Today is the third anniversary of my blog. As I mentioned in the second-anniversary blog post, it has been a roller-coaster ride with tremendous ups and a few downs.
 
Three years does not seem a lot of time, but many things have changed, for better or worse. I started the blog in September 2020, when the world was closed due to the pandemic. However, significant efforts were made to find a vaccine, thus allowing the world to reopen slowly, even after a series of surges generated by new variants of the virus.
 
For a few years, the world, especially the great powers, has slowly turned economic, financial, data, and people exchanges into geopolitical weapons. To learn more, check out the great work The Power Atlas: Seven battlegrounds of a networked world. Some scholars state that a new era of deglobalization is moving forward as more countries build barriers to the free flow of trade, data, services, and people. The securitization of the economy, particularly semiconductors, critical minerals, and digital technology, is impacting the whole planet.
 
The disruption of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the exponential race to launch the system that could be the winner has turned the world upside down. There is not a day when a new large language model is not released that supposedly will outperform all others. Students and teachers struggle to find the right approach to using AI, while many workers feel that machine learning will take their jobs and livelihoods. Even though many have asked to pause the development of AI, the race is growing exponentially while governments, societies, and people are trying to make sense of it and find the best approaches to regulate it.
 
An interesting turn is the great concern of AI´s ethics. I clearly understand the worries about making AI work ethically. However, that level of concern about ethical behavior is not shown when talking about humans, governments, and organizations. Why do we not ask for ethical regulations of politicians and governments? Is fighting discrimination in the real world easier than in the digital realm?
 
Three years ago, zoom diplomacy, vaccine diplomacy, and AI diplomacy were brand new terms. Today, even after the reopening of the world, most of the meetings worldwide are being held online, saving money and time but missing the human connection. Digital nomads have turned the globe into their offices, and many people have yet to return, if they ever do, to an office building.
 
Nowadays, diplomacy might be living its fifth evolutionary tipping point, with the confrontation between traditional views of sovereignty and innovative forms of global governance (Neumann, 2020). The big problem is that time is running out, particularly regarding climate change. Just read the headlines this summer regarding the scorching temperatures worldwide.
 
In terms of public diplomacy, the changes in the last years have been difficult to adjust. The transformation of Twitter into something else impacts the digital strategies of many countries, especially for basic accounts. Closing the door of data for research purposes is making it more challenging to listen and engage with audiences. The arrival of deep fakes, like Pope Francis wearing a puffer white jacket, is affecting the credibility of social media, reducing opportunities for governments to engage with foreign audiences. Disinformation is breaking havoc and helping radical views of people, politicians, and governments, making it more difficult to find common ground and collaborations.
 
Regarding consular diplomacy, the pandemic pushed it into the forefront of every ministry of foreign affairs. Foreign ministers and public servants at home, ambassadors, diplomats, and consular officers overseas all work together to help stranded citizens abroad while countries close their borders. Many MFAs are still struggling to meet the demand for documentary services, as the backlog of visas, passports, and other consular documents has not been solved. 
 
Lately, there has been a growing amount of research on consular diplomacy, but the field has not yet matured. Many studies have identified consular services as a prime target for using AI systems to manage them.
 
Despite the challenges that humanity confronts today, blogging has been a great experience that has opened the door to things I would not have thought of. Here are some of the milestones that I have achieved in the last three years of having my blog: 

• Publishing my article Beyond Traditional Boundaries: The Origins and Features of the Public-Consular Diplomacy of Mexico in the Journal of Public Diplomacy.  
• Teaching has been an extraordinary experience, full of challenges and rewards.
• Connecting with scholars and practitioners from around the world, some of whom I now call friends, has been extremely rewarding, allowing me to expand my ideas. 
• Writing has not been easy, especially if you do it in another language, but it has pushed me to think deeply about the influence of languages in the world, diplomacy, and my own life. I even got Writer´s block!
• Learning has been amazing, from pedagogical techniques to the intricacies of academic publishing, blogging, SEO strategies, and lately, everything about AI.
• Reading a substantial number of articles, books, studies, blogs, and even tweets to write about current events and apply new teaching pedagogies. 
• Experimenting with new artificial intelligence applications. See below for one example. 
• Participating and presenting at various international conventions. 
• Sharing ideas, bibliography, resources, and some of Mexico´s key experiences.

