Bancolombia’s analysts expect the Junta Directiva of the Banco de la República to increase its policy interest rate by 100 basis points, bringing it to 11.25 percent. This forecast suggests that the first half of 2026 will be characterized by a more aggressive tightening cycle than previously anticipated, with the rate potentially reaching 12.75 percent.
The international landscape is playing an increasingly decisive role in these local policy configurations. A recent week of central bank decisions globally revealed a shift in tone among major financial institutions, primarily due to rising uncertainty stemming from the conflict in Iran. This geopolitical tension has directly impacted costs for energy, transportation, and agricultural inputs.
In the US, economic activity shows signs of moderation, yet producer price inflation in February exceeded expectations. The yield curve for US Treasuries, managed by the US Department of the Treasury, has shown mixed behavior as the conflict escalates, with the spread between 10-year and 3-month bonds reaching levels not seen since 2023. Inflation expectations in the US have rebounded in the short term, though they remain anchored over longer horizons.
Forecast Category
Mar-25
Sep-25
Dec-25
Feb-26
Mar-26
Year-end 2026 Inflation
3.7%
4.0%
4.5%
6.2%
6.2%
Year-end 2027 Inflation
—
—
—
4.8%
4.8%
Year-end 2026 Policy Rate
6.50%
8.00%
9.25%
11.75%
11.75%
Year-end 2027 Policy Rate
—
—
8.00%
9.75%
10.00%
Domestically, the business indices from think-tank Fedesarrollo showed mixed results for February. However, there are positive indicators in the labor market, as the urban unemployment rate across the 13 primary metropolitan areas continued its downward trend. Additionally, goods exports recorded an advance during the same period.
In the local fixed-income market, the TES fixed-rate curve saw a recovery last week. However, the March Financial Institutions Survey suggests that devaluations of TES may persist in the short term. Long-term TES Class B placements in the first quarter reached 1.0 percent of the GDP.
Chart based on data from Grupo Cibest & the Banco de la República.
Energy markets remain volatile as crude oil inventories in the US increased beyond expectations in the third week of March. Despite this, the price of Brent crude rose toward the end of the week, driven by skepticism regarding a potential ceasefire in the Middle East. The Colombian peso appreciated over the past week, tracking the intensity of the regional conflict.
The equity market results for the fourth quarter of 2025 remained neutral and aligned with market expectations. Global volatility continues to be shaped by energy shocks, geopolitical strife, and a cautious approach toward investments in artificial intelligence.
The projected rate hike by the Banco de la República is intended to send a definitive signal of commitment to price stability. This adjustment reflects not only recent inflation trends but also a strategic effort to prevent the further deterioration of expectations in a high-risk environment.
Headline image: Bogotá headquarters of Banco de la República (Banrepublica). Photo credit Juan Enrique Rodríguez, courtesy Banrepublica
If you’re the type of Mac, iPhone, or iPad user who likes to update their operating systems manually, you will want to pay attention to your devices after you have installed the latest iOS 26.4, iPadOS 26.4, and MacOS Tahoe 26.4 software updates, because installing those updates will enable automatic updates for system software. If ... Read More
Though surprises are possible, polling says the front runners are Iván Cepeda, Abelardo de la Espriella, and Paloma Valencia.
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:
Clara Eugenia López Obregón, currently a senator for the Esperanza Democrática She has served as Minister of Labor (2016–2017), acting mayor of Bogotá (2011–2012), and Bogotá’s secretary of government (2008–2010). She has been affiliated with left-wing parties and was Gustavo Petro’s vice presidential running mate in the 2010 election.
Óscar Mauricio Lizcano, from the FAMILIA coalition. He served as Minister of Information Technologies (2023–2025), was a senator (2010–2018), and a member of the House of Representatives (2006–2010).
Raúl Santiago Botero, candidate of the “Romper el Sistema” movement (Break the Establishment). An agronomist engineer and businessman from Medellín, he presents himself as an independent candidate with no prior political experience.
Miguel Uribe Londoño, father of the slain presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay. He is running under the Colombian Democratic Party and previously served as president of the Centro Democrático party founded by Álvaro Uribe Vélez.
Sondra Macollins Garvin, from the movement “La Abogada de Hierro” (The Iron Lawyer) A criminal lawyer and psychologist, she presents herself as an independent candidate without political affiliations. She ran for the House of Representatives in 2022 and is known for her work in narcotrafficking and corruption cases.
Iván Cepeda Castro, a senator since 2014 and the official candidate of the Pacto Histórico, the same party as President Gustavo Petro. Polls project he will receive the highest vote share in the first election round. He is aligned with left-wing political ideas.
