President Gustavo Petro’s announcement on July 23, 2025, that multinational mining company Glencore would resume coal exports to Israel, is not only an economic-energy policy move aimed at replacing the Cerrejon mining contract as the only breakable agreement, but also a move involves multifaceted domestic politics, foreign policy, and international trade.[i] This statement stands out as one of the rare examples of Petro’s energy policy and pro-Palestinian foreign policy stance being combined.
Switzerland-based Glencore is one of the world’s largest mining and commodity trading companies.[ii] Located in Colombia’s northeastern La Guajira region, the Cerrejón field is known as Latin America’s largest open-pit coal mine.[iii]The field, which will produce 19 million metric tons of coal by 2024, includes a 150-kilometer railway line and a port opening onto the Caribbean Sea.[iv] While a major source of employment for the local population, the mine has also drawn intense criticism from environmental organisations and local communities. Glencore’s activities in this area are typical of the extensive privileges granted to foreign investors by the Colombian economy, which has been shaped by years of neoliberal policies.
Since taking office in 2022 as Colombia’s first left-wing president, Gustavo Petro has frequently stated that natural resources should be used for the benefit of the people. Known for his policies promoting the energy transition and reducing dependence on fossil fuels, Petro has also taken steps to tighten the scrutiny of multinational companies operating in the mining fields. The decision to reduce production at the Cerrejón field and the restrictions imposed on coal exports are also part of this political line.
Petro’s latest outcry against Glencore isn’t just framed on environmental or economic grounds, but also on moral and political grounds. Petro issued a presidential decree ordering a halt to coal exports due to Israel’s attacks on the Gaza Strip, and announced that if Glencore failed to comply, the contract would be unilaterally amended.[v]
Petro’s anti-Israel political stance can be considered part of a growing trend in Latin America. Leaders such as Brazilian President Lula da Silva and Chilean President Gabriel Boric have also reacted to Israel’s actions in Gaza and reinforced pro-Palestinian rhetoric. Petro’s export ban is a concrete step that extends this stance to the economic sphere. This demonstrates that Colombia is beginning to pursue an ethically based interventionist approach in its foreign policy.
The suspension of coal exports demonstrates that the Petro government is not only sending a diplomatic message but also exerting pressure through international trade routes. This decision is a significant example how energy exports can be used as a foreign policy tool. However, the fact that the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not yet issued an official statement on the matter suggests that the diplomatic implications of the process are not yet fully clear.
Petro’s call for “community resistance” in his statement demonstrates the government’s openness to using grassroots action as a political tool. While such rhetoric can encourage civic engagement and the empowerment of local communities, it also carries the risk of causing social tensions between the private sector and the government. Glencore’s presence in the region provides employment and infrastructure services to some communities, while posing threats such as pollution, water shortages, and displacement to others. Therefore, Petro’s call is an attempt to remobilize public opinion not only about Glencore but also about mining policies within the country.
Glencore’s statement emphasizes that coal shipments had already been halted before the decree and that the company was complying with the law.[vi] This statement could strengthen Glencore’s position in a potential international arbitration process. International law, however, allows for limited unilateral modification of contracts in disputes between investors and states. Many of Colombia’s bilateral investment treaties protect investors’ property rights and provide for compensation in the event of direct expropriation or unjust interventions. Therefore, the legal implications of Petro’s threat remain unclear.
Petro’s statements reflect not only mining policy in Colombia but also trends toward resource nationalism in Latin America. In recent years, there have been attempts to increase national control in the energy and mining sectors in countries like Mexico, Bolivia, and Argentina. Petro’s stance against Glencore creates a new paradigm that emphasises that multinational corporations cannot remain indifferent to social and political concerns.
This development is also part of a global debate about how energy exports can be used as a geopolitical tool. The use of energy resources as a sanctions tool in the context of war and human rights violations is beginning to take shape through Colombia’s coal, just as it has with Russia’s natural gas or Saudi Arabia’s oil.
This move by Petro’s government demonstrates that the energy sector is not merely an economic activity; it is also a political arena. The strategy of using energy exports as a tool for geopolitical pressure is a growing trend, particularly among countries in the global south. Petro’s approach, which combines pro-Palestinian policies with energy sovereignty, sends a clear message to the international community.
Gustavo Petro’s outburst against Glencore can be interpreted not only as an energy policy intervention but also as a political positioning, solidarity with the public, and a foreign policy stance aligned with international human rights discourse. Large-scale projects like the Cerrejon field create complex equations between economic interests and demands for social justice. The government’s course of action during this process will determine both the investment climate in Colombia and public trust in the state. A potential conflict with Glencore would trigger new debates on resource management, institutional accountability, and the limits of sovereignty, not only for Colombia but for the entire region.
[i] “Colombia’s Petro Threatens to Alter Glencore Contract over Israel Coal Exports”, Reuters,https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/colombias-petro-threatens-alter-glencore-contract-over-israel-coal-exports-2025-07-23/, (Date Accessed: 27.07.2025).
[ii] Glencore. “At a Glance”, Glencore, www.glencore.com/who-we-are/at-a-glance, (Date Accessed: 27.07.2025).
[iii] “Cerrejón Coal Mine”, Global Energy Monitor, https://www.gem.wiki/Cerrej%C3%B3n_Coal_Mine, (Date Accessed: 27.07.2025).
[iv] “Petro Threatens to Alter Glencore Contract…”, opcit.
[v] Ibid.
[vi] Ibid.
