Trump Achieved His Goals in Colombia, But His Methods May Backfire.
By provoking confrontations to demonstrate power, the president jeopardizes relationships with allies and potentially benefits China.
TroibNews 
For Donald Trump, confrontation is integral to his approach.
In his initial week back in the Oval Office, Trump has swiftly overturned his predecessor’s alliance-focused foreign policy, opting instead for a more aggressive version of “America First.” His provocative actions have heightened tensions with key allies across several continents and have created scenarios where he stands to gain politically, regardless of others' responses. This was evident in the recent tensions with Colombia, which almost escalated into a trade war over the return of migrants.
However, this approach may have long-term repercussions, potentially destabilizing an already fragile global order and driving potentially allied nations closer to China.
“People in Latin America are extremely worried,” stated Jorge Heine, the former Chilean ambassador to China. “For South America, the message is that it’s not a good idea to be very closely interlinked with the United States, because you might pay a heavy price,” he added, now a professor at Boston University. “And as a result of that, China’s prospects for stronger ties have been enhanced.”
As tensions between Washington and Bogotá simmered over the weekend, China's ambassador to Colombia publicly showcased China's willingness to engage with Colombia, reminding followers that the Colombian foreign minister's visit to Beijing last year signified the "best moment" in their bilateral relationship in 45 years.
Colombia isn’t the only nation feeling the effects of Trump’s confrontational methods. Allies are particularly concerned about his ongoing rhetoric about acquiring Greenland from Denmark, "taking back" the Panama Canal, imposing tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and Europe, and suggesting that Canada could circumvent tariffs by becoming the 51st state.
Given the U.S.'s economic and military dominance, Trump often holds leverage over leaders from Canada, Denmark, and now Colombia—historically steadfast allies who have worked closely with the U.S. Yet, after four years of former President Joe Biden’s focus on multilateral cooperation, Trump’s assertive tactics, often amplified through social media, have surprised even those leaders who anticipated a smoother second term.
“Before he was inaugurated, the thought in Europe was basically: ‘We got this, we can deal with this,’” said Liana Fix, a Europe fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who regularly communicates with EU officials. “People thought with the right approach — conceding on defense spending and paying more, taking him seriously and not literally and not responding to everything he says, lots of flattery — Europe could manage and preserve the relationship. And now, after just one week, people are quite rattled again. No one is sure how radical this is going to be.”
Over the weekend, relations between the U.S. and Colombia nearly escalated to an outright trade war after Colombian President Gustavo Petro denied landing rights to two military aircraft transporting undocumented Colombian migrants, prompting Trump to threaten a 25 percent tariff on Colombian goods. Tensions eased after extensive negotiations that might have mitigated the conflict had they occurred sooner.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced on X that Trump was backing off his tariff threat because Colombia “agreed to all of President Trump’s terms,” days after she posted an image illustrating the deportation of undocumented migrants—a move which may have influenced Petro’s decision to block the military flights.
“We are not anyone’s colony,” Petro asserted, advocating for the “dignified return of nationals.”
Leavitt’s remarks highlighted how Trump's emerging foreign policy seems primarily directed at domestic audiences. Despite the looming tariff threat, various administration officials and pro-Trump supporters publicly promoted this stance, many expressing indifference to the potential economic fallout and the possibility of higher prices on Colombian imports.
“CHARGE ME MORE FOR FLOWERS & COFFEE. Thank you,” tweeted Katie Miller, a spokesperson for the new Department of Governmental Efficiency and wife of Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller.
The episode underscored the intersection of Trump's main policy priorities—trade and immigration—with immigration taking precedence. The administration also halted processing visas for Colombians and increased Customs inspections of flights and cargo to and from Colombia, which will remain in effect until the first flight of Colombian migrants returns home.
Both the Trump and Obama administrations used visa restrictions to pressure countries into accepting deportation flights, and Trump’s new team will likely explore additional sanctions on countries deemed problematic. Border czar Tom Homan indicated that the administration was also pursuing agreements with third-party countries to process asylum seekers that the U.S. deports.
“First of all, we’ve got President Trump. They will take them back, I’m convinced,” Homan stated on Fox News when discussing countries that refuse deportation flights. “I’ve already got several countries lining up, willing to take nationals from any country for us. … If we can’t move them one place, we’ll put them somewhere else.”