 
I am optimistic that the next three years will be better than the last, maybe just because we are reaching a breaking point. But also because people worldwide want a better future for themselves and their children.
 
Neumann, I. B (2020). Diplomatic tense: A social evolutionary perspective on diplomacy. Manchester Univesity Press.
 
Experimenting with AI 
​
Below is a list created by generative AI about the significant milestones of diplomacy in the last three years. Do you agree with the results?
 
Prompt: You are a professor of diplomatic studies. Identify the major changes in the practice of diplomacy that have occurred since January 2020, giving a brief description and using bullets. Please be specific and concise.
 
Bing.chat (creative mode) response:
Some of the major changes in the practice of diplomacy that have occurred since January 2020 are:

• The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and its global impact, which challenged the multilateral cooperation and coordination, as well as the health and humanitarian response of the UN and other international organizations.
• The rise of tensions and conflicts in various regions, such as the Middle East, Africa, and Asia, which required diplomatic efforts to prevent escalation and promote dialogue and peace. Some examples are the Iran nuclear deal, the Libya civil war, the Ethiopia-Eritrea border dispute, and the India-China border standoff.
• The shift in the U.S. foreign policy under the Biden administration, which signaled a return to multilateralism and engagement with allies and partners, as well as a renewed commitment to human rights, democracy, and climate action.
• The emergence of new issues and challenges that require global cooperation and innovation, such as cyber security, digital diplomacy, artificial intelligence, and space exploration.

 
Bard by Google: 
Sure, here are the major changes in the practice of diplomacy that have occurred since January 2020:

• The rise of virtual diplomacy: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced diplomats to conduct much of their work online, through video conferencing and other virtual platforms. This has led to a new normal for diplomacy, with many experts predicting that virtual diplomacy will continue to be an important tool even after the pandemic is over.
• The increasing importance of soft power: In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries have turned to soft power, such as cultural diplomacy and educational exchanges, to maintain their influence abroad. This is because soft power is seen as a more effective way to build relationships and cooperation in the long term.
• The growing role of non-state actors: Non-state actors, such as international organizations, businesses, and civil society groups, are playing an increasingly important role in diplomacy. This is because they often have more expertise and resources than governments, and they can be more nimble and flexible in responding to challenges.
• The need for more inclusive diplomacy: The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for more inclusive diplomacy that takes into account the needs and concerns of all stakeholders. This includes women, youth, and marginalized groups.
• The challenges of cyber diplomacy: The rise of cyberwarfare and other forms of cyber threats has created new challenges for diplomacy. Governments are now grappling with how to deter and respond to these threats in a way that does not escalate tensions.

These are just some of the major changes that have occurred in the practice of diplomacy since January 2020. It remains to be seen how these changes will shape diplomacy in the years to come
 
Perplexity
Major changes in the practice of diplomacy since January 2020 include:

• Diplomacy during the COVID-19 pandemic: The pandemic has affected the way diplomacy is conducted, with many meetings and negotiations taking place virtually
• Diplomatic transformation: The Trump administration's attacks on U.S. diplomacy and decades of neglect have led to a need for a renewal of diplomatic capacity, with a focus on reinventing diplomacy for a new era 
• U.S.-China relations: The relationship between the U.S. and China has become increasingly tense, with China asserting itself more aggressively and the U.S. taking a more confrontational approach
• Emerging issues in economic diplomacy: Economic diplomacy has become more important, with countries using development aid, multilateral institutions, economic sanctions, and trade barriers to achieve their goals

 
Overall, the changing nature of diplomacy in the 21st century requires sustained attention and adaptation to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow.


