Brace yourself for a diplomatic showdown that’s hotter than a Bogotá summer: the U.S. State Department has pulled the visa of Colombian President Gustavo Petro after his jaw-dropping comments in New York City.
In a stunning turn of events, the State Department revoked Petro’s visa following his participation in a pro-Palestinian demonstration where he urged American soldiers to defy President Donald Trump and likened Israel’s actions in Gaza to historical atrocities, as Breitbart reports.
This saga unfolded during Petro’s visit to New York for the United Nations General Assembly, where he didn’t shy away from stirring the pot. Earlier in the week, during a U.N. speech, he accused Trump of “murder” over military strikes on drug-trafficking vessels in the Caribbean. Talk about starting with a bang.
Not content with one controversy, Petro also claimed during the U.N. General Assembly that most drug dealers are “blond and blue-eyed,” a statement that raises eyebrows and questions about his grasp on reality. He even pushed for international criminal proceedings against Trump. That’s not diplomacy; that’s a declaration of war by words.
The day before his street demonstration, Petro attended a meeting titled “In Defense of Democracy, Combating Extremism” alongside leftist leaders from Latin America and Spain, moderated by Chilean President Gabriel Boric. Notably, Trump wasn’t invited to this gathering, which focused on the supposed “risks” of conservative movements worldwide. Sounds like a cozy echo chamber, doesn’t it?
During this meeting, Petro aimed at Trump’s U.N. speech, accusing him of spreading falsehoods and stoking fears on issues like climate policy, women’s rights, and migration. While criticism is fair game, Petro’s rhetoric seems more about grandstanding than fostering dialogue.
Things escalated when Petro hit the streets of New York for a pro-Palestinian demonstration, where he didn’t just criticize policy—he called for outright rebellion. “I ask all the soldiers of the United States Army not to point their guns at humanity,” he declared. That’s not a policy critique; it’s a direct challenge to the military chain of command.
Petro doubled down, urging soldiers to “disobey the orders of Trump” and instead “obey the orders of humanity.” Such language isn’t just provocative; it’s a reckless invitation to chaos from a foreign leader on American soil. No wonder the State Department took swift action.
The State Department didn’t mince words in response: “We will revoke Petro’s visa due to his reckless and incendiary actions.” That’s a diplomatic slap heard ‘round the world, and frankly, it’s hard to argue with their reasoning given the gravity of Petro’s statements.
At the same demonstration, Petro proposed creating an army stronger than those of the U.S. and Israel, a notion as impractical as it is inflammatory. He also announced plans to introduce a U.N. resolution for such a force to establish a Palestinian state. Bold ideas, but ones that seem more about posturing than problem-solving.
Petro’s track record shows he’s no stranger to controversy, having severed Colombia’s ties with Israel in 2024 and long criticized U.S. foreign policy on narcotics enforcement. He’s argued that American counternarcotics efforts are a tool to control Latin America, a claim that dismisses the very real threat of drug trafficking in the region.
Adding to the mix, Petro has aligned himself with Venezuela’s fugitive leader Nicolás Maduro, a move that raises serious questions about his judgment in international partnerships. He’s also warned that “the bombs falling in Gaza will also fall here” in Colombia, a statement that seems designed more to alarm than inform.
Back home, Petro recently reinstated Equality Minister Juan Carlos Florián, whose appointment was temporarily halted by a Colombian court under gender parity laws due to his past as an adult film actor. While personal history shouldn’t disqualify someone from public service, the move adds another layer of contention to Petro’s leadership style.
It’s worth noting that Petro is barred by Colombia’s constitution from running for re-election in the upcoming presidential contest, which may explain his increasingly bold international stances. Perhaps he’s aiming for a legacy as a global provocateur rather than a unifier. Either way, his actions have consequences, as the visa revocation proves.
Ultimately, Petro’s words and actions in New York have painted him as a leader more interested in ideological battles than pragmatic governance, and the U.S. response sends a clear message: there are limits to how far rhetoric can go before it crosses a line. While diplomacy should always leave room for disagreement, calling for disobedience within another nation’s military is a bridge too far. The fallout from this episode will likely reverberate through U.S.-Colombia relations for some time.