On Sunday, Trump suggested a potential travel ban, having previously instructed agencies to identify countries where vetting visitors and visa applicants is seen as unfeasible—setting the stage for another travel ban targeting nations perceived as threats to national security.
“The Trump administration has already decided both how it will exert pressure, cutting through the Gordian policy and legal knots — and how fast it will do so,” remarked Stephen McFarland, a former ambassador to Guatemala, in a post on X.
Trump’s rapid escalation with Petro also revealed his inclination to turn disagreements with other nations into threats of tariffs promptly.
Implementing such threats would test the limits of presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, which grants the president significant power to manage international economics following an emergency declaration.
No president has used this act to impose tariffs, yet Trump has threatened it twice—once against Mexico during his first term and now against Colombia, in both cases striking deals with the implicated countries that left the legality of such actions under question.
However, the effectiveness of Trump's tariffs “really depends on the partner and the context,” noted Kathleen Claussen, a former U.S. trade official currently a law professor at Georgetown University. She pointed out distinctions between Trump’s threats against Colombia, stemming from a swiftly unfolding situation, and earlier threats against Canada and Mexico aimed at prompting both countries to curb illegal immigration and cross-border fentanyl trafficking.
“He went after a state that he knows he could push a little bit,” said Inu Manak, a trade policy fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “So it’s sort of a setting example with a weaker target, and then claim victory really quickly to show how tough he can be as a negotiator. But I wouldn’t imagine Canada and Mexico are going to fold that fast.”
The U.S. has invested decades nurturing its trade relationship with Colombia, aligning it with efforts to foster peace and stability in a nation long plagued by violence and drug trade issues. This effort included negotiating a free trade agreement designed to promote legitimate employment sectors like cut flower and coffee production.
Yet, what Trump has done regarding Colombia exemplifies how the U.S. risks losing ground to Chinese influence in Latin America, according to Manak. “Because it’s a great way for China to say, ‘Hey, you want financing. You want all these things? We’ll help you out. Like, you can’t trust the United States.’”
Robbie Gramer and Jack Detsch contributed to this report.
Frederick R Cook contributed to this report for TROIB News
In his initial week back in the Oval Office, Trump has swiftly overturned his predecessor’s alliance-focused foreign policy, opting instead for a more aggressive version of “America First.” His provocative actions have heightened tensions with key allies across several continents and have created scenarios where he stands to gain politically, regardless of others' responses. This was evident in the recent tensions with Colombia, which almost escalated into a trade war over the return of migrants.
However, this approach may have long-term repercussions, potentially destabilizing an already fragile global order and driving potentially allied nations closer to China.
“People in Latin America are extremely worried,” stated Jorge Heine, the former Chilean ambassador to China. “For South America, the message is that it’s not a good idea to be very closely interlinked with the United States, because you might pay a heavy price,” he added, now a professor at Boston University. “And as a result of that, China’s prospects for stronger ties have been enhanced.”
As tensions between Washington and Bogotá simmered over the weekend, China's ambassador to Colombia publicly showcased China's willingness to engage with Colombia, reminding followers that the Colombian foreign minister's visit to Beijing last year signified the "best moment" in their bilateral relationship in 45 years.
Colombia isn’t the only nation feeling the effects of Trump’s confrontational methods. Allies are particularly concerned about his ongoing rhetoric about acquiring Greenland from Denmark, "taking back" the Panama Canal, imposing tariffs on Mexico, Canada, and Europe, and suggesting that Canada could circumvent tariffs by becoming the 51st state.
Given the U.S.'s economic and military dominance, Trump often holds leverage over leaders from Canada, Denmark, and now Colombia—historically steadfast allies who have worked closely with the U.S. Yet, after four years of former President Joe Biden’s focus on multilateral cooperation, Trump’s assertive tactics, often amplified through social media, have surprised even those leaders who anticipated a smoother second term.
“Before he was inaugurated, the thought in Europe was basically: ‘We got this, we can deal with this,’” said Liana Fix, a Europe fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, who regularly communicates with EU officials. “People thought with the right approach — conceding on defense spending and paying more, taking him seriously and not literally and not responding to everything he says, lots of flattery — Europe could manage and preserve the relationship. And now, after just one week, people are quite rattled again. No one is sure how radical this is going to be.”
