The U.S. are expected to decide whether to revoke Colombia’s anti-drug certification, a measure that could have profound financial and diplomatic consequences. If the Trump administration rules against Bogota, it would be the first time since 1997 that Colombia loses the certification, putting at stake more than US$450 million in economic, social, and security aid. The deadline for the decision is Sept. 15, and the uncertainty has already sent ripples through diplomatic and economic circles in both countries.
US anti-drug decertification: A rare and costly sanction
Anti-drug certification is a mechanism established by U.S. law that evaluates whether countries are cooperating fully in the fight against narcotics. A negative ruling not only suspends key aid packages but can also trigger additional trade and financial sanctions. According to the Colombian-American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham), the immediate impact could mean the suspension of military assistance valued at US$40.4 million, in addition to broader cuts in economic aid programs.
Colombia’s Foreign Minister, Rosa Villavicencio, defended her country’s record, noting that the human and social cost of the drug war is often overlooked in Washington’s assessments. “We are doing the work and we have surpassed many of the indicators,” Villavicencio said in a recent press conference. “This is also a political decision, and it belongs to the United States. But Colombia has defended its sovereignty at the cost of lives, including those of our soldiers. The fair thing would be to maintain certification.”
The potential sanctions extend beyond aid. The U.S. Foreign Assistance Act allows the president and Congress to impose tariffs on exports from decertified countries or classify them as “unfair trading partners.” That designation could complicate Colombia’s access to trade preferences and increase the cost of borrowing from international financial institutions. According to AmCham President Maria Claudia Lacouture, the risks are significant: “There is a 70% probability that Colombia could lose certification due to insufficient progress against narcotrafficking. This would freeze at least US$241.7 million in economic and social assistance programs, and another US$171 million directed toward civil security projects.”
Coca crop expansion in Colombia and international pressure
The most recent report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) paints a grim picture of Colombia’s coca economy. Between 2022 and 2023, the number of hectares planted with coca rose from 230,000 to 253,000, representing an increase that is difficult to reconcile with Bogota’s narrative of progress. The problem has also become more widespread. While the previous spike in cultivation between 2021 and 2022 was concentrated in Putumayo, the latest growth occurred across 16 of the 19 coca-producing departments, with Cauca and Nariño among the hardest hit.
The UNODC report noted that 15 coca-producing enclaves account for 39% of total cultivation while occupying only 14% of the affected territory. Only the enclave of San Pablo–Taracue showed a reduction, with coca hectares down by 3% compared to 2022.
Still, coca is far from Colombia’s dominant crop. According to the Rural Agricultural Planning Unit (UPRA), coffee remains the leading agricultural product with 856,000 hectares planted by the end of 2024. The comparison underscores Colombia’s paradox: for every hectare of coca, there are approximately three hectares of coffee. Yet the global cocaine market continues to demand supply, sustaining high levels of cultivation despite alternative programs.
U.S. officials cite these statistics as evidence that Colombia has not met the benchmarks necessary to justify certification. Washington’s frustration has grown as the Petro administration distanced itself from aerial fumigation and coercive eradication programs, instead emphasizing rural development and voluntary substitution. Only but recently, Petro ordered to reinstate aerial glyphosate fumigation against coca crops, as the deadline for Washington’s decision is nearing.
A diplomatic test with historical echoes for Colombia
The looming deadline recalls a similar episode nearly three decades ago. In 1997, under President Ernesto Samper, the Clinton administration revoked Colombia’s certification following allegations that his presidential campaign had been financed with money from the Cali cartel. It took two years and a new administration under Andres Pastrana to regain certification, which paved the way for Plan Colombia — a multibillion-dollar program aimed at curbing coca cultivation and dismantling cartels.
Today, the stakes are no less significant. While Colombia’s government insists that cooperation with Washington remains strong — pointing to recent meetings between Colombian police chief General Carlos Fernando Triana and DEA director Terry Cole — the political climate is tense. Petro has openly criticized the U.S.-led war on drugs, calling it a “failed strategy” that has devastated rural communities without curbing global demand. His emphasis on sovereignty and human rights resonates domestically but risks alienating key allies abroad.
For many in Colombia, losing the US anti-drug certification would also carry symbolic weight, signaling a deterioration in one of the hemisphere’s most important bilateral relationships. Trade, counterterrorism cooperation, and international financing could all be affected, compounding the domestic political cost for Petro’s government.
Analysts suggest that Washington could opt for a middle path — renewing certification but attaching conditions. Such a decision would likely include warnings to intensify eradication programs and demonstrate clear reductions in coca cultivation. However, even this outcome would serve as a diplomatic rebuke and add pressure on Petro to recalibrate his approach.
Colombian officials remain optimistic about the US anti-drug certification
The clock is ticking toward the Sept. 15 deadline, and both governments are maneuvering carefully. Colombian officials remain publicly optimistic, insisting that U.S. recognition of their efforts is inevitable. Behind closed doors, however, concern is mounting that the loss of certification could derail crucial programs and embolden Petro’s domestic opponents.
For Washington, the decision also carries political weight ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. A tough stance on drugs remains a bipartisan talking point, and Colombia’s rising coca figures provide an easy target. If the Trump administration decides to act, it will not only shape the future of U.S.-Colombia relations but also send a clear message to other countries in the region about the costs of straying from Washington’s expectations.
Whether Colombia keeps its certification, loses it, or faces conditional renewal, the decision will echo beyond the US$453 million in aid at stake. It will redefine how the two nations approach the fight against narcotics and test whether alternative strategies centered on development, rather than eradication alone, can gain legitimacy in the international arena.