U.S., Colombia withdraw ambassadors amid accusations of coup plotting
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that he ordered the recall of John T. McNamara, the acting ambassador in Bogotá, on Thursday 'following baseless and reprehensible statements from senior Colombian government officials.' The State Department also called Colombia an 'essential strategic partner' but said it would pursue 'other measures to make clear our deep concern over the current state of our bilateral relationship.'
In response, Petro said he would call back Ambassador Daniel García-Peña from Washington in order to 'brief us on the progress of the bilateral agenda to which I committed myself from the beginning of my government.'
Although Rubio did not elaborate on the alleged 'reprehensible' statements, Colombian newspaper El Tiempo on Thursday published a letter allegedly sent to the U.S. House Committee on Ethics calling for an investigation into House Republicans, including Florida lawmakers Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, Rep. María Elvira Salazar, and Rep. Carlos Antonio Gimenez. The letter was signed by 30 Colombian representatives.
In it, the congressmen expressed 'deep concern' about the lawmakers' conduct and said that 'any unjustified interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign country undermines' the principles of mutual respect between nations.
Representatives Díaz-Balart and Gimenez were mentioned alongside Trump advisors including Rubio in recordings leaked to the Spanish newspaper El País that purport to show Petro's former Foreign Minister, Álvaro Leyva, seeking U.S. pressure to oust his old boss.
'I was in the United States with a top-tier figure: Mario Díaz-Balart. The Díaz-Balarts are the ones behind the Secretary of State,' Leyva allegedly told an unknown person in the recording. (Rep. Salazar was not mentioned in the recording but Colombian lawmakers accused her of making public comments aimed at delegitimizing Petro).
According to El País, the White House never considered Leyva's proposal, and Díaz-Balart dismissed the claims, saying he meets with all kinds of groups including officials in Colombia's current government. 'I laugh at so many fabrications, nonsense, and hypocrisy. It reminds me of the saying 'every fool with his own agenda'', he said.
Gimenez sloughed off the accusations as a 'media circus by Gustavo Petro and his henchmen' and said they shouldn't complain if the U.S. denies later denies them visas.
Concrete evidence of an actual coup plot remains elusive and analysts see the rhetoric from Colombia's government as problematic.
'The only proof that we have [of a coup plot] are Leyva's recordings… We do not even have real evidence of this happening from Leyva associates, which is problematic because it is not clear if these individuals were actively conspiring, especially as many of them have strongly denied these allegations,' said Sergio Guzmán, director of Colombia Risk Analysis, a consultancy.
'The U.S. Congress doesn't want to remain silent nor let this slide,' he added.
The recall of ambassadors is the most severe escalation yet in the tense relationship between Trump and Petro that has been brewing for months. Guzmán points to a number of factors deteriorating the relationship including Petro's treatment of the opposition; lack of political protection for presidential candidates; Colombia joining the BRICS development bank, and rising coca cultivation which could lead to U.S. aid cuts to combat drug trafficking.
The analyst said that Petro's impulsive foreign policy has made 'Colombia increasingly isolated and less credible' with its ally the United States. His current Foreign Minister, Laura Sarabia, also announced her resignation on Thursday.
Senator Paola Holguín from the opposition Democratic Center party told the Miami Herald that Petro's 'repeated disrespectful statements, lack of commitment to fighting drug dealing and terrorism, and the alignment of our country with anti-democratic regimes and U.S. rivals are creating growing hardships' between the two countries.
Meanwhile, Petro's supporters demand U.S. politicians respect Colombia's sovereignty and its democratically elected president. 'Calling him a narco-terrorist and drug addict is more than an insult; it's also an unacceptable fallacy; it's an affront to our nation and its sovereignty,' wrote Senator María José Pizarro Rodríguez of Petro's Historic Pact for Colombia political party on X.
Colombia and the U.S. have built strong bonds over two centuries but the relationship has been strained in the past — namely over Cold War politics and the war on drugs. This latest diplomatic row, however, is disconcerting for those who study the relationship.
'We are very worried over the current state of the diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Colombia,' said Holguín. 'The U.S. has been our main commercial partner, a great ally in our fight against narcotrafficking and terrorism, and an important humanitarian supporter.'
