 After reviewing the TRICAMEX consular coordination program developed in South Texas, and discussing the Transborder Consular Diplomacy experience of CaliBaja between Southern California and Baja California, I think is advisable to examine the chapter written by Ambassador Carlos González Gutiérrez titled “The meaning of a special relation: Mexico´s relationship with Texas in the light of California´s experience”. Ambassador González Gutiérrez had a first-hand experience of the differences between the two giants. He was the Consul General of Mexico in Sacramento, California, and later in Austin, Texas, the two States' capitals. It is not an exaggeration to say that what happens in the Golden State and the Lone Star State has a similar impact on Mexico and its community in the U.S. as the bilateral relationship in Washington and Mexico City. These two heavy-weights were once part of Mexico, as I mentioned in my post about the Origins of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy. For most of history, they had comparable approaches to Mexico and the Mexican community living there. However, in the 1990s, while Texas had a pragmatical approach, California´s electorate approved the ballot initiative Proposition 187 in 1994. Both States coincided in 2001, as the two enacted legislation to offer in-state tuition to undocumented persons who graduated from local high schools. But, as the reader will see in the chapter´s review, from there, their positions about immigration issues have significantly diverged. While the Golden State has promoted welcoming immigration policies, the Lone Star State has become the spearhead of the anti-immigrant movement in the U.S. Before moving forward, there is an important caveat that applies across the United States. Even though each State´s policies and the society´s attitudes towards immigrants are very different, not all is black or white, but many shades of gray, or I should say red and blue. Rural and ex-suburbs areas of the Golden State have the same negative sentiments towards immigrants as in any part of the Lone Star State. However, Texan cities such as Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio, and even border towns as El Paso and Brownsville are as welcoming to foreigners, particularly Mexicans, as California as a whole. You just have to see a county electoral map in both states to understand this situation. Figure 1 includes a comparative chart of some of the differences between the two States mentioned by Ambassador González Gutiérrez in his chapter, which will help comprehend better the situation in both States.    So, let´s start with the review.
The Ambassador declares that his essay's objective is to explore the relationship between Mexico and Texas in trade and migration while comparing it with California´s links with Mexico. He also analyzes the short and long-term perspectives of the Mexican Consular Diplomacy in Texas.[i] While describing the similarities and differences of Mexico's relationships and the Golden and the Lone Star States, González Gutiérrez pinpoints the origins of the very different roads that both states have taken regarding immigration. The Ambassador indicates that “if the Latino electorate in Texas were as relevant as is in California, it is less likely that Texas would promote with the same vigor a restrictive agenda regarding immigration.”[ii] As the reader will learn, the chapter is a vital contribution to understanding different paths that both States have taken concerning their immigrant communities. The Ambassador uncovers Texas´ disassociation between the reality of the migrants' relevance to the States´ prosperity and its anti-immigrant discourse and policies.[iii] González Gutiérrez substantiates comparing Mexico´s relationship with California and Texas because they are the two largest States, and both have the closest links to our country. Besides, the two represent the opposites of the U.S. ideological spectrum and reveal very different political cultures.[iv] The Ambassador implies that California and Texas´s different immigration paths resulted from a significant increase of Hispanics in Texas (60.4%), compared to California (38.9%) from 2000 to 2015.[v] The changes in foreign-born were also dissimilar. From 1990 to 2000, the foreign-born population grew by 37.2% in the Golden State, while from 2000 to 2018, only 19.9%. The numbers are superior in the Lone Star State, so from 1990 to 2000, it increased by 90% and 2000-2018 by 70%.[vi] I think there was a similar growth of anti-immigrant attitudes in places where new immigrants arrived recently. Additionally, from 2009 to 2014, as a result of the economic crisis, the number of undocumented Mexicans fell 190,000 in the Golden State while the numbers remained the same in the Lone Star State.[vii] Afterward, González Gutiérrez describes how California and Texas responded to immigration challenges. He starts explaining that in 2001 the two legislatures approved in-state tuition for undocumented youth. For the Golden State was the beginning of several pro-immigrant bills, while in Texas, it was outlier legislation and soon turned into the anti-immigrant field.[viii] While California inaugurated the era of anti-immigrant policies with Proposition 187 in 1994, later on, after taking over the control of the legislature and the governor´s office, the State embarked on an integrative agenda for migrants, enacting several laws, such as;
Meanwhile, from a practical perspective on immigration with then-governor George W. Bush, Texas became the anti-immigrant movement forerunner in the United States with Governor Greg Abbott and the enactment of the SB4 law in 2017.[x] The Ambassador explains that this movement resulted from the total control that the Republican party has of the State´s government and the need for getting the support of hard-core primary voters.[xi] He pinpoints the move to a more radical position as a result of Governor Perry´s presidential aspirations. He was the one that first sent Texan Rangers to guard the border, arguing the failure to do so by the federal (Obama) government.[xii] In the section titled “A special relationship with Mexico?”, González Gutiérrez tries to explain Texas´ contradictory position about its southern neighbor, considering that it has a very close trade and economic relation while implementing anti-immigrant policies directed mainly against Mexicans.[xiii]- As previously mentioned, he elucidates that the elections occur in the primaries. Politicians prefer short-term gains for their support, even if this means alienating part of the Latino community or against the State´s economic interests.[xiv] The Ambassador does not think that Texas will follow California on immigration issues because labor unions in the Lone Star State are not as strong as the Golden State. Also, the political distance between the two parties in California was narrower than the one in Texas.[xv] Besides, both States' political cultures are very different, and “it would be a mistake to assume that Latinos in the two are ideological alike just because they have the same ethnicity.”[xvi] In the last part of the chapter, the Ambassador evaluates Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy in Texas. He explains that the eleven consulates of Mexico in Texas have to deal with a “cognitive dissonance”, between the excellent trade partnership and its “Mexican bashing”.[xvii] González Gutiérrez depicts the Texan business sector's effort thru the Texas Mexico Trade Coalition to defend NAFTA, while State politicians remained on the sidelines for a while. It was not until the Coalition lobbied them when they publicly supported free trade with Mexico and Canada.[xviii] He asserts that Texas's special relation is limited and has not crossed over to additional bilateral concerns. It has not developed into regional-transborder arrangements such as the links between Baja California and California in CaliBaja, or the Arizona-Mexico/Sonora-Arizona Commission.[xix] Sadly, I think, the State with the most extensive shared border “there are no fora, commissions nor periodical meeting with the authorities of the four Mexican border states.”