Washington is Investigating Colombia’s President for Drug Ties—and Trump Could Use it as a Weapon

MIAMI — The United States Department of Justice is conducting criminal investigations into Colombian President Gustavo Petro for alleged ties to drug traffickers—a bombshell report published simultaneously by The New York Times and Bloomberg on Friday, as Colombia prepares for a presidential election in 73 days and as Petro is already navigating the most turbulent period of his administration.

The investigations are in their early stages. No charges have been filed. But the released information of the existence of two parallel federal probes—in the most powerful drug prosecution offices in the United States—against another sitting Latin American head of state represents an extraordinary escalation in Washington’s approach to a country it simultaneously designates as one of its most critical counter-narcotics partners.

What the DOJ is Investigating

U.S. federal prosecutors in Manhattan and Brooklyn have opened early-stage criminal investigations into Colombian President Gustavo Petro, examining potential links to drug traffickers and alleged campaign financing from illicit sources.

The investigations are being conducted by the U.S. attorney’s offices in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. Prosecutors specializing in international narcotics trafficking are involved, alongside the DEA and Homeland Security Investigations.

Authorities are reviewing possible meetings between Petro and drug traffickers, as well as alleged campaign donations tied to illicit sources. The inquiries remain in early stages, and it is unclear whether charges will be filed.

The investigations, which had not been previously reported, involve prosecutors who focus on international narcotics trafficking as well as agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration and Homeland Security Investigations. Among the questions being examined: whether Petro held meetings with drug traffickers, and whether his 2022 presidential campaign solicited donations from traffickers.

A spokesperson for Petro did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The U.S. attorney’s offices in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York declined to comment. The DEA and the Department of Homeland Security also declined to respond to media inquiries.

The Campaign Finance Scandal—The Foundation of the Probe

The DOJ investigation does not emerge from a vacuum. It is built on a documented Colombian judicial record that has been building since 2023.

Petro’s eldest son, Nicolás Petro, was arrested and formally admitted to Colombian prosecutors that illegal drug money entered his father’s 2022 presidential campaign. The money came from Samuel Santander Lopesierra—known as “The Marlboro Man”—a convicted drug trafficker. The U.S. DOJ views this as evidence that Petro’s election victory was illegitimately funded by the very cartels the United States is waging a targeted counterinsurgency campaign against, aimed at dismantling the region’s drug trafficking networks.

No charges have been filed against Petro himself in Colombia. He has consistently denied any wrongdoing and described the accusations as politically motivated.

On October 24, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control formally designated Gustavo Petro pursuant to counternarcotics-related executive authorities—the same legal framework used against Nicolás Maduro.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated at the time: “Since President Gustavo Petro came to power, cocaine production in Colombia has exploded to the highest rate in decades, flooding the United States and poisoning Americans. President Petro has allowed drug cartels to flourish and refused to stop this activity.”

The Treasury designation also cited Petro’s conduct beyond narcotics: his sharing of confidential information obtained via secure anti-money laundering communication channels, which led to the suspension of Colombia’s Financial Intelligence Unit from The Egmont Group—a 170-member global anti-money laundering network—and his alleged alignment with the narco-terrorist regime of Nicolás Maduro and the Cartel de Los Soles.

Trump’s History With Petro—and the Political Dimension

The DOJ investigation cannot be separated from the deeply personal and ideologically hostile relationship between Donald Trump and Gustavo Petro—a relationship that has produced one of the most contentious bilateral confrontations in recent U.S.-Latin American history.

Trump has frequently wielded criminal inquiries as a tool against other regional leaders and governments deemed adversarial to U.S. interests, and has harshly criticized Gustavo Petro, calling him a “sick man.” The U.S. president could use the investigations as leverage in seeking more cooperation from Colombia, which is both the world’s top producer of cocaine and one of America’s most crucial allies in cracking down on narco-terrorism in the region.

Trump could also use the existence of the investigations to attempt to influence the outcome of Colombia’s presidential election in May.

Following the U.S. military strikes on Venezuela on January 3, Trump again attacked Petro directly, saying the Colombian president “likes making cocaine and selling it to the US” and would not stay in power much longer. That statement—made by a sitting U.S. president about a sitting head of state of an allied country—was a preview of what Friday’s DOJ investigation report has now formalized in legal terms.

Since Petro ended forced coca eradication—aerial spraying—Colombia’s coca cultivation has hit an all-time historic record of 253,000 hectares, producing over 3,000 tons of potential cocaine annually. The Trump administration has labeled Petro a “passive facilitator” of the opioid crisis in American cities.

A February 2026 White House meeting between Petro and Trump ended on apparently cordial terms—a diplomatic reset that now looks considerably more fragile in light of Friday’s revelations.

Petro’s Response—and His Political Context

Petro has built his entire political identity on the premise that he is the victim of U.S. imperial pressure and domestic elite conspiracy. Friday’s DOJ investigation report will almost certainly be absorbed into that narrative to energize his base before presidential elections—and in Colombia’s current political environment, it may not hurt him as much as Washington intends.

By March 2026, 54% of Colombians approved of Petro’s performance, and 38% disapproved—a dramatic reversal from his historic lows of 26 to 27% approval in mid-2025. The recovery was driven in part by his handling of the Colombia-Ecuador border crisis, his opposition to U.S. military operations in Venezuela, and his positioning as a defender of Colombian sovereignty against external pressure.

The timing of the DOJ leak—three days before Colombia’s presidential first round on March 23—is difficult to characterize as coincidental. Paloma Valencia, the conservative frontrunner who won the right-wing primary last week with 55% of the vote, has built her campaign around a clean break with Petro’s progressive policies and a restoration of full counter-narcotics cooperation with Washington. A DOJ investigation into the incumbent—published by The New York Times two days before the first round—is the kind of interference that could either damage Petro’s preferred successor or, alternatively, generate a nationalist backlash that benefits the left.

What it Means for the May 31 Presidential Race

Colombia’s presidential first round is on May 31. The DOJ investigation arrives at the worst possible moment for Petro’s political project—and the best possible moment for Washington’s preferred outcome.

Trump has previously intervened in several elections across the region, contributing to a rightward wave, namely Ecuador, Chile, and—more recently—in Honduras.

The existence of a criminal investigation against a sitting president, published by The New York Times on the eve of an election season, will be a defining piece of political ammunition for every candidate running against Petro’s left-wing movement—and a rallying cry for every voter who sees U.S. interference in Colombian domestic politics as confirmation of exactly what Petro has been warning about.

For Miami’s large Colombian diaspora—which voted in significant numbers in last week’s congressional primary—Friday’s development adds a new and deeply unsettling dimension to an election they have been following with extraordinary attention.

The question now is whether a DOJ investigation into a lame-duck president of a country already scheduled to elect his successor in 73 days produces accountability, leverage, or simply more chaos in an election that was already the most consequential in Colombia's modern history.