The United States has updated a “do not travel” warning for large parts of southwestern Colombia after a wave of terrorist attacks have left over 20 people dead, underscoring growing international concern over the country’s deteriorating security situation and prompting regional authorities to demand stronger support from the leftist government of President Gustavo Petro.
The U.S. Department of State maintained most of Colombia at Level 3 – “Reconsider Travel” – citing crime, terrorism, civil unrest, kidnapping and natural disasters, but reinforced its Level 4 advisory for several conflict-hit regions, including the departments of Arauca, Cauca, Valle del Cauca and Norte de Santander.
Under the latest guidance, Americans are advised not to travel to Cauca, excluding the departmental capital Popayán, and Valle del Cauca, excluding Cali, due to crime and terrorism.
Norte de Santander and Arauca remain under the same highest warning level, while travel within 10 kilometers of the Colombia-Venezuela border is also strongly discouraged because of kidnapping risks, armed conflict and the possibility of detention.
“Do not travel to these areas for any reason,” the State Department said in its advisory, adding that violent crime, armed robbery and murder remain common, while terrorist groups continue to operate in remote and rural zones.
The warning was reinforced by a U.S. Embassy security alert issued in Bogotá on April 27, following 26 separate attacks across southwestern Colombia during the weekend of April 25. The attacks targeted transportation corridors, military installations and police stations, with authorities confirming at least 20 deaths and dozens of injuries.
Police and military facilities are frequent targets of armed groups, and the State Department warned that attacks in Colombia have included car bombs, grenades, truck bombs, explosive devices placed on roads and buildings, and even drones carrying explosives.
Illegal armed groups, including dissident factions of the former Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), narcotrafficking organizations and other insurgent groups, have expanded their territorial presence in recent years, particularly in remote areas where coca cultivation, illegal mining and strategic trafficking corridors overlap.
The deadliest recent attack occurred near the El Túnel sector in Cajibío, Cauca, along the Pan-American Highway, where an explosive device detonated against civilian vehicles, killing 20 civilians and injuring over 50 more. Authorities attributed the bombing to FARC dissidents under command of alias “Iván Mordisco”.
The attack shocked the country and intensified criticism of President Gustavo Petro’s “Total Peace” policy, which seeks negotiated settlements with illegal armed groups but has faced mounting scrutiny as violence worsens in several regions.
In response, the Cauca governor’s office declared three days of official mourning. Authorities described the bombing as an “atrocious and unjustifiable” act and ordered flags to be flown at half-mast across public institutions and schools as a tribute to the victims.
The government also called for national unity and a stronger institutional response to confront armed violence in one of Colombia’s most volatile departments.
In neighboring Valle del Cauca, Governor Dilian Francisca Toro said she respected the U.S. warning but urged foreign governments and the media not to define the entire region by recent attacks.
“We ask that our region not be stigmatized,” Toro said, insisting that Valle del Cauca remains open to visitors and that violence does not represent the department’s cultural, economic and social identity.
At the same time, she sharply criticized the national government’s security response after attacks in Cali and Palmira, calling for “real, sustained and effective support” through more troops, stronger intelligence operations and direct action against criminal structures operating in the region.
Following an explosion near the Agustín Codazzi Engineers Battalion in Palmira, Toro announced an investment of nearly 70 billion pesos ($17 million) to strengthen police communications infrastructure, expand surveillance camera networks and improve secure transport corridors across municipalities.
In Cali, Mayor Alejandro Eder said an attempted attack against the Pichincha Battalion involved explosive gas cylinders, one of which failed to detonate while another exploded inside a minibus.
Authorities activated a citywide security operation and Eder offered a reward of up to 50 million pesos for information leading to the capture of those responsible. “We cannot allow terrorism to regain ground in our city,” Eder said.
The upcoming monetary policy meeting of the Banco de la República, scheduled for April 30, takes place as the balance of financial risks has shifted significantly compared to the first quarter of 2026. Analysts from Bancolombia (NYSE: CIB) expect the Junta Directiva to increase the benchmark interest rate by 75 basis points, bringing the policy rate to 12.00%.
