‘Chile Cannot Afford To Import This Conflict’: Lawmakers and Community Leaders Clash Over Israel Policy
Chile’s condemnation of Israel’s Rafah operation has sparked a political firestorm, with calls to cut ties and accusations of antisemitism. Critics warn of selective outrage and electoral posturing.
Tensions between Chile and Israel escalated this week after Chile’s Foreign Ministry issued a sharply worded statement condemning Israel’s planned military operation in Rafah. The ministry described it as “the occupation of the entire Gaza Strip” and warned it would constitute a violation of international law, urging immediate international intervention.
President Gabriel Boric echoed the criticism on X, writing: “History will judge harshly those who execute, support, and justify the forced displacement and suffering of an entire people. The Netanyahu government has crossed a line once again. Chile condemns this unacceptable plan, which, if carried out, would constitute a flagrant violation of international law.”
The statement prompted left-wing lawmakers, including deputies from the Communist Party and the Frente Amplio, to call for severing diplomatic relations. Others called for a review of trade ties and increased scrutiny of military and technological cooperation.
Dr. Alfredo Misraji, president of the Jewish Community of Chile, condemned the government’s statements as a “strategic and moral failure,” especially amid rising antisemitism. He cited incidents since October 7, including antisemitic graffiti on synagogues, harassment of Jewish students, and the withdrawal of officials from interfaith events.
“When Bashar al-Assad massacred hundreds of thousands in Syria, no one talked about cutting ties,” Misraji said. “But now, when Israel defends itself from a genocidal terrorist group, the outrage is deafening. It’s a selective use of moral language, and it erodes Chile’s credibility.”
Misraji also accused some lawmakers of exploiting the conflict for political gain. “There are elections coming in November. And we see populist rhetoric replacing diplomatic principle. That’s dangerous for Jewish Chileans—and for our democracy.”
There are elections coming in November. And we see populist rhetoric replacing diplomatic principle. That’s dangerous for Jewish Chileans—and for our democracy.
A two-state vision in a one-war reality
Parallel to the diplomatic fallout, 620 Chilean lawyers, led by jurist Nelson Hadad and Senator Francisco Chahuán, submitted formal complaints to the International Criminal Court and other international bodies following an Israeli airstrike on a humanitarian flotilla departing from Malta.
Chahuán, a senator of Palestinian descent and chair of the Senate Human Rights Commission, distanced himself from calls to sever ties. “We condemned the events of October 7 in a forceful, categorical, and public manner,” he told The Media Line. “And we have raised our voice each time international law is violated… No death is justifiable, no human rights violation is justifiable, no matter where it comes from.”
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
He emphasized the need for a two-state solution. “There must be a solution that guarantees both states—Israel and Palestine—can live in peace within secure, internationally recognized borders. That is the essential foundation.” He also called for the deployment of UN peacekeepers and international oversight of postwar governance in Gaza.
When pressed on how Hamas might be removed from power, Chahuán avoided specifics, instead citing the importance of legal frameworks and reform within the Palestinian Authority. He referred to casualty figures attributed to Hamas without questioning their origin or the group’s control of information. He did not mention Hamas surrendering or being forcibly removed, nor did he offer a detailed alternative for political transition in Gaza without the military campaign he condemned.
In a subtle rebuke of Boric’s rhetoric, Chahuán added: “It is not helpful to generate communal conflict in our country. … Chile has historically been a bridge for dialogue and must continue to be one.”
Senate pushback: Chile must remain balanced
Senator Carmen Gloria Aravena, president of the Chile–Israel Interparliamentary Group and a member of the Senate’s Defense and Foreign Relations Committees, criticized the Boric administration’s stance. Known for bipartisan diplomacy, Aravena accused the government of abandoning neutrality. “Israel has long been a friend of Chile,” she said. “Yet today we have no ambassador in Tel Aviv, and now we hear calls to cut ties entirely. This is reckless.”
She warned of growing antisemitic rhetoric in Chilean discourse, particularly in the lower house of Congress. “Since October 7, we’ve seen not only silence about terrorism, but open expressions of support for Hamas. That should concern everyone who values democracy.”
While Chahuán called for legal review and reform, Aravena questioned the legitimacy of prosecuting Israel in international courts. “Dragging Israel to The Hague while ignoring crimes committed by Hamas sends a distorted message,” she said. “This is not how responsible nations behave.”
Dragging Israel to The Hague while ignoring crimes committed by Hamas sends a distorted message. This is not how responsible nations behave.
Chilean voices from Israel: “We feel abandoned”
Sivan Gobrin, vice president of the Chilean Community of Israel, an NGO representing over 10,000 Chilean citizens living in Israel, said the shift in Chile’s policy has left them feeling isolated. “We feel completely abandoned,” she said. “Since November 2023, there’s been no ambassador. Now we hear threats of a full rupture. What message does that send to Chilean citizens under fire?”
We feel completely abandoned. Since November 2023, there’s been no ambassador. Now we hear threats of a full rupture.
Gobrin criticized what she described as double standards. “Five Chileans were murdered by Hamas on October 7. The president never called their families. No action was taken against the Palestinian mission. But Israel gets all the condemnation? That’s not diplomacy—that’s bias.”
Clash of narratives, crisis of coherence
The growing divide in Chile’s political discourse has exposed deeper ideological rifts over foreign policy. Senator Chahuán has maintained support for a two-state solution and accountability for all sides, contrasting with calls for unilateral action by some left-wing legislators.
“I truly believe that peace efforts by both Jewish and Palestinian communities—in Palestine and Israel—must be heard with greater strength,” Chahuán said. “This is not a matter of confronting peoples, nations, or identities.”
Chile now faces a diplomatic crossroads. Its next steps will shape not only its relationship with Israel but also its broader identity as a player in international diplomacy. Chile has long held a reputation for principled foreign policy, but its stance reflects a regional trend toward intensified criticism of Israeli actions. Whether Chile’s trajectory will be seen as a moral stance or a diplomatic overreach may depend on how sustainable its position proves amid shifting international alignments.
