Analysis: Trump Is Exploiting Colombia and Ecuador’s Tense Relationship
Colombia is Trump and his Latin American coalition’s next target, threatening to undermine democracy in the region further
Cross-border tensions between Ecuador and Colombia have been somewhat tumultuous over the past several years. Recent actions by Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa have escalated those tensions through various tactics. With the White House’s backing, Noboa has imposed tariffs on Colombia, authorized internal military actions under the guise of counternarcotics operations, and villainized Colombia’s leftist government and its president, Gustavo Petro.
While the world is focused on Trump’s war with Iran, Latin America remains under threat, as noted by the recent Shield of the Americas summit at Trump’s golf resort in Florida. The summit gave birth to the Americas Counter Cartel Coalition, featuring a who’s who of sycophantic Latin American presidents, some of whom are indebted to Trump for helping them win major elections last year. The coalition is also meant to help counter Chinese investment in Latin America.
“The United States will train and mobilize partner nation militaries to achieve the most effective fighting force necessary to dismantle cartels and their ability to export violence and pursue influence through organized intimidation … The United States and its allies should keep external threats at bay, including malign foreign influences from outside the Western Hemisphere.”
When the Trump administration interfered in several Latin American elections in 2025, it exposed what it had in store for the region. In keeping with traditional U.S. foreign policy, it was predicted that Trump would do the same in 2026, fulfilling his intentionally vague policy on Latin America. A policy that highlights that President Donald Trump’s goal for the region is not about drug trafficking or liberating anyone, but about dominion.
Tax Day Sale! Become a paid subscriber today for just $35/year forever and help keep my work freely accessible to all
This became evident in the lead-up to the U.S.’s kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro when Trump claimed ownership of Venezuela’s oil. He would later make it obvious in the unprovoked war with Iran, and the aggression against Cuba also falls under the dominionist rhetoric he continues to use. Language indicating that the U.S. attacks on each country, whether military or otherwise, are about control of critical resources and governments.
Notably, leaders who aren’t openly far-right, such as the presidents of Colombia, Brazil, or Mexico, were not invited to the summit. This points to a key element of Trump’s focus on Latin America: to force far-right control by proxy. The Latin American leaders in Trump’s orbit aren’t working to rid the region of drug cartels, as they suggest. Nor are they fighting to liberate anyone. Instead, they’re using counternarcotics and anti-communism as pretexts to help the U.S. exert control over the region.
Just days before the summit, in a preview of what is to come, the United States, Ecuador, and Europol forces from Belgium and the Netherlands conducted what the U.S. called a counternarcotics operation near the Ecuador-Colombian border. The operation consisted of bombing targets, kidnapping what turned out to be farmers, and threatening the Indigenous communities where the attacks occurred.
The U.S. narrative provides cover for what many argue were meant to target locals opposed to Noboa’s government. Indigenous and farm labor union leaders pointed to Noboa’s history of targeting prominent leaders who oppose his government. Footage of the joint attack (on what was later determined to be a dairy farm) was propagandized and posted across social media and served as a highlight reel for leaders attending Trump’s summit.
Noboa, who allegedly has his own ties to drug smuggling operations, has rolled over for the White House since Trump took office in 2025. He has increasingly targeted his opponents, arresting some and kidnapping others, has suspended the country’s largest opposition party, has repeatedly issued states of emergency, and declared an “internal armed conflict,” allowing him to deploy the military on Ecuador’s streets to act as police.
It should be noted that in November, Ecuadorians voted against allowing U.S. military bases in the country and that Noboa is bypassing the constitutional ban on foreign military bases by disguising the U.S. military presence as “joint operations.” In addition to targeting his opposition, Indigenous people, and activist groups, and as violence escalates across the country, Noboa also chose to wage an economic war on Colombia, arguing that Colombia isn’t doing enough to counter drug trafficking and illegal mining.
What originally began as a 30% tariff on Colombian imports increased to 50% and will rise 100% beginning May 1. While the official stance of the Ecuadorian government is that the tariffs are a “security measure,” Noboa suggested that working with Colombian President Petro is off the table, closing the door to potential solutions before Petro leaves office in August. Colombia has since denied Noboa’s allegations and responded to the tariffs by suspending electricity sales to Ecuador indefinitely, which is already struggling with power shortages.
Noboa has consistently declared that he is unwilling to work with Petro’s progressive government, saying, “Unfortunately, it is impossible to reach agreements with those who do not share the same commitment to fighting narco-terrorism … In the future, we will be able to engage in dialogue with a government that is truly committed to combating crime and drug trafficking,” a comment that comes with many geopolitical implications.
With Colombia’s presidential elections on May 31, Noboa suggests that he is not only unwilling to work with Petro’s government, but that Ecuador will seek to resolve the issue only with a right-wing government that is “truly committed” to countering the illicit drug trade. His comments come as leftist Iván Cepeda is leading all candidates by a wide margin. Rounding out the top three are Paloma Valencia, a centrist, and Abelardo de la Espriella, a far-right candidate very similar to Argentine President Javier Milei. Cepeda is largely considered Petro’s successor.
Many of Noboa’s recent moves – from the attack that occurred last month on both sides of the Colombian-Ecuador border to the economic war with Colombia, in addition to Noboa’s rhetoric about Colombia’s current president – are not just destabilizing Ecuador-Colombia relations; they are seemingly meant to shift public opinion in Colombia to favor any candidate except Cepeda.
With at least a 10-point lead over the next contender in the upcoming election, shifting those numbers seems insurmountable. However, the Trump administration is attempting to dig into that by announcing an investigation of President Petro, alleging he may have ties to drug smuggling networks. Meanwhile, relations between Ecuador and Colombia continue to deteriorate as Noboa imitates Trump, in his actions and rhetoric, against his adversaries, both foreign and domestic.
Arturo is an independent freelance journalist. He has written hundreds of articles on policing, immigration, race, and Latin America. His work has been featured in outlets such as Unicorn Riot, The Antagonist Magazine, Latino Rebels, and more. Arturo is also on TikTok, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Mastodon, and Threads. To support his work, become a paid subscriber or donate via Venmo, PayPal, or Cash App.
That man is a monster.
Another quality report. It's wild how the US partners with leaders who are credibly alleged to have connections to drug trafficking, while claiming to establish ties and operations to stop narco trafficking.
Also interesting that Ecuador is one more example that proves deploying your military into your nation's streets doesn't improve safety. The reports that their highest murder rate was recorded last year after over a year of giving the military policing duties, is a direct repudiation of that approach. It echoes the results seen in the US from increasing militarization of policing and direct deployment of the military onto US streets.