Since taking office in August 2023, Santiago Peña has defined a foreign policy that has sparked admiration among international conservative sectors and concern in more critical circles. His alignment with figures such as Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Javier Milei is not merely rhetorical: it is a central piece of his political narrative aimed at positioning Paraguay as a bastion of “traditional” values, social conservatism, and a geopolitics aligned with the “Christian West” bloc.
A powerful symbolic gesture was the reopening of the Paraguayan embassy in Jerusalem in December 2024, a move that breaks with decades of cautious diplomacy and reaffirms explicit support for Netanyahu’s government policies regarding the Palestinian question.
Peña has repeatedly stated that Israel has “the legitimate right to defend itself” and that Paraguay stands “firmly with the people of Israel against the forces of evil, whatever the cost.”
This rapprochement also extends to the United States, particularly to Republican sectors close to Trump. Peña has participated in ceremonies and political forums that invite like-minded leaders and has publicly claimed that Paraguay’s foreign policy must not be guided by transitory interests but rather by non-progressive values (family, identity, religious freedom), which he says he shares with Trump and with Argentines such as Milei.
With Milei, his relationship appears especially symbolic in the dimension of a “cultural battle.” In recent conservative conferences organized in Paraguay, Peña praised Argentina’s economic adjustment programs, criticized progressive agendas, and defended the protection of the traditional family, marriage, and religious and cultural values as an essential part of the State.
Digital nightmare: Spyware and control
On February 26, 2026, Al Jazeera reported that the UK government has been investing in the development of software tested…
Social mobilization in Türkiye for national sovereignty and for the
On the sixth day of the conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States and Israel, and…
The mass regularisation of illegal immigrants in Spain and its
Strong opposition in Spain and Europe to the new decree law aimed at the mass regularisation of immigrants. In January…
Kiev, the Bomb, and a Fractured World Order
In late February 2026, Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service alleged that the United Kingdom and France were plotting to provide Ukraine…
Hegemonic restoration and unlimited war in the Arctic-space multipolar competition
In the context of the transition to a multipolar order, characterized by the erosion of Western unipolar dominance and the…
The Return of the Monroe Doctrine
This event aimed to analyze the concrete contemporary geopolitical landscape under the focus of the practical reactivation of the Monroe…
Iran-US-Israel War: What the experts say
The long-awaited war between the Islamic Republic of Iran, the United States and Israel has begun, the real trajectory of…
Argentine-U.S. Trade Agreement: Cooperation or Vassalage?
On February 5, the Agreement on Reciprocal Trade and Investment was signed between the administrations of Donald Trump and Javier…
Situation of the new round of EU sanctions against Russia
The European Union is approaching the twentieth round of sanctions against Russia, each new one more unsuccessful than the previous…
However, behind these alliances and statements lie a series of risks and contradictions that rarely appear in public speeches:
- Risk of diplomatic isolation: By supporting Israel so strongly and almost unconditionally in the Gaza conflict, and by recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in Paraguayan foreign policy, Peña risks alienating Arab nations and numerous countries that rejected Israel’s offensive. This may affect trade exchanges, cultural cooperation, or even food security.
- Pyrrhic external advantage over domestic emergencies: Problems such as poverty, insecurity, inequality, and the demand for public services persist in Paraguay. The political orientation toward foreign alliances can generate significant political costs if citizens feel that foreign affairs are being exaggerated while domestic issues are neglected. Critics already point out that the prioritization of these diplomatic issues appears ostentatious or disconnected from the daily lives of average citizens.
- Ideological dependency vs. economic pragmatism: Peña speaks of values, of “the West,” of opposition to “radical social experiments,” which brings him closer to conservative populist rhetoric. However, Paraguay’s economy depends heavily on agricultural trade, foreign investment, and commodity prices. A strong ideological alignment may complicate relations with actors who value human rights, international climate agreements, or trade with countries that do not share that vision.
- Constant comparison with more radical figures: Beyond evident differences among Milei, Trump, or Netanyahu, these figures have shown a willingness to impose the anti-woke discourse and to break with traditional diplomatic conventions. Peña must balance maintaining internal governability and a serious institutional image. Attempting to follow them could place him in uncomfortable situations: for example, his gestures are not always reciprocated with the same intensity by the U.S. president (analysts note that Peña “does not occupy the same seat as Milei or Bukele before the Trump administration”).
In sum, Peña’s government is shaping a new stage in Paraguayan foreign policy, one that places conservative values and evident pro-Western diplomatic alignment ahead of internal tensions. But this strategy is double-edged: it may consolidate support in certain ideological circles, yet it also risks isolation, detachment from domestic priorities, and international overexposure that could backfire if tangible results do not follow. In foreign policy as in domestic politics, convictions without concrete outcomes can prove politically dangerous.