Abelardo de la Espriella, a lawyer with far-right positions, running for the first time under the Defensores de la Patria movement. Recent polls place him as a likely second or third contender in voter preference.
Claudia López Hernández, former mayor of Bogotá (2020–2023) and former senator (2014–2018), running under the centrist movement “Imparables con Claudia.” She is known for her anti-corruption agenda and secured her candidacy with more than 570,000 votes (about 9%) in recent interparty primaries.
Paloma Valencia Laserna, current senator and candidate of the Centro Democrático party led by Álvaro Uribe Vélez. She won the right-wing interparty primary on March 8 with more than 3 million votes. Polls place her among the top three contenders, and if she reaches a runoff, she would become the first woman in Colombia’s history to do so.
Sergio Fajardo Valderrama, an academic and mathematician running for the Dignidad y Compromiso He served as mayor of Medellín and governor of Antioquia and is running for president for the third time.
Roy Barreras, from the political party La Fuerza (The Force). He won the left-wing coalition primary on March 8 with the lowest vote total (257,000 votes, about 3.6%). Although currently aligned with left-wing movements and part of the Petro administration, he has previously been affiliated with right- and center-leaning parties.
Gustavo Matamoros Camacho, of the Colombian Ecologist Party. He served in the Colombian Army for 43 years. With no prior political experience, his campaign focuses on public security.
Luis Gilberto Murillo, who served as Minister of Foreign Affairs (2024–2025) and Colombia’s ambassador to the United States (2022–2024). A human rights advocate and Afro-Colombian leader from Chocó, he presents himself as an independent, moderate, centrist candidate.
Carlos Eduardo Caicedo, running under the independent movement “Con Caicedo.” He was mayor of Santa Marta (2012–2015) and governor of Magdalena (2020–2023), where he built a strong base as a left-wing political leader.
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.
La izquierda de América Latina ha visto a la isla como su referente ideológico. Ahora, líderes de todo el espectro dudan en ayudar a una nación que está en la mira del gobierno de Trump.
En Colombia, la rápida proliferación de drones armados cada vez más sofisticados entre los grupos insurgentes se ha convertido en un inmenso reto para el gobierno.
Security officials say easy access by guerrilla groups to commercial drones, cheaply modified into deadly weapons, has put the nation’s army on its heels.
We analyse recent homicide figures in Colombia’s capital.
Anti-extortion police arrest a suspected member of the Satanás crime gang, linked to a rash of extortion and killings in Bogotá during 2025. Photo. Secretaria de Seguridad.
Last month we looked at the latest homicide data for the city: in 2025 violent deaths went down 3.4% on the previous year. These 1,165 killings gave Bogotá – with a population of around 8 million – a homicide rate of 14.8 deaths per 100,000 of the population.
This month we look deeper into this statistic. Why homicides? Though an imperfect indicator, murder rates do give an insight into insecurity in a zone as they are often the extreme outcome of robberies gone wrong, gang feuds, political violence, domestic violence, fights, targeted killings, drugging of victims and bungled kidnappings. Put simply, the number of bodies means the amount of crime.
Crime patchwork
Where are homicides happening? In our own analysis of Bogotá’s 20 districts (see map below) the gritty downtown area of Sant Fe has the highest rate of 54 killings per 100,000 inhabitants, followed by nearby Los Martíres with 47, and Ciudad Bolívar with 33.
Sant Fe, like many Bogotá districts, is a patchwork of agreeable barrios, such as the touristy Las Aguas for example, and historic La Candelaria (with just three homicides last year) juxtaposed with crime-ridden neighborhoods.
Heat map of current homicide rates adjusted for population size in Bogotá districts. Graphic: S. Hide
But in the southwest corner of Santa Fe lies San Bernardo, or ‘Samber’ as it is known locally, generally recognized as the most dangerous barrio in Bogotá, a hub for gangs selling drugs to street people and the scene of several fatal grenade attacks in 2025.
Santa Fe is a reminder that in Bogotá safer streets are often just a block away from no-go zones. Rolos and long-term residentslearn to navigate these invisible barriers.
To emphasize this point, Santa Fe, statistically the most dangerous district in the city, lies adjacent to the leafy district of Teusaquillo with a homicide rate of 5 per 100,000 in 2025 (amounting to nine deaths), which according to this metric makes it the safest district in Bogotá.
Less grim up north
Other districts registering less than 10 killings per 100,000 in 2025 are the more upmarket northern districts of the city: Chapinero, Usaquén, Suba, Fontibón and Engativá. And as in most years, there is a gradient towards safer barrios in the north, with the dividing line running roughly along the Avenida El Dorado (Av Calle 26).
