With notable absences, such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and most of the presidents or dignitaries from the 60 countries invited, the IV CELAC-EU Summit concluded with a 52-point joint declaration that, despite exceeding members’ expectations, also exposed the differences and polarization that frame the two continents.
Proof of this was that the summit, at which Gustavo Petro held the pro tempore presidency of CELAC, ended after just eight hours of discussion, despite being planned to have two plenary sessions between Sunday and Monday focused on promoting decisions on the triple transition: energy, digital, and environmental.
With a red carpet rolled out for the various delegations, the penultimate to arrive at the Pozos Colorados convention center—amidst great secrecy until the last moment—was Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who, along with his Spanish counterpart, Pedro Sánchez, were the only two presidents who accepted the invitation in person.
President Gustavo Petro during the CELAC-EU Summit. Foto:CANCILLERÍA DE COLOMBIA
Lula, who arrived determined to use the summit as a forum for debate on the tense situation in the Caribbean caused by the US military deployment, was critical of the polarization that marked the meeting: “Latin America and the Caribbean are undergoing a profound crisis in their integration project. We have once again become a balkanized and divided region, more focused on the outside than on the inside. We are once again living under the threat of political extremism, media manipulation, and organized crime,” said the Brazilian.
This view was echoed by Colombian Deputy Foreign Minister Mauricio Jaramillo, who warned EL TIEMPO that “Latin America and the Caribbean are polarized (…) My impression is that in other regions there are minimal processes on human rights issues and inclusive language, but in Latin America that consensus is beginning to crack, and that speaks to a challenge for multilateralism,” he said.
LEA TAMBIÉN
The family photo, a postcard of the meeting, adorned the guests with Arhuaco backpacks and included the Colombian president’s youngest daughter, Antonella, who accompanied him during his arrival at the Summit.
Subsequently, the plenary session was preceded by a sacred ceremony led by the Arhuaco mamo, the highest spiritual authority of the indigenous community of the Sierra Nevada, who, dressed in the traditional white tunic and conical hat, addressed the heads of state and government in the indigenous language and highlighted Santa Marta, the oldest city in Colombia founded by Europeans, as the “heart of the world.”
The Arhuaco mamo urged leaders to seek “concrete solutions” to protect the land and overcome differences in order to “live together in harmony.”
Co-chaired by Colombian President Gustavo Petro and European Council President António Costa, both leaders opened the session with speeches, along with the European Union’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Kaja Kallas, and the Foreign Minister of Uruguay, Mario Lubetkin, the country that received the presidency of CELAC.
President Petro opened the CELAC-EU Summit with a call for unity: “I want the summit to be a beacon of light in the midst of barbarism,” an idea that was recurrent in the other speeches, which emphasized strengthening multilateralism in a multipolar world and respecting the rules of sovereignty.
António Costa, President of the European Council. Foto:AFP
Similarly, Costa highlighted the choice of “dialogue rather than division,” noting that in his long political career he had “never seen so much progress” between CELAC and the EU. “Since the last summit, we have increased our contacts at all levels with more than 60 high-level visits between the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean,” he said.
Points of contention in the Santa Marta declaration
The bi-regional summit that brought together the states of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the European Union (EU) in Santa Marta culminated in an extensive 52-point joint declaration.
According to EL TIEMPO, these were the result of joint work carried out in previous diplomatic meetings that condensed issues such as climate change, digitalization, international cooperation, migration, gender equality, the fight against organized crime, and connectivity, among other points.
However, despite the central message being the ability to reach agreement despite ideological differences, several countries in the region expressed explicit reservations about some of the points—Argentina, Ecuador, El Salvador, among others—and, in the case of Venezuela and Nicaragua, withdrew from the document.
The shadow of Donald Trump loomed over the summit to such an extent that, without mentioning the United States, the text included a paragraph on the importance of maritime security and regional stability in the Caribbean, in clear reference to the missile attacks that the Republican has been launching for two months against boats he accuses of transporting drugs.
LEA TAMBIÉN
“It is true that many countries would have felt more comfortable with an explicit mention of the possibility and threat posed by the United States, but other countries did not want to make that mention (…) In the end, it is not a text in which everyone put what they wanted, but rather a document in which everyone felt represented,” said Colombian Foreign Minister Rosa Villavicencio at the close of the summit.
In fact, European Commission Vice President Kaja Kallas acknowledged in statements to the newspaper El País that the final document “did not directly mention the United States because otherwise fewer countries would have signed it.”
