Ambassador Eyal Sela hails ‘best moment’ in Israeli-Argentine bilateral relations

President Javier Milei’s decision to expel Iranian chargé d’affaires Mohsen Soltani Tehrani from Argentina in April sealed the alliance he has been constructing since before he took office: establishing total alignment with Israel in the midst of a geopolitical transition not only in the Middle East but also worldwide.

The move came after the Casa Rosada declared Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps to be a terrorist organisation, a gesture celebrated by the Benjamin Netanyahu government in the midst of the peak of global tension marked by the Israeli offensive in Gaza and Lebanon, the exchange of attacks with Iran, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the reaction of Western nations to the conflict.

It is in that context that Israel’s Ambassador to Argentina Eyal Sela speaks with PERFIL. Now in the closing months of his mission, the envoy highlights the diplomatic shift in Argentine foreign policy defined by Milei’s alignment with the United States and Israel. Along those lines, he addresses the strategic relationship in the framework of the newly signed Isaac Accords, the unprecedented statements by Argentina’s government regarding the war in the Middle East and the expulsion of Soltani Tehrani, the only Iranian representative in Argentina who was declared persona non grata.

“That’s a decision which should have been taken in 1994, after the attack on the AMIA [Jewish community centre],” he says of the latter, referring to worst terrorist bombing in Argentina’s history.

Ambassador Sela notes key aspects of bilateral cooperation, from new direct flights from Tel Aviv to Buenos Aires to the cooperation in areas including science, artificial intelligence and other sensitive areas. 

He also refers to the controversy surrounding the participation of Israeli energy company Navitas Petroleum in hydrocarbon exploration activities in the Malvinas basin, which Buenos Aires considers illegal because the licences were issued by the British government administration of the islands without Argentine authorisation.

“Argentina may take the decision it considers suitable to defend its interests,” he said.

Furthermore, the Israeli envoy denied any “democratic decay” in his nation, highlighting the strength of national institutions and responding to international questioning of the Israeli military offensive against civilian infrastructure in the occupied territories of Gaza and the West Bank, in a context of growing pressures by players like the European Union, which has approved sanctions against extremist Israeli settlers.

 

President Javier Milei has not only deepened the alliance with Israel and the United States as the linchpin of its foreign policy, he has also publicly defined himself as “the most Zionist president in the world.” How much strategic value does this shift by Argentina have for Israel in the Latin American scenario?

We value highly that Argentina has a leadership which sees things as they are. If somebody is a terrorist, they should be defined as terrorist and if you believe in determined values, you have to be on the side of the world defending democracy, liberty and human rights. Some people say: ‘I have interests so I don’t care about the other side not being democratic.’ But we believe in things being said clearly. We know what terrorism is and we have seen, for example, how sexual violence has been used as a weapon against people. 

We share values and believe that this agreement later translates into practical questions.

Has that alliance already translated into concrete
results?

This rapprochement makes it easier for us to advance in issues of trade and cooperation. One result is the direct flights between  both countries, subsidised by Israel, which will increase tourism, trade and air freight. Israel is already the country which consumes the most Argentine beef per capita outside Argentina and we hope that keeps growing. 

On November 29 an El Al flight will depart Tel Aviv, which is already almost fully booked and will bring some 300 persons to Argentina, returning the next day with a cargo of fish, fruit and other products which arrive today by other routes and which will probably be marketed at less cost.

Another example is an Israeli irrigation company, which will expand its activity in Argentina,  creating more jobs. I don’t want to enter into details because the company has still not made this public but part of that production will later be sold in Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay and other countries of the region. There will also be investments to increase fruit production in Argentina with a destination in third markets. We are working to make this relationship translate into concrete results. Furthermore, the Israeli government has made the decision to support investments in Argentina via a state company, providing guarantees for firms which perhaps still saw this country as risky. One more tool to deepen the good relations we have.

 

Based on your Latin American experience, do you recall any other president with such a strong degree of alignment with Israel?

Last week I received in my residence Jimmy Morales, an ex-president of Guatemala, a country which has transferred its Embassy to Jerusalem and continues to support us. [Israeli] President [Isaac] Herzog has also met Chile’s new President José Antonio Kast, who has announced that he will name an ambassador to Israel, something the previous government did not do. The same is happening with Paraguay, Ecuador and other countries in the region.

Today we are experiencing the best moment in the bilateral relations between Argentina and Israel and we want to continue deepening them. We believe that Israeli knowhow and technology can help Argentina a lot, for example in the rational use of water and in projects for desert zones and vineyard regions. We will continue working in all those areas.

Milei has also manifested his intention of transferring the Embassy to Jerusalem, which could run contrary to United Nations resolutions considering invalid any measures aiming at modifying that city’s legal status. What is Israel’s stance towards those who question other countries transferring their diplomatic missions there?

