Bogota, Colombia – On January 26 at 3:41am (08:41 GMT), a late-night social media message in Colombia sparked a diplomatic crisis.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro had taken to the platform X in the wee hours of the morning to criticise the United States for its handling of deportations. News reports had emerged that some migrants were handcuffed on board their flights.

“The US cannot treat Colombian migrants as criminals,” Petro wrote. “I disallow the entry of US planes carrying Colombian migrants into our territory.”

His statement came as two US flights returning Colombian migrants were in midair. They were subsequently denied entry.

But critics say what happened next would be yet another stumble for Petro’s embattled administration.

In a subsequent post, Petro demanded that the migrants be returned on civilian aircraft — not military planes — and that they be “treated with the dignity a human being deserves”.

US President Donald Trump responded swiftly. He threatened to impose 25-percent tariffs on Colombian goods entering the US, an amount which would rise to 50 percent by the end of the week if the deportation flights were not accepted.

He also revoked visas for Colombian government officials and pledged economic sanctions.

While Petro initially said he would retaliate with his own tariffs against US products, he eventually backed down. Within two days, deportation flights had resumed, with migrants carried on board Colombian Air Force planes.

The Trump administration declared it a diplomatic victory. “Today’s events make clear to the world that America is respected again,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

But in Colombia, the fallout is more complicated. Sergio Guzmán, a political analyst and director of the Colombia Risk Analysis consultancy group, told Al Jazeera the incident was widely perceived as a black eye for Petro.

“Petro wanted to confront Trump, and it backfired badly because Petro made a big miscalculation in terms of the strength with which Trump would respond,” Guzmán said.

But still, the episode offered a vision for how Latin American leaders might respond to disagreements with the US under Trump.

“Petro was baiting Trump to respond in a significant way,” Guzmán explained.

The spat with Trump comes as Petro enters the final full year of his presidency.

Petro is Colombia’s first left-wing president and a former rebel fighter who once fought in the country’s ongoing, six-decade-long internal conflict.

While Petro himself cannot run for re-election due to term limits, his political influence will be critical in shaping the 2026 race.

Petro is well known for his combative approach on social media. In 2024, for instance, he got embroiled in an online dispute with Israeli officials that culminated in the two countries severing ties.

But last week’s confrontation with Trump came as a shock to those in his inner circle, who had reportedly not been warned of the president’s decision to block the flights.

Allies and opponents alike feared his impulsive decision may send Colombia’s economy into disarray. It even contributed to political fractures.

On January 28, two days after Petro’s kerfuffle with Trump, the centre-left Colombian Liberal Party pulled out of the coalition government, citing the diplomatic row with the US as one of its reasons.

That split is likely to further deteriorate Petro’s ability to pass legislation in Colombia’s Congress.

“Everyone thought that the tragedy of Petro would be that he’d be a radical and scare away all the foreign investment, and there has been some capital flight,” said Will Freeman, a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, a think tank.

“But the tragedy of Petro is that he’s been an extremely weak president. He really hasn’t been able to get things done.”

Petro’s approval rating has remained somewhat constant throughout his term, oscillating around the 30 percent mark — a marked dip from the 56 percent support he enjoyed when he first took office.

Yet, he still enjoys a “hard floor of support, and this is not changing that”, Freeman added.

Nevertheless, Guzmán warned the spontaneous face-off between Trump and Petro points to a lack of direction in the latter’s government.

“Colombia is rudderless in terms of its foreign policy, and that’s going to create problems down the line,” Guzmán said.

One of the most defined aspects of Colombia’s foreign policy has been its historically close bonds with the US. Their diplomatic ties stretch back more than two centuries.

For decades, the two allies have fought a “war on drugs” together, and since 2017, the US has offered an estimated $1.5bn in aid for Colombia’s peace process. The South American country is one of the top recipients of US assistance worldwide.

But despite this tight relationship, Petro’s confrontation with Trump set alarm bells ringing in Colombia’s political spheres. Experts say the tension between the two leaders reveals fault lines in their countries’ bond.

“This episode really highlights the need for Colombia to diversify its alliances and to perhaps move away from its tethered foreign policy to the US and into other realms,” Guzmán said.

“However, to do that, Colombia would really have to have a sophisticated and long-term view of foreign policy, which it does not.”

Even before Trump, Petro had faced backlash in the US. His drug-policy reforms — shifting away from forced coca eradication and emphasising development over militarisation — have repeatedly put him at odds with Washington.

In response, the US Congress reduced foreign assistance to Colombia in recent years. From fiscal year 2023 to 2025, US aid was anticipated to drop by more than 8 percent.

Still, Petro’s public confrontation with Trump was unusual, according to Jorge Mantilla, a Colombian political analyst and conflict scholar.

“This is a crisis that, although short-lived, is unprecedented in the relationship with the US,” Mantilla told Al Jazeera.

“Petro continued to add fuel to the fire, and it’s not the conventional way in which Colombia has handled its international relations — and even less so with an ally such as the US.”

This is not the first time the Petro administration has found itself in troubled waters, though.

His presidency has been punctuated by high-profile political crises, both domestically and internationally.

For example, his outreach to Venezuela and Cuba as mediators in Colombia’s peace process has fuelled scepticism among more conservative sectors.

Meanwhile, his ambitious domestic agenda, including sweeping reforms to healthcare, pension and labour, has struggled to gain traction amid legislative roadblocks and opposition resistance.

His government has also faced recurring instability through a series of cabinet changes and internal disputes. Corruption allegations surrounding Petro’s son and the financing of his 2022 presidential campaign have further eroded confidence.

Nevertheless, for some of Petro’s supporters, his recent clash with Trump symbolised his defiant stance against US pressure and his commitment to protecting Colombian dignity.

His base — comprised of progressive voters, human rights advocates and sectors disillusioned with Washington’s interventionist approach — sees resistance to Trump’s hardline policies as an assertion of national sovereignty.

“I thought that what he did was good,” said Robinson Duarte, an economist who voted for Petro in 2022. “It hasn’t distanced me from him. I support him.”

Trump’s threat of tariffs and sanctions, though averted for now, has raised concerns about potential economic repercussions. This could hurt Petro-aligned candidates in 2026, especially if economic anxieties persist.

Yet, experts say Petro’s resilience in political crises should not be underestimated. His ability to turn moments of confrontation into populist rallying points has been a defining feature of his career.

If he manages to frame the Trump spat as a stand against foreign aggression, he could strengthen his coalition ahead of the 2026 election.

“He has also managed to position himself as a person with the capacity to tell (the US) that this is an autonomous country, we have dignity and we have to understand each other within the framework of international law,” Duarte said.

“Just because it’s Trump or the most influential person in the world, we are not going to bow down to the US’s way of doing politics.”