However, differences with the new policies in Washington were also reflected in other points of the declaration, such as efforts to address the effects of climate change, something Trump denies, and where the European Union and CELAC countries called for recognition of “the need for significant, rapid, and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
President Lula da Silva arrives at the CELAC-EU summit in Santa Marta. Foto:JUAN CAMILO REYES. EL TIEMPO
Reforming the United Nations Security Council “to make it more representative,” references to the war in Gaza, with a defense of the two-state solution, and global goals with a gender focus were other points of contention.
What do the points with recurring objections within the declaration say?
Point 10: addresses the “Zone of Peace” in the region and makes indirect references to the security situation in the Caribbean and Pacific. Some states considered it ambiguous or overly critical of external powers.
Point 14: expresses deep concern about the war in Ukraine, supports a sustainable ceasefire, and calls for a just and lasting peace based on international law and the territorial integrity of states. Although it avoids directly mentioning Russia, the text reaffirms the position of the majority of CELAC and the EU in defense of Ukrainian sovereignty and rejection of the use of force.
Point 15: It refers to the conflict in Gaza and the situation in the Middle East, which were interpreted by certain governments as a position favoring certain actors.
Point 18: includes a call to lift embargoes (such as that on Cuba) and questions extraterritorial sanctions. Several countries closer to Washington viewed this with suspicion.
LEA TAMBIÉN
Points 20 and 22: introduce references to the “Pact for the Future” and the “2030 Agenda and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals.” These global frameworks raise concerns among governments that prefer more flexible national agendas.
Points 42 and 44: deal with Artificial Intelligence, disinformation, and gender, including expressions such as “gender-based violence and discrimination,” which some countries consider to be interference in internal politics.
Venezuela: total break with the joint declaration of the CELAC-EU Summit 2025
Both Kallas and Foreign Minister Villavicencio agreed that Venezuela decided to withdraw from the declaration because of one particular point, number 14, which refers to Ukraine.
“It’s interesting because while we hear Venezuela complaining about the violation of international law, they refuse to sign a declaration on an obvious armed attack that took place three years ago. They should always apply the same standard,” Kallas said in his statements to El País.
The government of Nicolás Maduro, which criticizes the U.S. military presence in the Caribbean and describes European sanctions as aggressive, thus exposes its diplomatic distancing and reinforces its narrative of confrontation with what it perceives as an “imposed” international order.
Nicolás Maduro sent a letter to CELAC requesting a statement on the US operation. Foto:VTV
At this time, Caracas has not issued any statements regarding the incident.
Argentina: pragmatism with reluctance to embrace values
The Argentine government was among those that expressed the most reservations: it disassociated itself from paragraphs 10, 15, 18, 42, and 44; from the reference to “gender” in paragraph 9; from the “Pact for the Future” in paragraph 20; and from the “2030 Agenda/SDGs” in paragraph 22.
Its position seems to be aligned with a strategy of maintaining economic cooperation with Europe, but without making solid commitments on regulatory or value issues, such as gender equality or sustainable development, which the libertarian government of Javier Milei considers secondary to domestic priorities.
In a geopolitical context where Argentina is seeking to diversify its alliances, this reluctance also allows it to retain autonomy from external agendas.
Central America and the Caribbean: selective abstentions
Countries such as Costa Rica, El Salvador, Panama, and Trinidad and Tobago adopted positions of “partial abstention,” dissociating themselves from one or two paragraphs each.
LEA TAMBIÉN
These decisions can be interpreted as gestures of diplomatic prudence, considering that these countries prefer to maintain cooperation with Europe without fully committing themselves to issues that link them to regional dynamics where they have particular sensitivities, such as migration or Caribbean security.
Paraguay, Ecuador, and others: regional conservatism
In the case of Paraguay, it disassociated itself from paragraphs 10, 15, 18, 20, 22, and 44, while Ecuador did so from paragraphs 10, 15, and 18.
Both governments share a more conservative view of diplomacy, accepting economic cooperation but refusing to commit to agendas focused on social or normative values that they consider secondary or ideological.
What message do the abstentions and withdrawals from the Summit send?
From the perspective of some of the participants at the Summit in Santa Marta, whom EL TIEMPO consulted, the abstentions and withdrawals are not just diplomatic formalities; they are signs of a recalibration of alliances and regional priorities that reveal a growing autonomy in the region in the face of global agendas that some perceive as forms of pressure to impose a specific course of action.
They also show that the link between Europe and Latin America is being redefined when economic cooperation remains important, but the component of values and regulations becomes a factor of tension.
At the same time, in a more multipolar world, these chapters show how each state measures its commitments according to its own geopolitics and not only in terms of predetermined blocs.
STEPHANY ECHAVARRÍA – Editora Internacional El Tiempo
ALEJANDRA RODRÍGUEZ – Editora ADN
Enviada especiales a Santa Marta
