A few months ago, I commented that coffee diplomacy was “on trial.” Washington made coffee more expensive with its tariffs, Brussels complicated the market through poorly designed environmental regulation, and Beijing opened the cup to African coffee, while producers avoided environmental demands, geopolitical tensions and impossible measures as best they could. Since then the map has changed dramatically. The United States eliminated a 10% tariff on green coffee – including a 50% tax on Brazilian coffee – and the European Union was forced to reconsider its ambitious and stringent EU regulations on deforestation-free products.
This dual transformation underscores something already clear: coffee – grown by millions of small farmers in more than 60 countries – is not just a crop: it is also a geostrategic asset. As such, it requires serious and professional institutions protected from political fluctuations.
In the United States, eliminating tariffs – something that would have been unlikely a few months ago – immediately eased pressures on exporting countries. It was an economic decision, but it was also a political decision: in an inflationary context, making an everyday product cheaper becomes electorally profitable. Coffee, in the American debate today, is a message and a narrative, as well as a drink.
At the same time, the EU had to correct the EUDR. What was born as a tool to combat deforestation ended up becoming a technical nightmare for millions of small-scale coffee farmers, the industry, and the European Union itself, which realized in its dialogue with producing countries that its regulations, though well-intentioned, were unrealistic. Full traceability requirements have been difficult to meet, not because of environmental requirements – which coffee-producing countries cannot meet – but because of the obligation to demonstrate compliance with complex national standards, in environments that are difficult to understand on the Old Continent.
Politically, European transformation does not occur in a vacuum. Forces less sympathetic to the environmental agenda – many of which are described as right-wing or far-right – are already concentrated around 27% of the European Parliament and rule, or are part of governments, in much of the continent. This new link pushes towards a more realistic version of the EUDR, more aware of agricultural and commercial realities. There, producing countries, if they work together, can turn change into opportunity.
The technical work of dissemination and education by producers, and coffee diplomacy, has not only been essential for EU disaster resolution. In the United States, the National Coffee Association, the union that brings together the global industry, played a major role in bringing down the tariffs, with support from its members, from major multinational marketers and roasters, to exporters in coffee-producing countries such as the Hondurans gathered at ADECAFEH and the Colombian producers at the National Federation of Coffee Growers. Although the White House acted internally, the arguments and persuasion came largely from those representing the value chain. The lesson here is simple: the defense of coffee farmers in positions of power depends on the quality of the beans and the institutional strength of the sector.
But this institutionalism faces internal risks. Unions, cooperatives, stabilization funds, extension services and regional committees are the backbone of the product. Without it, there will be no regeneration of coffee plantations, no technical assistance, no traceability, and no international representation. It is rural civic infrastructure.
This is why there is concern about the growing temptation in some countries to exploit these institutions for political or electoral purposes. It’s not just about who runs the fund; The integrity of the structures that support millions of peasant families in Latin America, and which produce the majority of the world’s Arabica coffee, in at least 18 countries, is at stake.
Colombia is the most recent and obvious example. In 2022, having just come to power, President Gustavo Petro, during the union’s annual meeting, tried unsuccessfully to take over by force the National Union of Coffee Growers, an institution that had served as a global reference for rural development and governance for 98 years. The intention was clear: to control its resources and leverage its regional influence – presence in more than 600 of the country’s 1,100 municipalities – for political purposes in light of regional elections in October 2023 and beyond. This move was unprecedented. Despite institutional resistance, the blow to the coffee-producing country’s reputation has been significant, and international confidence – now in the process of recovery – has been seriously damaged.
History can repeat itself. This week the National Coffee Growers’ Congress is being held again, once again in the run-up to crucial elections for government: the parliamentary elections in March and, above all, the presidential elections in May 2026. Stories are circulating that Petro’s government – facing Washington, besieged by a difficult financial situation and besieged by alleged corruption scandals affecting some of the people closest to it – will seek to repeat this move before the 2026 elections, through a direct hostile takeover of the union or undermining it by enabling parallel structures. New, without the ability or experience, but without electoral conditions.
If this happens, the damage will be enormous: not only internally, but also to the international image of the sector that produces one of the most valuable types of coffee in the world. It would jeopardize public goods – purchasing security, scientific research, trade union institutions – which explains why Colombian producer historically receives one of the best shares of the international price.
Producing countries must seize the market moment – at relatively favorable prices – to invest in productivity, climate adaptation, generational change and industrialization, with the aim of boosting rural prosperity. Good pass prices. Strong and well-maintained institutions can last for centuries.
Recent changes in the United States and Europe show that strong institutions and coffee diplomacy work; And that cooperation between the public and private sectors is bearing fruit; And it is possible to move regulatory mountains. But they also remember an uncomfortable truth: defending this institution starts from within. Without union independence, there will be no credible dialogue at home or abroad.