President Javier Milei's decision to move the Argentine embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem , proudly announced before the Israeli Parliament, is not only a gesture of unconditional alignment with Benjamin Netanyahu's government. It is also a high-risk move that will erode the Arab countries' historical support for Argentina's claim to sovereignty over the Malvina Islands . With this measure, the government is deepening an erratic foreign policy that had already generated tensions with Africa and now threatens to isolate Argentina on a key diplomatic front.
The embassy move, scheduled for 2026, places Argentina among a small group of nations —Guatemala, Honduras, Paraguay, Papua New Guinea, and the Kosovar separatists —that are breaking with the international consensus on Jerusalem, a city whose status remains disputed since Israel annexed it in 1967. The UN, in multiple resolutions, has rejected this occupation and established that Jerusalem's sovereignty must be resolved in peace negotiations. Most countries maintain their embassies in Tel Aviv precisely to avoid endorsing a measure considered a violation of international law .
The problem for Argentina is not merely symbolic . The Arab League, which brings together 22 nations, many of them influential in multilateral forums such as the UN, has historically been an ally in the Malvinas dispute. Countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have consistently voted in favor of resolutions supporting Argentine sovereignty in the Decolonization Committee. However, Milei's decision, coupled with her belligerent rhetoric toward the Muslim world and her public embrace of Netanyahu, is already generating unrest. Several Arab embassies in Buenos Aires have filed formal complaints, while investments promised by Gulf countries are paralyzed, in part, due to the political deterioration.
The risk is clear: if Argentina loses Arab support, the Malvinas claim could be weakened in key forums . This isn't just about votes at the UN, but about a loss of legitimacy in a conflict that, like the one over Jerusalem, has roots in colonialism. The contradiction is evident: while the government demands respect for Argentina's territorial integrity in the South Atlantic, it endorses a measure that ignores international law in the Middle East.
Milei's announcement also comes at a delicate time. Netanyahu is facing global criticism for the Gaza offensive, which has left tens of thousands of Palestinians dead, and his governing coalition is crumbling. And last night, with the attack on Iran's capital, Tehran, Argentina's government is splintering. By tying itself so closely to a leader in crisis, Argentina is not only aligning itself with a controversial policy, but also burning bridges with nations that have been strategic partners.
The embassy move, promised in secret despite the government's initial denials to the Senate, reflects impulsive diplomacy, more concerned with ideological gestures than with a long-term strategy. While the Foreign Ministry is trying to contain the damage and ambassadors are being pressured to explain Argentina's position, the question is clear: was it worth jeopardizing decades of international consensus on the Malvinas Islands just to please Netanyahu?
