By Diego Cardona C., EL ESPECTADOR, August 21, 2026
(Translated by Eunice Gibson, CSN Volunteer Translator)
The national emergency produced by the earthquake on August 10 has resulted in other subjects receiving less analysis in Colombia. That’s true of foreign policy, where we have seen important changes since the first day of the administration. First of all, it’s necessary to identify the background of the world vision, which is different from that in the previous administration. It’s in that framework that we can place the relationship with the U. S.
For the Petro administration, the vision of the world was close to the thirdworldism of the ‘70’s: conflict of interests between north and south as the central theme; a capitalist north and a south that only exports raw materials; energetic voraciousness of the north and of capitalism; and the necessity for the south to undertake a kind of economic revolution, ending the exploitation of oil and gas, among other things.
There was little emphasis on the subject of drugs, because the north were the consumers and thus it was supposed that they ought to assume the cost and take over the principal work of control. Of the 24,000 hectares planted in coca in the mid ‘90’s, that has grown, according to recent U.N. statistics (UNODC) to 261,000 hectares in 2026. Would you expect, with those terrifying statistics, that the U.S. would continue being indifferent to the issue?
With regard to migration, it’s true that many of our fellow citizens found better opportunities for themselves and their families in developed foreign parts, especially in the U. S. and Europe. That economic migration, looking for a better quality of life in general, basically demonstrated that national policies were not satisfying the needs of a good number of our citizens. The migration through the Darién registered unprecedented numbers. Because of those two subjects—illegal drugs and uncontrolled migration—Colombia turned into a problem country and not just into a country of opportunities. The vision that was idyllic and a little autistic and irresponsible (the two phenomena brought financial resources into the country) put us in the eye of the hurricane.
The trade with the U. S. was as follows: $12,400,000,000 in exports and $16,000,000,000 in imports (30% of our exports and 25% of total imports). Putting 30% of the country’s exports in danger because of visceral political attitudes was frankly irresponsible. On the other hand, trade with China is very unequal and it has not been as promising as with Brazil, Argentina, or Peru. To China we export $2,400,000,00 annually, but we import $15,900,000,000, a worrisome negative relationship of 7 to 1.
Since “the facts are stubborn”, there was no setting for making a great, idyllic, speech. It’s clear that we have to export more to Latin America and Europe, and that at the same time, we have to make a significant effort to strengthen our presence in the whole Indo-Pacific region; but those are processes that last for years.
It’s worth noting that what some see as a resignation in the face of the might of the U.S., seems to be, more likely, the conviction that Colombia is a Western country, and to that extent should participate actively in regional and world play. It’s something similar to the motivation for participation in and creation of the OAS (Organization of American States), which was created in Bogotá; the participation in the Korean War; or the promotion of the famous Uruguay Round of the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), which redefined trade procedures worldwide. Colombia was also the country that promoted the “co-responsibility principle” on the matter of drugs, not only in the OAS and the Summit of the Americas, but also in Latin America’s relationships with Europe. The thematic proximity to the U.S. is more than anything a product of conviction, and not an imposition as some keep saying.
With nearly 300,000 hectares planted in coca in this country, it would be naïve to think that the bilateral agenda with the U.S. could be diversified to the maximum as everybody wants us to do. Left behind are the illusions of changing the status of illegal drugs at the international level, as was done with alcohol, with tobacco, social media, and television. It’s also necessary to produce tangible results in the area of migration. Meanwhile, a central task is to promote our exports (hopefully, of manufactured goods), U.S. investments in Colombia, education exchanges that are not only in technical areas, and persistent work on two “new” issues: the TIC (Trusted Internet Connections), which are an indispensable base for development, and the critical minerals.
As the anti-drug policy has changed from the previous administration to the current administration, the new emphasis on eradication and especially interdiction is understandable. Accordingly, even before the second round of the election, it had been announced that Colombia would be incorporated into the Shield of the Americas, which now has a membership of 19 countries. This will include direct exchange of military intelligence, coordination for interdiction on both land and sea routes, and the possibility that the member countries would request direct operational assistance or would carry out joint operations. In the case of Colombia, it’s understood that this will be in accord with the provisions of the Constitution.
President De la Espriella has announced his approval of our new Ambassador in Washington: she has served twice as a Minister, including Minister of Foreign Relations, with training in international relations, and important experience in public affairs and in the private sector, and besides that, she has the personal qualities for carrying out excellent management of the post.
In addition, a fundamental task for the new Ambassador will be working in Washington in a bipartisan manner, because there could be changes, especially in the U.S. House of Representatives, after the midterm elections in early November. There are 435 members and the Republican majority in the lower chamber is extremely narrow: 218 members, while the Democrats have 2012. That majority may be maintained, or it might change in November, especially if the closing of the Strait of Hormúz is not resolved.