National sentiment on Santa Rosa Island

The island of Santa Rosa emerged around 1950 in the Amazon River, on the border between Peru and Colombia, and was populated mainly by Peruvians, who set up police stations and immigration controls. Over time, the island has been widening towards the Colombian side, and if this continues, the arm of the river that separates it from Leticia could disappear, leaving Colombia’s main Amazonian city without direct access to the river. The 1922 Salomón-Lozano Treaty between the two countries defined the Amazonian border and divided the islands in the Amazon River between them, but in recent decades new islands, such as Santa Rosa, have appeared without a new treaty being signed to regulate their sovereignty. This situation has caused tension between Peru and Colombia, which, although they managed to resolve the border dispute a century ago, now face additional challenges, such as geographical changes to the river associated with the climate emergency and populist leaders on both sides of the border.

In June 2025, the Peruvian Congress passed a law awarding the island and naming it “Santa Rosa de Loreto,” disregarding the 1934 Rio de Janeiro Protocol, signed by both countries, which establishes that any new border situation must be resolved through a bilateral agreement. Colombia reacted patriotically and Peru responded with even more intense nationalism. In Colombia, President Petro said that Peru had “taken over” Colombian territory and moved the commemoration of the Battle of Boyacá to the port of Leticia, from where he said we had to “defend our nation.” Despite the patriotic tone, Petro has corrected his inaccuracy (the island has not been assigned to Peru, but neither has it been assigned to Colombia) and has proposed diplomatic channels and adherence to the 1934 Protocol. On the other hand, politician Daniel Quintero took a belligerent stance, stating that he will not hesitate to “go to war if Peru insists on leaving Leticia without the Amazon,” River and traveled to Santa Rosa to film himself waving the Colombian flag, saying “our Colombia defends itself with its soul and, as president, God willing, I will do the same.” 

Political exploitation has been evident on both sides. In Colombia, right-wing leaders, who in the past promoted ignoring The Hague’s ruling on Nicaragua, are now pointing the finger at Petro for his statements on the dispute with Peru. In the neighboring country, the dispute has united politicians from across the ideological spectrum: Congresswoman Patricia Juárez responded to Quintero that “this provocation will not go unpunished”; Congressman Guido Bellido Ugarte declared that “it is time to recover Leticia” for Peru; and three-time presidential candidate Keiko Fujimori responded directly to Petro, saying, “Don’t mess with Peru, we know how to fight and defeat terror,” as Camilo Gómez pointed out in El Espectador. In Colombia, figures such as Quintero have sought to capitalize on the tension on social media with an eye toward the 2026 elections, while in Peru, various analysts have interpreted the nationalist shift by Dina Boluarte and Congress as a strategy to divert attention from their low approval ratings and focus on the upcoming elections. 

Amid the patriotic rhetoric, the environmental problem, which is the underlying issue, has been relegated to the background. The island of Santa Rosa has expanded into Colombian territory due to river sedimentation, accelerated by deforestation in the upper basin and the sediment load carried from the Andes. This process explains not only the emergence of Santa Rosa, but also of seven other islands. Biologist Santiago Duque, a professor at the National University of Colombia, warns that the river’s flow has decreased by an alarming percentage: between April and September 2024, according to IDEAM, it fell by 82% compared to the previous year. For four months, an extensive beach emerged between Leticia and Santa Rosa, and forecasts indicate that in less than a decade this will be the permanent landscape. In turn, the latest report from the Monitoring of the Andes Amazon Program (MAAP) reported in 2024 more than 1.7 million hectares deforested in the Amazon, an increase of 34% over the previous year.

Historically, the Amazon has been conceived in Colombia as a military zone or a resource extraction zone, which explains the weak institutional presence in the region. As we have pointed out in previous research at Dejusticia, distance from the country’s political center often translates into a weaker state presence. Although the Colombian Foreign Ministry and successive governments have been aware of the situation of the river and the geographical changes in Leticia, it was only after the unilateral act of the Peruvian Congress that it became an issue garnering attention. The situation in Peru does not seem to be very different: many public services on the island of Santa Rosa are provided by Colombia, and the population depends largely on goods and supplies from Leticia and Tabatinga. The reality is that both states have systematically neglected the region, and the Amazon only becomes visible when it serves political purposes in Lima or Bogotá, that is, in the centers of power. 

As Sandra Borda warns, before discussing jurisdiction over a piece of land, the priority for both countries should be to stop sedimentation and deforestation at the headwaters of the Amazon to ensure its sustainability. However, nationalism has even reactivated the specter of armed confrontation: Peru militarized the island of Santa Rosa, Colombia mobilized troops to the border, and recently two Colombian surveyors were detained there by Peruvian authorities. This scenario reveals the limitations of the nation-state model, which in the 19th century allowed disputes to be channeled, but which today is insufficient: rather than solving problems, it fuels nationalist impulses that inflame collective emotions and obscure understanding, as in this case, that protecting the Amazon is equivalent to ensuring the common good. 

This is why we need new institutional models capable of addressing transnational problems, such as those affecting the Amazon, in order to ensure global stability. Today we have an organization such as the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO), which, although it needs reinforcement to guarantee its effectiveness in protecting the Amazon basin, is an important precedent for continuing to move in that direction. For now, with regard to Santa Rosa, there is hope that after the talks between the two countries in the Joint Commission for Border Inspection on September 11 and 12, 2025, President Petro’s diplomatic spirit will prevail and Peru’s positions will be moderated. Hopefully the countries will recognize that those most affected are the inhabitants of the border, communities that, beyond national flags, share daily life, trade, and social ties, and aspire to continue living together peacefully, as they have done for decades.