MIKTA: Expanding the Scope of Mexican Foreign Policy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Mexico: A leader in search of like-minded peers
Over the last decade Mexico has chosen and has been forced to practice a sort of ''stand alone'' foreign policy, in part due to its marginalization in Latin America, in part due to the growing bilateralization of relations in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) context. The national narrative of acting as a bridge in economic terms for accessing the NAFTA market proved not very attractive to international partners. As a result, Mexico has become the classical ''leader without followers.'' Joining the MIKTA initiative, a grouping formed by Mexico, Indonesia, South Corea, Turkey and Australia, is a highly welcomed option for regaining international presence without the Brazilian shadow, so strong in the region, and for defining a specific intermediary role. Mexico clearly embraced a ''Southern'' identity only in very limited moments of its foreign policy history and always tried to maintain a middle way, as an agreeable voice and a helpful fixer for international conferences and meetings. The old/new formula that seems to feed Mexico's new international MIKTA presence is that of ''multiple memberships'' following a rationale of ''like-mindedness,'' a rationale that allows for promoting its presence in a great variety of institutions and regional integration schemes, but without compromising too much of its national economic development priorities. This article analyzes these half-way/soft doctrinal foundations of Mexican foreign policy with respect to Mexico's identification with and outreach to the MIKTA group, both in terms of collective action and of bilateral efforts to establish viable relations with its members.
MEXICO’S FOREIGN POLICY: MULTIPLE IDENTITIES IN A SHIFTING WORLD
"The Road Ahead: the 21st Century World Order in the Eyes of Policy Planners". In an ever-changing and interconnected global context, foreign affairs ministries have become neuralgic centers for every State. Globalization, technological change, and increasing economic interdependence have given way to shared challenges that make cooperation more necessary and urgent than ever. We are living in an era of profound and fast-paced changes in the international system, marked by uncertainty and shared risks. The world faces a redistribution of economic, political, and social power. Terrorism, climate change, human displacement, and nuclear weapons stand out as some of the most alarming phenomena that call on globally coordinated solutions. Mexico is no stranger to this collective task.
Mexican Foreign Policy and Diplomacy: From Defensive Tradition to Incomplete Modernity
Politics & Policy, 2019
Two characteristic aspects of Mexican foreign policy and its operative arm, diplomacy, define the challenges the country must face in the twenty-first century: one is a doctrinarian diplomatic tradition of goodwill and defensiveness (principles of nonintervention, self-determination, and peaceful conflict resolution), which is clearly inadequate for facing current global challenges. The other is a fragmented push for modernity whose scope is limited to certain areas of the diplomatic agenda (human rights, democracy, multilateral activism), with a strong focus on specific contemporary issues (gender equality, the United Nations' 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the inclusion of civil society) which, at least in the short term, lacks the necessary strength and tools to define the course of Mexico's foreign policy.
The Participation of Mexico in Multilateral Diplomacy: The U.N. and OAS
Corvinus University of Budapest, 2018
Mexico has long been championed universal international organizations, especially the United Nations, as embodiments of international law and cooperation, as well as settings where it can bridge divides between developed and developing nations. The following paper will attempt to analyze the performance of Mexico in multilateral international organizations especially the U.N. and the OAS and answer if whether a different approach in foreign policy can play a more influential and powerful role in international politics. The discussion will focus on the answer to the question: Can Mexican foreign policy play a more influential role in multilateral diplomacy? And if yes, how could Mexico become a global player in the participation of multilateral diplomacy? In order to do it, the discussion will focus on the structure and the different sources of Mexico’s multilateral diplomacy policy in the U.N. and OAS organizations, trough specific content from examples that occurred over the history as part of the analysis.
Mexico’s Foreign Policy under Salinas: The Search for Friends in the First World
Iberoamericana – Nordic Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 2001
I. INTRODUCTION After years in the wings, Mexico is poised for the spotlight. The club of rich nations hails it as the perfect student of economics. What better candidate for stardom than this country of 85 million people, which went bust so publicly just over ten years ago and which has since embarked on dramatic and successful economic reforms? .Mr. Salinas has a claim to be hailed as one the great men of the 20th century (The Economist 1993).
