Costa Rica Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism as Global Jew-Hatred Exponentially Rises

By: Fern Sidman

Costa Rica has officially adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, becoming the sixth Latin American country to do so. The decision, which was announced following consultations with representatives of the American Jewish Committee’s (AJC) Arthur and Rochelle Belfer Institute for Latino and Latin American Affairs, has been widely welcomed by Jewish leaders and civil society organizations as a critical affirmation of moral leadership in an era of rising global antisemitism.

According to a report that appeared on Friday in The Algemeiner, Costa Rica joins Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama, and Uruguay in embracing the IHRA’s widely accepted framework, which serves as a non-legally binding tool to identify and confront manifestations of antisemitism in contemporary public life. Since its formal adoption by the IHRA in 2016, the working definition has been incorporated into policy by dozens of governments and international institutions, including the United States, Israel, the European Union, and the United Nations.

The definition characterizes antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews,” and explicitly outlines examples of its modern manifestations. These include, among others, Holocaust denial, conspiracy theories involving Jewish power, and demonization of Israel through rhetoric that applies double standards or denies the Jewish people’s right to self-determination.

In a statement reported by The Algemeiner, Dina Siegel Vann, Director of the AJC’s Belfer Institute, applauded the Costa Rican government’s move. “We are grateful that Costa Rica has joined the growing number of nations that view the IHRA definition as an essential guidepost to recognize antisemitism in its various forms so it can be properly addressed,” she said. “We urge all nations to take this important step to protect their Jewish communities and uphold their democratic values.”

The move comes against the backdrop of a documented global surge in antisemitic incidents and rhetoric, particularly in the aftermath of Hamas’s brutal assault on Israeli communities near the Gaza border on October 7, 2023. That attack, which led to the murder of over 1,200 civilians and the kidnapping of more than 250 hostages, has ignited a wave of anti-Jewish agitation around the world, including in countries with relatively small Jewish populations.

As The Algemeiner report emphasized, Costa Rica’s adoption of the IHRA definition has been hailed by Jewish advocacy groups as an urgent and necessary response to a climate increasingly hostile to Jews. “The increase of hate speech and attacks on Jews all over the world, especially after Oct. 7, demands ethical decisions and firm actions as this one,” said Gilbert Meltzer, President of Costa Rica’s Jewish Community, in a public statement. “We commend the government’s decision to support morality and combat discrimination.”

The IHRA’s working definition is distinguished by its effort to link classical antisemitism with more modern and frequently contested forms, including those that are cloaked in criticism of Israel. It warns that “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” constitutes antisemitism, while also allowing for legitimate criticism of Israeli policies to be expressed in the same manner as criticism of any other democratic state.

For Costa Rica, which has historically maintained warm relations with Israel and is home to a small but vibrant Jewish community, the move illustrates its commitment to democratic norms and the protection of minority rights. The announcement follows a broader trend across Latin America in which governments are confronting antisemitism not only as a Jewish issue, but as a societal threat that undermines national cohesion and democratic integrity.

The European Jewish Congress also weighed in on Costa Rica’s decision, describing it in The Algemeiner report as “a timely and courageous step” in the fight against anti-Jewish hatred. “Defining hate is the first step to combating it,” the organization said in a public statement. “A principled move that must inspire others.”

While Costa Rica’s adoption of the IHRA definition is symbolic in nature, Jewish leaders say it has practical implications. It provides policymakers, educators, and law enforcement officials with a consistent framework to assess and respond to incidents of antisemitism. Additionally, it serves as a benchmark against which public discourse, institutional behavior, and social media activity can be evaluated.

According to the information provided in The Algemeiner report, the AJC has played a key role in promoting the IHRA definition across the Americas, engaging directly with policymakers to underscore its relevance. As antisemitic trends become increasingly visible across university campuses, digital platforms, and street protests—even in countries with limited geopolitical engagement in the Middle East—the definition provides clarity in distinguishing between legitimate political debate and bigotry disguised as activism.

The Costa Rican government’s declaration comes amid renewed international calls for heightened vigilance and solidarity with Jewish communities facing mounting threats. In recent months, synagogues, Jewish schools, and cultural centers in various parts of Latin America have reported increased security concerns and hate-fueled graffiti. For a country like Costa Rica—known for its democratic stability and civil discourse—the adoption of the IHRA framework is viewed as an affirmation of its foundational values.

As The Algemeiner reported, global Jewish organizations are now turning their attention to other nations in the region that have not yet adopted the IHRA definition, urging them to follow Costa Rica’s lead. While the battle against antisemitism is far from over, Costa Rica’s announcement signals that moral clarity and political will can indeed make a difference—especially in moments of profound international uncertainty.