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.

 UPDATED JULY 2023

When I started the blog, I did not know a lot of articles and studies about consular diplomacy. I have compiled some resources about the subject in the last two years. The focus is on consular activities related to diplomacy and foreign policy, with a Mexican tilt. Below are some of the works I have identified, which I will update every few months.
 
This list is in alphabetical order but incomplete, and I would greatly appreciate any suggestions. Please feel free to send them in the comments section below or via email. 
 
I apologize for not using any reference-management software, but I do not know how to integrate it into the blog. 
 
July 2023 update:

BOOK CHAPTERS. 
 
Arredondo, R. (2023). Las Relaciones Consulares. In Ricardo Arredondo, Diplomacia. Teoría y Práctica, (pp. 315-374). Aranzadi.
 
Celorio, M. (2018). El papel de la diplomacia consular en el contexto transfronterizo: el caso de la CaliBaja. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 271-285). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Díaz de León, F. J. & Peláez Millán, V. (2018). La gestión consular integral mexicana en Estados Unidos. Su evolución al servicio de la diáspora y sus objetivos estratégicos. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 125-152). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
González Gutiérrez, C. & Schumacher, M. E. (1998). La cooperación Internacional de México con los mexicano-americanos en Estados Unidos: El caso del Programa para las Comunidades Mexicanas en el Extranjero. In Olga Pellicer & Rafael Fernández de Castro (coords.), México y Estados Unidos: Las rutas de la cooperación, (p- 1-23). Instituto Matías Romero and ITAM. 
 
Fernández, A. M. (2011). Consular Affairs in an Integrated Europe. In Jan Melissen and Ana Mar Fernández, Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, (pp. 97-114). Martinus Nijhoff. 
 
Fernández Pasarín, A. M. (2015). Towards an EU Consular Policy. In David Spence and Josef Bátora (eds.), The European External Action Service: European Diplomacy Post-Westphalia, (pp. 356-369). Palgrave Macmillan. 
 
García y Griego, M. & Verea Campos, M. (1998). Colaboración sin concordancia: La migración en la nueva agenda bilateral México-Estados Unidos. In Mónica Verea Campos, Rafael Fernández de Castro & Sidney Wintraub (coords.), Nueva Agenda Bilateral en la Relación México-Estados Unidos, (pp. 107-134). Fondo de Cultura Económica 
 
Hernández Joseph, D. (2018). Lecciones de la protección consular para la diplomacia consular. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 91-108). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Mendoza Sánchez, J. C. (2018). La diplomacia consular ante la demografía y la sociedad de Estados Unidos en el siglo XXI. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 153-183). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Tripp, J. O. (2018). La diplomacia consular mexicana y los riesgos de la hidrocefalia administrativa. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 217-229). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
JOURNAL ARTICLES
 
Chabat, J. (1987). Algunas reflexiones en torno al papel de los consulados en la actual coyuntura. Carta de Política Exterior Mexicana, 7(2).
 
Fernández, A. M. (2008). Consular Affairs in the EU: Visa Policy as a Catalyst for Integration? The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 3(1), p. 21-35.
https://doi.org/10.1163/187119008X266164
 
Fernández, A. M. (2009). Local consular cooperation: Administrating EU internal security abroad. European Foreign Affairs Review, 14(4), p. 591-606.
 
Fernández Pasarín, A. M. (2010). La dimension externa del Espacio de Libertad, Seguridad y Justicia: el caso de la cooperación consular local. Revista CIDOB d’Afers Internacionals, núm. 91, p. 87-104. OPEN ACCESS (In Spanish). 
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (1998). Mexicans in the United States: An Incipient Diaspora. Voices of Mexico (43). OPEN ACCESS.
 
Maftel, J. (2020). Application of the Principle of Mutual Consent in Consular Relations between States. Acta Universitatis Danubius, 16(2), p. 88-105. OPEN ACCESS.
 