[xx] Moreover, the Ambassador indicates that describing the situation at the border as a war zone does not help either. It is beneficial for getting funds or the signing of anti-immigrant bills. Still, it encumbers focusing on the bilateral relations' positive topics, such as economic development or the construction of binational infrastructure projects.[xxi] González Gutiérrez recommends that Mexico has to take advantage of Texas mobilization in support of NAFTA. Besides, the consulates need to assist in renewing old collaboration schemes or establishing new ones such as binational business and majors meetings.[xxii] At the same time, he declares the relevance of launching a Public Diplomacy strategy to highlight the contributions of Mexican migrants to the Lone Star State in public discussions.[xxiii] The Ambassador concludes that Mexico must cultivate a permanent dialogue with the Texas government to celebrate economic integration and be aware of the gap between reality and the public discourse.[xxiv] González Gutiérrez introduces an exciting idea that the consulate's work contributes to mitigating U.S. government institutions' absence responsible for facilitating new immigrants' integration. This idea is in line with what Francisco Javier Díaz de Léon and Víctor Peláez Millán described as the empowerment of the Mexican Community in their book´s chapter. Why is it worth reading? The chapter summarizes very well the different paths that the Golden and the Lone Star States have taken regarding immigrant issues. The Ambassador distinguishes some of the reasons this has happened, which helps comprehend the country's current situation. He also identifies areas of opportunities for Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy, particularly in closing the gap between reality and the public discourse in the Lone Star State. The Ambassador indicates that Texas offers a few advantages than other States, like its economic integration, the shared challenges at the border, and the growing Mexican population. I believe that if Mexico finds a way to work with Texas on this issue and promote greater collaboration in bilateral matters, it could lead the path to transform the current anti-immigrant attitudes and policies in other parts of the United States. To achieve this goal, I think Mexico would need to have a laser-focus Public/Consular Diplomacy long-lasting strategy, with a specific component that targets rural communities across the Lone Star State. It is interesting to reflect that the Consular Diplomacy of a country is the paradiplomacy of the other country´s State and local authorities. In this regard, this chapter contributes to the concept of Consular Diplomacy by incorporating the idea of paradiplomacy into its frame. Most of the consulates diplomatic activities are targeted toward state and local audiences. Of course, it has to consider the national context and the overall bilateral relation to be successful. By scrutinizing California and Texas trade and immigration stances and Mexico´s strategy, Ambassador González Gutiérrez encompasses paradiplomacy into Consular Diplomacy. This notion is relevant as both ideas are the different sides of the same coin. I also think that Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy in the United States had to adapt to the country´s patchwork of multiple, sometimes significantly different, federal, state, county, and authorities and policies. In the chapter, California and Texas's example proves very useful to see this characteristic and the need to have a flexible Consular Diplomacy. [i] González Gutiérrez, Carlos, “El significado de una relación especial: Las relaciones de México con Texas a la luz de su experiencia en California” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en Tiempos de Trump, 2018, p. 254. [ii] Ibid. p. 255. [iii] Ibid. p. 264. [iv] Ibid. p. 254. [v] Ibid. p. 259. [vi] Migration Policy Institute, “California, Demographics and Social” and “Texas, Demographics and Social” [vii] Ibid. p. 258. [viii] Ibid. p. 259-262. [ix] Ibid. p. 262. [x] Ibid. p. 261. [xi] Ibid. p. 263. [xii] Ibid. p. 260-261. [xiii] Ibid. p. 262-264. [xiv] Ibid. p. 263. [xv] Ibid. p. 263. [xvi] Ibid. p. 263-264. [xvii] Ibid. p. 264. [xviii] Ibid. p. 264. [xix] The official name in English is Arizona-Mexico Commission, while in Spanish is the Comisión Sonora-Arizona. [xx] González Gutiérrez, Carlos, Ibid. p. 265. [xxi] Ibid. p. 265. [xxii] Ibid. p. 265. [xxiii] Ibid. p. 265. [xxiv] Ibid. p. 265. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer, or company.
0 Comments
 In this post, I will review the last chapter of the book "The role of Consular Diplomacy in a transborder context: The case of CaliBaja", written by Ambassador Marcela Celorio. Note: I will use the term CaliBaja as presented in this chapter, e.g. CaliBaja rather than Cali Baja or Calibaja. I am skipping a few chapters because I believe the CaliBaja example is the other side of the coin of the TRICAMEX mechanism that I reviewed in this post. In this chapter, Celorio puts forward a very different experience from the other corner of the Mexico – U.S. Border: CaliBaja, a bi-national mega-region, which stands for California-Baja California. The Ambassador also discussed an example of what she defines as Transborder Consular Diplomacy. The CaliBaja initiative started in 2006-2007 and was officially launched in 2011. It comprises local and county authorities along the border between the two states but is mainly focused on the Tijuana-San Diego axis. There is even a website about the mega-region calibaja.net. It is the most-advance bilateral collaboration scheme along the nearly 2,000 miles of the shared border. As seen in the previous review, TRICAMEX comprises four consulates, focusing on immigration issues. At the same time, CaliBaja is a business-lead scheme that concentrates on trade and economic development.  Ambassador Celorio divided the chapter into three:
In the introduction, the Ambassador states that the borderland is a strategic area. The challenges and opportunities faced by the Mexican Consular Diplomacy are different from those in other regions such as the U.S. East Coast or the Midwest.[i] Some of the challenges and opportunities at the border include:
Celorio explains that to administer and develop the border, authorities at the federal, state, county, and local levels on both sides have undertaken numerous activities, some unilateral and others bilateral. Some have been institutionalized like the NADBank, and some did not last very long. These actions' success or failure depends on their capacity to respond to the border communities' needs.[iii] She explains that in the case of the San Diego- Tijuana border communities, their collaboration has expanded thru the years and now includes all municipalities of Baja California, along with California's border counties, including many cities.[iv] As a result, the private sector has visualized this cooperation as a mega-region and created the term CaliBaja.[v]
Ambassador Celorio explains that even though "the international border divides the people living on both sides, there are all types of factors that unite them and make them interdependent."[vi] Among different elements that unite border communities, she highlights the following three: i) a binational community that crosses international boundaries daily, ii) the need to mutually solve transborder problems, and iii) a strong economic and labor interdependence that is the basis of the region's entire population's well-being.[vii] Celorio recognizes that CaliBaja's success "…relies on the vision of its inhabitants, business persons and authorities, who have accepted the identity of a mega-region…",[viii] that happens to be located in two different countries. The Ambassador ascertains that being on the outskirts of power in both countries became a competitive advantage, establishing local communication channels that allow to self-define as a binational mega-region.[ix] For example, she writes about the Cross Border Xpress's uniqueness, a pedestrian bridge that connects Tijuana's airport with San Diego, transforming it into a binational airport. 