Trump

Pope Leo XIV has urged Christian political leaders who initiate wars to reflect on their actions and seek confession, as part of a moral examination of their conduct.

Speaking on Friday at the Vatican, the pontiff addressed Catholic priests during a conference focused on the practice of confession. He raised concerns about the responsibility of Christian leaders involved in armed conflicts and questioned whether they remain faithful to the teachings of Jesus.

“Do those Christians who bear grave responsibility in armed conflicts have the humility and courage to make a serious examination of conscience and to go to confession?” the pope asked in a speech to priests.

Although the pope did not mention any specific leader or conflict, his comments came amid increasing appeals from the Vatican for an end to the ongoing Iran war. The conflict began on February 28 after joint airstrikes carried out by the United States and Israel.

United States President Donald Trump, who was raised in the Presbyterian Christian tradition, leads the country during the conflict. Some of his senior officials are Catholics. They include Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Christian teaching emphasizes peace and rejects violence. The Catholic Church generally opposes war. However, the Church has long used the “just war” tradition to assess whether a conflict may be morally justified. The framework includes conditions such as defending against an unjust invasion.

Earlier this week, Cardinal Robert McElroy of Washington, D.C., criticized the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran. He said the military action did not meet the Church’s moral standards. According to him, the strikes were “not morally legitimate”.

During his remarks at the Vatican event, Pope Leo also highlighted the importance of confession within Catholic life. In that sacrament, believers admit their sins to a priest and seek forgiveness from God.

The pope said the practice encourages personal moral reflection. He added that it can also strengthen peace and unity within society.

The remarks formed part of a Vatican conference organized to discuss the role of confession in the life of the Church. The event brought together clergy who study and guide the practice of the sacrament.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

US President Donald Trump has said the war in Iran is “very complete” following a phone conversation that lasted about an hour with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Trump told CBS News that the joint military operation carried out by the United States and Israel had severely weakened Iran’s military capability.

“I think the war is very complete, pretty much,” he said, adding that the US was “very far” ahead of its original timeline.

According to Trump, the campaign left Iran with “no navy, no communications… no air force”.

He added: “Their missiles are down to a scatter. Their drones are being blown up all over the place, including their manufacturing of drones.

“If you look, they have nothing left. There’s nothing left in a military sense.”

The US president made the remarks shortly after speaking with Putin. The Kremlin said the Russian leader presented “several proposals to end the Iran conflict quickly” during the call.

American defence officials also indicated that the military was approaching the point where it could achieve its operational goals in the conflict.

Trump later addressed Republican lawmakers in Miami, where he described the war as a “short-term excursion”. He praised the performance of the US military and said global perception of the country had improved.

“The world respects us right now more than they have ever respected us,” he said.

“We’ve already won in many ways, but we haven’t won enough,” Mr Trump said.

“We will not relent until the enemy is decisively defeated,” he added.

Financial markets reacted quickly to the developments. Stocks on Wall Street moved higher after Trump’s comments. The S&P 500 rose by 0.8 percent in afternoon trading in New York, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.5 percent.

Oil prices also dropped from earlier highs, falling to about $92 per barrel after reaching around $120 earlier in the day.

Despite the decline, analysts warned that prices could rise again if the conflict continues or if shipping disruptions persist in the Strait of Hormuz.

Independent oil analyst Tom Kloza cautioned that the drop may not last.

“It may prove to be a fool’s drop, or it may not. I think they’re betting on the fact that the Strait of Hormuz needs to be reopened. But I don’t think we’re done with triple digit oil unless the Strait is actually reopened.”

Dan Pickering, chief investment officer at Pickering Energy Partners, also warned that market reactions may remain unpredictable.

“This market has been schizophrenic. What we should expect is that the markets will react to almost every piece of commentary. Tomorrow, it could be the Iranians commenting about fighting for a long time, or a tanker could catch fire in the Strait of Hormuz and we could be back to being afraid again.

“Oil prices are still elevated because we have a war in the Middle East and the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Donald Trump can’t talk it open. There’s going to have to be a change in the situation before those bottlenecked barrels can move again. Talk has to be backed up by actions.”