Melissen, J. (2020). Consular diplomacy's first challenge: Communicating assistance to nationals abroad. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 7(2), p. 217-228. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.298  OPEN ACCESS.
 
Muro Ruiz, E. (2012). La diplomacia federativa de los gobiernos locales y los consulados mexicanos en Estados Unidos de América, en un multiculturalismo latino. Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de México, 60(254), p. 29-56. https://doi.org/10.22201/fder.24488933e.2010.254.30192
 
Potter, P. (1926). The Future of the Consular Office. American Political Science Review, 20(2), p. 284-298. 
 
Puente, J.I. (1930, January). The Nature of the Consular Establishment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 78, p. 321-345. OPEN ACCESS.
 
Romero Vara, L., Alfaro Muirhead, A.C., Hudson Frías, E., & Aguirre Azócar, D. (2021). Digital Diplomacy and COVID-19: An Exploratory Approximation towards Interaction and Consular Assistance on Twitter. Comunicación y Sociedad, e7960. https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v2021.7960. OPEN ACCESS.
 
Saliceti, A. I. (2011). The Protection of EU Citizens Abroad: Accountability, Rule of Law, Role of Consular and Diplomatic Services. European Public Law, 17(1), pp. 91-109. 
 
Schiavon, J. (2015). Consular Protection as State Policy to Protect Mexican and Central American Migrants. Central America-North America Migration Dialogue (CANAMID) Policy Brief #7.
 
GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS 
 
Acuerdo Interinstitucional entre los Ministerios de Relaciones Exteriores de los Estados Parte de la Alianza del Pacífico pare el Establecimiento de Medidas de Cooperación Consular en Materia de Asistencia Consular. (2014, February 10). (In Spanish).
 
Agreement on Consular Assistance and Co-Operation between the Government of the Republic of Latvia, the Government of the Republic of Estonia and the Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2019, December 6). 
 
Instituto Matías Romero (2018, October). Mexico and California’s Strategic Relationship: True Solidarity in Times of Adversity. Foreign Policy Brief 15. Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. 
 
Mendoza Yescas, J. & Sotres Brito, X. (2022, August). Acceptance of High-Security Consular Identification Card in Arizona: An Example of Consular Diplomacy. Foreign Policy Brief 21. Instituto Matías Romero. Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores.
 

 BIBLIOGRAPHY LIST (04/23)
 
BOOKS:
 
Bada, X. & Gleeson, S. (eds.). (2019). Accountability Across Borders: Migrant Rights in North America. The University of Texas Press. 
 
Bada, X. & Gleeson, S. (2023). Scaling Migrant Worker Rights: How Advocates Collaborate and Contest State Power. The University of California Press. Especially chapter two: The Mexican Consular Network as an Advocacy Institution. OPEN ACCESS.

Berridge, G.R. (2022). Diplomacy: Theory and Practice. 6th edition. Palgrave Macmillan and the DiploFoundation. 
 
Carrigan, W.D. and Webb, C. (2013). Forgotten Dead: Mob violence against Mexicans in the United States, 1848-1928. Oxford University Press. 
 
Casey, C. A. (2020). Nationals Abroad Globalization, Individual Rights, and the Making of Modern International Law. Cambridge University Press
 
Délano Alonso, A. (2018). From here and there: Diaspora Policies, Integration, and Social Rights Beyond Borders. Oxford University Press. 
 
De Goey, F. (2014). Consuls and the Institutions of Global Capitalism. Routledge.
 
Fernández de Castro, R, (coord.). (2018). La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump. El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Gómez Arnau, R. (1990). México y la proteccion de sus nacionales en Estados Unidos. Centro de Investigaciones sobre Estados Unidos de América, UNAM. (IN SPANISH)
 
Græger, N. and Leira, H. (eds.). (2020). The Duty of Care in International Relations: Protecting Citizens Beyond the Border. Routledge.
 
Heinsen-Roach, E. (2019). Consuls and Captives: Dutch-North African Diplomacy in the Early Modern Mediterranean. University of Rochester Press.
 