2. The consular function in a transborder context. In this section, the Ambassador describes the particularities of a consular office located on the Mexico-U.S. border. She goes beyond the traditional definition of a consular district and explains how the Consulate General of Mexico in San Diego is more than just a regular consular office. Celorio details the consulate's work with Mexican authorities and labels these activities as Transborder Consular Diplomacy.[x] Celorio explains that "Mexican consular offices have transformed from a simple service agency to an effective diplomatic representation of Mexico in its consular district."[xi] And when the consulate is located at the border, such as the one in San Diego, the consular office transcends its legal definition, and it becomes some sort of a transborder consulate.[xii] The Ambassador indicates that the Mexican Consulate in San Diego is a transborder consulate that performs double duties: Mexico's government spokesperson while being involved in local and CaliBaja issues abroad.[xiii] She presents three concrete examples of these transborder responsibilities: binational sewage administration, education collaboration, and crisis management.[xiv] 3. Consular Diplomacy efforts during Trump's Administration. Ambassador Celorio explains that the role of the consulates of Mexico in the U.S. has expanded into new areas with the purpose of empowering the Mexican community so they can fully integrate into the host society.[xv] She refers to this "consular activity with a prominent focus on diplomatic and social issues" as Consular Diplomacy.[xvi] A significant contribution of this chapter is the definition of Consular Diplomacy, which refers "to the handling of international relations via peripheric organizations (consulates) -in their consular districts-, with local authorities, the host society, and its migrant community to protect their rights and improve their well-being."[xvii] In Trump's era, the Ambassador indicates that Mexico has recognized Consular Diplomacy as one of its foreign policy main advantages to protect its national interests and the ones of its community living abroad.[xviii] In the case of CaliBaja, the Transborder Consular Diplomacy is executed in the context of a highly intimate cooperation between authorities on both sides of the border. And these authorities and society have responded to Washington's policies by putting first the regional and border community interests.[xix] As an example of the Transborder Consular Diplomacy, Celorio describes the participation of the San Diego consulate in the binational border security meetings, Custom and Border Protection's (CBP) leadership training, and the consular office inside CBPs facility at the San Ysidro Point of Entry.[xx] For me, the participation of border consulates in the binational border security meetings is a perfect example of Consular Diplomacy as defined by Maaike Okano-Heijmans in "Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy," Consular officers participate in local meetings that deal with federal and diplomatic issues and negotiate with U.S. federal authorities in their areas of responsibility. The head offices at the capitals do not intervene or participate directly. Still, the meetings nourish the bilateral dialogue at the federal level not only between the Embassy and the Ministry with DHS but with other national stakeholders. Something similar happens with the collaboration on labor issues, particularly the Semana de Derechos Laborales (SDL) or Labor Rights Week. Ambassador Celerio closes her chapter, stating that no country can overcome alone the social and economic challenges of the 21st century. In some parts of the world, society and the government have decided to enhance efforts and create regions to meet the current reality competitively. The success of the bilateral relationship in the CaliBaja mega-region exemplifies how the Mexico-U.S. border is a source of prosperity and opportunity for both countries.[xxi] Why read this chapter? In this paper, Ambassador Celorio identifies the benefits of Consular Diplomacy regarding local issues that impact the overall bilateral relationship. CaliBaja is a significant development as they define themselves as binational and include trade to exchanges and crisis management. Besides, she states that the Transborder Consular Diplomacy helps create a prosperous, secure, and competitive region. "It is a diplomacy that adds not lessens, that helps to tear down walls and build more bridges and that recognizes that Mexico and the U.S. are more interdependent and are more integrated every day, particularly in the CaliBaja mega-region.[xxii] I believe that the CaliBaja initiative has many layers that have not yet been studied. For example, one is the issue of Place Branding of a binational mega-region and its impact on the overall Nation Brand. Another one is how a mega-region like CaliBaja can support the exercise of Soft Power in a localized way. Can the region's Soft Power overcome the two countries' unflattering characteristics? Ambassador Celorio introduces an innovative definition of Consular Diplomacy that goes beyond local issues and transcends borders, which helps develop the concept as practiced by Mexico's consular offices across the United. States. [i] Celorio, Marcela, “El papel de la diplomacia consular en el contexto transfronterizo: el caso de la CaliBaja" in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, 2018, p. 271. [ii] Ibid. p. 271-272. [iii] Ibid. p. 272. [iv] The CaliBaja mega-region has a population of 6.5 million people and a GDP of 250 billion dollars. Ibid. p 274. [v] Ibid. p. 273. [vi] Ibid. p. 273. [vii] Ibid. p. 274. [viii] Ibid. p. 275. [ix] Ibid. p. 275. [x] Ibid. p. 277. [xi] Ibid. p. 276. [xii] Ibid. p. 277. [xiii] Ibid. p. 277. [xiv] Ibid. p. 278. [xv] Ibid. p. 279. [xvi] Ibid. p. 279. [xvii] Ibid. p. 280. [xviii] Ibid. p. 280. [xix] Ibid. p. 281. [xx] Ibid. p. 281. [xxi] Ibid. p. 283. [xxii] Ibid. p. 284-284. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer, or company.  This post will review the chapter “The synergies with other communities: The case of TRICAMEX,” written by Jorge A. Schiavon and Guillermo Ordorica R. of the book Mexican Consular Diplomacy in Trump´s Era. TRICAMEX stands for mecanismo de concertación Triángulo del Norte de Centroamérica y México or “Central America Northern Triangle and Mexico consular consultation program.” It is an innovative way to implement the Consular Diplomacy of the four countries involved (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico), which started in McAllen, Texas, in December 2015. According to Maaike Okano-Heijmans, a scholar of the Clingadndale Institute, one form of Consular Diplomacy is when “Governments attach increasing important to and are becoming more involved in consular affairs at the practical as well as policy levels”[i] that entails from the negotiation of agreements about consular affairs to the exchange of best consular practices and cooperation on the ground. TRICAMEX fulfills completely this description of what Consular Diplomacy is, as you will see. I believe that the negotiation of an agreement between the consulates of Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Mexico in McAllen, Texas, was a critical step forward for broader collaboration and the exchange of best practices. However, what stands out was the four governments' interest to expand this mechanism across the U.S. and include the topic in their formal bilateral and regional diplomatic agendas. It is a clear example of Consular Diplomacy. I estimate that Schiavon and Ordorica's work is the first academic analysis of TRICAMEX, as I could not find any other besides official press releases and some news about the group's activities in different cities (See the list at the bottom of the post). This is one of the reasons why this paper is a valuable contribution to the study of Consular Diplomacy. In this chapter, Schiavon and Ordorica describe the origins of TRICAMEX and its activities, focusing on two areas: consular protection and community engagement. Besides, they propose new collaboration areas, such as the “Coordinated Consular Protection (Protección Consular Coordinada). The two authors incorporate a novel idea: “minilateralism”, described as a new way of collaboration between a reduced number of countries to solve shared challenges that can turn into crises.