Trump and Petro test détente after months of open hostility

For months, United States President Donald Trump described Colombia’s leader, Gustavo Petro, in blunt and personal terms, calling him a “sick man” and an “illegal drug leader”. On Tuesday, however, the two presidents sat down together at the White House for their first face-to-face meeting in Washington, DC — a moment that signalled at least a pause in an unusually tense bilateral relationship.

Both leaders emerged portraying the talks as constructive, even as they acknowledged that deep political differences remain. Speaking after the meeting, Petro brushed aside questions about his public clashes with Trump, including accusations that the US president had committed human rights violations. Instead, he framed the encounter as pragmatic rather than reconciliatory.

“It’s a meeting between two equals who have different ways of thinking,” Petro said. “He didn’t change his way of his thinking. Neither did I. But how do you do an agreement, a pact? It’s not as between twin brothers. It’s between opponents.”

Trump, for his part, struck a notably warmer tone than in previous months. Speaking to reporters from the Oval Office, he said he felt positive about the exchange.

“I thought it was terrific,” he said.

The agenda covered familiar pressure points in US-Colombia relations, including transnational drug trafficking and regional security in Latin America. But the choreography of the meeting itself was also telling. Unlike Trump’s recent, highly publicised sessions with foreign leaders,often staged with cameras and extended Oval Office remarks, this meeting unfolded almost entirely behind closed doors and stretched close to two hours.

What followed was a modest charm offensive. Petro later posted on social media that Trump had given him several gifts, including a framed photograph of the meeting accompanied by a handwritten note.

“Gustavo – a great honor. I love Colombia,” the note read, signed by Trump. Petro also shared an image of a signed copy of Trump’s book, The Art of the Deal, inscribed with the words, “You are great.”

“Can someone tell me what Trump said in this dedication?” Petro joked in Spanish. “I don’t understand much English.”

The humour masked a relationship that, until recently, had been openly hostile. Their feud began almost immediately after Trump’s second inauguration. On January 26, 2025, just six days into Trump’s new term, the two leaders clashed publicly over US deportation flights to Colombia. Petro objected to what he described as human rights violations faced by the deportees. Trump responded by framing Petro’s resistance as a threat to US “national security” and threatened sweeping sanctions on Colombian imports. Petro ultimately reversed course.

The confrontations did not stop there. Petro repeatedly condemned US military actions in the Caribbean and Pacific, comparing deadly attacks on boats to murder. He also accused Trump of effectively “kidnapping” Venezuela’s then-president Nicolas Maduro during a US operation to remove him from power.

Washington retaliated in kind. Trump revoked Petro’s US visa after the Colombian president criticised the United States during a speech at the United Nations General Assembly and briefly joined a pro-Palestinian protest. In October, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on Petro, accusing his government of allowing “drug cartels to flourish”. After Maduro was removed from office on January 3, Trump issued a blunt warning to Petro that he had better “watch his a**”, widely interpreted as a threat of military action.

Against that backdrop, Tuesday’s meeting represented a clear tonal shift. The first sign came earlier in the month, when Trump and Petro held their first phone call on January 7. The Washington meeting pushed that reset further, without erasing the underlying disagreements.

Those differences were still on display in the leaders’ separate public appearances afterward. Trump, speaking briefly as he signed legislation to end a government shutdown, reflected on the history between them.

“He and I weren’t exactly the best of friends, but I wasn’t insulted, because I’d never met him,” he said. “I didn’t know him at all, and we got along very well.”