Thus, the diplomatic statements of Latin American states demonstrated the continued ideological division of the region into pro-American right-wing and anti-American left-wing forces. Most governments in the region avoid harsh language to avoid complicating relations with Washington.
Alexander VorobyovMaster of History, Department of History of Russia RUDN, Guest Lecturer of the University of UNAN (Nikaragua)
Source: Source: russiancouncil.ru
On February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel launched a joint military operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran. «Epic rage» (a) or «The Lion's Market». . . . Military installations and cities in Iran were bombed, and on March 1, it became known about the murder of the Islamic Republic of Rahbar Ali Khamenei, who ruled the country since 1989. In response, Iran attacked Israel, as well as the countries of the Middle East, where the US military bases are located: Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan and Oman. Russia and China condemned the beginning of the military operation, on their joint initiative, an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council was convened.
The European Union and Britain condemned Iran’s bombing of U.S. allies in the Middle East, but on February 28, none of the European countries provided their bases for strikes on Iranian territory. Britain's position changed on March 1, when Prime Minister Kir Starmer allowed American planes to strike the Islamic Republic from British military bases in the region. In the face of a sharp escalation of the conflict, it is important to pay attention to the reaction of the countries of the global South to a new war in the Middle East, in particular, the countries of Latin America.
Argentina and Paraguay acted as traditional diplomatic allies of the United States and Israel in Latin America. Argentine Foreign Ministry and Paraguay Chamber of Deputies Chairman Raul Latorre supported the military operation. Argentine President Javier Miley said the Islamic Republic had been hostile to Argentina for decades. He cited data from Argentina's prosecutor's office that Iran was responsible for the 1994 terrorist attack at a Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people.
More moderate statements were made by the Governments of Peru, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Panama. These countries condemned Iran’s bombing of the Middle East, while expressing concern about the escalation of the conflict. Neutral, pacifist statements calling for peace without explicit condemnation by a particular party have been published by Bolivia, Chile, Mexico, Honduras and Uruguay. Their foreign ministries stressed the need for a peaceful settlement and said they were monitoring the situation closely.
The key partners of Iran in the region also took a moderate position. — Venezuela and Nicaragua. On February 28, Venezuelan Foreign Minister Ivan Hil issued a statement condemning the Bolivarian Republic. «Military path chosen to attack the Islamic Republic». . . . However, after news of the murder of Iran’s Rakhbar, the message was removed from his Telegram channel. Earlier, President Delcy Rodriguez also called for a peaceful settlement, while condemning Iran’s attacks on the Middle East, where US military bases are located. Such rhetoric contrasts with the position of Caracas a year ago, when during the 12-day war, the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry called the actions of Israel. «illegal and criminal aggression» against Iran. After the January US military operation in Venezuela and the abduction of Nicolas Maduro, the Republic not only normalized political and economic cooperation with Washington, but also markedly adjusted its diplomatic vector.
Nicaragua's presidents Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo condemned «All forms of war»We called for an early peace and expressed condolences to Iran in connection with the death of Ayatollah. This position is also markedly different from the statements of 2025, when the Israeli attack was called the Nicaraguan authorities. «Cowardly attack»Iran expressed full solidarity in connection with the death of its citizens from actions. «Genocide of Israel». . . . The easing of Managua's rhetoric may be due to concerns of increased U.S. pressure. Nicaragua's economic dependence on its northern neighbor remains significant, and the country's military potential is disproportionate to that of the U.S. Southern Command.
Cuba, Brazil and Colombia made the toughest statements with unconditional condemnation of the US-Israel attack on Iran. Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel condemned the strikes on Iran, saying that the beginning of hostilities disrupted the negotiation process on the nuclear issue. The country is currently under serious pressure from the United States: in February, the Trump administration imposed an oil embargo, and in a recent statement, the President of the United States allowed the opportunity to «Taking control of» The islands. Despite these factors, Havana retains strong anti-American rhetoric.
Presidents of Brazil and Colombia Lula da Silva and Gustavo Petro also condemned the attack on Iran. Petro issued a more detailed statement criticizing the bombing of civilian facilities and calling for continued negotiations on nuclear disarmament: «It's barbaric, and it's pointless to tell Iranian women to free themselves by taking off veils if those who demand it kill their daughters. The debate on nuclear disarmament between the US and Iran should continue. And humanity must demand that Israel and Palestine hold free elections to elect their leaders.». . . . Both leaders represent left-wing movements, and countries will hold elections in 2026. Anti-imperialist rhetoric has traditionally been used by left-wing forces in the region to mobilize the electorate in opposition to the right, focused on rapprochement with the US and Israel.
Thus, the diplomatic statements of Latin American states demonstrated the continued ideological division of the region into pro-American right-wing and anti-American left-wing forces. This year, however, the left camp has weakened markedly. This was influenced by the electoral defeats of the left in several countries. — Bolivia, Honduras and Chile — A successful US military operation in Venezuela. Most governments in the region seek to avoid harsh language to avoid complicating relations with Washington. Even a number of radical anti-American forces are showing more restrained discourse, reflecting a shift in the balance of power and limited opportunities for open confrontation between the US and the US.