[ii] Schiavon and Ordorica view TRICAMEX as an excellent example of minilateralism on immigration issues by consular offices in the United States.[iii] The chapter is divided into five parts. In the first section, they explain the immigration context that resulted in the establishment of new consulates of Honduras and El Salvador in McAllen.[iv] In December 2015, the four consulates signed a joint declaration establishing the consular consultation program “to exchange best practices and promote Consular Diplomacy initiatives, to strengthen the dialogue with public and private stakeholders involved in the care of their immigrant communities.”[v] This local initiative got the attention of the capitals of the four countries. In December 2016,[vi] the four countries' ministries of foreign affairs decided to expand TRICAMEX to other U.S. cities.[vii] In the chapter´s second segment, the authors describe that TRICAMEX McAllen “held frequently meeting with social and community organizations, academic institutions, leaders, and authorities interested in immigration issues. Because of it, all involved actors better understand the consular work and display their interest in improving outreach mechanisms, collaborations, and the information exchanges…”[viii] Schiavon and Ordorica present an example of the greater collaboration the consular activities related to the Missing Migrant Initiative. The four consulates elaborated a single survey to encourage the localization of missing persons. Additionally, Mexico offered the other consulates the use of its consular protection calling center (Centro de Información y Atención a Mexicanos -CIAM-) to search for lost people.[ix] For the Central American consulates, TRICAMEX McAllen was also a conduit with Mexican authorities, including the State of Tamaulipas and the city of Reynosa.[x] Internally, the mechanism provided opportunities for training and exchanges of best practices.[xi] For example, the Inter-American Development Bank organized a training seminar in Mexico City that later was replicated in many consular offices of the Northern Triangle across the U.S.[xii] Besides, they work together in supporting vulnerable populations such as migrant women and unaccompanied minors. As part of this collaboration, Mexico shared the Protocol for the consular care of unaccompanied migrant children and adolescents, created with the support of UNICEF Mexico.[xiii] The authors also list other examples of collaboration, including meetings with the President of Guatemala in April 2016 and a U.S. office representative of the International Organization of the Red Cross.[xiv] In the area of community affairs, TRICAMEX McAllen opened channels of communication with different organizations and leaders. Mexico shared with the Central American consulates some community affairs programs instrumented by the Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (IME), including the Ventanilla de Atención Integral para la Mujer or “Initiative for the Comprehensive Care of Women” -VAIM-.[xv] In the chapter`s fourth part, Schiavon and Ordorica identify that TRICAMEX McAllen is gradually expanding into the political and social spheres. The first focused on local authorities and the second on the business community. The goal is to multiple channels of communication with key players in favor of the immigrant community and promote development in the home countries.[xvi] The authors conclude their chapter stating that there is room for TRICAMEX to grow into a Proteccion Consular Conjunta (Joint Consular Protection).[xvii] They analyze International and Regional Laws, saying that there are no legal obstacles to provide consular assistance to persons of other nationalities. This chapter is worth reading because, as I mentioned before, it is the first academic paper about this consular initiative. It is also interesting since the authors demonstrate that Consular Diplomacy can also be a multilateral effort by different countries with shared challenges. TRICAMEX proves that minilateral Consular Diplomacy can be developed, and furthermore, can have successful outcomes benefiting their communities and the participating countries. Examples of concrete collaborations, as the Missing Migrant Initiative, shows the benefits of working together. Besides, it reiterates some of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy characteristics, such as establishing partnerships with like-minded organizations, institutions, and persons; its adaptability and innovative approaches; and its willingness to share experiences, policies, and best practices with other countries. For more information about TRICAMEX, see (organized by date) Estrada, Priscilla, “Consulate group Tricamex celebrates one year of success”, Valley Central, December 6, 2016. (In English) Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Press Release, December 14, 2016. (In Spanish) Consulado General de México en Chicago, Press Release, December 20, 2016. (In Spanish) Consulado de México en McAllen, TRICAMEX McAllen 2017 Quarterly Bulletin (4). (In Spanish) Dirección de Asuntos Consulares, “Experiencia del espacio de coordinación local TRICAMEX, para la Protección Consular”, Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de El Salvador, June 2018. (In Spanish) Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Press Release, July 10, 2018. (In English) “Border Patrol operations, TRICAMEX fly over Rio Grande Valley” in Homeland Preparedness News, July 24, 2018. (In English) Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Remarks by Foreign Affairs Ministry, October 11, 2018. (In English) Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Press Release, October 30, 2018. (In English) Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores y Cooperación Internacional de Honduras, Press Release, October 8, 2018. (In Spanish) Smith, Molly, “Formed in the wake of 2014 migrant crisis, consular group faces familiar challenges”, in The Monitor, November 29, 2018. (In English) Inter-American Development Bank, “IDB trains officials from Central America Northern Triangle”, December 20, 2018. (In English) Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Guatemala, Press Release, September 2, 2020. (In Spanish) [i] Okano-Heijmans, Maaike, “Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy”, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ´Clingendael´, February 2010, p. 2. [ii] Schiavon, Jorge A., and Ordorica R., Guillermo, “Las sinergias con otras comunidades: el caso de TRICAMEX” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, 2018, p. 185. [iii] Ibid. p. 185. [iv] Ibid. p. 189-192. [v] Ibid. p. 186. [vi] This action took place in December 2016, a month after the election of Donald Trump as president. See Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Press Release, December 14, 2016. (In Spanish) [vii] Ibid. p. 186. [viii] Ibid. p. 189. [ix] Ibid. p. 190. [x] Ibid. p. 190. [xi] Ibid. p. 191. [xii] Inter-American Development Bank, “IDB trains officials from Central America Northern Triangle”, December 20, 2018. [xiii] For a brief description of protocol´s origins and its benefits, see Gallo, Karla, “En el camino hacia la protección integral de la niñez migrante, UNICEF México Blog, August 21, 2019. [xiv] Ibid. p. 192. [xv] I will write a post about the VAIM later. For a brief description of the program click here, or read Gómez Maganda Guadalupe, and Kerber Palma, Alicia, “Atención con perspectiva de género para las comunidades mexicanas en el exterior” in Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, No. 107, May-August 2016, pp 185-202, and the doctoral dissertation of Martha Eréndira Montejano Hernández of 2018. [xvi] Ibid. p. 194. [xvii] Ibid. p. 199. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company.  In the last couple of days, I have been reading the spectacular book Antología Protección Consular a Mexicanos en los Estados Unidos 1849-1900, written by Ángela Moyano Pahissa. After the author reviewed what I think must have been thousands of official documents and correspondence written by consuls of Mexico, the Mexican delegation in Washington, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, she divided the book into five chapters that deal with specific problems:
In each, Moyano Pahissa included a selection of official documents that reflect the ideas, challenges, and solutions regarding these specific problems that resulted from the Mexico - U.S. War of 1846-1848 and the loss of half of its territory. It is incredible to read that some of them have not changed since then. After reading the book, I now better understand the colossal influence that the annexation to the U.S. of the former Mexican territory had on the Mexicans living in those lands and the development of Mexico’s Consular Diplomacy. From having to ratify their land ownership through a complicated and unfair process, to the need to decide in a year the nationality they wanted to have, Mexicans suffered greatly in the United States after 1848. Besides, there was a direct attack not only against their culture but themselves. “Some historians state that in the decade from 1850 to 1860, Anglo-Americans lynched between three to four thousand Mexicans of a total population of ten thousand.”[i] The systematic loss of property rights, in violation of Article VIII of the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty, had significant consequences for Mexicans. Even though property requirements to be able to vote were almost eliminated by then, payment of taxes was still a common requirement to vote, thus limiting their possibility to participate in politics and influence policies. Therefore, Mexico’s government had to enhance the defense of its nationals’ rights north of the border, including the establishment of consular offices in places that before was its own country. Back then, Consuls of Mexico had to respond to information requests by the President’s office about high profile cases reported in the press, when they involved Mexicans, either as victims or as perpetrators. They also presented complaints to U.S. authorities for the delay in court cases, the imposition of high cash bail amounts, or extended detention periods. Mexican consular agents also had to be in constant communications with local and state authorities and the Mexican community, creating cooperation networks. Border consulates had additional challenges like smuggling and attacks on Mexican communities by outlaws, and tribes. If all this sounds similar to what Maaike Okano-Heijmans, a scholar of the Clingendael Institute, described as Consular Diplomacy in “Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy,” is because it is! The loss of property rights, the problem of questionable citizenship, the attack on Mexican culture and people, combined with widespread discrimination that Mexicans faced after 1848 in the lost territories, catapulted the government of Mexico to develop an incipient Consular Diplomacy, way before it was the norm across the world.[i] Some of the characteristics of today´s Mexican Consular Diplomacy developed during this period, such as:
[i] Moyano, Pahissa, Ángela, Antología Protección Consular a Mexicanos en los Estados Unidos 1849-1900, México, 1989, p. 113. [i] Heijmans, Maaike and Melissen, Jan in Foreign Ministries and the Rising Challenge of Consular Affairs: Cinderella in the Limelight, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, June 7, 2006, p. 4. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer, or company.  In the chapter “Consular Diplomacy in the face of U.S. demography and society in the 21st Century,” of the book La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempo de Trump, Ambassador Juan Carlos Mendoza Sánchez explains that demography changes in the United States have resulted in the expansion of nativist movements and anti-immigrant sentiments amongst the white population. He also details Trump´s changes to immigration policies and Mexico´s response to these challenges thru the implantation of an active and innovative Consular Diplomacy. In the section titled “A new demography face that scares the WASP sector,” the Ambassador pinpoints June 18, 2003, as a milestone because it was the day when the Latino community in the U.S. reached 38.8 million turning into the first minority, overpassing the Afro-American population.[i] As a result, alarms rang amongst the conservative white people, and their response to this “invasion” was the creation and expansion of nativist and anti-immigrant policies. Mendoza Sánchez details the history of anti-immigrant regulations in the U.S., starting from infamous California´s Proposition 187 of 1994 to Samuel Huntington´s book Who are we?[ii] Latino population's fast growth in the U.S. resulted in being the majority group in 30 cities, so the Ambassador states that “it is not unfounded the white-population fears of becoming a minority in their own country [and that fear] have slowly developed into anti-immigrant sentiments, and policies to make the U.S. unattractive to those who live there.”[iii] Donald Trump`s presidency is just a new and more radical chapter in the U.S. immigration policy. In the second part of the chapter, Ambassador Mendoza Sánchez explains that it was a radical change in the designation of undocumented migrants as threats to national security and public safety in two Executive Orders signed by the President. He also details some of the multiple changes to immigration policies, guidelines, and enforcement operations to criminalize undocumented immigration, with a particular focus on Mexico´s border and the Latino population.[iv] Another significant change was the end of enforcement priorities; thus, turning every single undocumented immigrant a target. Considering the existence of three million of mixed households meant the possibility of massive deportation that would have tremendous social consequences in the U.S. consequences of the new enforcement guidelines.[v] In the section “New challenges for Mexican Consular Diplomacy,” Mendoza Sánchez emphasizes that immigration policy changes have a direct impact on Mexicans in the U.S. It presents one of the biggest challenges to Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy. He identifies ten of them, but here I only include six:
The Ambassador highlights that there are more Mexican with immigration status than undocumented ones, for the first time in ages.[vii] This fact is unknown in the U.S. and contradicts the current anti-immigrant rhetoric that most Mexicans are undocumented. He explains that undocumented persons tend to live in sanctuary cities, and the implementation of policies to limit resources to those authorities will affect them.[viii] Fortunately, it has not been occurred yet, mostly thru lawsuits. Mendoza Sánchez writes that the Mexican community's geographical dispersion across the U.S. is one of the biggest challenges for consulates that cover large territories. The Mexican government's response was the establishment of the Mobile Consulate program that in the 21st century expanded into the Consulado sobre Ruedas (Consulate on Wheels) initiative.[ix] These activities were crucial for assisting vulnerable Mexicans after Trump´s inauguration.[x] Additionally, he identifies that “developing synergies with pro-immigrant organizations, authorities, other countries’ consulates, and minority groups is one of the most effective activities for consulates under the current circumstances.”[xi] Consular Diplomacy in action. In response to the enhanced anti-immigrant context, the government of Mexico designed a Consular Diplomacy strategy that contained three main activities:
He briefly explains the FAMEU program implemented in 2017 that had a 50 million dollar extraordinary budget. He briefly mentions Local Repatriation Arrangements[xiii] that help Border consulates in the orderly and humanly repatriation of Mexican nationals.[xiv] These arrangements are a clear example of Maaike Okano-Heijmans´ Consular Diplomacy definition because they are “diplomatic” in nature but are negotiated, signed, and implemented locally. Then the Ambassador explains five different programs part of Mexico`s Consular Diplomacy: a)Protection to Mexicans Abroad Innovations (Innovaciones en la proteccion a mexicanos).