Mexico's Foreign Policy under President Salinas: Searching for Friends Abroad
Mexico"s official foreign policy under Carlos Salinas (1988)(1989)(1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994) was defined as a search for economic modernization and diversification in its external relations. Traditional elements of Mexican foreign affairs were largely turned upside down, even if the Salinas diplomatic team maintained its traditional discourse in multilateral fora. The new Mexico became pragmatic, internationalist, pro-American and economistic. However, attempts to diversify economic relations and build economic bridges with Europe and Asia did not bear fruit. When the dust settled, Mexico had devoted most of its political capital on cultivating its relations with the United States, and largely distanced itself from Latin America. NAFTA, the crowning achievement of the sexenio, did not necessarily render Mexico more politically vulnerable, as common wisdom has it and, paradoxically, it may yet prove the key to enhanced diversification. But however one judges Salinas" term in office, it is clear that the political economy orientation his administration gave Mexico has become institutionalized. Therefore, making sense of current Mexican foreign policy requires an understanding of the Salinas era.
Mexican Policy and Its Implications for United States-Mexico Relations
Mexican Policy and Its Implications for United States -Mexico Relations, in Sucesión Presidencial, 1991
Hacia principios de los años 90 del siglo XX, en México emergieron dos tendencias políticas con posiciones distintas frente a la apertura de la economía mexicana al exterior y ante el ¨cambio estructural¨ que además implicana un repliegue sustancial del Estado como actor económico directo. Se trata de la coyuntura preliminar a la firma del Tratado de Libre Comercio entre Estados Unidos, Canadá y México. La disputa por la apertura política y transición democrática -encabezada en aquél momento por el Frente Democrático Nacional (FDN) transcurría paralela a fundamentales reformas económicas.
Resistance from Within: Why Mexico's Attempt to Advance an Active Foreign Policy Failed
Review of Policy Research, 2005
After becoming the first opposition candidate to win since 1910, President Vicente Fox kindled expectations at both national and international levels. He claimed he would enhance significantly the scope of the Mexico's foreign policy and engage the country in international politics in a way more befitting of its newly acquired democratic status. Nevertheless, little consideration was given to the fact that for many decades foreign policy in Mexico had been deployed to create an area screened-off from domestic politics where conflicting factions were brought together and a policy consensus worked out. That consensus was sufficiently ample for the authoritarian elite, given its foreign policy goals and principles. It would, however, fail to suffice for any political leader willing to step outside the box of tradition. Fox did just that. In consequence, widespread reactions of disapproval from key political actors and the media led the president to settle for a more modest international agenda in 2002. This article explores the key processes that triggered so much internal resistance to Fox's foreign policy designs. I argue that these processes underpin what continues to be the essentially autarchic nature and scope of the Mexican foreign policy tradition. Such an autarchic approach is glorified in Mexican political rhetoric, yet has led to many lost opportunities for Mexico. Most importantly, I stress that the Mexican foreign policy tradition discourages and forecloses the kind of engagement in the international arena that seeks to share in rather than to free-ride the collective efforts of the international community to procure security and peace. So despite its new democratic status, Mexico remains more of a spectator than an actor on the international stage.
Th is article analyses the international relations of Mexican sub-state governments. It aims to answer four questions: 1) What explains the recent and dramatic increase in their international activities?; 2) Do these federal units have an independent foreign policy?; 3) What are their levels or degrees of sub-state diplomacy?; and 4) Which variables explain the variation in their degree of sub-state diplomacy? Th e fi rst section argues that the growth in international activities is generated by the combination of two sets of variables: a) the growing interdependence and globalization of the international system; and b) the democratization, decentralization and structural reform processes in the domestic arena. Th e second section sustains that Mexican sub-national units do not have a foreign policy of their own. Th e third section shows that there is a wide variation in the states' degree of international participation. In order to characterize this variation, a typology is constructed and the 32 Mexican federal units are classifi ed in two moments in time (2004 and 2009) and a comparative analysis between these two periods is presented. Th e fourth section argues that the degree of sub-state diplomacy depends on three variables: economic (gross state product); political (juxtaposed government); and geographic (border location). Each of these variables is tested to determine its impact, providing evidence to sustain the relevance of the economic variable, arguing that juxtaposed government functions as a trigger variable for initiating or increasing external activities, and that the border is a necessary, but not suffi cient, variable to explain the degree of international projection.