But in terms of reducing crime, there are success stories in the south. While still the most dangerous district, Santa Fe has reduced its homicide rate by 28 per cent in 2025 alongside Bosa, Usme and Antonio Nariño, all with reductions in double digits.
These results are hard to assess; organized criminal gangs are present in all these areas, so the peace could be transitory and a result of rival gangs declaring a truce, or one gang leveraging control, rather than societal shifts or better policing.
Ciudad Bolívar, a southern city district with high rates of poverty and crime. There were 218 homicides reported in this sector of the city during 2025. Photo: S. Hide
In some cases, large-scale operations have had an impact, combing security and social services in a carrot and stick approach called megatomas. In Santa Fe, for example, following the grenade attacks, the Bogotá administration both militarized the barrio and flooded it with development programs to support the huge homeless population there. This approach seems to have worked, at least temporarily.
On the negative side, three central districts (Puente Aranda, San Cristóbal and Rafael Uribe Uribe) have seen a spike in killings, a reminder of the balloon effect; pushing down on crime in one zone just forces it to pop up somewhere else.
Sicario scenarios
What’s behind the killings? Police databases do not reveal motives, but media coverage and occasional analyses by Bogotá’s Secretaría de Seguridad give insights into the city’s mean streets.
Targeted killings, usually carried out by paid hitmen (sicarios), are for the city the visible tip of an underworld iceberg of organized crime. Hits are carried out often on the street or public spaces against identified victims by professional gunslingers sometimes recruited specifically for the job with promises of cash.
Clear-up rates are low: in June last year city councilors complained that in the first half of 2025 out of 521 homicides, 156 were targeted hits, for which only 16 people had been arrested. “In other words, 90 per cent of assassinations on Bogotá go unpunished,” pointed out councilor Julián Espinosa in one debate.
This was despite the city police’s vaunted Plan Candado – Padlock Strategy – of mobile rapid response teams and drones to quickly catch perpetrators by locking down zones within minutes of a major crime.
Vigil for Miguel Uribe, the young politician shot by a 15-year-old hitman in a Bogotá park in June 2025. He survived the initial attack but died from his wounds two months later. Photo: S. Hide.
The most high-profile killing was the gunning down of senator and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe, shot in the head during a walkabout in a Bogotá park. The police quickly apprehended the small-time gangsters behind the shooting in June 2025, including the 15-year-old shooter, but today despite nine arrests are no closer to revealing the paymasters behind the hit.
Another unsolved assassination was the targeted killing of emerald czar Hernando Sánchez, shot dead while walking with his family in a leafy northern suburb of Usaquén in April last year. The military-style killing, by a sniper hiding in nearby woodlands, was identical to the mysterious murder nine months before of a fellow emerald baron, known as Pedro Pechuga, also unresolved.
Weapons of choice
Despite Colombia having restrictions for private ownership of firearms, the majority of 2025 killings were with guns, at 703, according to the police database. Other weapons recorded were knives (304), blunt objects (84) and grenades (6).
This pattern has persisted for decades; Colombia, and its capital, are flooded with illegal firearms, many of them from the estimated 600,000 guns smuggled south across the border from the U.S. each year. Just in the first four months of 2025, police confiscated 8,466 illegal weapons across the country
According to Carolina Ortega, a political scientist at the National University, and quoted by UPI, illegal guns were used in 78 per cent of killings in Colombia.
Easy access to guns also raised the risk of spontaneous killings, according to data from the Secretaria de Seguridad which showed that40 per cent of Bogotá homicides followed a dispute, argument or scuffle.
Most of these happened outside on the street, late in the evening, and “amidst scenes of revelry and excessive alcohol consumption”, said the report, released as part of a media campaign called “Take a second before you shoot…”.
Violent machismo
Femicides went down on 2025, both in Bogotá and at national level, according to data released this week by the Observatorio de Mujeres y Equidad de Género de Bogotá.
In Bogotá during 2025 there were 97 females killed, around 8% of total violent deaths. Of these, 20 were classified as femicides. This was slightly less than in 2024 (22 deaths) and mirrored a similar reduction (7%) nationally. Nationally, approximately one killing in five of a female was later classified as a femicide, the “violent expression of machismo”, said the study.
A study by Bogotá’s Secretaria de la Mujer found that in 49 per cent of cases in the capital, the women had suffered physical violence in the weeks before the murder, and 40 per cent had previously sought help from the police.
