TEHRAN – Argentina’s October midterm elections handed President Javier Milei’s La Libertad Avanza party a sweeping victory. But this was not a triumph of domestic approval — it was a triumph of foreign leverage. 

While Milei expanded his legislative footprint, the win came amid rising poverty, mass layoffs, and deepening social unrest. The election was less a referendum on Milei’s governance than a demonstration of how far the United States and Israel were willing to go to secure their strategic interests.

Austerity by chainsaw

Since taking office in December 2023, Milei has wielded his signature “chainsaw” approach to public spending with brutal efficiency. His zero-deficit plan slashed subsidies, gutted pensions, and suspended disability benefits. Inflation dropped from 289% to 32%, but the cost was staggering: over 200,000 formal jobs lost, 18,000 businesses shuttered, and homelessness in Buenos Aires up 38% since late 2023. Garbage containers now bear warning signs because people sleep inside them. Soup kitchens overflow, and pensioners protest weekly against cuts that have left them unable to afford basic necessities.

U.S. leverage 

The role of the administration of President Donald Trump in shaping the election outcome was explicit. A $40 billion bailout — half from the U.S. Treasury and half from private banks — was conditioned on Milei’s success. “If he wins we’re staying with him, and if he doesn’t win, we’re gone,” Trump declared during Milei’s visit to the White House in mid-October. This statement turned Argentina’s democratic process into a geopolitical transaction. Milei’s campaign was buoyed not by domestic achievements but by the promise of foreign cash.

In a post-election statement, Trump hailed Milei’s victory as a vindication of U.S. support, calling it “proof that the Argentine people made the right choice.”

Israeli endorsement

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu added his voice to the chorus, congratulating Milei on his “extraordinary victory” and praising his courage. The two leaders met in New York during the UN General Assembly, where Netanyahu called Milei “a true friend of the State of Israel and the Jewish people.” Milei has returned the favor by backing Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, which many international observers have described as genocidal.

Beyond symbolic gestures, Milei’s alignment with Israel has served strategic purposes. His government has promoted the “Isaac Accords,” a regional initiative aimed at deepening Latin American ties with Tel Aviv. Israeli firms have expanded their footprint in Argentina’s defense and surveillance sectors, while Milei has echoed Netanyahu’s rhetoric in international forums, defending Israel against charges of war crimes. This ideological and diplomatic alignment has helped Milei court conservative blocs and foreign investors, reinforcing his image as a reliable partner for Western allies.

Brazil chose autonomy

Argentina’s trajectory stands in stark contrast to Brazil’s. In 2022, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva won the presidency on a platform of social inclusion and regional independence. Despite economic challenges, Lula’s victory reflected a genuine popular mandate. Argentina, by contrast, saw its democratic process reshaped by external actors. While Brazil resisted foreign pressure, Argentina succumbed to it — its elections influenced not by performance, but by foreign endorsement.

Strategic interests over social welfare

Milei’s alliance with the U.S. and Israel has yielded political capital but deepened Argentina’s social crisis. His economic reforms have pleased foreign investors and agribusiness elites, but devastated the working class. Cuts to disability pensions, affecting over 140,000 people, had negligible fiscal impact but sent a clear message: austerity will be enforced, regardless of human cost. Critics argue that these measures are more symbolic than effective — designed to signal loyalty to foreign backers rather than serve the Argentine people.

A democracy distorted

Argentina’s midterm results may have reshaped its legislature, but they did not reflect a groundswell of domestic support. They revealed a country caught between economic desperation and foreign leverage. The election was not a celebration of Milei’s leadership — it was a cautionary tale of how democracy can be bent by geopolitical pressure.