Over the weekend, relations between the U.S. and Colombia nearly escalated to an outright trade war after Colombian President Gustavo Petro denied landing rights to two military aircraft transporting undocumented Colombian migrants, prompting Trump to threaten a 25 percent tariff on Colombian goods. Tensions eased after extensive negotiations that might have mitigated the conflict had they occurred sooner.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced on X that Trump was backing off his tariff threat because Colombia “agreed to all of President Trump’s terms,” days after she posted an image illustrating the deportation of undocumented migrants—a move which may have influenced Petro’s decision to block the military flights.
“We are not anyone’s colony,” Petro asserted, advocating for the “dignified return of nationals.”
Leavitt’s remarks highlighted how Trump's emerging foreign policy seems primarily directed at domestic audiences. Despite the looming tariff threat, various administration officials and pro-Trump supporters publicly promoted this stance, many expressing indifference to the potential economic fallout and the possibility of higher prices on Colombian imports.
“CHARGE ME MORE FOR FLOWERS & COFFEE. Thank you,” tweeted Katie Miller, a spokesperson for the new Department of Governmental Efficiency and wife of Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller.
The episode underscored the intersection of Trump's main policy priorities—trade and immigration—with immigration taking precedence. The administration also halted processing visas for Colombians and increased Customs inspections of flights and cargo to and from Colombia, which will remain in effect until the first flight of Colombian migrants returns home.
Both the Trump and Obama administrations used visa restrictions to pressure countries into accepting deportation flights, and Trump’s new team will likely explore additional sanctions on countries deemed problematic. Border czar Tom Homan indicated that the administration was also pursuing agreements with third-party countries to process asylum seekers that the U.S. deports.
“First of all, we’ve got President Trump. They will take them back, I’m convinced,” Homan stated on Fox News when discussing countries that refuse deportation flights. “I’ve already got several countries lining up, willing to take nationals from any country for us. … If we can’t move them one place, we’ll put them somewhere else.”
On Sunday, Trump suggested a potential travel ban, having previously instructed agencies to identify countries where vetting visitors and visa applicants is seen as unfeasible—setting the stage for another travel ban targeting nations perceived as threats to national security.
“The Trump administration has already decided both how it will exert pressure, cutting through the Gordian policy and legal knots — and how fast it will do so,” remarked Stephen McFarland, a former ambassador to Guatemala, in a post on X.
Trump’s rapid escalation with Petro also revealed his inclination to turn disagreements with other nations into threats of tariffs promptly.
Implementing such threats would test the limits of presidential authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, which grants the president significant power to manage international economics following an emergency declaration.
No president has used this act to impose tariffs, yet Trump has threatened it twice—once against Mexico during his first term and now against Colombia, in both cases striking deals with the implicated countries that left the legality of such actions under question.
However, the effectiveness of Trump's tariffs “really depends on the partner and the context,” noted Kathleen Claussen, a former U.S. trade official currently a law professor at Georgetown University. She pointed out distinctions between Trump’s threats against Colombia, stemming from a swiftly unfolding situation, and earlier threats against Canada and Mexico aimed at prompting both countries to curb illegal immigration and cross-border fentanyl trafficking.
“He went after a state that he knows he could push a little bit,” said Inu Manak, a trade policy fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. “So it’s sort of a setting example with a weaker target, and then claim victory really quickly to show how tough he can be as a negotiator. But I wouldn’t imagine Canada and Mexico are going to fold that fast.”
The U.S. has invested decades nurturing its trade relationship with Colombia, aligning it with efforts to foster peace and stability in a nation long plagued by violence and drug trade issues. This effort included negotiating a free trade agreement designed to promote legitimate employment sectors like cut flower and coffee production.
Yet, what Trump has done regarding Colombia exemplifies how the U.S. risks losing ground to Chinese influence in Latin America, according to Manak. “Because it’s a great way for China to say, ‘Hey, you want financing. You want all these things? We’ll help you out. Like, you can’t trust the United States.’”
Robbie Gramer and Jack Detsch contributed to this report.
Frederick R Cook contributed to this report for TROIB News
