Argentina to move embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv
June 11 (UPI) -- Argentina will move its embassy from a Tel Aviv suburb to Jerusalem next year, Argentinian President Javier Milei announced Wednesday night in a speech in his honor in Israel's Knesset.
Milei is participating in a three-day visit to Israel that began Tuesday.
In Jerusalem, he was welcomed in the Knesset by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana and Opposition Leader Yair Lapid.
They praised the warm ties between Israel and the South American nation under his leadership. Milei has been Argentina's president since 2023.
"Javier, you are a true friend," Netanyahu said. "With this visit, we are bringing our relations to new heights. 12,000 kilometers [7,500 miles] separate Buenos Aires, Israel and the Knesset in Jerusalem. This great distance is compensated for by the closeness of our hearts."
Milei first announced his intention to move the embassy in Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv, during his first state visit to Israel in February 2024.
"In 2026 we will make effective the move of our embassy to the city of West Jerusalem," he said Wednesday.
Ohana called the embassy move an "historic moment in the history of Israel-Argentina relations."
Jerusalem is a religious city and Tel Aviv is secular.
Argentina also doesn't have a consulate in Jerusalem, which is 42 miles east of Tel Aviv. There are about 90 foreign embassies in Tel Aviv and six in Jerusalem: United States, Guatemala, Honduras, Kosovo and Papa New Guinea. During President Donald Trump's first presidency, he ordered the U.S. embassy to move Tel Aviv, and it became official on May 14, 2018.
Milei began is speech describing the current political atmosphere globally: "cancer" of spreading antisemitism and "corruption" of Western values, noting the left has lost its moral compass and was "siding with Hamas."
"Argentina will not stand on the sidelines," he said in noting it will "raise its voice in defense of fellow human beings."
Lapid commended Milei for being "truly right wing" due to his slashing government spending, lowering inflation and investing in the middle class. Lapid said his current government was doing the opposite.
Mileil said that, though Israel is in a hostile region, the nation is a bastion of democracy. He counted the number of "miracles" -- the formation of the state, its victory in the war of independence, its emergence as a global technological leader and economic reforms of the 1980s during hyperinflation.
"Unfortunately, I do not have the good fortune of visiting Israel during peaceful times," Milei said at the Knesset. "On October 7, the people of Israel were victims of a barbaric attack. We thought we had finally ended such barbarism, but the tragedy woke us from that dream."
He noted four Argentine nationals remain in Hamas captivity and vowed Argentina would continue to pursue their release.
Milei met with survivors of Hamas captivity and families of Argentine hostages.
Netanyahu said: In the face of this unprecedented and brutal aggression, you spoke with absolute clarity. We stand with you in the battle against the forces of darkness.
"You have taken a stand for truth against falsehood, understanding that this is a war of unparalleled justice -- an all-out battle against barbarism that threatens the entire world," he added.
Netanyahu described Argentina's role in Jewish history, calling the nation a refuge for Jews fleeing persecution in the 19th century.
Milei said his country's "economic miracle" is occurring because of the opposition to "unnecessary" government spending and carrying out fiscal and monetary reforms.
He is scheduled to conclude his visit on Thursday with a return to the Western Wall.
During a meeting between Milei and Netanyahu on Tuesday, they spoke about plans for a direct flight between Buenos Aires and Tel Aviv by the Israeli carrier El Al. It would be the first flight between those cities since the capture of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in 1960.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
43 minutes ago
- New York Post
Greta Thunberg's a vapid leftist — and a useful idiot for terror
Professional leftist Greta Thunberg was brought to Israel this week after the 'selfie yacht' she was traveling on attempted to break through the naval blockade of Gaza. Her boat, the 'Madleen,' was part of a flotilla pretending to deliver aid to alleviate an imaginary famine. The 22-year-old was given food and shelter and sent home by the Israeli government, which she accused of 'kidnapping' her. All the usual suspects went along with this predictable framing. Advertisement If Thunberg really wanted to better understand the concept of an abduction, she might have asked Hamas to visit the Israelis still being tortured in a dank basement somewhere in Rafa. But the 'human rights activist,' which is how the legacy media unironically describes her, has never once called for the release of the hostages taken by Islamists. Advertisement Indeed, the flotilla effort was reportedly organized by a 'Hamas operative.' '[The Israelis] tried to make us watch all kinds of propaganda videos,' Thunberg told reporters after landing in Paris, 'but I didn't watch. This is nothing compared to what is happening in Gaza, which is in desperate need of humanitarian aid.' Referring to GoPro videos made by Palestinians that document the gleeful slaughter of women, children and the elderly as 'propaganda' is a bold accusation coming from a cosplay revolutionary whose biggest problem was getting a vegetarian meal from her hosts. Advertisement As this was all going on, incidentally, Israel has been sending hundreds of aid trucks into the Gaza Strip. Hamas opposes this effort, as it uses food and aid to control the Palestinian population. On the day Thunberg was whining to reporters in Europe, at least five aid workers were murdered by Hamas trying to bring food to the population. The real question is: Why is she in the news at all? Advertisement Thunberg was named Time's Person of the Year in 2019 after dropping out of high school and 'raising awareness for climate change.' It was quite a historic accomplishment: No one was talking about global warming before Greta came around, apparently. Me? I tend to think the kid who stays in school and learns a thing or two about biology before lecturing me about science is the real hero. But we live in a time where emotionalism and vapidity are often confused with decency and wisdom. Thunberg is the embodiment of this trend. Thunberg's most infamous moment was a frivolous emotional outburst at the United Nations, where she screamed at those who had bequeathed her with unprecedented wealth, safety, and freedom. 'You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,' she claimed. Advertisement But really, her dream was to be famous. Or, maybe, it was first the dream of exploitative parents who persuaded their child that the world was on the precipice of Armageddon. Since her Time magazine cover, Thunberg has achieved nothing. Her native Sweden has turned back to fossil fuels. Europe, as well. The Earth, however, is still here. Advertisement Subsequently, Thunberg has moved on to champion other trendy leftist causes, such as Black Lives Matter and now 'Free Palestine.' The only thing she understands less about than climate science seems to be the Middle East. As far as I can tell, Thunberg has never once said anything remotely compelling or witty or smart. There are millions of young people far more worthy of attention. For years, youth shielded Thunberg from criticism. Even now, journalists fail to ask her any serious, in-depth questions about the issues she champions. Advertisement The chances she could answer one are incredibly slim. Well, Thunberg is now a young woman, and so we can freely point out that she's always been an extraordinary imbecile. But now, she's also a useful idiot for terrorists. For that, there is no excuse. David Harsanyi is a senior writer at the Washington Examiner.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