Meanwhile, Australia confirmed that it granted asylum to five members of Iran’s visiting women’s football team. Authorities said the players feared persecution if they returned home.

Australia’s home affairs minister Tony Burke said the athletes would be allowed to remain in the country.

“They are welcome to stay in Australia, and they are safe here, and should feel at home here,” he told reporters.

The development came after the players refused to sing Iran’s national anthem during a tournament match in Australia last week, an act widely viewed as a protest against the Islamic Republic.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

A prominent businessman from the United Arab Emirates, Khalaf Ahmad Al Habtoor, has asked United States President Donald Trump to explain the reasons behind Washington’s decision to engage in war with Iran alongside Israel.

Habtoor raised the concerns in an open letter posted on X, where he criticised the move and questioned whether the US leader had considered the possible consequences for countries in the Gulf region.

In the message, he asked Trump: “Who gave you the authority to drag our region into a war with #Iran? And on what basis did you make this dangerous decision?

Did you calculate the collateral damage before pulling the trigger? And did you consider that the first to suffer from this escalation will be the countries of the region itself!

The peoples of this region have the right to ask as well: Was this your decision alone? Or did it come as a result of pressures from #Netanyahu and his government?”

Habtoor, who founded and chairs the Al Habtoor Group, also accused the US president of exposing Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries to dangers they did not choose.

He wrote: “You (Trump) have placed the countries of the #GulfCooperationCouncil and the Arab countries at the heart of a danger they did not choose. Thank God, we are strong and capable of defending ourselves, and we have armies and defences that protect our homelands, but the question remains: Who gave you permission to turn our region into a battlefield?”

Neither President Trump nor the White House has issued a response to the letter. The government of the UAE has also not publicly endorsed the message.

The letter is seen as a rare public criticism from a prominent figure in the UAE. It reflects rising concern in the Gulf as the conflict between the US, Israel and Iran continues into its sixth day.

Last week, US and Israeli forces launched coordinated attacks on Iran. The strikes reportedly targeted military positions as well as civilian facilities. Iran responded with its own attacks against Israel, US positions and locations in Gulf countries that host American military assets.

Reports indicate that the first five days of the conflict, described by the US as Operation Epic Fury, have caused heavy casualties. Estimates suggest that more than 2,400 people have died in Iran, including at least 181 children.

Iranian authorities claim that US-Israel strikes during the early hours of the war hit the all-girls Minab Primary School. According to Tehran, the attack killed more than 165 female students and school staff. Israel has denied responsibility, while the United States says it is investigating the incident.

Washington says six American soldiers have died so far in the conflict. Iran, however, claims it has killed more than 500 US troops.

A US-based conflict monitoring organisation reports that Iran has launched more drones and missiles at Gulf states than at Israel since the war began.

Data from the Critical Threats Project (CTP), part of the American Enterprise Institute, states that Iran fired 255 drones and missiles at Israel after the conflict started on February 28. During the same period, the report says 2,171 drones and missiles were directed toward Gulf countries, especially the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait.

According to the report, 1,138 of those attacks targeted the UAE, making it the most heavily struck country in the conflict.

In his letter, Habtoor also criticised the escalation in relation to Trump’s Board of Peace initiative announced in January 2026. The programme aimed to rebuild Gaza and was backed by about seven billion dollars pledged by Gulf states.

He wrote: “For before the ink has dried on the #BoardOfPeace initiative that you announced in the name of peace and stability, we find ourselves facing a military escalation that endangers the entire region. So where did those initiatives go? And what is the fate of the commitments made in the name of peace?”

Habtoor further questioned whether the financial contributions from Gulf countries were meant to support peace or to fund a war.

He stated: “Most of the funding proposed in those initiatives came from the countries of the region themselves, and from Arab Gulf countries that contributed billions of dollars on the basis of supporting stability and development. And these countries have the right to ask today: Where did this money go? And are we funding peace initiatives or funding a war that exposes us to danger?”

The businessman also argued that the conflict could impose significant financial costs on Americans.

He wrote: “And here they are today, finding themselves in a war funded from their money and taxes, with costs ranging, according to the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), between 40-65 billion dollars for direct military operations, and could reach 210 billion dollars including economic impacts and indirect losses if it lasts four to five weeks, not to mention the sacrifice of Americans themselves in a war in which they have neither camel nor she-camel.”