The convergence of elevated inflation, recent reversal episodes, and misaligned market expectations has reinforced the perceived need for a restrictive monetary stance. This strategy aims to contain domestic demand while preserving the institutional credibility of the central bank. Unlike previous sessions, the current decision-making process is influenced by a shifting global environment where markets have moved toward a higher-for-longer interest rate scenario amid increased uncertainty.
Recent discussions regarding the participation of the Ministro de Hacienda in the Junta Directiva sessions have introduced an additional element of analysis. However, current assessments suggest this does not alter the fundamental policy diagnosis, and no disruptions to the decision-making process are anticipated. Monetary policy is expected to maintain consistency, with the strategic focus shifting from reaching a contractive level to determining the necessary duration of that posture.
Analysts project Banco de la República will raise rates to 12.00% to combat inflation despite slowing domestic economic growth.
The international economic context provides a mixed backdrop for the Colombian decision. Private sector activity in the US appeared to accelerate in April, following a 1.7% monthly increase in retail sales during March. In contrast, the Eurozone reported a contraction in economic activity during April. Energy markets have also seen volatility, with US crude inventories rising in the second week of April while gasoline stocks saw a significant decline. Furthermore, crude prices surged following reports of new security incidents in the Strait of Hormuz.
Domestically, the Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística reported that the Índice de Seguimiento a la Economía grew by 1.6% in February. While imports maintained growth during the same month, the urban unemployment rate across the 13 primary metropolitan areas continued a downward trend through March 2026. In the fixed income market, the central government reported debt levels at 64.2% of GDP for the first quarter, with internal debt accounting for 71.2% of that total.
Market movements reflected these broader trends as the US Treasury curve saw valuation increases driven by investor caution. In the region, Colombia, Brazil, and Uruguay emerged as the primary beneficiaries of the J.P. Morgan (NYSE: JPM) GBI index rebalancing in March. Locally, fixed-rate Títulos de Tesorería experienced devaluations across the entire curve last week. According to the April Encuesta de Opinión Financiera, these devaluations are expected to persist in the coming months. In currency markets, the COP appreciated last week against a backdrop of global and local factors, while the Euro lost ground against the USD.
Headline photo: Bogotá headquarters of Banco de la República (Banrepublica). Photo credit Juan Enrique Rodríguez, courtesy Banrepublica
The Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil of Colombia (RNEC), the entity responsible for organizing elections in the country, reported that a total of 14 candidates have officially registered to run in the country’s presidential elections, scheduled for May 31, 2026. In this vote, citizens will elect the President and Vice President of the Republic for the 2026–2030 term.
According to the electoral authority, the candidates represent a wide range of political perspectives, from left to right, including independent candidacies running through political movements. Here the list and brief profile of the candidates:
The RNEC also reported that “the draw to determine the position of presidential candidates on the ballot will take place on March 25 at the Ágora Bogotá Convention Center.”
This process marks the formal start of the final phase of the presidential campaign, during which candidates will seek to consolidate support ahead of the first round on May 31. If no candidate secures an absolute majority, a runoff between the two leading candidates will be held on June 21.
List of registered candidates for Colombia’s presidency. Photo courtesy of the Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil.
Headline photo: Polling station in Colombia during last Congress elections in March 8, 2026. Photo courtesy of the Registraduría Nacional del Estado Civil.
U.S. federal prosecutors have opened preliminary criminal investigations into Colombian President Gustavo Petro over alleged links to drug traffickers and possible illicit financing of his 2022 campaign, according to a report by The New York Times.
The previously undisclosed probes are being conducted by federal prosecutors in Manhattan and Brooklyn and involve specialists in international narcotics trafficking, as well as agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration and Homeland Security Investigations, the newspaper said, citing people familiar with the matter.
Investigators are examining, among other issues, whether Petro held meetings with individuals connected to drug trafficking networks and whether his presidential campaign solicited or received donations from such actors. The two investigations are being carried out independently and remain in their early stages, with no certainty that they will lead to formal criminal charges.
There is no indication that the White House played any role in launching the investigations, according to the report. However, the inquiries emerge in a broader context of heightened tensions and fluctuating diplomacy between Bogotá and Washington.
Relations between Petro and U.S. President Donald Trump have been volatile, marked by sharp public exchanges, threats of tariffs that were never implemented, and the temporary revocation of Petro’s U.S. visa. Trump has repeatedly accused Petro of failing to curb narcotics production and has described him in highly critical terms, while Petro has denounced what he characterises as political pressure and interference.
The U.S. Treasury Department last year imposed sanctions on Petro, members of his family and senior officials, including Interior Minister Armando Benedetti, alleging links to narcotics activity. The measures, which included asset freezes and travel restrictions, were justified by Washington on the grounds that cocaine production in Colombia had reached record levels and that the government had offered concessions to armed groups involved in trafficking.
Petro has rejected those claims, insisting that his administration has strengthened seizures of cocaine and slowed the rate of expansion of coca cultivation. He has also denied any knowledge of illicit funds entering his campaign, dismissing the allegations as politically motivated attacks.
Colombia’s Attorney General is examining charges that Petro’s son – Nicolás Petro – received money from individuals linked to illicit activities during the 2022 campaign. While his son acknowledged receiving funds that were not reported, no criminal charges have been filed against the president himself, and Petro has maintained he was unaware of the campaign “donations”.
According to the NYT, the U.S. investigations are taking place amid a broader strategy in which Washington has increasingly used legal and judicial tools to advance foreign policy objectives. Analysts say such actions could serve as leverage in bilateral relations or influence political dynamics in allied countries.
The timing of the probes is particularly sensitive, as Colombia prepares for presidential elections on May 31, with a potential runoff in June. Petro, the country’s first leftist president, is constitutionally barred from seeking re-election but has actively backed his political successor with hardleftist Iván Cepeda.
The allegations could reverberate through the electoral campaign, where relations with the United States remain a central issue. Candidates on the right have emphasised the importance of maintaining close ties with Washington, while figures on the left have framed U.S. actions as a challenge to Colombia’s sovereignty.
Despite months of tensions, diplomatic relations between the two countries have shown signs of stabilisation in recent weeks. Petro and Trump held a bilateral meeting at the White House earlier this year, which both sides described as constructive, and officials have since sought to rebuild communication channels.
Even so, uncertainty persists over the trajectory of the relationship, particularly as Washington continues to prioritise counternarcotics cooperation with Colombia, historically one of its closest partners in the region.
Petro has consistently denied any links to drug trafficking and has pointed to his government’s security strategy, which includes negotiations with armed groups and efforts to reduce violence, as evidence of a broader approach to the drug trade.
The start of U.S. investigations add a new layer of complexity to an already fraught political and diplomatic landscape, with potential implications not only for Petro’s post-presidential future but for Colombia’s ties with its most important security ally.
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday there was “no going back” on his goal to bring Greenland under U.S. control, refusing to rule out the use of force and escalating tensions with European allies already bracing for a renewed transatlantic trade dispute.
Trump’s remarks followed a series of social media posts featuring AI-generated images, including one depicting the president standing in Greenland holding a U.S. flag and another showing a map of North America with Canada, Greenland and Venezuela covered by the stars and stripes.
The imagery, shared without official explanation, has fuelled alarm among allies and raised questions about the blurring of political messaging and artificial intelligence at a moment of heightened geopolitical strain.
“As I expressed to everyone, very plainly, Greenland is imperative for National and World Security. There can be no going back — on that, everyone agrees,” Trump said after speaking with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte.
Greenland, a vast Arctic island rich in minerals and strategically located between North America and Europe, is a self-governing territory of Denmark, a fellow NATO member. Trump’s renewed push to acquire it has revived a proposal he first floated during his previous term, but has now been accompanied by explicit warnings of tariffs and the possible use of force.
European leaders reacted with unease. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen told parliament in Copenhagen that “the worst may still lie ahead.”
“We can negotiate about everything — security, investments, the economy — but we cannot negotiate our most fundamental values: sovereignty, our country’s identity, our borders and our democracy,” Frederiksen said.
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen urged the bloc to prepare for a more confrontational era.
