Colombia’s new pro-Israel pivot deepens rift over Gaza and foreign policy
Colombia’s new right-wing government has restored diplomatic relations with Israel, reversing a break ordered by former leftist president Gustavo Petro over the Gaza war. Petro now accuses Bogotá of “applauding genocide,” exposing a deep split over how Latin America should respond to Israel’s campaign.
Colombia has swung sharply back toward Israel diplomatically, reopening ties that were severed under its previous left-leaning government and igniting a fierce domestic argument over the Gaza war. The new right-wing administration of President Abelardo de la Espriella has restored relations with Israel two years after then-president Gustavo Petro broke them, citing what he described as Israel’s conduct in Gaza.
Petro, now in opposition, reacted with a stark accusation: that re-establishing full relations with Israel while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remains in power amounts to “applauding genocide in Gaza.” His charge, delivered on 25 August, underlines how a foreign-policy decision traditionally framed in terms of security cooperation and trade is now inseparable from the moral and legal debate over Israel’s military campaign and Palestinian civilian deaths.
For Colombians, the policy reversal is not just a distant diplomatic gesture. Israel has been a longstanding supplier of military equipment and training to Colombian security forces, relationships that reach into counterinsurgency operations, intelligence-sharing, and internal security doctrine. Restoring ties could mean renewed arms deals, joint training, and technology transfers that directly affect how the Colombian state conducts operations in its own territory.
The shift also lands at a time when Colombia is grappling with its own human rights concerns. Government security forces, armed groups and criminal organizations all shape daily life in contested regions. Critics of closer security ties with Israel argue that importing hardware and doctrine from a country accused by some of grave violations in Gaza could harden military approaches at home and weaken accountability. Supporters counter that Israel’s experience in technology and counterterrorism is valuable against Colombian armed groups and that severing ties did little to change conditions in Gaza.
Regionally, Colombia’s pivot feeds into a broader Latin American divide over the war. Some governments have sought distance from Israel over Gaza, downgrading relations or issuing sharp condemnations, while others maintain close security and economic links. Bogotá’s decision to move back into the pro-engagement camp, despite continuing controversy around Israel’s actions, may encourage like-minded governments to do the same — or sharpen criticism from neighbors that view Gaza through the lens of their own histories of conflict and displacement.
Strategically, the restoration of ties underscores how Middle Eastern conflicts now resonate inside Latin America’s political battles. Aligning with Israel is not only about bilateral interests but about signaling positioning on global issues, from human rights norms to alignment with Washington. For de la Espriella, the move helps define his government’s ideological profile and reassures partners who value close security cooperation. For Petro and his supporters, it is a line in the sand over what kind of actions Colombia is willing to be associated with abroad.
A single sentence captures the stakes: by tying its relationship with Israel to the political fate of Benjamin Netanyahu, Colombia has turned a foreign-policy reset into a referendum on how much civilian suffering in Gaza a democracy is willing to look past for strategic gain. That framing will be difficult for Bogotá to unwind, whichever government is in power in the years ahead.
The next signals to watch include whether Colombia announces new defense or intelligence agreements with Israel, how domestic courts and oversight bodies respond to any legal challenges grounded in human rights concerns, and whether regional organizations take up the issue. Any high-level visits, joint exercises or arms contracts in the near term will show how quickly the restored relationship moves from symbolism to concrete security cooperation.
Sources
- OSINT