Habtoor also criticised Trump for engaging in foreign military operations despite previous promises to focus on domestic priorities.

In the letter he wrote: “You have even broken your promises not to get involved in wars and to focus only on America and put it at the top of your priorities, as you ordered foreign military interventions during your second term that included seven countries: Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Syria, Iran, and Venezuela, in addition to naval operations in the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific Ocean.”

He added: “You directed more than 658 foreign air strikes in your first year in office, which equals the total strikes in Biden’s entire term, for which you directed your arrows of criticism for involving the United States in foreign wars.”

Habtoor concluded his message by urging greater transparency from the US leadership.

He wrote: “True leadership is not measured by war decisions, but by wisdom, respect for others, and pushing toward achieving peace. And if these initiatives were launched in the name of peace, then we have the right today to demand full transparency and clear accountability.”

By Sabiu Abdullahi

Spain has pushed back against pressure from the United States after President Donald Trump warned that Washington could halt trade ties over Madrid’s refusal to support American military strikes on Iran.

In a national broadcast from the Moncloa Palace, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez set out his government’s position in clear terms. He told citizens that Spain’s stance could be reduced to three words: no to war. He also stressed that one “illegality” could not be met with another, framing the issue as a matter of principle and international law rather than political rivalry.

Tensions escalated when Spain declined to grant the United States permission to use the shared military bases at Morón and Rota for operations targeting Iran. Spanish authorities described the strikes as unjustified and risky. In response, Trump labelled Spain a “terrible” partner and threatened to cut off all trade between the two countries.

The warning has raised concerns about a key economic partnership. The United States ranks among the top destinations for Spanish exports and remains a major source of investment. Although no formal sanctions or tariffs have been announced, the prospect of trade restrictions has unsettled investors and business leaders.

Spain’s approach aligns with its recent foreign policy record. The government has adopted firm positions on conflicts it believes may violate international law. It has criticised Israel’s actions in Gaza and recognised a Palestinian state ahead of several European Union members. At the same time, Madrid has backed Ukraine in resisting Russia’s invasion, while urging restraint to avoid broader escalation elsewhere.

Spanish officials have also invoked the memory of the 2003 Iraq invasion. That conflict, which Spain supported under a previous administration, sparked widespread protests at home. Many citizens still regard that decision as an error that increased insecurity and carried lasting costs. Leaders now argue that military action can produce consequences that endure well beyond the battlefield.

The dispute unfolds at a delicate time for Spain’s coalition government. It faces political pressure in parliament and allegations of corruption involving individuals close to the leadership. However, recent opinion polls indicate that a significant number of Spaniards hold unfavourable views of Trump. Analysts say this could reduce the domestic fallout from the diplomatic clash.

For Madrid, the confrontation extends beyond Iran or access to military facilities. It touches on Spain’s broader role in global affairs. The government maintains that adherence to peace and international legality reflects national values and long-term interests. Critics counter that challenging the United States may expose the country to economic strain that could affect ordinary citizens.

The next phase depends largely on Washington’s response. If the White House moves from rhetoric to concrete measures, trade relations could face serious disruption. Until then, Spain remains in a tense standoff that tests both its diplomatic principles and its economic stability.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States First Lady Melania Trump is set to preside over a United Nations Security Council meeting on Monday, marking a historic moment at the global body.

Her appearance was announced last week before the United States launched military operations against Iran. According to her office, Melania will “make history at the United Nations, taking the gavel as the United States assumes the Security Council Presidency to emphasise education’s role in advancing tolerance and world peace.”

Stephane Dujarric, spokesperson for the UN secretary-general, confirmed that the event represents the first occasion a first lady or first gentleman has chaired a Security Council session.

The United States holds the rotating presidency of the Council for the month of March.

The development comes at a time of strained relations between Washington and the United Nations. Political and financial disagreements have increased in recent years, with the US expressing frustration over its status as the largest contributor to the organisation’s budget.

Since returning to office last year, President Donald Trump has withdrawn American support from several major UN agencies, including the World Health Organization.

The UN recently introduced a reform initiative. Washington paid $160 million into the body’s regular budget a few days ago, after making no contribution in 2025. Despite that payment, the United States still owes about $4 billion in outstanding contributions to the UN’s regular and peacekeeping budgets. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has warned that the organisation faces a serious financial crisis.

Melania Trump’s Security Council appearance takes place amid intensifying conflict in the Middle East. A joint US-Israeli military campaign began on Saturday with strikes in Tehran that killed Iran’s supreme leader. Iran has since carried out missile and drone attacks across several countries in the region.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has confirmed that the United Kingdom will not take part in offensive military action against Iran, despite criticism from United States President Donald Trump.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Starmer said he stood by his decision not to join the initial US-Israeli strikes. Trump had earlier expressed frustration with the UK’s stance and told The Daily Telegraph he was “very disappointed”. He also claimed Starmer “took far too long” to permit the use of British bases such as the Chagos Islands for operations linked to the strikes.

Responding to the remarks, Starmer told MPs: “President Trump has expressed his disagreement with our decision not to get involved in the initial strikes.

“But it is my duty to judge what is in Britain’s national interest, and I stand by it.”

The prime minister explained that although British forces will not participate directly in attacks, the UK has allowed US forces to use certain British bases for limited defensive purposes. He said the request concerned targeting Iranian missiles at storage depots or launch sites.

“It is simply not possible to shoot down every Iranian missile and every drone after they’ve been launched,” he said.

“The US requested permission to use British bases for that specific and limited defensive purposes.”

Starmer stressed that UK bases in Cyprus were not being used by American bombers. He addressed reports of a drone strike at RAF Akrotiri and clarified the circumstances.

“It is important for me to say that our bases in Cyprus are not being used by US bombers,” he said.

“I want to be clear. The strike on RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus was not in response to any decision that we have taken. In our assessment, the drone was launched prior to our announcement.”

He added that developments since the weekend had changed the security picture. “It is clear that Iran’s outrageous response has become a threat to our people, our interests, and our allies, and it cannot be ignored,” he said.

Around 300,000 British nationals are believed to be in countries affected by the crisis. More than 100,000 have registered with the Foreign Office for updates. Airspace closures have disrupted travel across much of the region.

Starmer urged citizens to remain vigilant and register their presence. “We’re asking all British citizens in the region to register their presence so we can provide the best possible support and to monitor the Home Office travel advice, which is being regularly updated,” he told MPs.

He noted that local authorities in several areas have advised people to stay indoors. The government has deployed rapid response teams to assist British nationals and is working with regional governments and the travel industry to facilitate safe returns.

The prime minister also addressed concerns about the legality of military action. He referred to lessons from the Iraq war and underlined the need for a clear legal foundation.

“We all remember the mistakes of Iraq and we have learned those lessons. Any UK action must always have a lawful basis, and a viable thought-through plan,” he said.

He repeated that Britain would not join offensive operations. “ I say again, we were not involved in the initial strikes on Iran, and we will not join offensive action now. But in the face of Iran’s barrage of missiles and drones, we will protect our people in the region and support the collective self-defence of our allies, because that is our duty to the British people.”

Starmer also said the long-term objective of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons must be resolved through talks rather than force.

“So it’s clear the Iranian regime must never be allowed to get their hands on nuclear weapons. That remains the primary aim of the United Kingdom and our allies, including the US, and ultimately, this will have to be achieved at the negotiating table,” he said.

Elsewhere in Parliament, Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey criticised Trump’s decision to launch strikes, which he described as “an illegal war”. He also called on wealthy British tax exiles in the Middle East, including “billionaires and washed up footballers”, to “pay their fair share to fund British defence”.

In a separate exchange, Starmer said the UK is working with Ukraine to counter drone threats in the Gulf. He highlighted Ukraine’s experience in responding to Iranian-made drones during Russia’s invasion.

“Ukraine, sadly, has more expertise than anyone in dealing with drones, and that’s why we’re putting their expertise and our expertise together and using it to help our allies in the region of nations as we speak,” he said.

As tensions escalate, the government has pledged to enhance security at Jewish and Muslim places of worship in the UK. Ministers say efforts will continue to protect British interests abroad while pushing for a diplomatic solution to the crisis.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

The Editorial Board of The New York Times has strongly criticised Donald Trump over his decision to launch a fresh military attack on Iran, describing the move as reckless and poorly justified.

In an opinion piece published on February 28, 2026, the board said Mr. Trump had gone against his earlier campaign promise to end wars, noting that he had instead ordered military strikes in several countries over the past year.

The editorial stated that the latest operation, carried out in cooperation with Israel, was broader than earlier attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities in June. It accused the president of failing to properly explain the reasons for the action to Americans and the international community.

According to the board, Mr. Trump did not seek approval from Congress before authorising the strike, despite constitutional provisions that grant lawmakers the authority to declare war. It also criticised the timing and manner of his announcement, noting that he released a video in the early hours of Saturday claiming Iran posed “imminent threats” and calling for regime change.

The editorial questioned the credibility of the president’s justification. It pointed out that he had earlier claimed Iran’s nuclear programme was “obliterated” during the June strikes, a position it said was contradicted by intelligence reports and the need for a new attack.

While acknowledging that preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons is a legitimate objective, the board argued that the administration had not clearly defined its goals or secured sufficient domestic and international support.

It further stated that the president’s approach showed disregard for both U.S. law and international rules governing warfare.

The editorial also criticised the Iranian government, describing it as oppressive and responsible for widespread human rights abuses, including the killing of protesters and persecution of minorities. It added that Iran’s leadership had long posed a threat through its hostility toward the United States and alleged support for violent activities abroad.

Despite this, the board maintained that the dangers posed by Iran do not justify what it described as an ill-prepared and potentially destabilising military action by the Trump administration.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

United States President Donald Trump has drawn widespread condemnation after posting a controversial video on social media that features an AI-generated scene portraying former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama as monkeys.

The video surfaced late Thursday during a flurry of activity on Trump’s Truth Social account. Within less than one hour, the president uploaded dozens of posts on the platform.

One of the materials shared was a compilation video that repeated his long-standing claims that the 2020 presidential election was manipulated. Those allegations have been dismissed in court and through official reviews.

Close to the one-minute point of the footage, an altered segment appears. It shows the Obamas’ faces placed on monkeys’ bodies. The background audio features the song ‘The Lion Sleeps Tonight’.

Trump reposted the same video twice. The timing fueled further anger online because the incident occurred during Black History Month.

Users on X and other social media platforms reacted strongly. Many described the clip as racist and degrading. Some critics argued that the post reinforced racist stereotypes historically used against Black people.

The controversial upload formed part of a broader late-night posting spree. During the same period, Trump again promoted discredited narratives about widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, despite the absence of supporting evidence.

In a separate post that drew attention, Trump shared a screenshot bearing the message, “This can be a great option if things don’t work out,” alongside a fight scene video of martial artist Bruce Lee. He did not clarify the meaning of the message, leaving observers to speculate.

The uproar followed renewed scrutiny of Trump’s remarks about the U.S. electoral process. Earlier in the week, he suggested that Republicans should assume control of election administration in several areas and proposed federal involvement in voting oversight.

“The Republicans should say, ‘We want to take over,’” Trump reportedly said during a conservative podcast released Monday.

During the same conversation with former deputy FBI director Dan Bongino, he added that elections should be “nationalised.”

However, in an interview with NBC News correspondent Tom Llamas on Wednesday, Trump attempted to retract that position.

“I didn’t say nationalise,” he claimed, even though recordings of the earlier remarks circulated widely.

The White House later tried to ease tensions sparked by the statements. Press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president remains loyal to the U.S. Constitution. She added that he believes previous elections were affected by “fraud and irregularities,” although no verified evidence supports the claim.

Only hours after that clarification, Trump appeared to reinforce his stance while speaking in the Oval Office.

“The federal government should get involved,” he said.

The developments have continued to generate debate across political and civic circles in the United States. Critics argue that both the video controversy and the election comments raise concerns about political rhetoric and democratic norms.

By Sabiu Abdullahi

After months of sharp exchanges marked by insults, threats, tariffs and sanctions, United States President Donald Trump and Colombian President Gustavo Petro are set to meet in Washington on Tuesday in what appears to be an effort to ease a strained relationship.

Petro confirmed his attendance after accepting an invitation from Trump last month. The decision followed what both sides described as a cordial phone call that brought an abrupt end to a prolonged public feud.

The talks come at a critical time for the Colombian leader. His administration is seeking to convince Washington that it remains committed to fighting drug trafficking. This follows a recent US military operation in neighbouring Venezuela that led to the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro, whom Washington accused of links to drug cartels. Petro is also pushing for the lifting of US sanctions imposed on him.

Trump said on Monday that he was looking forward to a “good meeting” with his Colombian counterpart.

Petro arrived in Washington on Monday on a special visa. His previous visa had been revoked in September after a speech delivered to a pro-Palestinian audience, during which he urged American soldiers to disobey Trump.

The deterioration in relations began early in Trump’s second term in January 2025, despite Colombia’s reputation as one of Washington’s most reliable partners in the region, especially on security and defence matters.

Tensions flared after the Trump administration launched a mass deportation campaign that involved the use of military aircraft. Some deportees arrived in restraints, a move that angered Petro. He initially blocked two deportation flights and said he would “never allow Colombians to be brought back in handcuffs on flights.”

Later the same day, Petro reversed his decision after Washington threatened tariffs and sanctions. Colombian authorities announced that the country would accept “all” of Trump’s conditions, including the “unrestricted acceptance of undocumented immigrants” who entered the US.

The dispute deepened in March 2025 after US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed that Petro had described members of the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua as “his friends” who only needed “more love and more understanding.” Petro denied the claim and blamed a possible misunderstanding on his limited English.

The Trump administration escalated matters in September by decertifying Colombia as a counternarcotics partner. US officials accused Bogotá of failing to meet its obligations, though they said funding would continue. Petro rejected the claim and argued that Colombia was doing its part, while drug consumption remained a US social problem.

“The US decertified us after dozens of deaths among police officers, soldiers, and civilians who were trying to disrupt cocaine trafficking,” Petro said.

Relations worsened further after Petro publicly called on American soldiers to disobey Trump during a visit to New York for the UN General Assembly. He also described Trump as an “accomplice to genocide” in Gaza. In response, the US revoked his visa, citing “reckless and incendiary actions.”

In October, Trump stepped up his criticism and described Petro as a “thug,” while blaming him for drugs reaching the United States. Soon after, the US Treasury imposed sanctions on Petro and several members of his family and cabinet.

“Since President Gustavo Petro came to power, cocaine production in Colombia has exploded to the highest rate in decades, flooding the United States and poisoning Americans,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said.

Petro denied the allegations and vowed to challenge the sanctions. “On the contrary, my government has seized more cocaine than in the entire history of the world,” he said. In November, he made his bank accounts public to demonstrate, according to him, that he had no links to drug trafficking.

The standoff intensified again in December after Trump warned that countries involved in drug trafficking could be “subject to attack.” Petro responded by cautioning Trump against threatening Colombia’s sovereignty and invited him to visit the country.

A turning point came on January 3, 2026, when US forces carried out an operation in Venezuela that resulted in Maduro’s capture. Trump renewed his attacks on Petro soon after.

“He’s making cocaine and they’re sending it into the United States,” Trump said. “So, he does have to watch his ass.”

Trump later added that Petro was “a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States, and he’s not going to be doing it very long.”

Petro rejected the remarks and spoke of “taking up arms” if necessary to defend Colombia’s sovereignty. Days later, Colombia’s foreign minister signalled readiness for dialogue with US officials.

On January 7, the two leaders held an unexpected phone call that eased tensions. Petro said the conversation helped calm relations, though he maintained that the US operation in Venezuela was “illegal.” Trump welcomed the exchange and invited Petro to the White House.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump said Petro’s attitude had changed in recent weeks. “He was certainly critical before that. But somehow after the Venezuelan raid he became very nice. He changed his attitude very much,” Trump told reporters.

Colombia’s presidency said the meeting would “define strategic priorities and strengthen lines of cooperation,” while describing Petro’s visit as a “milestone in bilateral relations.”

In addition to the White House talks, Petro’s schedule includes meetings with political, academic and business figures, as well as engagements with members of the Colombian diaspora in the United States.