Hernández Joseph, D. (2015). Protección Consular Mexicana. Ford Foundation & Miguel Ángel Porrúa. (IN SPANISH)
 
Herz, M. F. (1983). The Consular Dimension of Diplomacy: A Symposium. Institute of the Study of Diplomacy, Georgetown University. 
 
Hofstadter, C. G. (2020). Modern Consuls, Local Communities and Globalization. Palgrave Pivot.
 
Lafleur, J.M. & Vintila, D. (2020). Migration and Social Protection in Europe and Beyond (Volume 2): Comparing Consular Services and Diaspora Policies. IMISCOE Research Series. OPEN ACCESS

Melissen, J. (2005). The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice. In J. Melissen (ed.), The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations. (pp. 3-27). Palgrave MacMillan. 
 
Melissen, J. and Fernandez, A. M., (eds.) (2011). Consular Affairs and Diplomacy. Martinus Nijhoff. 
 
Moyano Pahissa, Á. (1989). Antología Protección Consular a Mexicanos en los Estados Unidos 1849-1900.Archivo Histórico Diplomático Mexicano, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. (IN SPANISH)
 
Muñoz Martinez, M. (2018). The Injustice Never Leaves You: Ant-Mexican Violence in Texas. Harvard University Press. 
 
Platt, D. C. M. (1971). The Cinderella Service: British Consuls since 1825. Archon Books. 
 
BOOK CHAPTERS
 
Berridge. G. R. (2022). Consulates. In G.R. Berridge, Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, (pp. 141-157). Palgrave and DiploFoundation.
 
Calva Ruíz, V. (2018). Diplomacia Consular y acercamiento con socios estratégicos. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 205-216). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH) 
 
De Moya, M. & Bravo, V. (2021). Conclusion: Lessons Learned and Future Research. In V. Bravo & M. De Moya (eds), Latin American Diasporas in Public Diplomacy, (pp. 311-324). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74564-6_13
 
Fernández de Castro, R. & Hernández Hernández, A. (2018). Introducción. In R. Fernández de Castro(coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 17-25). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Fernández Pasarin, A. M. (2016). Consulates and Consular Diplomacy. In C. Constantinou, P. Kerr & P. Sharp (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Diplomacy. Sage Publishing. 
 
Gómez Zapata, T. (2021). Civil Society as an Advocate of Mexicans and Latinos in the United States: The Chicago Case. In V. Bravo & M. De Moya (eds.), Latin American Diasporas in Public Diplomacy, (pp. 189-213). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74564-6_8
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (1997). Decentralized Diplomacy: The Role of Consular Offices in Mexico´s Relations with its Diaspora. In Rodolfo O de la Garza and Jesús Velasco (eds.), Bridging the Border: Transforming Mexico-U.S. Relations, (pp. 49-67). Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (2006). Del acercamiento a la inclusión institucional: la experiencia del Insittuto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. In C. Gónzalez Gutiérrez (coord.), Relaciones Estado-diáspora: aproximaciones desde cuatro continentes, Tomo 1, (pp. 181-220). Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. (IN SPANISH)
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (2018). El significado de una relación especial: las relaciones de México con Texas a la luz de su experiencia en California. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 253-269). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Heijmans, M. y Melissen, J. (2007). MFAs and the Rising Challenge of Consular Affairs Cinderella in the Limelight. En K.S. Rana y J. Kurbalija (eds.), Foreign Ministries Managing Diplomatic Networks and Optimizing Value (pp. 192-206). Malta: DiploFoundation.
 
Laveaga Rendón, R. (2018). Mantenerse a la Vanguardia: Desafío para los Consulados de México en Estados Unidos. In R. Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 231-251). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Leira, H. & Græger, N. (2020). Introduction: The Duty of Care in International Relations. In N. Græger & H. Leira (eds.), The Duty of Care in International Relations: Protecting Citizens Beyond the Border, (pp. 1-17). Routledge.
 
