Connect with us

Politics

In Colombia, anger and disbelief at Trump threats of U.S. strikes

Published

on

In Colombia, anger and disbelief at Trump threats of U.S. strikes

An offhand comment by President Trump threatening to attack Colombia, a major U.S. ally, has roiled its government and confounded its public, anxious and unsure whether to take the U.S. leader seriously.

Trump’s remarks came during questions from reporters Tuesday over a prospective U.S. military campaign against drug trafficking networks in Latin America. The mission could expand beyond Venezuela, the prime target of nascent U.S. war plans, the president said.

“I hear Colombia, the country of Colombia, is making cocaine,” Trump said at a Cabinet meeting. “Then they sell us their cocaine. We appreciate that very much, but yeah, anybody that’s doing that and selling it into our country is subject to attack. Not just Venezuela.”

Gustavo Petro, Colombia’s first leftist president, who has repeatedly clashed with the White House, likened Trump’s bellicose rhetoric to a declaration of war.

“Do not threaten our sovereignty, because you will awaken the Jaguar,” Petro wrote on X. “Attacking our sovereignty is declaring war; do not damage two centuries of diplomatic relations.”

Advertisement

In an official communique, the Colombian Foreign Ministry called on “brotherly” nations in Latin America and the Caribbean to reject “any attempt at foreign intervention that seeks to undermine sovereignty.”

Trump’s latest threat comes amid deteriorating relations with Bogota, which celebrated 200 years of diplomatic relations with Washington just three years ago and, marking the occasion, was designated a major non-NATO ally by President Biden, a status celebrated across party lines on Capitol Hill.

Petro’s election that year began a shift, with U.S. assistance reduced in 2024 over Petro’s drug policies and, at the beginning of this year, paused completely by the Trump administration. The Treasury Department labeled Petro an “illegal drug dealer” in October and imposed sanctions against him and his family.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has been a harsh critic of President Trump.

(Fernando Vergara / Associated Press)

Advertisement

Evan Ellis, who served in Trump’s first term planning State Department policy on Latin America, the Caribbean, and international narcotics, told The Times that strikes against Colombia are unlikely — but not as far-fetched as the prospect of a U.S. attack on Mexico, whose economic clout is greater, and whose government has fared better in diplomacy with Washington.

“There’s a strong hope that it’s just bluster — that, given Colombia has a sovereign government that the U.S. recognizes and has long worked with, it’s understood it would be catastrophic for the relationship,” Ellis said. “There’s a combination of concern and confusion, but there is a hope that this is just part of the president’s style.”

Trump’s secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and deputy secretary of State, Christopher Landau, both have deep knowledge of the region and are said to be advocating against military strikes against U.S. allies. But Petro’s insults against Trump, calling him “ignorant,” “profoundly rude” and “against humanity,” have rankled a U.S. president accustomed to obsequious praise.

“In a certain way, despite the close military relationship and everything at stake, you clearly have a president who’s been imprudent at best,” Ellis said of Petro. “Making shrill and defiant statements against Trump are about the clearest way to get on his bad side.”

Advertisement

United Nations figures show that Colombian cultivation of coca — the raw ingredient in cocaine — has reached record levels in recent years, fueled by rising demand for cocaine not only in the United States, but also Europe and elsewhere.

Whereas U.S.-Venezuelan relations have been strained for more than a quarter of a century, Colombia has long been viewed as a steadfast ally, receiving billions in aid from Washington destined for antidrug campaigns. The alliance has endured despite large-scale internal strife in Colombia and the nation’s status as the world’s primary producer and exporter of cocaine.

The specter of a U.S. military attack seemed unfathomable to many Colombians processing the news Wednesday.

“A few years ago, we would never have imagined that Colombia could be threatened with attacks on its territory,” said Sebastián Bitar, an analyst at the University of the Andes. “We trusted in the solid relationship between the United States and Colombia.”

