At what precise moment had Peru fucked itself up?

(Mario Vargas Llosa, Conversation in the Cathedral)

Diplomacy as an institution serves countries with rapporteurs that elegantly communicate updates on foreign policy and help their governments make informed decisions. Their tact, sense of awareness, and knowledge of the geopolitical landscape prevent violence and promote their countries’ interests.

In Latin America, this was no exception. The region is shared by a score of brotherly Hispanic countries along with the booming and bustling Brazil as well as a myriad of English, French, and Dutch islands. The relations between these usually involved creating trade blocs or keeping cordial relations with the United States and Europe.

These overall simple precepts generated an environment of peaceful coexistence. As a matter of fact, multiple advances of international relations were developed in Latin America. In 1826, Simón Bolívar personally created Pan-Americanism when he convened all countries of the Americas to the Congress of Panama. This movement effectively predated other integrationist movements such as Pan Arabism or Pan Europeanism by more than a century.

In the 1930s the government of Mexico formulated the Estrada Doctrine. It emphasizes sovereignty as a pillar of foreign policy and acts under the basis of non-intervention, peaceful resolution of conflicts, and self-determination. Today this sounds like the norm, but when it was formulated, imperialism, suzerainty, and bloody wars were still the common course of action for many countries.

A final shining product of Latin American contribution to international relations is the Betancourt Doctrine created in Venezuela in the late 1950s. This practice rejects the recognition of non-democratic governments and spurred a pro-democracy international movement at a time when military uprisings and coups were starting to be commonplace.

Diplomacy also gave troubled intellectuals and artists a calm atmosphere where to continue their cultural endeavors. It must be noted that the best works of Octavio Paz, Vinicius de Moraes, and Jorge Edwards were written while on missions abroad.

Sadly, these golden years of summits and black tie events are over. Latin America is no longer a region characterized by its indispensable diplomatic activity. Gone are the days when Fidel Castro would give hours-long speeches at the UN or when the bipolar powers were scrambling for the future of the unaligned countries with proxy wars and propaganda.

This year, we have seen Latin American relations grow increasingly erratic. Foreign Ministries from Mexico to Argentina have become a bully pulpit of hostilities. The modus operandi has shifted from speeches and chit-chat at cocktail parties to threats of force and provocations.

The lack of professionalism displayed by Latin American relations has brought forth multiple crises in the past six months. These international embarrassments have shed light on the disarray that Latin American diplomacy has fallen into.

Guyana and Venezuela, South America prepares for war

The year began with Venezuela and Guyana almost going to war over a territorial dispute. The South American neighbors have been claiming sovereignty over the Essequibo territory for the better part of 200 years. Since late November last year, there was an escalation in rhetoric to reclaim the territory by the Venezuelan government which included a highly questioned referendum. Finally, between December and January, the regime of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela mobilized over five thousand troops to the Guyanese border in a defiant provocation.

The Guyanese government called on its allies to fend off the Venezuelan threat. Western governments expressed their rejection of Venezuela’s actions. A British warship even showed up in defense of the Commonwealth country. Brazil, which borders both countries, armed its border with Venezuela to discourage an incursion into Guyana. Brazilian president Lula Da Silva supported the Guyanese claims and rejected Venezuela’s actions. Da Silva was quoted saying, “We do not need a war in South America.”

By January, a meeting between Maduro and Guyana’s president Irfaan Ali produced a written agreement pledging both countries to diplomatic channels and international justice to settle the issue. The affair has quieted down ever since.

Despite all of their domestic problems, there hasn't been a major war between Latin American countries since the Peruvian-Ecuadorean skirmish of 1995 that lasted under two months.

The Guyano-Venezuelan affair involved more than a couple casus belli which gladly did not escalate. Analysts assure that there was never an intention to start a war. The affair is now labeled as a smokescreen to divert attention from the repressive regime and to create patriotic cohesion. Not for nothing, Carl von Clausewitz assured us war is politics by other means.

Regardless of the motivations, threatening war with a neighbor for political support is irresponsible, petulant, and even in poor taste.