New Proposal Would Sell Off Millions of Acres of U.S. Public Lands
A new proposal being pushed by Republicans calls for the sale of millions of acres of public land after deeming them "eligible for disposal." Specifically, the Republican majority on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is proposing that the U.S. government sell up to 3 million acres of public land. Why? The committee deduces that, by selling these millions of acres, revenue directed to the U.S. Treasury would help to hit revenue goals in the federal budget. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT), chairman of the committee, on Wednesday released the 69-page draft bill, which lists Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service land in most Western states as "eligible for disposal." Those states include Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington and Wyoming. And, as first reported by Outdoor Life, Montana is conspicuously absent from the list of states possibly affected if the bill passes. The outlet reports that Montana's Congressional delegation has been vocal in their opposition to land sales or transfers. The bill's language calls for the "disposal not less than .50 percent and not more than 0.75 percent of National Forest System land, and shall dispose of all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to those tracts selected for disposal." The bill claims that selling off the public lands "would address local housing needs (including housing supply and affordability) or any associated community needs."Federally protected lands, such as national parks and national monuments, are safe from the sale. But as Outdoor Life reports, a sale of this magnitude would be "by far the biggest proposed federal land sale in modern U.S. history." The outlet also reports that Republican leadership stripped the land-sale provision from the so-called "Big Beautiful Bill" before kicking it up to the Senate, where Republicans have a wider majority versus a slim majority in the House. The bill, even if passed, would face a significant uphill battle, given that the bill's language also calls for the Secretary of the Interior to "consult with the Governor of the State in which the nominated tract is located regarding the suitability of the area for residential development; each applicable unit of local government; and each applicable Indian Tribe." In an effort to calm the waters among avid hunters and fishermen who have long opposed the sale of public lands, Lee shared video assuring the conservation community that they will not be affected. 'To our hunters, anglers, and sportsmen, you will not lose access to the lands you love," he said in the video. "Washington has proven it can't manage this land. This bill puts it in better hands.' New Proposal Would Sell Off Millions of Acres of U.S. Public Lands first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 12, 2025
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Are Americans worried about Russia using nuclear weapons? What a new poll found
As the war in Ukraine rages on, there is widespread concern among Americans that Russia could resort to using nuclear weapons, according to the latest Quinnipiac University poll. The survey — which sampled 1,265 registered voters June 5-9 — also found that Americans are pessimistic about the likelihood that a ceasefire will be achieved soon. Further, most respondents said they disapprove of President Donald Trump's handling of the conflict, making it the issue the president performed the most poorly on. 'As the Russia-Ukraine war grinds through its third year, Americans make it clear they have little appetite for the way the Trump administration is handling the situation,' polling analyst Tim Malloy said in a news release about the poll. Here is a breakdown of the findings. Trump approval on the war A majority of voters, 57%, said they disapprove of the way Trump has handled the war thus far, while 34% said they approve. Ten percent said they weren't sure. These figures have largely held steady over time. In a March Quinnipiac poll, 55% said they disapproved of the president's stance on the conflict, and 38% said they approved. Opinions on the issue tracked closely with partisan affiliation. Most Republicans, 70%, said they favor the president's approach, while 94% of Democrats and 57% of independents oppose it. Trump's 34% approval rating on the Ukraine war also stands out as the lowest rating among seven issues respondents were asked about, including the Israel-Hamas war, the economy and immigration. On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly said he could end the European war in 24 hours, but now — four months into his term — the conflict has only escalated. As of early June, there have been an estimated over 1.3 million combined casualties, according to a June study from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a think tank. Though lacking success, Trump has made continual efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, including by organizing diplomatic summits and speaking directly with both Presidents Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Cease-fire, nuclear weapons and escalation The poll — which has a margin of error of 2.8 percentage points — also asked respondents about the likelihood that a lasting cease-fire will be achieved soon. Less than one-third, 27%, said they are confident that a permanent ceasefire will be reached in the near future. Meanwhile, 69% said they are not confident. While 45% of Republicans expressed optimism, just 14% of Democrats and 24% of independents shared this sentiment. On the other hand, a majority of Americans are worried about the chances of nuclear escalation — a feeling that nuclear experts share, according to previous reporting from McClatchy News. About two-thirds of voters, 64%, said they are concerned about the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons, while 35% said they are not concerned. Here, there was agreement across the political spectrum, with 75% of Democrats, 61% of independents and 53% of Republicans expressing concern. Further, most respondents said the U.S. military should put boots on the ground if Russia expands the war into a NATO country. Sixty-two percent said 'American troops should get involved' if Russia attacks a NATO nation. Meanwhile, 29% disagreed. Here, again, there was consensus among partisans, with 70% of Democrats, 64% of independents and 54% of Republicans saying America should get involved in this scenario.
