As the violence in Gaza continues, the Israeli government continues to receive criticism from the international community for targeting civilians as well as Hamas militants. On the other hand, Tel Aviv argues that these military operations are aimed at protecting its population.
It is difficult to remain neutral in this ongoing conflict as several Latin American governments are disparaging Israeli military tactics, prompting counter Israeli criticisms.
Latin American Critics
The most prominent example of disapproval against Tel Aviv was carried out by Brazil as it recently ordered the recall of its ambassador to Israel,Henrique Sardinah.
The decision was made last Wednesday, July 23, via a statement which stressed the hundreds of Palestine civilians that have died and also “condemn[ed] the disproportional reaction of Israel.”
However, Brasilia is not alone in denouncing Israel, as other regional nations have made similar strong statements.
For example, Bolivia’sPresident Evo Moraleshas called for sanctions against Tel Aviv. The Andean head of state took accusations to a new level by stating that Israel is carrying out a “genocide” against Palestinians in Gaza. Meanwhile, Ecuador recalled its ambassador to Israel in mid-July, preceding the accordant decision of Brazil.
Similarly, Argentina, which has a complicated relationship with Israel, has publicly reprimanded bothHamas and Tel Aviv.Namely, the Argentine government has declared that Israel is exacerbating the situation via its land military operations in Gaza.
To be fair, not all of Latin America has attacked Israeli military operations – other nations have condemned Hamas as well.
Colombia, for example, is opposed to any type of violence. Nevertheless, Bogota has been more negative towards Hamas, stating that their missiles flying into Israeli territory “aggravate the conflict and are a step backwards from peace efforts.”
Similarly, the Mexican Secretariat of Foreign Affairs has issued two press communiqués regarding the ongoing violence, on July 10 and July 14. The first press release expressed that Mexico finds fault with rocket attacks and aerial bombardments, but does not specifically single out the suffering of a particular nation.
Finally, the Peruvian government has similarly criticized the ongoing violence. A Peruvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs communiqué highlights that Hamas and Israel should return to negotiations, and take into account the “Roadmap to Peace” as well asresolutions by the United Nations.
A United Latin America?
There have been attempts by regional blocs to form a consensus on appropriate reaction to the ongoing violence in the Middle East.
Most notably, on Wednesday July 23, representatives of several Latin America governments discussed their own positions during a meeting of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS). OAS Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza called for an immediate cease-fire, declaring: “Gaza has no viability,no possibility of life in current conditions.”
While the OAS has attempted to be neutral (generally speaking), the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) has taken a stronger stance. In a July 11 press release, ALBA strongly condemns Israel’s attack against the Palestinians.
Finally, the members of the Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR) will meet today Tuesday, July 29, in Venezuela. The Latin American media has reported that Brazil is expected to bring up the situation in Gaza and may push for a bloc-wide resolution.
As for Israel, Tel Aviv has responded to some of the aforementioned actions. Most notably, when Brazil recalled its ambassador, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor declared, “this is an unfortunate demonstration of why Brazil, an economic and cultural giant, remains a diplomatic dwarf.”
TheIsraeli governmenthas also addressed Argentina’s disapproval of the Israeli land operations in Gaza. Tel Aviv explained that the “only reason” for these land military operations is to destroy the missiles used to attack the Israeli population.
A Game of Geopolitics
Certainly, Latin American policymakers should deplore the ongoing violence that has cost hundreds of lives, both Palestinian and Israeli. However, we would be remiss to disregard the role of geopolitics.
For example, Tel Aviv is a close Washington ally, serving as a major antagonist of President Morales throughout his presidency. Thus, Bolivia’s criticism of Israel is not particularly surprising. Meanwhile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru all have close political, military and economic relations with Washington. Hence, there is a limit to these nations’ willingness to denounce a major U.S. ally.
Moreover, Latin America in general has been increasing ties with Palestine and the Arab world for years. A major development occurred in 2010, when, to Washington and Tel Aviv’s disdain, various Latin American nationsrecognized Palestineas an independent state.
This was an understandable move, as Latin American trade and diplomatic initiatives with the Arab world have increased over the past years (i.e. summits between Arab and South American leaders). Therefore, the acknowledgment of Palestine was an important geopolitical move by Latin American governments as way to strengthen ties with investment-prone Arab nations.
Nations within Latin America have differing positions on the ongoing violence in Gaza. Latin American initiatives have progressed from recalling ambassadors to demanding sanctions, to neutral declarations for peace. However, everyone agrees that an immediate cease-fire is necessary. The Gaza incident’s effect on Israeli-Latin American relations in the near future remains to be seen.