Leira, H. & Neumann, I. B. (2011). The Many Past Lives of the Consul. In J. Melissen & A. M. Fernández, (eds.), Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, (pp. 223-246). Martinus Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188761.i-334.69
 
Leira, H. & Neumann, I. B. (2017). Consular Diplomacy. In P. Kerr & G. Wiseman (eds.), Diplomacy in a globalizing world: Theories and Practice. 2nd edition. Oxford University Press. 
 
Melissen, J. (2011). Introduction The Consular Dimension of Diplomacy. In J. Melissen & A. M. Fernández, (eds.), Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, (pp. 1-17). Martinus Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188761.i-334.6
 
Melissen, J. (2022). Consular Diplomacy in the Era of Growing Mobility. In Christian Lequesne (ed.), Ministries of Foreign Affairs in the World. Diplomatic Series, Vol. 18. (pp. 251-262). Brill Nijhoff.

Mendoza Sánchez, J. C., & Cespedes Cantú, A. (2021). Innovating through Engagement: Mexico’s Model to Support Its Diaspora. In L. Kennedy (ed.), Routledge International Handbook of Diaspora Diplomacy. Routledge.
 
Neumann, I. and Leira, H. (2020). The evolution of the consular institution. In I. Neumann, Diplomatic Tense,(pp. 8-25). Manchester University Press. 
 
Okano-Heijmans, M. (2011). Changes in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy. In J. Melissen & A. M. Fernández, (eds.), Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, (pp. 21-41). Martinus Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188761.i-334.13
 
Okano-Heijmans, M. (2013). Consular Affairs. In A. Cooper et al., (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, (pp. 473-492). Oxford University Press. 
 
Rana, K. S.  (2011). The New Consular Diplomacy. In K. S. Rana, 21st Century Diplomacy. A Practitioner's Guide. Continuum.
 
Schiavon, J. A. & Ordorica R., G. (2018). Las sinergias con otras comunidades: el caso Tricamex. In R.Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 185-203). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Torres Mendivil, R. (2018). La diplomacia consular: un paradigma de la relación México-Estados Unidos. In R.Fernández de Castro (coord.), La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en tiempos de Trump, (pp. 109-124). El Colegio de la Frontera Norte & El Colegio de San Luis. (IN SPANISH)
 
Ulbert, J. (2011). A History of the French Consular Services. In J. Melissen & A. M. Fernández, (eds.),Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, (pp. 303-324). Martinus Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004188761.i-334.96
 
Valenzuela-Moreno, K. A. (2021). Transnational Social Protection and the Role of Countries of Origin: The Cases of Mexico, Guatemala, Bolivia, and Ecuador. In V. Bravo & M. De Moya (eds.), Latin American Diasporas in Public Diplomacy, (pp. 27-51). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74564-6_2
 
JOURNAL ARTICLES
 
Bada, X., & Gleeson, S. (2015). A New Approach to Migrant Labor Rights Enforcement. Labor Studies Journal,40(1), 32-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160449X14565112.
 
Birka, I., Klavinš D., & Kits, R. (2022). Duty of Care: Consular Diplomacy Response of Baltic and Nordic Countries to COVID-19. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 17(2022), 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10115.
 
Bravo, V., & De Moya, M. (2018). Mexico’s public diplomacy efforts to engage its diaspora across the border: Case study of the programs, messages and strategies employed by the Mexican Embassy in the United States. Rising Powers Quarterly, 3(3), 173-193. 
 
Cárdenas Suárez, H. (2019). La política consular en Estados Unidos: protección, documentación y vinculacion con las comunidades mexicanas en el exterior. Foro Internacional, LIX(3-4), 1077-1113. https://doi.org/10.24201/fi.v59i3-4.2652. (IN SPANISH)
 
Crosbie, W. (2018). A Consular Code to Supplement the VCCR. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13(2), 233-243. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-11302019
 
Délano, A. (2009). From Limited to Active Engagement: Mexico’s Emigration Policies from a Foreign Policy Perspective. International Migration Review, 43(4), 764-814. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2009.00784.x.
 
