Well, folks, it seems Chilean President Gabriel Boric has decided to play hard to get with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. According to a report by the Chilean newspaper La Tercera, Boric outright refused a phone call from Rubio last Friday, citing a packed schedule while preparing a fiery speech to Congress. When it comes to discussing Chile’s increasingly hostile stance toward Israel, Boric prefers to pass the buck.
Breitbart News reported that Boric, a far-left leader, dodged Rubio’s call meant to address concerns over Chile’s policies on Israel, redirected the conversation to Foreign Minister Alberto van Klaveren, and doubled down on his criticism of Israel during a June 1, 2024, congressional address.
The drama started last Friday when Rubio reached out to discuss Chile’s potential moves against Israel, including whispers of a full diplomatic break. Boric, reportedly too busy polishing his speech, left Rubio to chat with van Klaveren instead. One might wonder if “fine-tuning” a speech is code for avoiding tough conversations.
Let’s rewind a bit—Boric has been vocal about his disdain for Israel’s actions in Gaza for months now. Back in late October 2023, he recalled Chile’s ambassador from Israel, a clear signal of his displeasure. He’s also accused Israel of “genocide” against Hamas, a claim that’s as bold as it is divisive.
Not stopping there, Boric excluded Israel from the International Air and Space Fair, a symbolic snub if there ever was one. Add to that his pledge to back South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, and you’ve got a leader who’s not shy about picking sides. It’s a stance that raises eyebrows, especially when dialogue could be more productive than boycotts.
Fast forward to last Friday’s dodged call, and the message seems clear: Boric isn’t eager to hear counterpoints. The ten-minute chat between Rubio and van Klaveren was described as “absolutely cordial” by the foreign minister himself. Yet, one can’t help but think a direct conversation with Boric might have carried more weight.
During their brief exchange, Rubio updated van Klaveren on U.S. efforts to secure a ceasefire in Gaza, a point that barely made a ripple in Chile’s public discourse. Van Klaveren assured Rubio there’d be no immediate rupture of diplomatic ties with Israel, a small relief in an otherwise tense situation. Still, with Boric at the helm until March 2026, who knows what’s next?
Then came Boric’s big moment on June 1, 2024, with a speech to Congress that pulled no punches. He blasted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and urged lawmakers to pass a boycott of Israeli goods, calling it a matter of “principle.” That’s a spicy take, but principles don’t always translate to practical solutions.
Boric didn’t stop at boycotts; he also pushed for diversifying Chile’s defense contracts to cut reliance on Israeli industry. He even threw his support behind Spain’s idea of an arms embargo on Israel, stating it’s to stop “killing children.” Emotional? Sure, but it’s a policy proposal that sidesteps the complexity of the conflict.
Now, let’s circle back to the snub—Boric’s team insists it wasn’t personal, with the presidency noting that “presidents contact presidents” and not secretaries of state. Van Klaveren echoed this, saying it wasn’t “disrespect” to Rubio. Fair enough, but protocol feels like a convenient excuse when the stakes are this high.
Van Klaveren’s take on the call was almost too rosy, describing it as “friendly really.” He even noted a missed meeting with Rubio months prior due to scheduling conflicts, painting this as just another routine chat. Yet, when a U.S. secretary of state calls, most leaders would at least consider picking up the phone.
Chile’s foreign ministry, as quoted by La Tercera, emphasized the “cordial tone” of the Rubio-van Klaveren dialogue, reviewing bilateral ties like they were a casual coffee chat. If only the underlying issues were as easy to sip through. Turns out, diplomatic niceties don’t always bridge policy divides.
Boric’s speech didn’t announce a full break with Israel, but his rhetoric—calling out “ethnic cleansing”—was anything but conciliatory. It’s a loaded term that inflames more than it informs, especially when solutions are what’s needed. One wonders if this hardline stance will isolate Chile on the global stage.
So, where does this leave us? Boric’s actions, from ambassador recalls to boycott calls, signal a leader more interested in grandstanding than engaging with allies like the U.S. on nuanced issues. It’s a risky play, and as the saying goes, actions often come with unexpected consequences.
Ultimately, while Boric’s term runs until March 2026, his inability to seek immediate reelection in November might limit how far he can push this agenda. Still, for now, Chile’s foreign policy on Israel remains a lightning rod, and Rubio’s unanswered call is just the latest flash of thunder. Let’s hope cooler heads prevail before the storm gets worse.