Jerusalem is our capital. All the ambassadors of the world who maintain diplomatic relations with Israel present their credentials to the Israeli president in Jerusalem – i.e. the formal process for becoming an ambassador takes place there, not in Tel Aviv. Our president, prime minister, Congress and the Foreign Ministry are all in Jerusalem. Every country thus recognises Jerusalem as Israel’s capital de facto, over and above some deciding to maintain their embassies in Tel Aviv. That is a sovereign decision of each state.

We note with satisfaction that increasingly more countries are transferring their embassies to or opening offices in Jerusalem, including some Latin American and European countries. And we welcome Argentina being able to do that when the President considers it the right time.

 

Regarding the Isaac Accords signed by Argentina and Israel, what do they imply concretely in sensitive areas, like artificial intelligence, defence or cybersecurity? Those are issues about which the Argentine government is pretty hermetic.

The accord we signed is specifically about cooperation in artificial intelligence. That understanding has already been signed and both governments are working on mechanisms of exchange and the transfer of knowhow between states.

At the same time a great part of our development in these areas is in the hands of the private sector so that there is also dialogue between the companies of both countries. The same happens with cyber-security – many Argentine banks and firms are already using Israeli technology developed by Israeli companies to protect their systems and interests. The aim of these accords is to generate a framework of cooperation to ease the transfer of knowhow and support private initiatives. We provide the institutional umbrella for companies to grow and the links between the public and private sectors of both countries to deepen.

 

The Israeli company Navitas Petroleum projects the illegal exploitation of resources in the Malvinas Islands. The Province of Tierra del Fuego even recently sued them with the Israeli stock exchange regulatory agency. How does Israel respond to a company violating national and international norms concerning a territory in dispute?

It’s a private company. We are aware of the Argentine position and we are engaging in dialogue over this issue. We know that Argentina can take any decision or measure it considers suitable to defend its interests.Israel’s position remains reflected in the declarations of our foreign minister [Gideon Sa’ar] to the UN Security Council where he maintained that the future of the islands must be resolved via direct negotiations between Argentina and the United Kingdom.

 

Can the Israeli government exert influence in any way, bearing in mind the possible impact on bilateral relations?

Israel has also entered into dialogue with the company and we would prefer to find a solution but always considering that it is a private company. And we understand that Argentina can adopt the measures which it considers necessary in this case.

 

What is Israel’s stance on the Malvinas question?

We support direct negotiations between both parties to resolve the future of the islands.

 

So could it then be said that Israel accompanies the Argentine request for the UK to sit down to negotiations?

Israel is showing different nuances in its position, as expressed by Foreign Minister Sa’ar at the Security Council when calling for negotiations over the sovereignty of the islands.

 

President Milei has taken a very strong stance regarding the war in the Middle East, publicly supporting the attack on Iran and its regional allies. How do you read this stance?

For Argentina, Iran is a country which killed many Argentines. There are not many countries which have suffered attacks with so many victims. Iran never collaborated with the investigation nor helped to learn the truth and there are still more than 100 families who want to know who killed their loved ones in the attacks on the Israeli Embassy [in 1992]  and AMIA [in 1994]. So the Argentine stance also has that component. And its government should be thanked for clearly saying that Iran is a theocracy, not a democracy – a country which does not guarantee human rights nor permits people to live, love and dress as they want.

It is also a country which has threatened to wipe Israel off the map and which supports proxy terrorist organisations like Hezbollah, Hamas or the Houthis. That is why we value the support of countries like Argentina, Canada and several European countries which have declared the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to be terrorist.

 

How do you evaluate the Argentine government’s decision to expel Mohsen Soltani Tehrani, the Iranian chargé d’affaires in Argentina, after the clash with Tehran over having declared the Revolutionary Guard to be terrorist?

That’s a decision which should have been taken in 1994, ever since we knew that Iran was behind the attack against  AMIA and they never wanted to collaborate with the investigation.

 

Were there prior conversations between both governments in that respect?

That’s a decision which should have been taken years ago but it was Argentina’s decision, not Israel’s.

 

Since the war began, have the organisations linked to Iran been active on the Triple Frontier?

There is no information nowadays about a specific threat and we continue developing our normal activities. We’re working on those issues and maintaining contact with different countries.

 

Thinking about the changes in stance of some European leaders towards Israel on the basis of recent events, you mentioned human rights and the theocratic nature of the Islamic Republic of Iran. How does Israel respond to the violence of Israeli settlers against the Palestinian population of the West Bank?

Israel is a democratic country with an independent judicial system. We are investigating every charge and any Palestinian has recourse to the Israeli Supreme Court if they consider that they suffered damage. We are studying those cases and trying to do everything possible so that those situations do not occur.

There might be some isolated cases and unfortunately not everybody obeys the law but they do not represent the majority. Ever since our foundation we have invited our neighbours to dialogue over how to live in peace in a territory the size of Tucumán. Some accepted and we have managed to reach peace agreements with Jordan, Egypt and, more recently, the countries of the Abraham Accords. Others, unfortunately, do not wish this.