According to observatory data, last year Secretaria staff supported 142,688 women, of which 48% were facing violence, a slight reduction on the previous years. The 2025 figures were a reminder that although more warning signs were being detected, timely intervention was not always possible, said the report.
“Femicide does not arise from nothing: it is foreshadowed, repeated, and often normalized before reaching its most tragic outcome,” it concluded.
Pay up – or pay the price
In 2025 many Bogotá murders were linked to extortion demands, with gangs ruthlessly gunning down small business owners if they failed to pay protection money. Sometimes shop staff or a passerby were also killed or injured, in some case with grenades or explosives.
Protection rackets are nothing new in the city, but cases and killings skyrocketed post-pandemic partly because of turf wars between gangs diversifying from the drug trade and Venezuelan gangs linked to the transnational group Tren de Aragua with names like Las Satanás and Los Coyotes.
Extortion reached epidemic proportions in 2024, with an average of 200 cases a month, and continued into 2025 with a rash of crimes such as the killings of informal minibus drivers in the south of Bogotá.
Overall, Bogotá in 2025 saw extortion go down by 20 per cent compared to 2024, though it was still higher than any year during the previous decade. And already in the first month of 2026 there have been several murders linked to extortion demands including a grenade attack on a nightclub in Los Mártires last week which killed one and injured a dozen more.
Millionaire’s ride
Another death last week, that of a university professor found dead and incinerated on the outskirts of the city, highlighted increased cases of Bogotá’s infamous Paseo Millonario, where armed gangs working with taxi drivers attack and extort passengers, often torturing them to reveal bank details while they empty their accounts.
Victims are often targeted late at night leaving bars or restaurants. In a chilling twist, recent cases pointed to victims being subdued with ketamine, with the drug either killing or severely incapacitating the victim.
According to data from the GAULA (Anti-Kidnapping and Extortion Group), 40 Paseo Millonario cases were reported in 2025, a rise of 207 per cent on the previous year. Even that figure was thought to be a huge underestimate since many victims were too scared to come forward. Hotspots were in Chapinero, Kennedy, Bosa, Ciudad Bolívar, and Fontibón.
In one case a taxi gang held a victim for 19 hours, prompting the Attorney General’s Office to reclassify such crimes as “kidnapping” with a potential 42-year prison sentence. In theory this prompted the police to start responding more robustly to a crime that has plagued Bogotá for decades.
Perpetrators of these high-impact crimes were also more likely now to get locked up, with 47 imprisoned last year out of the 52 captured, which was way above average jailing rate of 6 percent of criminals arrested, according to Bogotá police chief Giovanni Cristancho, talking to RCN News last week.
But he also admitted that the understaffed police force was struggling to keep up with constantly emerging kidnap gangs, usually small teams of four or five people which could easily move around the city.
“As soon as we reinforce one area, such as around Calle 85, the modus operandi shifts to other zones,” he told RCN.
It’s that randomness, and the risk of being drugged – or worse – that makes the Paseo Millonario one of the most feared crimes in Bogotá. And for 2026, the one to watch.
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.
Trade war fears resurface
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.
Canada and Venezuela react
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 weighs in
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.
U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday that the United States would “run” Venezuela until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” of power is completed, following a U.S. military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Speaking at a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida, Trump described the operation as a “spectacular assault” and “one of the most stunning, effective and powerful displays of American military might and competence in American history.”
“This was overwhelming military power,” Trump said, praising U.S. forces for what he called their “breathtaking speed, power, precision and competence.” He said the operation involved close coordination between the U.S. military, intelligence agencies and law enforcement.
Trump said Venezuelan forces had been “waiting for us” and were in a “ready position,” but were “completely overwhelmed and very quickly incapacitated.” He said no U.S. servicemembers were killed and no equipment was lost.
According to Trump, U.S. forces struck what he described as a “heavily fortified military fortress” in the heart of Caracas, disabling Venezuelan military capabilities and temporarily cutting power to the capital. “The lights went out due to a certain expertise that America has,” he said.
U.S. military officials said the operation, dubbed “Operation Absolute Resolve,” relied on months of intelligence gathering and the deployment of more than 150 aircraft. General Dan Caine said the mission maintained “total surprise,” dismantling Venezuelan air defense systems before U.S. helicopters arrived at Maduro’s compound shortly after 1:00 a.m. Eastern Time.
The helicopters came under fire, Caine said, prompting a response with “overwhelming force.” One aircraft was hit, but all returned safely. Maduro and his wife “gave up” and were taken into custody by the U.S. Department of Justice, boarding the USS Iwo Jima at 3:29 a.m., he added.