Guillermo Cochez, a Panamanian politician who served as his nation’s ambassador to the Organization of American States, believes that Trump’s threat against Colombia amounts to bluster, noting close ties between U.S. Southern Command and the Colombian military. “The most Americanized military in Latin America is the Colombian military,” Cochez told The Times.

Advertisement

“The United States will not do anything in Colombia, because they have to solve Venezuela first. That will be happening in the next phase,” Cochez said.

“Petro has so many problems inside Colombia that is known by the American government,” Cochez added. “It’s a distraction for Donald Trump. He’s trying to use his fight with Trump to try to get some respect in Colombia.”

The armed forces of the two nations have collaborated for years, conducting joint training exercises and counter-narcotics operations. A unilateral strike could upend that relationship, wrote the Colombian daily El Heraldo in an editorial, warning a U.S. attack could spark an “unprecedented regional reaction, with internally displaced [civilians], retaliations by various actors, border crises and new diasporas.”

Throughout Latin America, Trump’s saber-rattling has alarmed many — especially on the left — reflecting the region’s historic wariness of U.S. intervention.

Alejandro Rusconi, a left-wing Argentine lawyer and analyst, called Trump’s statements “yet another demonstration of the belligerent escalation being carried out by the U.S. government against the peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Advertisement

But many local analysts warned that Colombia needed to heed Trump’s threat, taking whatever steps are necessary to avoid a direct confrontation.

“Its not the time to provoke the United States,” economist Mauricio Reina told Red Más Noticias, a Colombian outlet.

“With Donald Trump,” he added, “one has to fly low, avoiding the radar.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

Published

on

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

new video loaded: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

On the fifth day of the war in Iran, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the U.S. military operation was intensifying and that more warplanes were arriving in the region.

By Christina Kelso

March 4, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

Published

on

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A U.S. submarine sank a prized Iranian warship by torpedo, the first such sinking of an enemy ship since World War II, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said Wednesday morning.

Hegseth joined Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine at the Pentagon to provide an update to reporters on “Operation Epic Fury” in Iran.

“An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters,” Hegseth said. “Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo. Quiet death. The first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War Two. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department. We are fighting to win.”

Caine said that an Iranian vessel was “effectively neutralized” in a Navy “fast attack” using a single Mark 48 torpedo. He added that the U.S. Navy achieved “immediate effect, sending the warship to the bottom of the sea.”

Advertisement

WATCH HEGSETH’S ANNOUNCEMENT:

Hegseth said that the U.S. Navy sank the Iranian warship, the Soleimani. The flagship was named for Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian military officer who served in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who the U.S. killed in a January 2020 drone strike during President Donald Trump’s first term.

“The Iranian Navy rests at the bottom of the Persian Gulf. Combat ineffective, decimated, destroyed, defeated. Pick your adjective,” Hegseth said. “In fact, last night we sunk their prize ship, the Soleimani. Looks like POTUS got him twice. Their navy, not a factor. Pick your adjective. It is no more.”

This map shows U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iranian naval forces as of March 1. (Fox News)

Hegseth also told reporters at the briefing that the U.S. and Israel will soon achieve “complete control” over Iranian airspace after Iran’s missile capabilities were drastically diminished in the four days of fighting.

Advertisement

US ‘WINNING DECISIVELY’ AGAINST IRAN, WILL ACHIEVE ‘COMPLETE CONTROL’ OF AIRSPACE WITHIN DAYS, HEGSETH SAYS

“More bombers and more fighters are arriving just today and now, with complete control of the skies, we will be using 500 pound, one thousand pound and 2,000 pound laser-guided precision gravity bombs, of which we have a nearly unlimited stockpile,” he said.

The war has killed more than 1,000 people in Iran and dozens in Lebanon, while U.S. officials said six American troops were killed in a fatal drone strike in Kuwait.

Thousands of travelers have been left stranded across the Middle East.

This map shows security and travel updates for Americans regarding countries in the Middle East region. (Fox News)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Caine told reporters that the U.S. military is helping thousands of Americans stranded in the Middle East after the U.S. State Department urged citizens to leave more than a dozen countries.

