President Donald Trump's public support for right-wing candidate Abelardo De La Espriella for the second presidential round in Colombia reactivates a historic debate in Latin America: the role of the United States in electoral processes in the region and the rest of the world. Looking ahead to the runoff, Trump not only congratulated the winner of the first round, but also assured that the result will be “very important for the future” of the Latin American country and its relationship with Washington. To what extent can this influence be perceived as a form of interference? We address it.
First modification: 06/03/2026 - 18:40 Last modification: 06/05/2026 - 00:07
Donald Trump intervenes again in a Latin American election. The support for Colombia's right-wing candidate, Abelardo De La Espriella, reopens the debate on US interference in the region and even in countries outside the hemisphere.
Less than three weeks before the second presidential round on June 21, the leader of the White House expressed his “complete and total support” for De La Espriella, winner of the first round in Colombia and favorite to compete for the Presidency against the Government candidate, the leftist Iván Cepeda. The US president described the opposition candidate as an “intelligent, strong and determined” leader and assured that his eventual Administration would strengthen economic growth, trade, the fight against drug trafficking and the reestablishment of “law and order.”
To display this content from X (Twitter), you must allow audience measurement and advertising cookies.
The statement is interpreted by political sectors and analysts as a direct intervention in a foreign electoral campaign. And the message takes on special relevance because it comes from the head of state of the main world power and main political, economic and military partner of Colombia.
But the most sensitive aspect of his statement was the implicit political message. Trump affirmed that the result of the elections will be “very important for the future of Colombia and its relationship with the United States,” a statement that various analysts interpret as a direct signal to Colombian voters about the international consequences of their election.
The controversy occurs at a particularly sensitive time for the bilateral relationship. Since Trump's return to the White House, Bogotá and Washington have gone through episodes of tension due to immigrant deportations, anti-drug policy and ideological differences between the Republican president and Gustavo Petro, the first left-wing president in Colombia.
In this context, the explicit support of the main hemispheric power for one of the presidential candidates is read by political sectors and academics as an intervention in a sovereign electoral campaign.
Read also: Why does the ruling party in Colombia question the quick count of the first electoral round?
Between “full identity” and the rejection of external pressures
The most forceful response came from the Casa de Nariño. Petro questioned Trump's statement and maintained that "when a country intervenes in the decisions of another country, freedom dies," while calling on Colombians to preserve national sovereignty.
"I invite all of Colombia to vote in complete freedom and not become anyone's slaves or colony. An entire young generation of New Granadans fought alongside Bolívar and Nariño to give us Freedom and Sovereignty. If the heart of the world loses its freedom and sovereignty, the hope of the world and of Colombia goes out," Petro declared on his social networks.
From De La Espriella's campaign, however, the support was celebrated. The candidate assured that there is a “full identity” with Trump in terms of security and the fight against drug trafficking, affirmed that he shares the defense of private property and free trade, and claimed a strategic alliance between Bogotá and Washington.
According to the right-wing lawyer and businessman who is running as an independent, it is a "union, strengthened by two leaders who respect each other and who share the same values and non-negotiable principles, will make our people more prosperous, their homes safer, and their future brighter."
The episode also comes in a context of questions by Petro and the Government candidate about the electoral process. However, the Electoral Observation Mission of the European Union, the OAS and representatives of the UN and Human Rights Watch ruled out irregularities in the vote counting of the first round. The EU delegation described the elections as “orderly, transparent and fluid.”
Beyond the immediate political dispute, Trump's support reopens a broader discussion about the limits of foreign influence in democratic campaigns and about the weight that the United States still retains in the definition of Latin American political scenarios.
Read alsoScrutiny in Colombia coincides with the pre-count; HRW, UN, EU and OAS refute Petro's complaint about “possible fraud”
The Trump model: the US as an electoral actor in Latin America and the world
The Colombian case does not constitute an isolated event. Since his return to the White House, Trump has assumed an increasingly active role in Latin American political processes, becoming a strong external factor in several presidential campaigns.
