Colombia’s President on Why Trump’s War on Drugs Is Failing

In May, Colombians will choose a successor to President Gustavo Petro, the first leftist leader in the country’s modern history. The results of that election will cement — or erase — Petro’s legacy at home, where voters will choose from a field including leftist Iván Cepeda, conservative Paloma Valencia and far-right lawyer Abelardo Gabriel de la Espriella.

In his nearly four years in office, Petro has struggled to implement the full breadth of his reformist program; he’s also facedlow approval ratings. But as Colombia’s global representative on the world stage, he’s had an outsized impact, with combative speeches at the United Nations attacking governments who “applaud genocide” in Gaza and fail to deliver climate action.

Petro, who is constitutionally barred from seeking a second term, has emerged as one of the sharpest critics of U.S. foreign policy and the War on Drugs — leading to a public feud with President Donald Trump, who called Petro a “sick man” who should “watch his ass.”

Trump has accused Petro of failing to clamp down on the cocaine trade and demanded aggressive action against the cartels. For his part, the Colombian leader has argued the best way to dismantle the gangs would be to legalize cocaine worldwide. As Colombians voted in a crucial legislative election Sunday, Petro travelled to Vienna to deliver a final message as President to U.N. drug officials: criminalization isn’t working.

On Tuesday, POLITICO sat down with Petro in the Colombian Ambassador’s residence in Vienna. He discussed his views on narcotics, U.S. intervention in Latin America and the follies of what he calls a capitalist “culture of extinction.”

“We have reached a world where capitalism is showing its end. And its demise is not peaceful,” Petro said. “The climate crisis scientifically heralds the end of existence — if we do not change the way we produce and consume throughout the world.”

This interview has been translated from Spanish and edited for clarity and length. 

In your inauguration speech, you said that the War on Drugs had failed. You are now in the final months of your term. Why did you think it was important to come to Vienna, to the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs? And do you believe that the world has listened to what you said when you first took office? 

First of all, there is overwhelming evidence that a globalized, public policy against drug use has failed. This policy considers drug use to be a crime and does not prioritize public health measures and social transformation to reduce drug use. It has failed. After half a century of such policy — which originated in the United States under the Nixon administration for political reasons, and which spread globally without understanding the cultural differences and diverse social and economic realities that exist around the world — we can observe [what the results have been].

Regarding the cocaine problem, which is the one I know about: One million people have been killed in Latin America. Not in a major conflict, as we see in the Middle East, but diffusely in a kind of social violence that is built around the clandestine nature of the production, distribution and consumption of narcotics. One million deaths is a war, and most of those deaths have occurred in Colombia — around 300,000. [Editor’s note: Colombia’s armed conflict has killed roughly 450,000 people; much of the violence is fueled by the cocaine trade, which finances guerrilla groups, paramilitaries and criminal organizations.]

The number of murders in Mexico and Ecuador is increasing. [Editor’s note: While the homicide rate in Ecuador is increasing, last year the homicide rate in Mexico dropped by 30 percent.] If you make a map of [the] America[s] and look at the homicide rates, putting them from highest to lowest, you will find exactly where the drug trafficking routes are. That is why there are cities within the United States that are among the most violent in the world; less and less [violence] from Colombia; more and more from Mexico, Central America and Brazil. [Editor’s note: The most violent cities in the world are concentrated in Latin America, while American cities rank lower.]

And the map? Now, as the cocaine market expands rapidly in Europe, Australia, New Zealand and other countries around the world, including China, you find that these routes of violence are also spreading across the globe. That is the first failure. One million lives have been lost. But there is a second failure that I believe is even more resounding and dangerous, and that is the deaths in the United States. [Cocaine has been replaced by] the increase in demand [for] fentanyl.

Fentanyl is a deadly drug. If we look at the latest statistics, we are talking about 70,000 and 80,000 deaths per year. If consumption is not stopped, within 10 years the United States will have more deaths from fentanyl consumption than Latin America has had from cocaine production in the last 50 years. This second piece of data is an even greater, more significant sign of failure.

And there is a third element of failure that I bring to the table for discussion: The initial cocaine export cartels — which were exclusively Colombian and are now featured on TV, such as Pablo Escobar's cartel … If we compare them with the current drug trafficking organizations — in terms of their criminal dimension, their political and economic power … These are multinational enterprises, in terms of their global operations. They can be in Dubai, they can be in Egypt, they can turn Africa into a chain of cocaine warehouses ready to ship to Europe. They can enter Australia. They are capable of penetrating the intelligence barriers of the People's Republic of China. They reach Japan, and they are undoubtedly present throughout the Americas. It is multinational in terms of its business scale, but it is also multinational in terms of the origin of the bosses, who are Mexican, French, Albanian, Arab, American, Colombian, Uruguayan. … It is what I call a confederation of mafias. And that confederation of mafias today builds an almost unpunished network, which not only handles cocaine trafficking, but is also multi-crime. It encompasses organ trafficking, human trafficking, women, children, weapons. It is aware of internal and external armed conflicts and takes advantage of wars to build routes to the large markets, which are basically located in the northern hemisphere. These facts mark the failure of an anti-drug policy, which must be replaced by much more effective ways of dealing with what has become a global problem.