Colombia and Argentina, all bark and no bite

Diplomatic relations between Colombia and Argentina date from the meeting held in Guayaquil, now Ecuador, between Bolívar and José de San Martín over 200 years ago. Ever since, mutual respect and distance have kept a sound commercial exchange flowing between the two. Things were so peaceful the two countries only shared headlines whenever a soccer match was involved.

However, the most popular Argentinian at the moment after Lionel Messi is probably president Javier Milei. The brash libertarian is well-known for having a tongue as wild as his hair and for remarking on his ideological foes, like leftist Colombian President Gustavo Petro.

Presidents Milei and Petro have been going back and forth on social media and television since they came into power. Their use of words like “fascist” or “nazi” and “guerrilla fighter” or “commie” to address each other have become increasingly common.

In March, Univision aired a primetime interview of Milei where he repeated his pleasantries. It was followed by an equally cordial rant on X by Petro. The rain of abrasive press releases and crass comments by each country’s ambassadors were not late to arrive.

In the following days, bilateral relations reached its lowest point. Argentinian diplomats in Colombia were expelled, the Colombian ambassador in Argentina was summoned back to Bogotá, and it all seemed like the embassies were ready to be closed down. A textbook example of a school fight followed by silent treatment. As mature as they come.

Miraculously, a few days later a joint statement was released by the Foreign Ministries of both countries claiming conversations were held to resolve their differences, and the diplomats were welcomed back to their embassies. Officials of two friendly countries traded blows for a week over ideological slurs and then agreed to turn the page.

While we are still waiting on the handshake photo op between the two childish presidents, it is apparent the words exchanged by Bolívar and San Martín echoed strongly enough to reach the ears of our days.

Mexico and Ecuador, mi casa no es tu casa

In April, the governments of Ecuador and Mexico perfectly exemplified the embarrassing state of Latin American diplomacy.

The armed forces of Ecuador busted into the Mexican Embassy in Quito and detained former vice-president Jorge Glas who was seeking asylum to flee corruption charges.

Besides the flagrant violation of diplomatic immunity and international law, the operation produced the shocking videos of Ecuadorian troops subduing a Mexican diplomat and holding him on the ground as well as Glas physically being dragged out of the embassy in a chilling display of brute force.

The government of Mexico has since accused Ecuador at the International Court of Justice for violating its sovereignty. Ecuador countersued Mexico for granting asylum to Glas while knowing he was being investigated and tried for corruption charges at the time of the asylum request. Unsurprisingly, diplomatic ties between the two have been broken.

The whole snafu shed light on the political motivations behind the actions of both countries. Mexico is headed by the veteran leftist Lopez Obrador, and Ecuador is implementing iron fist policies by its young rightist leader Daniel Noboa. Jorge Glas was vice president of former leftist president Rafael Correa, a close ideological ally in the region for Obrador. Makes sense.

The scandalous episode also shows how little regard there currently is for diplomacy in the region. Even for sacrosanct precepts like immunity and not meddling in the justice and politics of the host country.

Okay, and?

Diplomacy has become the last resort for conflict mediation in Latin America as opposed to a first choice like in the developed world. The few times it is considered first it involves diplomats making uncouth comments about the host country’s governments. These episodes display that Latin American governments more and more use their diplomacy for extra-diplomatic problems that could have been averted with solid diplomatic channels. The risks of intertwining short-term political goals with institutional matters like State-sovereignty and war should no longer continue to be ignored.

As a final comment, it should also be noted that the lack of professionalism in Latin American diplomacy is also related to the lack of professional career diplomats. Ask around and you'll see the last names of ministers and presidents repeat themselves in the payroll of missions under ostentatious titles like “Cultural Attaché”, “Political Advisor” or “Minister Counsellor”.

Nowadays, it seems that when not causing problems to help approval ratings, Latin American diplomacy is more concerned with handing out cozy jobs reeking of nepotism and political favors. Embassies and consulates have become rewards for veteran politicians waiting on their pensions. New York, Paris, Madrid, Caribbean countries, and any other dream vacation spots have foreign missions full of these sinecures. The diplomatic circles of Latin America definitely do not have any Talleyrands or Kissingers around.

Sadly, it looks like it's going to be a while before standards are raised and we see again any semblances of Diego Arria, Pérez de Cuéllar, or Minerva Bernardino.