Latin America's political coalitions can be defined by their new position on Ukraine
How we understand the hemisphere's left vs right coalitions should shift as the US flips sides at the UN
Here is how Latin America voted on a UN resolution in mid-2024 condemning Russia’s attacks on nuclear power plant infrastructure in Ukraine.
And here is how Latin America voted on the resolution yesterday, just seven months later, condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at the three year mark1.
That is quite a geopolitical shift across the region.
That shift happened because of Donald Trump’s election in the United States, not because governments in Latin America changed ideologies2. When the US changed its vote from a pro-Ukraine position to a pro-Russia position at the UN, it shook up the entire dynamic of how Latin America approaches the Ukraine issue3.
Here are descriptions of the groups of countries and how they shifted4.
A group of countries have correctly condemned Russia’s invasion throughout. Thanks to Chile, Guatemala, Peru, Uruguay, and others in the Caribbean who voted the correct way to condemn Russia in both 2024 and 2025.
A group of center-left countries led by Brazil and Colombia were neutral before and remain neutral today, but the tone of their neutrality has shifted. Back in 2023 and 2024, Lula and Petro justified their neutral positions on Ukraine by highlighting their desire for a working peace process and the importance of maintaining neutrality to be able to work with both sides. That rhetoric sounds almost Trump-like now in 2025. Following the US shift, Petro accused the US of “treason’ against Ukraine, and Lula’s comments have inched towards more mild criticisms of Russia in recent weeks. It’s odd to watch leaders for whom the “non-aligned” position is the anti-US position flip their rhetoric but not their votes in the new environment.
Unlike Brazil and Colombia, in El Salvador, Bukele seems to be endorsing a bit of pro-Putin authoritarianism, perhaps backed by some Russian bitcoin money. That has kept him neutral in both votes.
In Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum has broken with AMLO’s previous center-left neutrality and decided to back Ukraine. Whether she does this because it is morally the correct thing to do or because she wants to align with Canada and Europe in the coming geopolitical battles, I’m glad to see it.
Cuba, which voted on Russia’s side in 2024, was unwilling to be on the same side as the US in the 2025 vote. So it switched its vote to an abstention. This is probably the most amusing shift of all of them.
Nicaragua under Daniel Ortega is morally repugnant.
Haiti, with barely a functioning government, is likely playing some UN politics by flipping its vote to side with the US and Russia in order to get something later out of the UN Security Council.
And then, there is the group of center-right and rightwing countries that flipped from pro-Ukraine to neutral because they feared going against Trump in this UN vote. Argentina, Paraguay, Panama, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic were cowardly in their votes. There is no other way to describe their change in position.
How Latin America votes on Ukraine is not all that important. Lula’s desire for a Nobel Peace Prize aside, the region is not going to play a large role in what is largely a European issue.
Still, it’s worth watching these groupings of countries moving forward because they define a set of emerging coalitions. Other issues in this hemisphere could end up breaking along similar lines. Additionally, as Chile, Ecuador, Honduras, Costa Rica, Brazil, and Colombia have elections in the coming two years, they may move from one coalition to another.
Meanwhile, here is a map of how the coalitions break down, updated from what I posted on social media yesterday. Keep this map in mind the next time you think about left vs right in the hemisphere. The coalitions are moving.
These were quick screenshots. I didn’t edit these maps to make them perfect.
Only Mexico switched leaders between those two UN votes, and the presidency there remained with the same party.
The language of the resolutions is different, but I would argue that the map of votes in 2024 would not change if it had hypothetically used the 2025 wording.
Some countries, including Venezuela, aren’t allowed to vote at all due to their failure to pay their dues to the UN. I have decided to not address them here.