Trump said Maduro and Flores are being taken to New York to face drug trafficking-related charges. Maduro has repeatedly denied U.S. accusations that he leads a drug cartel.
Trump said the United States was prepared to carry out a second wave of attacks if necessary, adding that Washington was “not afraid of boots on the ground” and that U.S. forces had operated “at a very high level” inside Venezuela.
Asked how the United States would govern Venezuela during the transition, Trump offered few specifics, saying only that officials were “designating people right now.” He gestured toward himself and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, saying that for a period of time “it’s largely going to be the people standing right behind me.”
Rubio described Maduro as a “fugitive of American justice” with a US$50 million reward on his head. “I guess we saved ourselves $50 million,” Rubio said, prompting Trump to add: “We should make sure nobody claims it.”
Rubio said Maduro had been given “multiple opportunities” to avoid confrontation but instead chose to “act like a wild man,” accusing him of inviting Iran into Venezuela and allowing criminal gangs to send migrants into the United States. “President Trump is not a game player,” Rubio said.
Trump also said U.S. companies would be allowed to enter Venezuela to repair its oil infrastructure and “start making money for the country,” framing the intervention as the beginning of a “partnership” that would make Venezuelans “rich, independent and safe.” He referred to Maduro as an “illegitimate dictator.”
Trump confirmed that Rubio had been in contact with Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s vice president and one of Maduro’s closest allies. Rodríguez issued an audio statement after the strikes urging the United States to provide proof of life for Maduro and Flores, sparking speculation that she may no longer be in Venezuela.
Trump said Rodríguez had expressed a willingness to do “whatever the U.S. asks,” though analysts say she would struggle to gain credibility as an agent of political change after years of defending the Maduro’s regime.
Opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado has hailed the operation as a turning point for the country.
“The hour of freedom has arrived,” Machado said in a statement, declaring that Maduro is now facing international justice for “atrocious crimes” committed against Venezuelans and foreign citizens. She said the time had come for “popular sovereignty and national sovereignty” to prevail.
Machado called for the immediate recognition of opposition-backed Edmundo González Urrutia as Venezuela’s legitimate president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, urging military officers to recognize his authority.
“We are prepared to enforce our mandate and take power,” she said, calling on Venezuelans inside the country to remain organized and on those abroad to mobilize international support for rebuilding Venezuela.
“Venezuela will be free,” Machado said. “Hand in hand with God, until the very end.”
U.S. President Donald Trump has hailed as “brilliant” the U.S. military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, as explosions were reported in Caracas early Saturday. Governments across the Americas and Europe are reacting to the arrest of the Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores.
In a brief telephone interview with The New York Times hours after the strikes, Trump praised the planning and execution of the operation. “A lot of good planning and a lot of great, great troops and people,” Trump said. “It was a brilliant operation, actually.”
Trump said U.S. forces carried out a large-scale strike against military targets in Venezuela and captured Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, who were flown out of the country. He has not disclosed where they are being held. The U.S. administration claims there were no American casualties in the operation but declined to comment on Venezuelan casualties.
Venezuelan authorities have yet to confirm Maduro’s capture. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said on state television that the whereabouts of Maduro and Flores were unknown and demanded “proof of life” from Washington.
Interior Minister and the regime’s henchman Diosdado Cabello urged calm, telling Venezuelans not to “make things easier for the invading enemy,” and alleged without evidence that civilian buildings had been hit.
In a separate statement broadcast on state television VTV, Venezuela’s Attorney General Tarek William Saab formally requested proof of life for Maduro and Flores. Saab condemned the U.S. action as a shift “from rhetoric to direct violence” and described the strikes as a premeditated act of terrorism. He said the operation left an unspecified number of people injured and killed, without providing figures or evidence.
Explosions were reported across Caracas in the early hours of Saturday, with power outages affecting several districts, according to witnesses and local media. Venezuelan state outlets reported strikes on major military and government sites, including Fuerte Tiuna, the country’s largest military base, and the La Carlota air base in heart of the capital.
According to sources inside Venezuela, pro-opposition supporters aligned with Venezuela’s legitimate president-elect Edmundo González and Nobel Peace Prize laureate María Corina Machado have begun mobilizing to secure government buildings and institutions and are preparing steps toward a political transition. Sources claim to be preparing the groundwork for what they describe as a interim administration, though no formal announcement has been made.
The U.S. embassy in Bogotá issued a security alert urging American citizens in Venezuela to shelter in place, citing “reports of explosions in and around” Caracas. The United States suspended operations at its embassy in Caracas in 2019.
