Diplomats to MEMO: Colombia’s ICJ withdrawal reflects alignment with US

Colombia’s decision to withdraw from South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), followed by the opening of its embassy in occupied Jerusalem on Wednesday, has drawn criticism from former Latin American ambassadors, who see the moves as a significant shift in Bogotá’s foreign policy, particularly its stance on Palestine.

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry confirmed that it had informed the Court of its decision to withdraw the declaration of intervention filed on 5^th April 2024 under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute.

The move marks a reversal of the position taken by former President Gustavo Petro, whose government cut diplomatic ties with Israel in May 2024 over its military offensive in Gaza and backed South Africa’s case at the ICJ.

The ministry explained that the decision was made under the president’s constitutional authority to manage foreign relations, while emphasising that Colombia remains committed to its obligations under the 1948 Genocide Convention.

Speaking to MEMO, Roberto Mayorga Lorca, professor of Economic Law and former Chilean ambassador to the Philippines, criticised the Colombian government’s change of position. “The shift by Colombia’s current government regarding the genocide in Gaza has been regrettable,” Mayorga said.

He argued that since President Abelardo de la Espriella took office in August, Bogotá had moved away from condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza, to adopting what he described as a position of “complicity or concealment”.

Mayorga identified four major developments behind the policy shift: the restoration of diplomatic relations with Israel, the relocation of Colombia’s embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, the lifting of restrictions on exports to Israel, and the withdrawal of Colombia’s intervention in the ICJ proceedings.

READ: Flavio Bolsonaro’s first-round lead in Brazil alarms Palestine supporters

Mayorga said the change reflected Bogotá’s increasing alignment with US foreign policy. “The explanation for this shift appears to have been provided by the Foreign Ministry itself, which indicated that Colombia was aligning its position on this matter with Trump’s policy,” he said.

Colombia opened its embassy in occupied Jerusalem today, marking a major shift in its traditionally pro-Palestinian foreign policy under newly inaugurated President Abelardo de la Espriella. pic.twitter.com/F8xGscfv0J

— WAFA News Agency – English (@WAFANewsEnglish) October 14, 2026

Former Chilean Ambassador Nelson Hadad also linked the decision to Colombia’s change of government, arguing that the new administration had fundamentally altered the country’s foreign policy. Hadad described the withdrawal as part of a broader realignment with Washington under US President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

“The new government is a right-wing, perhaps even far-right administration, highly submissive to US policies defined by President Trump and his Secretary of State, Marco Rubio”, Hadad told MEMO.

“This represents a complete and profound change from Colombia’s position under President Petro, resulting from the influence and pressure exerted by President Trump”.

Colombia holds Jerusalem Embassy opening with FM Gideon Sa’ar and FM Omar Bula Escobar😀

Image source: IsraelMFA pic.twitter.com/RfQAxx2PJz

— La Hermana de Mariposa (@VenetianCora) October 14, 2026

Israel welcomed the withdrawal, with Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar thanking President de la Espriella following diplomatic discussions aimed at restoring bilateral ties. The rapprochement has extended beyond diplomatic relations. Colombia opened its embassy in Jerusalem and restored its previously suspended free trade agreement with Israel, further reversing policies introduced under Petro’s administration.

Mayorga said the change reflected Bogotá’s increasing alignment with US foreign policy. “The explanation for this shift appears to have been provided by the Foreign Ministry itself, which indicated that Colombia was aligning its position on this matter with Trump’s policy,” he said.

Mayorga, meanwhile, warned of the broader political and ethical implications of Colombia’s decision. “Politically, it has provoked opposition across the political spectrum at a time when global public opinion, including sections of the Jewish community, condemns what is happening in Gaza,” he said.

He argued that governments remaining silent in the face of alleged atrocities risk undermining international efforts to uphold accountability. “Ethically, it demonstrates the lack of morality of some governments in the face of situations of evident dehumanisation, such as the attempted extermination of an entire nation,” Mayorga added.

“Colombia está con nosotros”. Las palabras de nuestro primer ministro @netanyahu en la recepción organizada por el @IsraelMFA por la inauguración de la Embajada de Colombia en Jerusalén 🇮🇱🇨🇴 pic.twitter.com/9znJgegzu5

— Israel en Colombia (@IsraelinCol) October 14, 2026

Addressing the legal implications of Colombia’s withdrawal from South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ, the Professor of International Relations at the Central University of Chile (UCEN) Nelson Hadad argued that the decision would have little impact on the proceedings or the court’s eventual judgment.

“I believe Colombia’s withdrawal will have no significant legal consequences. It is simply the withdrawal of one country and does not affect in any way the outcome we expect from the court,” he said.

He also rejected the suggestion that the move constituted a diplomatic victory for Israel, stressing that it would have “no influence whatsoever on the court’s eventual ruling.”  Hadad expressed confidence that the ICJ would ultimately find that Israel had committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, while pointing to the deliberate deprivation of food, water and medicine as conduct relevant to the legal definition of genocide.

READ: Chile’s envoy to Israel at center of political storm over remarks about Palestinians

He further warned that Colombia’s decision formed part of broader political efforts to undermine international judicial institutions and weaken accountability for alleged violations of international law. “The objective is to destroy and dismantle the authority of international courts,” he said, accusing the United States of targeting both the ICJ and the International Criminal Court (ICC) to shield Israel from legal scrutiny.

Hadad argued that such withdrawals could weaken international efforts to combat impunity, “This action also undermines humanity’s aspiration to end impunity and pursue the prosecution and punishment of individuals and countries that violate international law and commit the most inhumane, degrading and abominable crimes.”

He added that other countries could follow Colombia’s example, potentially reducing the diplomatic pressure on Israel without necessarily affecting the legal proceedings. “The objective is to prevent further pressure from being placed on Israel and to limit the number of countries seeking sanctions against a state that fails to fulfil its obligations as a member of the United Nations.”

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.