You spoke yesterday during your speech at the U.N. of how different drugs seem to embody the characteristics of the societies that consume them. And you apologized to the delegates for this analysis, but I thought it was interesting. Why do you think fentanyl is the drug of the climate crisis, as you mentioned yesterday? Do you think that the U.S. and other wealthy societies that consume fentanyl are societies in despair? 

Undoubtedly, there is a cultural origin to substance use, which in the past lived alongside certain moments of recreation, a release from routine, whether that routine was agriculture or something else, [like] war … Wine is linked to Latin cultures. Mediterranean civilization would not be known without wine.

Basically, by turning these types of substances into commodities; by trying to intensify their consumption to maximize profits, issues such as alcoholism began to appear in various societies.

But seen through the lens of our contemporary problems, I feel that in America, at least three drugs — cannabis, cocaine and now fentanyl — have a serious connection to the social and political structures of their time. It is not that marijuana or cannabis is no longer consumed — it seems to be the most widely consumed drug — but its initial phase corresponds to the youth movements that opposed the Vietnam War. That is why [President Richard] Nixon unleashed the policy that I criticize.

And so he conceived, in my opinion mistakenly, that by attacking these consumptions he could attack his social and generational opposition.

But if we move on to the more contemporary issue of cocaine, which emerged with great force in the 1980s in the U.S., and which involves Colombia as the main producer in a kind of sophisticated illegal trade, we see that cocaine is located mainly in areas with higher income levels. Only [low-quality crack] cocaine reaches [poor] Black neighborhoods. It puts [poor] Black people in jail, not high-income men and women. It is a typical drug of the Wall Street executive and its function — both in the executive circles of finance and in industrial work, often done by migrants — is to work harder, staying awake. Cocaine is linked to the ultimate phase of capitalism's expansion on a global scale, but especially in the U.S.

Today, the feeling is different. Wall Street no longer exists as a paradise, as a mirage of progress for anyone in the world. What we see now is decline. It is a decline of capital, not of a specific society. We have reached a world where capitalism is showing its end. And its demise is not peaceful. It seems to be mired in bombs, violence and something that I have studied in depth: the climate crisis, on which I have built my political project. The climate crisis scientifically heralds the end of existence — if we do not change the way we produce and consume throughout the world.

Such scientific discovery leads to cultural perceptions — and anti-cultural perceptions. It leads to what I call “the culture of extinction.” When you look at birth rates, you find that the decision of young people today is not to procreate. We see this even in Colombia. If such a decision was widespread, the result is the end of the species. But that decision is based on certain realities, namely the well-founded belief that capital has reached its limit, and that its limit could be the end of the species of life.

Obviously, there are alternatives, there is hope. Capital can be overcome and, therefore, life on the planet can be maintained. Capitalism leads people not to individualism, but to the isolation of the individual in their loneliness. Individuals at their weakest are vulnerable to suicide. And fentanyl is a suicide drug. I call it the drug of human extinction.

Note that [the fentanyl crisis] has not spread to South America or Europe. Its consumption has been concentrated in the U.S. for now. But the more isolated the individual is by capital, the more vulnerable they are to the most addictive and deadly drugs.

Colombia didn’t participate in the Shield of the Americas meeting in Miami over the weekend. U.S. President Donald Trump said that Latin American countries should offer their militaries to help defeat the cartels. Why did you decide not to participate in this event, and what do you think this alliance will achieve? 

First of all, we weren't invited, and you don't go where you're not invited. I was invited to the funeral of Jesse Jackson — with whom I had a relationship. We had already spoken personally, and I find the struggles for the rights of African [Americans] in America in general, and in the U.S. in particular, to be absolutely respectable. We experience something similar in Colombia.

But I think the meeting of the so-called Southern Shield has two major flaws. One is political. It is a political meeting, more than anything else. It is not a military meeting.

The concept I have heard a lot from [Secretary of State] Marco Rubio and Elon Musk is the idea of a white Christian Western civilization. [Editor’s note: Neither Rubio nor Musk responded to a request for comment in time for publication.] That does not exist. Perhaps in the past, in the days of the Crusades, it could be argued with some legitimacy — and it resulted in major violence and bloodshed. But today we are not in the age of the Crusades. Bringing the Crusades into the present day seems to me to be an anachronism typical of a culture of extinction. The U.S., North America in general, South America and the Caribbean ... all of us are diverse societies. Europe can no longer be conceived of as anything other than a diverse society. And that's not a bad thing. In my opinion, today's contemporary world can claim human diversity as an asset.

American society will become increasingly powerful if it recognizes its diversity. And Latin America will become an increasingly listened-to voice if it recognizes its diversity. Slogans such as [those defending a] Western, Aryan and Christian civilization are an anachronism that will weaken us, and using that kind of slogan and policy would only lead to an enormous level of violence within each society.