Délano, A. (2014). The diffusion of diaspora engagement policies: A Latin American agenda. Political Geography, 41, 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2013.11.007.
 
De la Vega Wood, D. A. (2014). Diplomacia consular para el desarrollo humano: una visión desde la agenda democrática. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior 101, May-August, 167-185. (IN SPANISH)
 
Durand, J., Massey, D. S. & Parrado, E. A. (1999). The New Era of Mexican Migration to the United States. The Journal of American History, 86(2), 518-536.
 
Gómez Maganda, G. and Kerber Palma, A. (2016). Atención con perspectiva de género para las comunidades mexicanas en el exterior. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, No. 107, May-August, 185-202. (IN SPANISH) 
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (1999). Fostering Identities: México´s Relations with Its Diaspora. The Journal of American History, 86(2), 545-567. https://doi.org/10.2307/2567045
 
Græger, N. & Lindgren, W. Y. (2018). The Duty of Care for Citizens Abroad: Security and Responsibility in the In Amenas and Fukushima Crises. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13(2), 188-210. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-11302009
 
Hernández Joseph, D. (2012). Mexico’s Concentration Consular Services. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy,7(2), 227-236. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119112X625556.
 
Haugevic, K. (2018). Parental Child Abduction and the State: Identity, Diplomacy and the Duty of Care. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13(2), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-11302010
 
Leira, H. (2018). Caring and Carers: Diplomatic Personnel and the Duty of Care. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13(2), 147-166. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-11302007
 
Leira, H. and de Carvalho, B. (2021). The Intercity Origins of Diplomacy: Consuls, Empires, and the Sea. Diplomatica 3 (1), 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1163/25891774-03010008
 
Lottaz, P. (2020). Going East: Switzerland´s east consular diplomacy toward East and Southeast Asia. Traverse: Zeitschrift für Geschichte = Revue d´historie 27(1), 23-34.
 
Marina Valle, V., Gandoy Vázquez, W. L., and Valenzuela Moreno, K. A. (2020). Ventanillas de Salud: Defeating challenges in healthcare access for Mexican immigrants in the United States. Estudios Fronterizos, 21 (e043). https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2020.1714462
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2023). Beyond Traditional Boundaries: The Origins and Features of the Public-Consular Diplomacy of Mexico. Journal of Public Diplomacy 2(2), 48-68.
 
Martínez-Schuldt, R. D. (2020). Mexican Consular Protection Services across the United States: How Local Social, Economic, and Political Conditions Structure the Sociolegal Support of Emigrants. International Migration Review, 54(4), 1016-1044.
 
Melissen, J. (2020). Consular diplomacy's first challenge: Communicating assistance to nationals abroad. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 7(2), 217-228. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.298

Melissen, J. & Okano-Heijmans, M. (2018). Introduction. Diplomacy and the Duty of Care. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 13(2), 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-23032072
 
Navarro Bernachi, A. (2014). La perspectiva transversal y multilateral de la protección consular. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior (101), May-August, 81-97. (IN SPANISH)
 
Necochea López, R. (2018). Mexico´s health diplomacy and the Ventanilla de Salud program. Latino Studies(16), 482-502. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41276-018-0145-8
 
Okano-Heijmans, M. & Price, C. (2019). Providing consular services to low-skilled migrant workers: partnerships that care. Global Affairs, 5(4-5) 427-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2020.1714462
 
Rangel Gomez, M. G., Tonda, J., Zapata, G. R., Flynn, M., Gany, F., Lara, J., Shapiro, I, & Ballesteros Rosales, C. (2017). Ventanillas de Salud: A Collaborative and Binational Health Access and Preventive Care Program. Frontiers in Public Health 5. 30 June. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00151.
 