Bogotá Mayor Carlos Fernando Galán called for calm and announced increased security measures near the U.S. and Venezuelan diplomatic missions in the Colombian capital. “It is clear that a new stage is opening today for Venezuela, which should be oriented toward the return of democracy. That process must be peaceful and with full respect for the civilian population and international law. At this moment, the protection of Venezuelan citizens, both within their country and abroad, is a priority. Bogotá is home to hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan citizens, and our responsibility is to ensure their safety, their rights, and coexistence in the city,” he said.
Maduro was indicted in the United States in 2020 on corruption and drug trafficking charges, which he has repeatedly denied. The U.S. State Department has offered a $50 million reward for information leading to his arrest or conviction.
U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said Maduro and Flores had been indicted in the Southern District of New York on charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy and cocaine importation conspiracy, adding that both would face U.S. justice.
Republicans react to Venezuela strikes
U.S House Representative María Elvira Salazar, a Florida Republican and outspoken critic of the Maduro government, said the strikes represented “the fall of a criminal structure masquerading as a government.” She said Maduro’s removal opened the door for “a real democratic transition led by Venezuelans who have resisted tyranny for years.”
Republican Senator Carlos Gimenez affirmed that “President Trump has changed the course of history in our hemisphere. Our country and the world are safer for it. Today’s decisive action is this hemisphere’s equivalent to the Fall of the Berlin Wall.”
Senator Rick Scott announced “A new day for Venezuela and Latin America. The United States and our hemisphere are safer because of President Trump’s leadership!”
U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau said in a social media post that Maduro had been removed from power and would be put on trial or punished, without providing further details.
Reactions from Latin America
Former Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez defended the U.S. action as legitimate self-defense, arguing that Venezuela had for years harbored armed groups and facilitated drug trafficking. Uribe said that when a country becomes “a sanctuary for narco-terrorism,” it inevitably triggers consequences. He accused Venezuela’s leadership of destroying democratic institutions and fueling an exodus of millions across the region, urging Venezuelans to pursue freedom and institutional reconstruction.
Former Colombian President Iván Duque also welcomed the development, calling Maduro’s capture “the beginning of the end of the narco-dictatorship in Venezuela.” Duque said the moment opened a path toward democratic reconstruction with international support, while emphasizing the need to protect regional security.
Colombia’s current President Gustavo Petro took a sharply different view, rejecting what he called aggression against Venezuela’s sovereignty. Petro said Colombia had deployed security forces to its border and activated contingency plans in case of a mass influx of refugees, while seeking to convene the United Nations Security Council. “Internal conflicts between peoples are resolved by those same peoples in peace,” Petro said.
Argentina’s President Javier Milei struck a celebratory tone, posting on “X”: “Long live freedom, carajo!”
Ecuador’s President Daniel Noboa voiced support for Venezuela and the opposition. “To María Corina Machado, Edmundo González and the Venezuelan people, it is time to recover your country,” Noboa wrote, adding that what he called “narco-Chavista criminal structures” would continue to fall across the continent.
Colombian presidential candidate Paloma Valencia of the Centro Democrático party was among the first to react to the breaking news, stating: “Free Venezuela. The illegitimate dictator who usurped power, and subjugated Venezuela and the Venezuelans, has fallen. Democrats yearned for an opportunity for the return of democracy and freedom.”
Medellin Mayor Federico Gutiérrez also celebrated the arrest of the regime leader, saying: “Dictator Nicolás Maduro has been captured. Every tyrant’s time comes. Venezuela Free.”
Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has urged restraint and respect for international law, while Cuba’s President Miguel Díaz-Canel condemned the “criminal attack” by the United States.
As of Saturday morning, no senior Venezuelan military official, including Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino, had appeared publicly, and it remained unclear who controlled key state institutions or how Venezuela’s armed forces would respond as the crisis continued to unfold.
Screen capture from television shows DEA agents escorting Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro.
The United States has captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro, along with his wife Cilia Flores, after a series of targeted military strikes on Caracas at 1:30 am on Saturday, January 3, 2026.
In a statement posted on his Truth Social platform, U.S President Donald J. Trump said U.S. forces, working with U.S. law enforcement, conducted a “large scale strike” that resulted in the capture of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Trump said both were flown out of Venezuela, without providing details on where they were taken or the legal basis for their detention.
“The United States of America has successfully carried out a large scale strike against Venezuela and its leader, President Nicolas Maduro,” Trump said, adding that more information would be released at a news conference scheduled for 11 a.m. ET at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida.
