Chile’s Political Turn: An Opening for Israel

Two months after José Antonio Kast took office in Santiago, Chile’s political turn is no longer a matter of speculation. The contrast with the outgoing administration of Gabriel Boric has begun to translate into concrete diplomatic signals, offering a revealing window into how Latin America may position itself amid geopolitical tensions. Chile is no minor actor: it remains one of Latin America’s most stable economies and a country with significant regional influence.

Under Boric, Chile framed the war and the wider Middle Eastern crisis largely through a human rights and international law lens, while adopting increasingly confrontational positions toward Israel. Kast, by contrast, has placed his emphasis on alignment with democratic partners, security cooperation and a more strategic reading of global instability. That shift does not erase Chile’s complex domestic landscape, but it does change the diplomatic tone.

The clearest signal came in May, when Kast met Israeli President Isaac Herzog during the presidential transition in Costa Rica and told him that Chile intended to return its ambassador to Israel after more than two years. He also expressed an interest in expanding cooperation with Israel in areas such as agriculture, health, artificial intelligence, technology and security. What had seemed in March like a possible recalibration has now begun to acquire institutional form.

This matters beyond bilateral symbolism. Israel’s global diplomatic environment remains under pressure, and reliable partners in regions often considered peripheral to Middle Eastern affairs are becoming increasingly valuable. In that context, Chile —a country with regional weight, institutional credibility and a politically active Palestinian community— gains strategic relevance.

A bilateral relationship under strain

Chile occupies a paradoxical place on Israel’s Latin American map. It is a favored destination for thousands of young Israelis who travel each year through Patagonia, the Atacama Desert and its vast national parks. Politically, however, relations between Jerusalem and Santiago deteriorated sharply during Boric’s presidency, reaching one of their lowest points in decades.

The country is home to the largest Palestinian community outside the Middle East —descendants of immigrants who arrived from the Ottoman Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries— today estimated at more than 400,000 people (in a country with a population of 10 million). By contrast, the Jewish community is under 20,000. This demographic asymmetry has historically shaped public debate. Under Boric’s administration, however, identity-driven politics moved beyond the symbolic and social sphere into the institutional arena, directly affecting bilateral relations with Israel.

The deterioration was not merely rhetorical. It began with the delay in receiving the credentials of Gil Artzyeli, then Israel’s ambassador to Chile — an unusual diplomatic signal that set the tone early in the administration. It was followed by the recall of Chile’s ambassador to Israel after the October 7 massacre, the withdrawal of military attachés, the review and freezing of defense cooperation agreements, and a series of sharply critical public statements directed at the Israeli government, both domestically and in international forums.

The repercussions extended beyond formal diplomacy. Chile’s Jewish community experienced a rise in antisemitic incidents amid the broader context of Israel’s multi-front war over the past years. Acts of vandalism targeting Jewish institutions, including synagogues, demonstrated how developments in the Middle East increasingly reverberated within Chile’s domestic arena.

Kast’s arrival at La Moneda has begun to shift that cycle. The announced return of Chile’s ambassador to Israel is not a full strategic reset, but it is a meaningful diplomatic reversal. Still, automatic alignment should not be assumed. Campaign rhetoric and diplomatic gestures can set a tone, but lasting foreign policy changes require institutional continuity, bureaucratic follow-through and political capital.

Kast’s government is already facing domestic pressures, including security challenges and economic expectations. For Israel, the key question is not only whether the discourse will improve, but whether this will translate into sustained cooperation in trade, defense, innovation, technology, water, agriculture and multilateral coordination.

A region in political realignment

Chile’s transition is also part of a broader regional pattern. After a prolonged cycle dominated by left-leaning governments, Latin America is experiencing a gradual shift toward right-of-center leadership that is redefining foreign policy priorities. Israel’s Foreign Ministry has openly described 2026 as a year of renewed focus on Latin America, and the signs of change are already visible.

Bolivia has moved toward restoring relations with Israel after years of rupture. Honduras’ new leadership has opened a new chapter in its relations with Israel. Ecuador has strengthened security-oriented cooperation and taken a harder line against Iran-backed terrorist organizations. Argentina, under President Javier Milei, has become one of Israel’s closest friends in the region, while Paraguay under President Santiago Peña has also deepened its relationship with Jerusalem.

This evolving landscape does not mean Latin America is becoming uniformly pro-Israel. The region remains politically fragmented, and upcoming elections in countries such as Brazil and Colombia will be decisive for the continent’s diplomatic map. Both countries, alongside Chile under Boric, were among the most critical of Israel during the multi-front war. A change in Santiago therefore matters not as an isolated event, but as part of a wider struggle over how Latin America defines democracy, security, sovereignty and international alignment.

For Israel, the lesson should be strategic rather than celebratory. Diplomatic windows open and close with electoral cycles; durable alliances demand more than temporary political affinity. If a more favorable climate toward Israel emerges in Santiago and other regional capitals, it will require seriousness, consistency and long-term engagement.

Chile’s change of government may mark the beginning of a new phase in bilateral relations. The first signals are encouraging, but the real test will be whether symbolic gestures become concrete policy. In a region where Israeli technology can address real needs —from water management and agriculture to health, security and innovation— sustained cooperation will matter far more than symbolism.