“The seismic change we are going through today is an opportunity — in fact a necessity — to build a new form of European independence,” she said.
Trump has threatened steep tariffs on countries he says stand in the way of U.S. interests, including European allies involved in NATO exercises in Greenland. The European Union has warned it could retaliate with tariffs on up to €93 billion ($101 billion) of U.S. imports if trade measures are imposed.
One option under discussion is the EU’s Anti-Coercion Instrument, a powerful tool that could restrict access to public tenders, investment or services, including digital services where U.S. companies hold a surplus.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent sought to calm markets and dismissed fears of an escalating trade war.
“It’s been 48 hours. Sit back, relax,” Bessent told reporters in Davos. “Calm down the hysteria. Take a deep breath.”
Financial markets were less sanguine. U.S. stock index futures slid to one-month lows, global equities fell, and gold prices touched record highs as investors sought safety.
The inclusion of Canada and Venezuela in the AI-generated map added to the controversy.
Canada, a close U.S. ally and NATO member, has previously been the subject of Trump’s rhetoric suggesting it could become the “51st state.” Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said he was “concerned” by the escalation and warned of the implications for North American and transatlantic security.
Canadian officials said Ottawa has drawn up plans to send a small contingent of soldiers to Greenland to participate in NATO military exercises, pending final approval from Carney. Canada already has aircraft and personnel deployed there as part of a NORAD exercise involving the United States.
Venezuela’s government condemned Trump’s post and called on citizens to share the country’s official map online in what officials described as a symbolic defence of sovereignty.
Russia, which has closely watched the growing rift between Washington and Europe, questioned Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the island was the result of “colonial conquest,” while denying Moscow had any designs on the territory.
Protesters also took to the streets in several European cities, including Zurich, where demonstrators carried banners opposing Trump’s appearance at Davos and denouncing what they called imperialist policies.
Despite pushback from allies and some members of Congress, Trump has shown no sign of softening his stance, leaving diplomats and markets braced for further escalation as NATO cohesion and global trade relations come under renewed strain.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro has made Gaza the moral centerpiece of his foreign policy. Since the October 7, 2023, Hamas terror attacks, he has devoted extraordinary political capital to denouncing Israel, questioning its right to self-defense, and framing the Gaza war as a singular global emergency.
He summoned “Free Palestine” marches, spent public funds hosting solidarity concerts in Bogotá’s Plaza de Bolívar, donned a keffiyeh near Times Square alongside Roger Waters, branded Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “war criminal,” labeled Gaza a “genocide,” and even urged U.S. military personnel to disobey orders from President Donald Trump over Middle East policy.
The performance was theatrical, relentless – and costly. Petro’s visa to the United States was revoked. Months later, he was placed on the U.S. Treasury’s OFAC sanctions list alongside his close political ally and interior minister Armando Benedetti, as well as his wife – or estranged wife – Verónica Alcocer, whose marital status, according to Petro himself, remains mysteriously unresolved.
Yet for all this moral fervor, Petro has remained conspicuously silent on one of the gravest human rights catastrophes unfolding today: Iran’s brutal suppression of nationwide protests.
His silence is deafening.
Since protests erupted across Iran in late December 2025, the regime has responded not with reform but with terror. Demonstrators demanding economic relief, dignity, and political change have been met with live ammunition. Militiamen aligned with the Revolutionary Guards have swept through cities on motorbikes, firing automatic weapons into crowds. Snipers reportedly aim at faces and genitals. Morgues are overflowing. Bodies are stacked in blood-soaked streets. More than 12,000 are believed dead. Thousands more have been dragged from hospital beds into prisons, many never to be seen again.
This is not metaphorical violence. These are not contested narratives. These are crimes against humanity carried out by a theocracy against its own citizens.
And yet – nothing from Petro.
The Iranian regime insists the unrest is a foreign-engineered plot: psychological warfare orchestrated by hostile powers to destabilize the Islamic Republic. The opposition, by contrast, sees a nationwide rupture—an uprising rooted in decades of repression, economic collapse, and the severing of legitimacy between rulers and ruled.
