Colombian President Challenges the U.S.: A Call to Relocate the U.N. Headquarters and Form an International Army to Liberate Palestine
In a bold act of defiance against U.S. positions, Colombian President Gustavo Petro dominated the international scene with two dramatic moves: first, a symbolic protest by proposing to relocate the United Nations headquarters from New York after Washington revoked his visa; and second, an escalatory call for the creation of an international army to liberate Palestine.
These steps are not mere rhetoric; they mark an ethical and political rupture with what Petro and his allies view as unjustified support for genocide and Israeli aggression in Gaza, while also reexamining global power balances and the legitimacy of institutions meant to uphold international law.
Visa Revocation Sparks Proposal to Move the U.N.
Washington canceled President Petro’s entry visa to attend the U.N. General Assembly, citing his alleged calls for U.S. soldiers to disobey orders and for “incitement to violence.”
In response, Petro told the Express newspaper that the decision “shows the U.S. government is no longer committed to international law,” and openly declared: “The U.N. headquarters cannot remain in New York.”
Relocating the U.N., he argued, would symbolically weaken American dominance within the institution and reopen the question of neutrality and legitimacy in global governance. He also underscored that heads of state attending the General Assembly enjoy full immunity, making Washington’s decision a breach of diplomatic norms.
From Symbolic Protest to Armed Call: An “International Army” for Palestine
In a fiery General Assembly speech, Petro went beyond diplomatic protest, urging nations unwilling to accept genocide to form an armed force to defend the Palestinian people and liberate occupied Palestine.
“We need a strong army of nations that refuse genocide. I call on the armies of Asia, the great Slavic people, and Bolívar’s armies of Latin America,” he declared.
Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto even announced his country’s readiness to contribute 20,000 soldiers as a potential deployment force in Gaza — giving Petro’s call a tangible dimension beyond symbolism.
Strategic and Political Implications
Petro’s initiative seeks cross-continental mobilization — from Asia to Eastern Europe to Latin America — presenting a Global South-driven challenge to Western hegemony. He framed it as resistance to the “tyranny and authoritarianism” of the U.S. and NATO, which he accused of “killing democracy” and reviving systems of domination.
The proposal has sparked reactions ranging from likely U.S. and allied rejection, to cautious interest from Global South states, and strong resonance among Palestinian and Arab audiences as a potential shift from symbolic solidarity to practical military backing.
Analysis: Symbolism or a New Era of Alliances?
Relocating the U.N. headquarters would be a symbolic blow to U.S. influence, while the call for an “international army” raises profound legal and logistical questions. Yet both reflect a moment of deep frustration with Western policy and a search for alternative frameworks of legitimacy and resistance.
Whatever its immediate outcome, Petro’s speech has thrust the Palestinian cause back into the heart of fierce international debate, signaling that growing discontent with Western dominance may push states and peoples toward new forms of alliances and resistance.