In his strategy, the US president combines ideological affinities with signals of diplomatic, economic and commercial pressure towards governments or candidates considered adversaries.
One of the most recent cases is that of Honduras. During the presidential campaign, Trump expressed his preference for Nasry Asfura and warned that a victory for another candidate could affect bilateral cooperation. The opposition pointed out those statements as a form of pressure on the Honduran electorate.
In Argentina, the US Administration was also accused of indirectly intervening in the electoral climate through political gestures and explicit support for the now president Javier Milei. Washington linked part of its financial and economic support to the continuity of the political project aligned with the White House.
In both cases, the candidates backed by Trump ended up winning at the polls.
Under this panorama, Brazil is the next major scene of dispute. It emerges as the next major front of regional political confrontation. Although Trump has not yet formalized a direct electoral endorsement, he recently received Senator Flavio Bolsonaro in Washington, one of the main figures of the conservative opposition and potential rival of the current president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
The dissemination of photographs of the meeting from the Oval Office was interpreted as a political signal in favor of the Bolsonaro sector.
The differences between Trump and Lula are known. The US president has repeatedly questioned left-wing Latin American governments and maintains disagreements with Brazil on commercial, geopolitical and strategic issues. However, analysts warn that an intervention that is too explicit could generate effects contrary to those sought and end up strengthening the attacked candidates.
Although Trump has managed to establish himself as a relevant actor in several Latin American campaigns, his influence is not always effective, at least not if we compare it with recent elections in countries outside the hemisphere. In the elections last April, the American came to the rescue of the then Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, with an intervention that even crossed the limits of words of support from a distance. In the middle of the election campaign, his vice president J.D. Vance arrived in Budapest, where he openly expressed his support for Vladimir Putin's ally and 16 years in power.
The message of influence was direct. Trump promised "the full economic might" of the United States to help Hungary if the far-right leader was re-elected. "We are excited to invest in the future prosperity that will be generated thanks to the continuity of Orbán's leadership," he said, a statement similar to the one he made in the cases of Honduras and Argentina.
But his words were not enough and the conservative Péter Magyar broke with years of political hegemony.
In nations like Canada and Australia, the US president's interventions ended up harming political forces aligned with his positions.
In countries with a strong historical sensitivity to foreign intervention, Washington's support can become a double-edged sword.
It is still unclear whether Trump's interference in the Colombian campaign will become more aggressive or not and whether another step in that direction could cause a reverse reaction that pushes part of the electorate towards options that they perceive as defending sovereignty.
Read alsoAdmirer of Trump, Milei and Bukele: this is Abelardo de la Espriella
Security and a strong hand, a region that redefines its relationship with Washington
The growing concern about insecurity and organized crime has favored the rise of leaders who promote heavy-handed policies, with a rise in candidates similar to Trump, since the speech connects with several of the priorities promoted by the tenant of the White House.
In Colombia, De La Espriella built a good part of his campaign around proposals for toughening the penal code and frontal combat against illegal armed groups. His political style has been compared to that of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, another Latin American leader who maintains a close relationship with Washington. The phenomenon is repeated in other nations where the deterioration of public security has shifted the electoral debate towards issues of order, territorial control and the fight against crime.
The elections taking place in Latin America during 2026 reflect a deeper transformation: the redefinition of the relationship between the governments of the region and the United States.
While China expands its economic and commercial influence, Trump promotes a more confrontational foreign policy, based on bilateral ties, selective pressures and ideological affinities. In this context, electoral processes have become a space where American influence once again becomes openly visible.
The Colombian election thus represents much more than a dispute between two national political projects. It also functions as a test of the real extent of Trump's influence in Latin America and of the ability of countries in the region to preserve the autonomy of their democratic decisions in the face of external pressures.
Read alsoThe war that no president has managed to end in Colombia
With Reuters, EFE and local media
Related keywords
The content you requested does not exist or is no longer available.