So there is a first fundamental error. All of America, from Alaska to Patagonia, must recognize its diversity and not think of a homogeneous, imposed society, because that would only generate violence in all the countries of America. And a disagreement between the countries of America. And against that I have a proposal: Instead of conflicts between civilizations, what we have to build is dialogue between civilizations, and the United Nations has to move away from being a meeting place for nations — which is already ineffective — towards a meeting between civilizations and peoples to solve the most serious problems of humanity.

The second big mistake of the meeting is the issue of drugs. The 17 countries gathered are the least experienced in the fight against drugs in the Americas. Some of them are deeply penetrated by the corruption of drug trafficking. But if anyone has experience in the fight against drugs, it is Colombia.

I'm going to give you an example, and it's not out of chauvinism: In the middle of the meeting of the 17 countries of the Southern Shield in Florida, there is military action on the border 300 meters from Colombia. It is said to be between the U.S. and Ecuadorian armies. Do you know the result of that operation? An Ecuadorian with a rifle was arrested and dynamite was found in his house. On the same day, just a few kilometers away but inside the Colombian border, we found three tons of cocaine. In a well-targeted bombing, we collected 35 rifles, five M60 machine guns and captured about 30 members of armed drug trafficking organizations. You put that on the scale and then [you see] where the real shield against drug trafficking is.

Colombia has built a network of 75 countries whose police intelligence agencies coordinate with each other, and that is why we seized 3,300 tons of cocaine during my administration, the highest figure ever. We have handed over 800 drug traffickers to the U.S., collected 78,000 weapons, and started a program on that border with the United States where Ecuador captured one Ecuadorian with his rifle.

Do you see a severe threat to the sovereignty of Latin American countries from this kind of rhetoric from the U.S.? And how should countries in the region respond to threats of U.S.-instigated regime change in Cuba?

Many of us have been threatened. Me too. I am on the OFAC list [the U.S. Treasury Department’s roster of individuals, companies and entities subject to U.S. economic sanctions], and I have never in my life done any business, legal or otherwise. I am not a businessman; I am a political leader who has been dedicated since a very young age to the struggle for social justice in my country. I lived for many years without banks and without money in my pocket, but I have also been punished for my opinions.

What I truly believe in, and I am trying to make it a reality, is a dialogue between all the nations of America. In fact, I do believe, based on science, that the main problem facing humanity is the climate crisis. And I try to get Europe to return to that goal instead of thinking about bombs. And all of humanity as well.

In America, there is a possibility for a solution for a large part of the problem. One of the major sources of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere is the U.S. energy matrix. Its modes of production, its modes of consumption. South America has three times more capacity to generate clean energy compared with the total energy the U.S. currently produces, of which about 70 percent comes from fossil fuels. In other words, with a simple investment to realize the clean energy potential of South America, we could clean up 100 percent of the U.S. energy matrix by simply running electrical cables. This would be a truly fundamental step in solving humanity's main problem. All that is needed is a political agreement, political will, and investments that are essential today for both the U.S. and South America. $500 billion. Of course, it implies a different geopolitical world. It implies that South America and the Caribbean cannot be seen as a land to be conquered, but as a diverse civilization with which to dialogue.

The way my visit to Trump — our personal meeting in Washington, in the Oval Office … The way it unfolded and what we discussed, both for him and for me … acknowledging that we are different … that can be a message. It is the message that we can meet and engage in dialogue despite our differences and that there are common points. For example, the energy crisis that is looming in the world due to the Iranian-Israeli-U.S. war is manageable from an energy point of view, if Colombia simply supplied a lot of energy to Venezuela, and we extract the oil that remains temporarily. But if we want to think about the immediate future, the energy that Colombia supplies to Venezuela must be clean, because in the end, both countries could have clean energy matrices, and this would enable the U.S. to bring that energy to the United States. It is a concrete and immediate solution. Incidentally, Colombia's position is that there should be an immediate ceasefire in the Middle East.

What does this have to do with Cuba? Cuba is a country that should not be living off oil. Cuba is a country that should already have a 100 percent clean energy matrix. It should be full of fiber optics. A Cuba open to the world would be a society that could help the world in various areas. Remember that it managed to make the COVID vaccine in the midst of COVID and, similar to what the U.S. and Europe achieved. It could help the world in scientific networks of public health development. In Caribbean art and culture, and even in the recognition of European art linked to Caribbean arts. But it must open up to the world, and that cannot be imposed — that must be discussed. A peaceful dialogue with Cuba means engaging with it, not excluding it. And I believe that there are people in the U.S. government who think similarly: that instead of imposing an empire, from which Cubans always liberate themselves, what is ultimately needed is to establish a dialogue between the Americas and include Cuba in the world of fiber optics and clean energy.

This is not just a technological solution; it would bring about political diversity that would increasingly lead to a deeply democratic and free continent. America: land and freedom. But freedom cannot be imposed. Freedom is built. And in America, in all of it, we still need to build freedom.