Explosions were reported across parts of Caracas in the early hours of Saturday, according to witnesses and videos posted on social media, which showed flashes in the sky, fires and power outages in several areas of the capital. One of the main targets appeared to be Fuerte Tiuna, the country’s largest military base and a key command center for Venezuela’s Bolivarian Armed Forces.
The extent of damage and possible casualties could not be independently verified. Venezuelan authorities did not immediately confirm whether senior military officials, including Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino, were injured or killed in the strikes.
In Washington, Republican lawmakers were quick to praise President Trump’s decisive action. Representative Mario Díaz-Balart praised the operation, saying it demonstrated decisive leadership against what he described as an illegitimate regime that posed a threat to U.S. and regional security. Other lawmakers raised questions about the legality of the strikes and whether Congress had authorized the use of force.
In Colombia, Medellín Mayor Federico Gutiérrez expressed support for Venezuelans living abroad, saying millions had fled repression and economic collapse under Maduro’s rule. Venezuelan migrants make up a significant share of Medellín’s population, local authorities say.
It remains unclear how Venezuela’s armed forces will respond or whether Maduro’s removal will lead to a peaceful transition of power with the return of President-elect Edmundo González and opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, both currently out of the country.
El presidente Gustavo Petro está enzarzado en una guerra de palabras con el presidente Donald Trump sobre el papel de Colombia en el tráfico mundial de drogas. El asunto es complicado.
Avianca Group International Limited (AGIL) yesterday reported its consolidated financial results for the third quarter of 2025. The company achieved $411 million USD in Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, Amortization, and Rent (EBITDAR), resulting in a 27.2% margin for the period.
The third-quarter EBITDAR represents a 15.5% year-over-year increase from the $356 million USD reported in Q3 2024. Total operating revenues reached $1,509 million USD, marking a 12.8% increase compared to the $1,338 million USD recorded in the same period of the prior year. Total operating costs increased by 13.3% year-over-year, settling at $1,290 million USD. Net income for the quarter was $101 million USD, an improvement from $72 million USD in Q3 2024.
Operational and Capacity Metrics
Capacity, measured in Available Seat Kilometers (ASKs), reached 18,284 million, denoting a 6.8% increase compared to Q3 2024. This growth was attributed primarily to a 6.2% year-over-year increase in Stage Length. Passenger departures increased 1.0% year-over-year. The company transported 9.7 million passengers, consistent with the volume in the comparable period of 2024. The network encompassed 169 routes serving 83 destinations across 28 countries. Subsequent to the quarter’s close, Avianca introduced three new international routes, which included Belém (Brazil) and Monterrey (Mexico).
Cost performance for the quarter indicated a reduction in overall per-unit costs. Total Passenger CASK (Cost per Available Seat Kilometer) was 5.7 cents, a 1.9% decrease relative to Q3 2024. This decline was largely driven by Passenger Fuel CASK, which decreased 9.9% to 1.7 cents, resulting from lower fuel prices and increased fuel efficiency. Passenger CASK excluding fuel increased 2.1% year-over-year to 3.9 cents.
Balance Sheet and Credit Rating Actions
As of September 30, 2025, Avianca reported liquidity totaling $1,361 million USD, which represented 24.2% of last-twelve-month revenue. This total includes a cash balance of $1,161 million USD and $200 million USD available through an undrawn Revolving Credit Facility. The Net Debt to last-twelve-month EBITDAR ratio improved sequentially to 2.8x from 2.9x reported on June 30, 2025.
Rating agencies Moody’s and Fitch upgraded Avianca’s credit ratings to B1 and B+ respectively. Both rating actions were assigned a stable outlook.
Business Unit Performance and Network Development
The cargo division, Avianca Cargo, recorded $157 million USD in revenue during Q3 2025, representing a 14.1% year-over-year increase. The operating freighter fleet currently consists of nine Airbus A330s, following the integration of two additional P2F aircraft during the quarter.
The loyalty program, LifeMiles, reported a 72% year-over-year increase in Q3 2025 Third-Party Cash EBITDA, reaching $77 million USD.
In network strategy, AGIL expanded its Business Class service to 54 additional routes from key operational centers including Bogotá (Colombia), Medellín (Colombia), San Salvador (El Salvador), Quito, and Guayaquil (Ecuador). The company’s passenger operating fleet totaled 161 aircraft as of September 2025, including 134 Airbus A320 family aircraft, 15 Boeing 787s, and 12 Airbus A330s.
Avianca is a member of Star Alliance and is part of the Abra Group. The Abra Group also controls Gol Linhas Aéreas Inteligentes S.A. and holds a strategic investment in Wamos Air .