d)Education Opportunities Window (Ventanilla de Oportunidades Educativas). e)Promotion of preventive health among migrants (Promoción de la salud preventiva de los migrantes). Even though Mendoza Sánchez briefly describes each program, I do not include them here. In Figure 1, located at the end of the post, you can find a summary. All of them are innovative consular undertakings of Mexico`s Consular Diplomacy, which some countries are replicating. Most of them are unique and lay outside the traditional consular services offered by most ministries of foreign affairs to their citizens abroad. Four of the five programs highlighted by Ambassador Mendoza Sánchez are under the responsibilities of the Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (Institute of Mexicans Abroad).[xv] I would like to share an extraordinary achievement of one of them: la Ventanilla de Salud or Health Window. In 2017, the American States Organization granted the “Inter-American Award on Innovation for Effective Public Management” to the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Health of Mexico for the Health Window program in the Social Inclusion category. That year the Health Windows at the consular network provided 5.2 million services to 1.7 million people.[xvi] Conclusion. The chapter is interesting to read as the Ambassador summarizes the origins of the Anglo-American population's growing resentment against immigrants and minorities. He explains that “for the WASP community, the country´s demographic change is a challenge to their way of life, values, and identity; therefore, the hardening of U.S. immigration policies.”[xvii] Mendoza Sánchez states that “to face this new reality, the Mexican Consular Diplomacy has engaged in the largest mobilization of its history with extraordinary programs… [with] the objectives of defending undocumented Mexican migrants´ rights and interests, and supporting them for better integration into their host communities.”[xviii] He also describes some of Consular Diplomacy´s most-forward-looking programs developed to take care of the Mexican community's needs during difficult times. The Ambassador recommends the following:
In this chapter, Ambassador Mendoza Sánchez implicitly highlights one of the essential features of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy: its adaptability and scalability. As seen in Figure 1, most of the programs described in the chapter started in one or two consulates. After having good results, they were slowly expanded into a country-wide operation at all 50 consulates, and sometimes in other countries with large Mexican populations. [i] Mendoza Sánchez, Juan Carlos, “La diplomacia consular ante la demografía y la sociedad de Estados Unidos en el siglo XXI” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, Rafael Fernández de Castro (coord.), Mexico, 2018, p. 154. [ii] Ibid. p. 154-155. [iii] Ibid. p. 157-158. [iv] Ibid. p. 159. [v] Ibid. p. 161. [vi] Ibid. 163. [vii] Ibid. p. 164. [viii] Ibid. p. 165. [ix] Ibid. p. 165-166 [x] Ibid. p. 165 [xi] Ibid. p. 167. [xii] Ibid. p. 168. [xiii] The LRAs are signed by the Consulates of Mexico and DHS agencies. Border LRAs also include the participation of the National Migration Institute of Mexico. Find a public version of the 9 border LRAs here. [xiv] Ibid. p. 169-170. [xv] To learn more about Mexico`s government engagement with its diaspora, read the multiple publications of Alexandra Delano included in Google Scholar. See also Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior # 107 Comunidades Mexicanas en el Exterior, May-August 2016; de Cossío Díaz, Roger, et al., Mexicanos en el Exterior: Trayectoria y perspectivas 1990-2010, Instituto Matías Romero, 2010; Laglagaron, Laura, Protection through Integration: The Mexican Government Efforts to Aid Migrants in the United States, Migration Policy Institute, January 2010; and Rannveig Mendoza, Dovelyn and Kathleen Newland, Developing a Road Map for Engaging Diasporas in Development: A Handbook for Policymakers and Practitioners in Home and Host Countries, International Organization for Migration and Migration Policy Institute, 2012. [xvi] Ibid. p. 179. [xvii] Ibid. p. 180. [xviii] Ibid. p. 180. [xix] Ibid. p. 181. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company.   In this post I analyze the chapter “Mexico´s Integral Consular Management in the United States” written by Francisco Javier Díaz de León and Víctor Peláez Millán of the book La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump (Mexican Consular Diplomacy in Trump´s era). In this chapter, Díaz de León and Peláez Millán evaluate Mexico’s comprehensive consular administration in the United States. They conclude that even though it has been able to face challenges and adapt to new circumstances, it lacks a long-term strategic vision. The chapter is divided into three sections:
In the first section, Díaz de León and Peláez Millán analyze the political context and the Mexican community’s conditions during Donald Trump’s presidency. They highlight the permanent fear experienced by Mexicans, particularly those undocumented, as a result of the aggressive Anti-immigrant and Anti-Mexican rhetoric and policies, at all levels, including some segments of U.S. society. The authors identify the “legitimacy of bullying” against Mexicans across the nation, starting from the White House. Following the President’s lead, many local, county, and state authorities and politicians presented anti-immigrant actions to curb immigration. Simultaneously, the authors indicate that “the Mexican diaspora is not alone; it has the support of a wide range of organizations and collaboration networks of civil rights and pro-immigration groups, legal representation, community development, [and] educational, health and financial services providers…”[i] This support is the result of the work of the 50 Mexican consulates that, since 1990, included community affairs activities to the traditional protection and documentation services.[ii] Recognizing this new situation, in early 2017, the government of Mexico authorized more than 50 million dollars to implement the new strategy entitled Fortalecimiento para la Atención a Mexicanos en Estados Unidos (Strengthened Assistance to Mexicans in the United States), also referred to as FAMEU. Its objective was to support the Mexican community in the United States during these trying times.[iii] Some of the strategy results in 2017 were the establishment of the Centros de Defensoría (Legal Defense Centers) that provided advice to more than 580,000 people and offered legal assistance and representation to 29,000 Mexicans.