Benjamin Gedan, Director of the Wilson Center's Latin America Program, echoed the concerns, stating, 'For decades, Colombia has been the most strategic U.S. partner in the region, so it is troubling to see yet another diplomatic crisis.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
31 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump branded, browbeat and prevailed. But his big bill may come at a political cost
WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama had the Affordable Care Act. Joe Biden had the Inflation Reduction Act. President Donald Trump will have the tax cuts. All were hailed in the moment and became ripe political targets in campaigns that followed. In Trump's case, the tax cuts may almost become lost in the debates over other parts of the multitrillion-dollar bill that Democrats say will force poor Americans off their health care and overturn a decade or more of energy policy. Through persuasion and browbeating, Trump forced nearly all congressional Republicans to line up behind his marquee legislation despite some of its unpalatable pieces. He followed the playbook that had marked his life in business before politics. He focused on branding — labeling the legislation the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' — then relentlessly pushed to strong-arm it through Congress, solely on the votes of Republicans. But Trump's victory will soon be tested during the 2026 midterm elections where Democrats plan to run on a durable theme: that the Republican president favors the rich on tax cuts over poorer people who will lose their health care. Trump and Republicans argue that those who deserve coverage will retain it. Nonpartisan analysts, however, project significant increases to the number of uninsured. Meanwhile, the GOP's promise that the bill will turbocharge the economy will be tested at a time of uncertainty and trade turmoil. Trump has tried to counter the notion of favoring the rich with provisions that would reduce the taxes for people paid in tips and receiving overtime pay, two kinds of earners who represent a small share of the workforce. Extending the tax cuts from Trump's first term that were set to expire if Congress failed to act meant he could also argue that millions of people would avoid a tax increase. To enact that and other expensive priorities, Republicans made steep cuts to Medicaid that ultimately belied Trump's promise that those on government entitlement programs 'won't be affected.' 'The biggest thing is, he's answering the call of the forgotten people. That's why his No. 1 request was the no tax on tips, the no tax on overtime, tax relief for seniors,' said Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. 'I think that's going to be the big impact.' Hard to reap the rewards Presidents have seen their signature legislative accomplishments unraveled by their successors or become a significant political liability for their party in subsequent elections. A central case for Biden's reelection was that the public would reward the Democrat for his legislative accomplishments. That never bore fruit as he struggled to improve his poll numbers driven down by concerns about his age and stubborn inflation. Since taking office in January, Trump has acted to gut tax breaks meant to boost clean energy initiatives that were part of Biden's landmark health care-and-climate bill. Obama's health overhaul, which the Democrat signed into law in March 2010, led to a political bloodbath in the midterms that fall. Its popularity only became potent when Republicans tried to repeal it in 2017. Whatever political boost Trump may have gotten from his first-term tax cuts in 2017 did not help him in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats regained control of the House, or in 2020 when he lost to Biden. 'I don't think there's much if any evidence from recent or even not-so-recent history of the president's party passing a big one-party bill and getting rewarded for it,' said Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst with the nonpartisan University of Virginia's Center for Politics. Social net setbacks Democrats hope they can translate their policy losses into political gains. During an Oval Office appearance in January, Trump pledged he would 'love and cherish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.' 'We're not going to do anything with that, other than if we can find some abuse or waste, we'll do something,' Trump said. 'But the people won't be affected. It will only be more effective and better.' That promise is far removed from what Trump and the Republican Party ultimately chose to do, paring back not only Medicaid but also food assistance for the poor to make the math work on their sweeping bill. It would force 11.8 million more people to become uninsured by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office, whose estimates the GOP has dismissed. 'In Trump's first term, Democrats in Congress prevented bad outcomes. They didn't repeal the (Affordable Care Act), and we did COVID relief together. This time is different,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii. 'Hospitals will close, people will die, the cost of electricity will go up, and people will go without food.' Some unhappy Republicans Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., repeatedly argued the legislation would lead to drastic coverage losses in his home state and others, leaving them vulnerable to political attacks similar to what Democrats faced after they enacted 'Obamacare.' With his warnings unheeded, Tillis announced he would not run for reelection, after he opposed advancing the bill and enduring Trump's criticism. 'If there is a political dimension to this, it is the extraordinary impact that you're going to have in states like California, blue states with red districts,' Tillis said. "The narrative is going to be overwhelmingly negative in states like California, New York, Illinois, and New Jersey.' Even Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who eventually became the decisive vote in the Senate that ensured the bill's passage, said the legislation needed more work and she urged the House to revise it. Lawmakers there did not. Early polling suggests that Trump's bill is deeply unpopular, including among independents and a healthy share of Republicans. White House officials said their own research does not reflect that. So far, it's only Republicans celebrating the victory. That seems OK with the president. In a speech in Iowa after the bill passed, he said Democrats only opposed it because they 'hated Trump.' That didn't bother him, he said, 'because I hate them, too.'