There are surely Palestinians who want to live in peace but today they are dominated by the same people who carried out the October 7 attacks [in 2023] where over 1,000 people were slaughtered along with rapes and other atrocities. While they continue to glorify the terrorists, giving their names to streets or stadiums and making monthly payments to the families of those who sacrifice their lives, it will be very difficult to advance. On our side we are ready to seek a solution and reach agreements, as we have already  demonstrated in the past. If there is a real will for peace on the other side, we will do everything within our reach.

 

Is a two-state solution, or a binational state, a possibility for the Israeli government?

There are various options. Until now, amid all the alternatives placed on the table, the Palestinian side has not managed to make a decision. That’s why we believe that we must sit down, talk and negotiate. Unfortunately that will is often lacking on the other side. 

 

Considering that the attacks remain active in Gaza and that Hamas remains in power, has Israel achieved its military objectives?

We have recently seen Hamas again rejecting internationally driven peace process proposals. One of the conditions was to hand over their weapons. This is a central point – in any state, the monopoly of force has to be in the hands of the legitimate government.

Imagine a criminal group with more weapons than the state itself. That is what is happening with  Hamas and also with Hezbollah in Lebanon. If we want to arrive at peace, we must ensure that all arms are only under state control and not with terrorist groups who can use them for attacks like October 7.

 

You are placing the State of Israel and armed Palestinian groups in a fragmented territory between Gaza and the West Bank on the same level. Many of those groups define themselves as resistance organisations. Do you consider them equivalent to a state constituted of regular armed forces?

We do not view those who killed innocent people as liberation fighters. They are terrorists and criminals  and they should not have weapons. The Palestinian National Authority controls some institutions and part of their challenge, just as in Lebanon, is to face up to the armed groups operating beyond the state.

There are not many examples in the world of organisations with more armaments than the government itself. Hamas took control of Gaza via a coup and has governed there ever since while the Palestinian National Authority does not even try to disarm them.

Somebody has to do it because there will never be peace while there are armed groups in Gaza who openly say that they want to repeat October 7 and continue killing civilians, including partygoers who believed in peace. There we see a profound difference in values.

 

How does Israel deal with the deterioration of its international image in the face of denunciations of genocide in Gaza?

We are trying to show what we consider to be the truth while verifying all information before communicating it. 

I’ll give an example. At the start of the conflict there was an explosion in a hospital and many media rapidly reproduced the Hamas version, via the Gaza Health Ministry, saying that it was an Israeli missile which had caused numerous deaths. We said from the start that this was incorrect and that Israel had  not launched a missile there. But while we investigated, the damage was already done and much of the world had already assumed that Israel had attacked a hospital. Afterwards there emerged reports indicating that it was a missile launched from Gaza which had misfired but by then the public perception was installed.

That’s why it is important for us to give precise information and avoid fake news. Sometimes in a world of social networks and immediate coverage, rumours are published without sufficient verification. Even international media have afterwards recognised that some of their information came from sources linked to Hamas. What we ask is that they be more careful too and verify before spreading certain accusations.

 

The images circulating from Gaza created impact. At times some scenes recalled the destruction of Hiroshima after the atomic bomb with entire buildings destroyed and neighbourhoods demolished. Do you think those images feed much of the international rejection?

No, because it is totally different. Hamas operated out of those buildings. Before attacking those buildings we gave notice, called them on the telephone, sent messages and even used mechanisms to warn people to evacuate. The images do not always show all the context, as with German cities like Dresden or Nuremberg after the Allied bombing during World War II without telling the full story of what was happening. No Hamas terrorist gave warning before entering the Nova festival to kill innocent people nor did they give people time to escape. Sometimes we pay the price for acting in this way in the form of some terrorists managing to flee, precisely because we were trying to avoid uninvolved victims. We take following the rules very seriously and all those buildings were  notified before being attacked.

 

Critical voices have been heard from inside Israel. Nadav Tamir [a former advisor of Shimon Peres] recently spoke of the country’s “democratic and moral decay.” How do you respond to the internal criticism?

Nadav Tamir is a good friend of mine. We worked together at the Foreign Ministry, overlapped in Washington and even played basketball together. And precisely that demonstrates what we are: a democracy where somebody like Nadav can freely express what he thinks and every Israeli has the right to vote as they wish. Others might see it differently.

Would there were more voices like that in the Palestinian world and that in Iran people could express themselves freely. When our enemies are democratic like us, it will be much easier to reach agreements. The Iranian people want to have relations with Israel and the West, to live freely and dress and love as they wish but there is a  dictatorial theocracy which will not permit it. We take the plurality of opinions very seriously. In Israel anybody can express their ideas, receive support and participate politically – that’s how a democracy works. At the end of the day we live together with people who think differently and still have good relations. I send greetings to my good friend Nadav.

 

Is there anything else you’d like to add in conclusion?

That Argentina wins the World Cup. Long live Argentina, we love Argentine football.