[iv] Besides, the Centro de Información y Asistencia a Mexicanos (CIAM), Mexico’s 24 hours consular assistance calling center, received nearly 300,000 phone calls, and the Ventanilla de Asesoría Financiera (Financial Advice Desk) benefitted more than 124,000 Mexicans.[v] 2. Integral Consular Diplomacy Management. In the chapter’s second part, Díaz de León and Peláez Millán explain that the consulates of Mexico have a comprehensive work that includes three areas: protection, documentation services, and community affairs, also know as the consular tripod. The authors incorporate to the concept of Mexico’s Consular Diplomacy additional objectives: improve the Mexican community’s well-being and promote their empowerment and inclusion to the host society.[vi] This is an extra element to the Consular Diplomacy ideas that Daniel Hernández Joseph and Reyna Torres Mendivil present in their book’s respective chapters. Díaz de León and Peláez Millán explain that in recent years, the consular network executed an innovation process to improve the quality of its services.[vii] Some of the results were:
Nevertheless, the authors recognize lagging areas, such as training, budget planning, computing equipment, and administrative systems’ reengineering.[ix] Díaz de León and Peláez Millán state that it is indispensable to identify ways to improve and maximize the use of available resources in addition to work with new partners. It will allow the consulates to respond to the immediate needs of the Mexican community while focusing on the strategic goal of promoting their empowerment and integration.[x] 3. Areas of opportunities: Strategic Vision of Mexico’s comprehensive consular management. Regarding areas of opportunities, the authors of the chapter distinguish the following three: a) Assuming a proactive role in the construction of a favorable ecosystem for the Mexican Diaspora. b) Establishing a systematic outreach mechanism towards the 23 million Mexican-American. c) Strengthening the consulate’s political activities that will add value to Mexico’s Consular Diplomacy. The critical element is to incorporate these prospects and the consular services improvement process into a long-term strategic vision that will allow the consulate to achieve the overall foreign policy objectives proactively. Díaz de León and Peláez Millán conclude that the Mexican community appreciates and trusts the Mexican consular network.[xi] Also, Mexico’s Consular Diplomacy enjoys “the legitimacy and credibility to confront the current challenges and take advantage of the opportunities, regardless of U.S. immigration policies and activities.”[xii] Its most significant challenge is to develop a far-reaching plan to benefit the Mexican community north of the border. This reading is a valuable contribution to the concept of the Consular Diplomacy of Mexico as the authors incorporate the Mexican Community’s empowerment as one of its goals. It also poses two crucial questions: a) How to maximize available resources assigned to its consular network? b) How to attract other relevant actors to collaborate in these efforts? Their answer could be the path for the much needed long-term strategic vision. Besides, it is also significant because Díaz de León and Peláez Millán identify three areas of opportunity which could be implemented to continue the transformation of the consular services and programs offered by Mexican consulates in the U.S. [i] Díaz de León, Francisco Javier and Peláez Millán, Victor, “Mexico´s Integral Consular Management in the United States” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, Rafael Fernández de Castro (coord.), Mexico, 2018, p. 131. [ii] Ibid. p. 131. [iii] Ibid. [iv] Ibid. p. 132. [v] Ibid. p. 133. [vi] Ibid. [vii] This is similar to other country´s consular services modernization initiatives, as referred by Heijmans, Maaike and Melissen, Jan, in Foreign Ministries and the Rising Challenge of Consular Affairs: Cinderella in the Limelight, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael, June 7, 2006, p. 7. [viii] Ibid. p. 136. [ix] Ibid. p. 137. [x] Ibid. p. 137-138. [xi] Ibid. p. 148. [xii] Ibid. p. 147. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company.  This post is the review of chapter five of the book La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump (Mexican Consular Diplomacy in Trump´s Era). In the chapter "Consular Diplomacy: A paradigm in the Mexico - U.S. relation" Ambassador Reyna Torres Mendivil writes that in recent years there has being a change in Mexico´s public discourse that recognizes consular activities as one of the critical elements of the country´s foreign policy.[i] She explains that consular services form part of Mexico´s Ministry of Foreign Affairs' main activities. Also gives examples such as the multiple bilateral consular groups that Mexico has and its active participation in multilateral fora like the Global Consular Forum or the Regional Conference on Migration. By distinguishing the unique characteristics of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy, Torres Mendivil aims to contribute to the evolution of the definition of the term. She explains that the dividing lines between the diplomatic and consular activities have almost erased. The Ambassador revised the diplomatic functions of the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations and found out that of the 13 activities described for a consulate, three are similar to the ones of an Embassy.[ii] Then presents examples of the Mexican consulates´ diplomatic functions.[iii] Torres Mendivil determines that Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy replicates, supports, and compliments at the local level the Embassy´s activities in Washington. And in some cases, these local collaborations later on become formal bilateral agreements.[iv] The Ambassador explains that the need for protection and empowerment of the community pushed the consulates to build bridges with local authorities and even U.S. citizens and other non-traditional actors.[v] In addition to the tripod or regular consular activities,[vi] Torres Mendivil includes a fourth element of the consular action plan: Public Diplomacy. Its objective is the promotion of the image of Mexico. This new dimension is what explains the development from traditional consular assistance into a full-swing Consular Diplomacy.[vii] Here is a diagram of this evolution:  The Ambassador explains how Mexico´s consular network implements the country´s Public Diplomacy. She gives different examples of foreign policy activities via Consular Diplomacy, including the collaboration with non-traditional actors such “as shelters for domestic violence victims, financial and credit organizations and religious institutions of all denominations.”[i].