Fox News
36 minutes ago
- Fox News
North Carolina governor vetoes Republican-led anti DEI and trans legislation
North Carolina Gov. Josh Stein has vetoed four controversial bills that target diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and transgender rights, setting up a political clash with the Republican-led General Assembly. Stein, a Democrat, blasted the three DEI-focused bills as being "mean-spirited" that would "marginalize vulnerable people" and took aim at Republicans who failed to pass a fiscal budget for the year that just began. The DEI bills ought to ban DEI training, hiring practices and staff positions in state and local governments as well as outlawing the use of state funds for DEI programming. The legislation would have imposed civil penalties on workers who violate the rules. No Democrats supported the three DEI bills. "At a time when teachers, law enforcement, and state employees need pay raises, and people need shorter lines at the DMV, the legislature failed to pass a budget and, instead, wants to distract us by stoking culture wars that further divide us," Stein said in a statement. "These mean-spirited bills would marginalize vulnerable people and also undermine the quality of public services and public education. Therefore, I am vetoing them. I stand ready to work with the legislature when it gets serious about protecting people and addressing North Carolinians' pressing concerns." The measures cutting or eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives in state and local governments, K-12 public schools and the university system have been a major priority for GOP lawmakers. They argue the programs targeted have overemphasized identity to the detriment of merit and societal unity. The transgender bill began as a bipartisan measure to curb sexual exploitation by enforcing age verification and consent rules for pornography websites. But lawmakers later added controversial provisions, including a ban on state-funded gender-affirming procedures for prisoners. It also affirms the recognition of two sexes and requires the state to officially attach a transgender person's new birth certificate to their old one if they change their sex assigned at birth. Stein said in a veto message that he strongly supported the anti-sexual exploitation provisions in the bill, but the final measure went too far. "My faith teaches me that we are all children of God no matter our differences and that it is wrong to target vulnerable people, as this bill does," he added. One Democrat backed the fourth bill before Stein vetoed it. All four bills now return to the General Assembly, which could reconvene later this month to attempt veto overrides. Republicans are one vote short of a veto-proof supermajority in the House. The vetoes bring Stein's total to 11 since taking office in January — all within the past two weeks. Stein was previously North Carolina's attorney general since 2017 after serving in the state Senate from 2009 to 2016. The progressive attorney and politician campaigned on a platform of lowering the cost of housing, increasing job creation, expanding access to abortion and improving education.
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Trump got $170 billion for immigration. Now he has to enact it.
And as illegal border crossings decline, ICE must look within the country to reach its arrest quota — a goal of 3,000 daily apprehensions in recent weeks. But an increase in arrests in the months ahead doesn't automatically result in more deportations, as it will take time for the administration to build out a 'logistical pipeline all over the country,' said Ken Cuccinelli, who served as deputy secretary of Homeland Security during Trump's first term. 'It's a whole lot of little contracts with state and local officials. It's building more facilities. It's reopening the ones they already have. And all you need is one choke point in the logistics — every convoy is as fast as the slowest ship,' Cuccinelli said. 'You've got to have the planes, the vehicles, the manpower, the security, in all the right places.' The domestic policy bill also includes over $1 billion for the immigration court system to hire more judges and staff, but it's unclear how quickly the administration can build out the courts, and whether it can move at a rate that can keep up with an increased pace of ICE arrests — or if the effort will ultimately result in longer detention time. The Trump administration's efforts to work around the immigration courts have been met with legal challenges. And the case backlog is substantial: roughly 700 immigration judges are coping with a 3.5 million case pile-up. The funding for immigration judges is 'important as well, because the system is backlogged,' said Michael Hough, director of federal relations at NumbersUSA, a group that works to reduce both legal and illegal immigration. 'Just because you detain these people, especially people who have been here for a while, they need hearings — you've got to get them in front of an immigration judge.' While the White House celebrates the bill's passage, political pressure is already growing for congressional Republicans to enact new policy. Immigration hawks say the money is crucial, but the party also has to look to legislation that will make permanent changes to the immigration system — such as reviving talks around border security and asylum law from the party's legislation from last year, known as H.R.2. 'There are other legislative changes that Republicans campaigned on, and that we're going to continue to be looking to them to move things forward and not just sit on their hands now that they've passed the Big Beautiful Bill Act,' said a person close to the Trump administration, granted anonymity to speak candidly. 'No, this is a budget reconciliation bill … it's infused a ton of money into this effort, but there's still some policy changes that the administration has talked about and wants to pursue.'