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Related Article

Israel says fighter jet took down Iranian warplane, the first shootdown of its kind
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Published

on

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) is preparing for President Trump to declare a national emergency in order to seize control of this year’s midterm elections from the states, including by bracing his Senate colleagues for a vote in which they would be forced to either co-sign on the power grab or resist it.

In the wake of reporting last week that conservative activists with connections to the White House were circulating such an order, Padilla sent a letter to his Senate colleagues Friday stating that any such order would be “wildly illegal and unconstitutional,” and would no doubt face “extremely strict scrutiny” in the courts.

“Nevertheless, if the President does escalate his unprecedented assault on our democracy by declaring an election-related emergency, I will swiftly introduce a privileged resolution [and] force a vote in the Senate to terminate the fake emergency,” wrote Padilla, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.

Padilla wrote that such an order — which could possibly “include banning mail-in voting, eliminating major voting registration methods, voter purges, and/or new document barriers for registering to vote and voting” — would clearly go beyond Trump’s authority.

Advertisement

“Put simply, no President has the power under the Constitution or any law to take over elections, and no declaration or order can create one out of thin air,” Padilla wrote.

The same day Padilla sent his letter, Trump was asked whether he was considering declaring a national emergency around the midterms. “Who told you that?” he asked — before saying he was not considering such an order.

The White House referred The Times to that exchange when asked Tuesday for comment on Padilla’s letter.

If Trump did declare such an emergency, a “privileged resolution,” as Padilla proposed, would require the full Senate to vote on the record on whether or not to terminate it — forcing any Senate allies of the president to own the policy politically, along with him.

Experts say there is no evidence that U.S. elections are significantly affected or swung by widespread fraud or foreign interference, despite robust efforts by Trump and his allies for years to find it.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, Trump has been emphatic that such fraud is occurring, particularly in blue states such as California that allow for mail-in ballots and do not have strict voter ID laws. He and others in his administration have asserted, again without evidence, that large numbers of noncitizen residents are casting votes and that others are “harvesting” ballots out of the mail and filling them out in bulk.

Soon after taking office, Trump issued an executive order purporting to require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship before registering and barring the counting of mail-in ballots received after election day, but it was largely blocked by the courts.

Trump’s loyalist Justice Department sued red and blue states across the country for their full voter rolls, but those efforts also have largely been blocked, including in California. The FBI also raided an elections office in Georgia that has been the focus of Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

Trump is also pushing for the passage of the SAVE Act, a voter ID bill passed by the House, but it has stalled in the Senate.

In recent weeks, Trump has expressed frustration that his demands around voting security have not translated into changes in blue state policies ahead of the upcoming midterm elections, where his shrinking approval could translate into major gains for Democrats.

Advertisement

Last month, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, “I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!”

Then, last week, the Washington Post reported that a draft executive order being circulated by activists with ties to Trump suggests that unproven claims of Chinese interference in the 2020 election could be used as a pretext to declare an elections emergency granting Trump sweeping authority to unilaterally institute the changes he wants to see in state-run elections.

Election experts said the Constitution is clear that states control and run elections, not with the executive branch.

Democrats have widely denounced any federal takeover of elections by Trump. And some Republicans have expressed similar concerns, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who chairs the Senate rules committee.

In the Wall Street Journal last year, McConnell warned against Trump or any Republican president asserting sweeping authority to control elections, in part because Democrats would then be empowered to claim similar authority if and when they retake power.

Advertisement

McConnell’s office referred The Times to that Journal opinion piece when asked about the circulating emergency order and Padilla’s resolution.

Padilla’s office said his resolution would be introduced in response to an emergency declaration by Trump, but hoped it wouldn’t be necessary.

“Instead of trying to evade accountability at the ballot box,” Padilla wrote, “the President should focus on the needs of Americans struggling to pay for groceries, health care, housing and other everyday needs and put these illegal and unconstitutional election orders in the trash can where they belong.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending