready to fall” and reasserted his desire to acquire Greenland.

The U.S. seizure of Venezuela’s president has governments, executives and investors bracing for wide-reaching business and geopolitical fallout.

“I had utterly lost hope,” said one Venezuelan who has lived in exile from his country for seven years.

The US carried out limited airstrikes in Venezuela this morning and claim to have captured Nicolás Maduro. Colombia has reacted with strong condemnation.

Colombia this morning woke to the news that US forces had attacked the neighbouring capital Caracas. President Donald Trump claimed via Truth Social that Maduro had been captured and extricated from the country, with the airstrikes necessary for that operation to take place.

It later emerged that the attack and capture was an arrest. The US has confirmed Maduro’s indictment in New York and that he will stand trial for narcotrafficking and potentially other offences. This dates back to 2020, although it was not widely known that Maduro’s wife Cilia, captured with him, had also been part of that case.

What is Colombia’s position?

Unsurprisingly, President Gustavo Petro is firmly against US action in general and particularly in the neighbouring country. In the short term he has sent troops to the border in preparation for a possible surge in refugees. Interestingly, it seems that the Colombian government may have had advance warning, as his security meeting started at 3AM.

Acabamos de terminar consejo de seguridad nacional desde las 3 am.

Se despliega la fuerza pública en la frontera, se despliega toda la fuerza asistencial que dispongamos en caso de entrada masiva de refugiados.

La embajada de Colombia en Venezuela está activa a llamadas de…

— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) January 3, 2026

Petro rejects all US actions that violates the sovereignty of Venezuela and Latin America. He has said already that he will use his position on the UN security council to discuss this matter and search for a solution. In this, he will find support domestically and internationally.

For many in Colombia, and indeed Latin America in general, this brings memories of US interventionism during the Cold War. From helping to topple Allende in Chile, supporting dictatorships across the Southern Cone and the Sandinista affair, there is a long history of meddling in regional politics.

Equally, there is no love for Nicolás Maduro in Colombia. That is shared across the political spectrum for different reasons and comes through solidarity with the Venezuelan people, a dislike of the immigration wave he caused or a fierce disagreement with leftwing politicians in general.

However little sympathy there is for Maduro, that does not equate to support for direct military action from the US in foreign territory. Many Colombians have fears that similar might happen to their country. While that seems unlikely, Donald Trump is at best unpredictable and few would have seen today’s actions coming a year ago.

Colombia is also likely to have strained relations with the incoming administration in Caracas. Petro and many on his side are no fans of Machado, who they see as a classic representative of the Latin rightwing oligarchy.

Petro will be wary of supporting the notion that presidents can be toppled in this manner and regime change forced upon a nation by foreign forces. At the least, he will call for free and fair elections to be held sooner rather than later.

Relations with the USA have significantly deteriorated, for obvious reasons, but Colombia is very much with international feeling on this one, with Trump the pariah. A number of world leaders have issued statements decrying and condemning the US actions. Only Machado, Netanyahu and Argentina’s Milei have departed from the consensus, unsurpisingly.

ELN held a short-lived paro armado in December warning against foreign interference in the region, so it’s entirely likely that they might announce similar measures in the next few weeks. It’s unclear how or if groups such as the gaitanistas may react, given that they were recently declared terrorist organisations by the US State department.

What happens next?

For Colombia, the three biggest fears for the future are the probability of refugees fleeing across the border; the possibility that similar will happen here; the effects on this year’s election. This might have been a relatively quick operation, but its effects will linger for months at bare minimum and likely years.

Venezuela itself will have to work out who is going to replace Maduro in the presidential Palacio Miraflores. That could well be recent Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado, or could be a general stepping up to lead an interim government while elections are organised.

It could even be a continuation government, refusing to give in after the loss of Maduro and daring further strikes. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has ruled out further actions for the time being now that Maduro has been captured.

The likelihood of large scale US actions within Colombian territory is very low, despite Trump’s rhetoric that Petro might be next in line. The country has just assumed a position on the UN security council and is a member of NATO. Having said all that, focused operations targeting terrorists are certainly possible and Trump is often hard to predict.

Even smaller, focused operations would be incredibly controversial within Colombia and Petro would be pushed to respond strongly, not only by his own supporters. However, his options are relatively limited. He does not have the firepower to make serious counterattacks and is unlikely to want to do so outside of Colombian territory, for example against carriers in international waters.

Any operation involving boots on the ground within Colombia would be a very different story and the military would be more or less forced to intervene. That would push tensions to boiling point with the White House.

Venezuelan immigrants to Colombia already number around two million or more and this action is likely to see increased travel across the borders. Colombia has sent troops to the border in order to attempt to maintain order. Cities such as Cúcuta in Norte de Santander and Riohacha in La Guajira are already under strain and will struggle to absorb further numbers.

It is entirely possible that serious criminal elements and/or government or armed fores members will try to cross within the chaos, putting added pressure on the Colombian government. They may be destabilising elements and there may be pressure from the US not to harbour who they see as essentially international criminals.

For the upcoming election, candidates are already in a difficult position on this topic and things are likely to get harder. Rightwingers have spent years railing against the Venezuelan regime, but will be aware that most Colombians oppose this action.

The added complication is the possibility of Trump supporting one side or another, even making remarks like he did before the Guatemalan election or even offering financial support as he did in the Argentinian elections.

That will be tricky – being on Trump’s side will alienate enough voters to make victory unachievable, yet coming into office in conflict with the leader of the USA will make governing difficult. Candidates have a fine line to walk in terms of balancing electoral rhetoric with diplomacy.

Then there’s the question of who is in the Palacio Miraflores in Caracas. Hard leftwingers will start off on a bad footing with a Machado government or similar, whereas rightwingers will chime with her politically. If there is a sort of continuity, expect the opposite.

Given the surprise, if not shock, of this morning’s actions, it is hard to predict exactly what will happen next, other than there will be short term chaos at least. Trump, of course, thrives on chaos and has a gift for navigating uncertain times. He described this as a “brilliant operation” but few in the region will be in agreement. After all, he is not the one who has to live with the consequences.

The post US strikes in Venezuela: what does it mean for Colombia and what happens next? appeared first on The Bogotá Post.