Colombia’s decision to suspend electricity exports to Ecuador stands as another step in the tense relations between Bogota and Quito. The announcement, made official by Colombia’s Ministry of Mines and Energy, is a direct response to the imposition by Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa of a 30% tariff on imports of Colombian products, a measure that Quito justified on security grounds and an alleged lack of cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking along the shared border.
The suspension of electricity transactions with Ecuador was presented by Bogota as a preventive action to protect the country’s energy sovereignty, at a time when the power system is under pressure due to climate variability and warnings about the potential effects of El Niño phenomenon. It is worth recalling the acute crisis in Ecuador’s electricity system in recent years, which is highly dependent on the energy that Colombia sells to its neighbor.
President Gustavo Petro and his team have categorically rejected the Ecuadorian tariff increase, describing it as an economic aggression that breaks the principles of regional integration and puts key sectors of bilateral trade at risk. Although both governments have expressed their willingness to engage in dialogue, the scale of the decisions adopted by each side reflects the depth of the political and diplomatic discontent affecting the bilateral relationship.
Quito has defended its policy as an exercise of sovereignty in the face of what it considers insufficient Colombian commitment to combating organized crime, particularly drug trafficking and illegal mining, while Bogota insists that it has made concrete contributions to cooperation and that reciprocity has not been complete.
Colombia-Ecuador crisis: electricity exports suspended
The suspension of electricity exports was implemented through a resolution by the Ministry of Mines and Energy, which authorizes the modification, suspension, or reactivation of international energy transactions with Ecuador depending on the evolution of technical, energy, and commercial conditions.
According to the Colombian government, the measure seeks to ensure domestic supply and prioritize national demand in a context of pressure on the electricity system, partly attributed to climate variations that could intensify with phenomena such as El Niño. Energy Minister Edwin Palma emphasized that the country believes in regional integration, but that it must be based on conditions of equity, security, and good faith.
“The duty of the State is to guarantee, above all, that Colombian households, industry, and essential services have safe and reliable energy. This is a responsible, preventive, and sovereign decision,” the minister said.
Ecuador, for its part, imports a significant portion of its electricity from Colombia, although energy dependence has varied in recent months. The Colombian government also announced the dismantling of a mechanism that allowed private companies to participate in the sale of energy to Ecuador, an initiative that had facilitated energy exchange and that is now put on hold amid current tensions. This reconfiguration of energy cooperation marks a shift from previous efforts to strengthen electrical integration between the two countries.
This entire scenario has its immediate origin in Quito’s decision to impose a 30% security levy on Colombian imports, a measure that, according to Noboa, will take effect on Feb. 1. The Ecuadorian government has argued that the measure is a response to the trade deficit with Colombia, which exceeds US$1 billion annually, and to the perception of a lack of effective actions by the Colombian state in the fight against drug trafficking and illicit activities along the extensive border shared by both countries.
This tariff imposition has been interpreted by sectors of the Colombian government and trade community as a punishment that will primarily affect nonmining and nonenergy products, medicines, vehicles, coffee, and other goods that represent a substantial share of exports to Ecuador.
The trade clash has led Bogota not only to suspend the sale of electricity, but also to apply a 30% levy on a group of 20 products from Ecuador, with the possibility of expanding this list if conditions in bilateral trade do not normalize. Colombia’s minister of Trade, Industry, and Tourism has described this levy as proportional, temporary, and subject to review, aimed at restoring balance in the conditions of exchange between the two countries following Quito’s unilateral decision.
Rechazamos la medida arancelaria impuesta por Ecuador, una agresión económica que rompe el principio de integración regional.
En materia energética Colombia ha actuado con hechos, cooperación y solidaridad:
-Mantuvimos la venta de energía a Ecuador cuando su sistema más lo… pic.twitter.com/L8e7ao8AWo
— Edwin Palma Egea (@PalmaEdwin) January 21, 2026
Political context and rising tensions
The trade crisis is unfolding at a time of particularly delicate relations between Petro and Noboa, amid political and security differences. Some of the tensions have been fueled by public statements about security cooperation and judicial cases with diplomatic implications, such as the situation of former Ecuadorian Vice President Jorge Glas, which has led to exchanges of recriminations between the two leaders.
These frictions underscore the complexity of the ties between Colombia and Ecuador, which, although they share a history and cooperation in multiple areas, are now facing a breaking point that could have far-reaching economic and political consequences if it is not addressed through diplomatic dialogue.
The repercussions of the decisions adopted by both governments are being felt in both the political and commercial spheres. Colombia’s business sector has expressed concern about the impact of Ecuadorian tariffs, while Ecuador faces the possibility of higher prices for imported products and the challenge of managing an energy market without the same level of international electricity supply it has historically had.
In this context, the governments of Bogota and Quito are faced with the need to explore negotiation mechanisms that would allow them to ease tensions and prevent an escalation that would harm their economies and regional integration, following several months of growing disagreements between the two governments.
Related: Colombia–Ecuador Crisis: Business Leaders Warn Against Tariffs, Urge De-escalation.