Narrative control matters. In modern conflict, perception is a battlefield. As scholars Ihsan Yilmaz and Shahram Akbarzadeh have noted, authoritarian regimes increasingly rely on Strategic Digital Information Operations—psychological warfare designed not merely to suppress dissent, but to reshape reality itself. The objective is cognitive: to induce fear, discredit opponents, and convince societies that resistance is futile.
Petro’s brand of performative moralism has not been cost-free. His compulsive need to condemn Israel – and, by extension, the United States – was read in Washington not as symbolism but as direct provocation. It coincided with a marked deterioration in U.S.–Colombia relations, freezing high-level dialogue, undermining security cooperation, and contributing to the unprecedented decision to revoke his U.S. visa. For a country whose military, intelligence, and counter-narcotics apparatus remains deeply intertwined with American support, the damage was neither abstract nor symbolic – it was strategic.
The rupture with Israel was even more explicit. By publicly referring to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “Nazi,” Petro crossed a diplomatic red line that few world leaders have dared approach. The comparison – historically illiterate, morally inflammatory, and deeply offensive- effectively severed Colombia–Israel relations. Defense cooperation was halted, diplomatic channels collapsed, and decades of bilateral engagement in security, technology, and trade were sacrificed to rhetorical escalation. Whatever one’s view of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, equating the Jewish state with the architects of the Holocaust is not principled criticism; it is diplomatic arson.
In both cases, Petro appeared less concerned with consequences than with signaling ideological virtue to a global activist audience. The result has been the erosion of Colombia’s standing with two key partners—one its most important ally, the other a longstanding strategic collaborator—while yielding no tangible benefit to the civilians whose suffering he claims to champion.
What makes Petro’s silence on Iran so damning is not merely its contrast with his Gaza activism; it is the exposure of a deeper incoherence. For years, leftist politicians, celebrities, and fringe groups have flooded streets in capitals around the world denouncing Israel’s war as “genocide.” Now, when protesters are machine-gunned in Iran, hospitals are raided, and young people are summarily executed, this outrage dissipates.
As Allister Heath wrote recently in The Telegraph, this is “pure, unadulterated evil… a stain on humanity.” And yet where are the chants? Where is the flotilla? Where are the luvvies? One might also ask: where is the Colombian president who claims human rights as his moral compass?
The answer is uncomfortable. Gaza became a performative ritual of sit-ins and campus “occupations.” The tragedy of Iran exposes the hollowness of that performance.
When Iran’s protests began in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, authorities initially assumed they were manageable. Bazaar merchants—traditionally conservative and closely linked to the state—were seen as transactional actors seeking economic relief, not regime change. Even Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei acknowledged their grievances, a rare concession.
But the regime miscalculated. Protests spread to more than 25 provinces. Ethnic minorities—Kurds, Baluch, Arabs, and Azeris—joined despite deep skepticism about the opposition and fears of what might follow. The unrest evolved from economic protest into an existential challenge to the state, triggering a massacre reportedly claiming more than 6,000 lives.
Meanwhile, fears of chaos loom. Exiled figures such as Reza Pahlavi position themselves as transitional leaders, even as their proposed roadmaps concentrate power in ways eerily reminiscent of the current theocracy. The Syrian precedent—where Western intervention elevated jihadist actors rather than democratic forces—haunts the region.
None of this excuses silence.
President Petro has every right to condemn injustice – especially on his own soil, where human rights abuses by FARC dissidents and the ELN guerrilla continue to inflict immense suffering on Colombia’s most vulnerable. Yet here, too, the silence has been deafening: soldiers kidnapped, children cowering under desks amid gunfire in Cauca, an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Catatumbo that has displaced more than 60,000 people and quietly slipped from the government’s agenda.
For Petro, moral leadership is selective. If civilian lives matter, they matter everywhere. If state violence is intolerable, it is intolerable whether committed by an ally, an adversary, or a regime ideologically convenient to ignore.
Silence in the face of mass murder is not neutrality. It is complicity by omission.
Petro’s foreign policy has become a study in selective empathy – loud where ideology demands it, louder still on social media, but mute where principle requires courage. That is not moral clarity. It is hypocrisy incarnate.
Login