The US Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has authorized the entry of Colombian shell eggs destined for industrial processing, according to an announcement made by Diana Marcela Morales Rojas, Minister of Commerce, Industry and Tourism (MinCIT). This decision expands the export capacity for Colombia’s poultry sector by allowing the product to enter the US market without requiring additional import permits or sanitary certificates from the Colombian Government.
The authorization by APHIS follows technical and commercial discussions between US and Colombian regulatory bodies. Minister Morales Rojas stated that the outcome enables the poultry industry to expand its presence in international markets and integrate into higher-standard value chains.
Six US facilities have been designated to receive the Colombian shell eggs for processing. These plants are situated in the states of New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Arkansas, and Georgia. The direct entry authorization for industrial use simplifies the logistics and required sanitary compliance for the export of the product.
Above photo: Colombia’s Minister of Commerce, Industry and Trade, Diana Marcela Morales (courtesy MinCIT)
Why such a massive U.S. military deployment off the coast of Venezuela, supposedly to combat the “Cartel of the Suns” and stop drug trafficking from Venezuela to the United States? After more than four months, the results amount to little more than a handful of small vessels destroyed – an extremely modest impact given the scale of the force deployed.
The reality is that the volume of drug trafficking transiting through Venezuela to the United States is relatively small. Venezuela is not a producer of cocaine, much less of fentanyl, most of which enters the United States via Mexico. If the real interest is not to halt drug trafficking, what then is the motivation for placing the Fourth Fleet on a war footing in the Caribbean Sea? Logic might lead one to think the U.S. interest is oil, since Venezuela holds the largest reserves in the world—but that is not it either. Today the United States is the world’s leading oil producer, at 13.4 million barrels per day, and it has proven reserves sufficient for approximately ten years, assuming no new discoveries and no improvements in recovery or technological advances—an impossible assumption.
So what, then, is the underlying issue if it is neither drugs, nor oil, nor other minerals in which Venezuela might have potential and that would be attractive to the United States?
The answer lies in a little-publicized document formally released by the White House on December 4, titled National Security Strategy 2025. While the document introduces substantial changes in relations with Europe and traditional adversaries, the most striking element is the new emphasis placed on Latin America. Of the document’s “roadmap to ensure that America remains the greatest and most successful nation in human history”, five sections are devoted exclusively to our region, positioning Latin America as a fundamental component of U.S. security – a very significant shift from earlier versions, which historically prioritized the Middle East or Asia. There is a new strategy, or if you will, a “New Monroe Doctrine,” a continuation of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, reaffirming U.S. preeminence in the region.
“After years of neglect, the United States will once again apply and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to reestablish U.S. preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region. We will deny non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our Hemisphere,” states the 29-page document.
Key elements of this new doctrine include: countering external influence by requiring Latin American governments to dismantle foreign military installations and divest strategic assets in exchange for aid or alliances; stopping illegal migration, including naval patrols in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific, selective border deployments, and the use of incentives for governments to curb migratory flows; combating narco-terrorists and cartels; and sealing economic and political commitments with aligned governments in a win-win framework that would include procurement preferences and greater cooperation, among other measures, with a view to turning Latin America into a stable market for U.S. exports and a buffer against global rivals.
In recent years, China has achieved significant penetration in Latin America through its diplomacy and long-term strategy (the Belt and Road Initiative, or New Silk Road). For nearly all countries in the region, China has become the leading trading partner, displacing the United States; it is also an investor in major infrastructure projects and a lender of funds (in Venezuela’s case, a very large lender that negotiated debt repayment in oil at very low prices). In addition, China has become a major supplier of weapons and information technology.
In this context, what Washington appears to be seeking is indeed a regime change in Venezuela to counter the influence of China and Russia, but without openly announcing it in order to avoid a direct diplomatic confrontation. Trump has segmented the region into friendly regimes (Argentina, El Salvador, Ecuador, Honduras, and Guatemala), enemy regimes (Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua), and regimes in limbo (Colombia and Brazil).
For Venezuela, regime change appears imminent, which would profoundly benefit Colombia, because, as Miguel Uribe Turbay said before he was assassinated, “as long as there is no freedom in Venezuela, there will be no peace in Colombia.” On the other hand, a change of government in Colombia is also approaching, and the country will have to decide which of these groups it wants to belong to—whether it repairs its relations with its traditional partner and ally, or definitively joins the group of pariah states in the region. Let us hope it is the former.
About the author:Luis Guillermo Plata served as Minister of Trade, Industry of Commerce during the government of President Álvaro Uribe Vélez, and in 2021, appointed by President Iván Duque, Ambassador of Colombia to Spain.
Login