Every week, there is consular presence in one or more media outlets, including scheduled radio and TV programs, where consular officers share relevant information to the Mexican community and the general public. She explains that Mexico has exchange programs similar to those offered by the U.S. (International Visitor Leadership Program), Australia (International Media Visits), and Spain (Programa Internacional de Visitantes). The country developed the “Jornadas Informativas”[ii] , also knowns as IME´s conferences and organized the firsts visits to Mexico for Dreamers in 2014 and 2015. [iii] Additionally, Torres Mendivil explains that the consular network makes enormous efforts to keep alive and visible traditional cultural celebrations. Even though it is hard to measure, she states that there was some influence by Mexico´s consular offices in the popularity of the Day of the Death in the U.S., that end up in the creation of the Disney movie “Coco”.[iv] The political use of anti-immigrant sentiments is not new. It has compelled the consulates to be more strategic and resourceful to protect and empower the Mexican community in the U.S. Ironically, the current administration heavy-handed anti-immigration actions have resulted in greater sympathies and a better understanding of the migrant community reality in the country. At the end of the chapter, Ambassador Torres Mendivil proposes developing the consular network 2.0, which has to be visualized as a bilateral relationship at the local level (relación bilateral al nivel de cancha).[v] It will have to include outreach to multiple actors and local networks. In the end, this will result in a more positive image for Mexico and its diaspora. In the end, a solid consular diplomacy shields Mexico during challenging times, like the one we are living during the Trump administration. The chapter details Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy, adding new characteristics. More importantly, it proposes some ideas for developing a definition of the term, considering the country´s experience and practice. Torres Mendivil briefly mentioned a topic that has developed thru time, which is the popularity of the Day of the Dead in the United States and its implications for Public Diplomacy. I think should be analyzed further. What do you think? If we summarize the previous chapter by Ambassador Hernández Joseph together with the one written by Ambassador Torres Mendivil, three elements of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy stand out:
These elements could be used to further elaborate a definition of Consular Diplomacy, from the perspective of Mexico´s practice. In the next post, I will review chapter 6 of the book La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump titled “Mexican Comprehensive Consular Management in the United States. Its evolution for the service of the diaspora and its strategic objectives.” [i] Torres Mendivil, Reyna, “Consular Diplomacy: A paradigm in the Mexico - U.S. relation” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, 2018, p. 109. [ii] Torres Mendivil, “Consular Diplomacy: A paradigm in the Mexico - U.S. relation”, p. 111. [iii] Torres Mendivil, p. 113-115. [iv] Torres Mendivil, p. 115. [v] Ibid. p. 116. [vi] For Mexico´s consular affairs, tripod or regular consular activities includes documentary services and consular protection for nationals, as well as community affairs activities organized under the umbrella of the Institute of Mexicans Abroad (IME). [vii] Ibid. p. 117. [i] Ibid. p. 119-120. [ii] For a brief description in English of the Jornadas Informativas see ´Migrant-Focus Conferences` on page 19 of the paper Protection through Integration: The Mexican Government's Efforts to Aid Migrants in the United States. [iii] Ibid. p. 119. [iv] Ibid. p. 120. [v] Ibid. p. 123. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company  In this chapter of the book La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump (Mexican Consular Diplomacy in Trump´s Era), Ambassador Daniel Hernández Joseph makes an excellent overview of Mexico’s diplomacy confronting the ever-changing immigration issue in the United States. He identifies elements, as he calls them, that worked well in the past, and some that they did not, that could be used in responding to the challenge that Trump´s administration presents.
Hernández Joseph does an excellent job of synthesizing the most critical periods in the history of Mexico-U.S. migration, which includes Mexico´s most relevant actions. He divides the phases as follow:
By focusing on Mexico’s consular protection of its nationals in the U.S., Ambassador Hernández Joseph highlights the attributes of the rising Consular Diplomacy: its relevance to the country´s overall foreign policy goals and its increase visibility. Therefore, this chapter is valuable as it presents the evolution of the concept of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy. He explains some of Mexico´s challenges regarding immigration policies and attitudes in the United States, such as the 1930s massive deportation of Mexicans, and the period of bilateral agreements like the Bracero program, that ran from 1942 until 1964. The Ambassador acknowledges the value of the two-way dialogue and the importance of agreements, even if there is no full compliance. Hernández Joseph also recognizes the efforts undertaken by the government of Mexico to promote the empowerment of the Mexican community north of the border, indicating that it is one of the critical elements of its Consular Diplomacy. Ambassador Hernández Joseph also acknowledges that an area where Mexico has not succeeded is in improving its image in the United States; notably, it has failed in attaining the recognition by the U.S. society of the contributions made by the Mexican community to the country´s wellbeing.[ii] From Mexico´s previous experiences, the Ambassador identifies four elements that helped the country defend its interests in the United States:
I agree that these four lessons are essential tools that could be displayed to confront the current anti-immigrant movement in the United States, as part of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy. To conclude, Ambassador Hernández Joseph states that in “…today´s environment, the biggest challenge is to make that the bilateral dialogue effectively results in benefits and protection of the interests of the migrants.”[iv] As we can see, Mexico´s practice of Consular Diplomacy is broader and deeper than the recognized definition of the term described by Maaike Okano-Heijmans.[v] In this case, as a country that has a large population living overseas, migration bilateral negotiations and issues are the core of its Consular Diplomacy efforts. And it is essential to remember that the agreements and actions have to be brought to the operational level by each consulate. It is remarkable to realize that some of these activities that are now considered Consular Diplomacy were already being implemented by the consulates of Mexico in the United States a century ago. So we need a reevaluation of these activities in light of this new academic framework. An exciting twist about Consular Diplomacy that needs to be further explored is that while the center of the actions is to assist and protect its own citizens abroad, most of the consular activities are undertaken via partnerships with local organizations, authorities, and citizens of the host country. So here we have a case of Public Diplomacy with the foreign policy objective of helping its nationals overseas, with the support of local actors. I recommend this chapter because it presents a summary of Mexico´s consular protection activities in the United States and identifies lessons for today´s Consular Diplomacy challenges. [i] Hernández Joseph, Daniel, “Lecciones de la protección consular para la diplomacia consular” in La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en los tiempos de Trump, 2018 p. 92-95. [ii] Hernández Joseph, Daniel, “Lecciones”, 2018 p. 103. [iii] Hernández Joseph, Daniel, Ibid. p. 103-105. [iv] Hernández Joseph, Daniel, Ibid. p. 105. [v] See previous post on Consular Diplomacy LINK and Okano-Heijmans, Maaike, “Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy”, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ´Clingendael´, February 2010, p.1. DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer, or company. 
|
Rodrigo Márquez LartigueDiplomat interested in the development of Consular and Public Diplomacies. Archives
May 2022
Categories
All
|
