Interview: Ariel Gelblung, Director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Latin America

Between Sunday, March 9, and Wednesday, March 12, the director of the Simon Wiesenthal Center for Latin America, Ariel Gelblung, visited Chile, where he held various community meetings and media interviews.

We took advantage of his visit to interview him and learn about the purpose of his trip and his career as a director.

Dear Ariel, when and why was the Simon Wiesenthal Center established in Latin America?

“Of course. In February 1992, the Argentine government announced its intention to open the so-called ‘Nazi archives.’ A month later, the attack on the Israeli Embassy took place, and a few months after that, Erich Priebke, the SS officer responsible for the Ardeatine Caves massacre, was found in Bariloche. All of this made it clear that the Wiesenthal Center needed an office in Latin America. By the time the AMIA attack occurred, the Center was already fully operational.”

What topics did you address in your lecture on March 11?

“Last Tuesday, I gave two lectures. In the morning, I presented one called ‘HOW TO ARGUE WITH AN ANTISEMITE,’ designed as an interactive session where participants could present real-life situations, and we provided tools to help them be better prepared. Let’s be clear: there is no arguing with someone who is fully convinced and unwilling to listen—it is like asking a wall for an opinion. In the evening, I presented my book ANTISEMITISM: Defining to Combat. The book was conceived as a manual for non-Jews or those who lack sufficient knowledge to better understand this hatred and take a stand against it.

Chile has always been a concern for me since I took office in 2015. It is the perfect storm: the largest Palestinian community outside the Arab world, influenced by leadership that aligns with Hamas’s rhetoric; a left-wing movement filled with anti-Israel prejudices that has sided with terrorism; and far-right factions that refuse to fade away. As journalist Alejo Schapire said, referring to the last runoff election in France, ‘People have to choose between those who hate Jews and those who hate Zionists.’ Added to this is an ineffective anti-discrimination law and resistance to properly legislate against hate speech.”

In your opinion, how have different governments in the region, particularly in Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia, impacted Jewish communities?

“The Argentine Jewish community, the largest in Latin America, has had to raise its profile following the two attacks suffered in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994. Objectively speaking, since 1983, the fight against antisemitism has become a state policy. However, events such as the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran and the assassination of Prosecutor Nisman have been particularly challenging. While we consider anti-Zionism to be a form of antisemitism, no democratic government should lose sight of the fact that local Jewish communities consist of national citizens who must be protected. A strong democracy must wisely balance majority rule with the unwavering respect for minorities; failing to do so signifies a democracy of poor quality.

Regarding Javier Milei, it is clear that we are used to living in a hostile world, where we face aggression in various places. So when someone not only respects us but also openly expresses sympathy for us and wishes to embrace us, such gestures of goodwill are appreciated. However, this does not mean that the entire Jewish community must pledge allegiance to him. The community represents its own interests, not those of a political faction, and it remains diverse in that regard.

The situation in Brazil is different. The Jewish community finds itself in a difficult position because Lula, in his third presidential term, no longer filters his rejection of Israel. He attempts—though not always successfully—to spare the Jewish community. And when the community must set a boundary, it should not become a tool for Bolsonaro’s rhetoric. In this regard, Brazilian society has helped maintain that balance. The more extreme Lula became—going so far as to claim that Israel is worse than the Nazis and withdrawing Brazil’s ambassador from Tel Aviv in response to criticism—between February and November of last year, a dozen states adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Definition of Antisemitism. This was significant because, in São Paulo, it was already used as a legal argument to convict an antisemite in court, in a case where I had the honor of contributing an expert opinion that the judge referenced in the ruling.

Petro is an unabashed antisemite who seeks in every way possible to betray the American tradition of protecting Jewish communities from Middle Eastern conflicts. He remained utterly silent in response to the events of October 7, 2023, and the subsequent revelations, such as the murder of the Bibas family. Instead, he has become a relentless poster of pro-Palestinian narratives, at least once a week, echoing all the falsehoods and unverified claims of terrorist propaganda. This led us to name him one of the ‘Antisemites of the Year 2023’ in our annual report, just as we had designated Daniel Jadue in 2020. The difference is that the Colombian people—the ordinary men and women—have a deep, historic affinity for Israel. This will cost Petro dearly.”

Source: Diario La Palabra Israelita, Viernes 14 de Marzo.