Schiavon, J. A. & Cárdenas Alaminos, N. (2014). La proteccón consular de la diáspora mexicana. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior (101), May-August, 43-67. (IN SPANISH)
 
Torres Mendivil, R. (2014). Morfología, tradición y futuro de la práctica consular mexicana. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior 101, May-August, 69-79. (IN SPANISH)
 
Tsinovoi, A. and Adler-Nissen, R. (2018) Inversion of the “Duty of Care”: Diplomacy and the protection of Citizens Abroad, from Pastoral Care to neoliberal Governmentality. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy (13) 2, 211-232. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-11302017
 
Xia, L. (2021). Consular Protection with Chinese Characteristics: Challenges and Solutions. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 16 (2-3), 253-274. https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191X-BJA10068.
 
Valenzuela-Moreno, K. (2019). Los consulados mexicanos en Estados Unidos: Una aproximación desde la protección social. INTERdisciplina, 7(18), 59-79. https://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/inter/article/view/68460/61387.
 
OTHER WORKS
 
Batalova, J. (2008). Mexican Immigrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. 23 April. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/mexican-immigrants-united-states-2006.
 
Bruno, A. y Storrs, K. L. (2005). Consular Identification Cards: Domestic and Foreign Policy Implications, the Mexican Case, and Related Legislation. Congressional Research Services. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/RL32094.pdf.
 
Global Consular Forum. (2016). Seoul Consensus Statement on Consular Cooperation, 27 October.

González, C., Martínez, A. & Purcell, J. (2015). Report: Global Consular Forum 2015, Wilton Park, July. Global Consular Forum.
 
Haynal, G., et al. (2013). The Consular Function in the 21st Century: A report for Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada. Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto. 

Israel, E. & Batalova, J. (2020). Mexican Immigrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. 5 November. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/mexican-immigrants-united-states-2019.
 
Kunz, R. (2008). Mobilising diasporas: A governmentality analysis of the case of Mexico. Working Paper Series, “Glocal Governance and Democracy” 3. Institute of Political Science, University of Lucerne. https://zenodo.org/record/48764?ln=en#.YyZZyC2xBaR. 
 
Laglagaron, L. (2010). Protection through Integration: The Mexican Government’s Efforts to Aid Migrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/publications/IME_FINAL.pdf
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2021). El surgimiento de la Diplomacia Consular: su interpretación desde México. Unpublished essay. (IN SPANISH)
 
Murray, L. (2013). Conference report: Contemporary consular practice trends and challenges, Wilton Park, October. Global Consular Forum. 
 
Noe-Bustamante, L., Flores, A. & Shah, S. (2019). Facts on Hispanics of Mexican origin in the United States, 2017. Pew Hispanic Center. 16 September. https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/fact-sheet/u-s-hispanics-facts-on-mexican-origin-latinos/. 
 
GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS
 
Global Affairs Canada. (2017). Evaluation of the Consular Affairs Program. Diplomacy, Trade and Corporate Evaluation Division, Global Affairs Canada. https://www.international.gc.ca/gac-amc/assets/pdfs/publications/evaluation/2018/cap-pac-eng.pdf
 
Gradilone, E. (2012). Diplomacia Consular 2007 a 2012. Ministério das Relações Exteriores (Brazil) and Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão. https://funag.gov.br/biblioteca-nova/produto/1-182-diplomacia_consular_2007_a_2012

Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. (2018). Población Mexicana en el Mundo: Estadística de la población mexicana en el mundo 2017. 23 July.http://www.ime.gob.mx/estadisticas/mundo/estadistica_poblacion_pruebas.html.
 
Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. (2021). ‘Revista “Casa de México”’. 22 January. 
https://www.gob.mx/ime/articulos/revista-casa-de-mexico.
 
Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. (2019). Fortalecimiento de la Atención a Mexicanos en el Exterior, Libro Blanco 2012-2018. (IN SPANISH)
 
OTHER BLOG POSTS (BESIDES THIS BLOG)
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2021). Public-Consular Diplomacy at its Best: The case of the Mexican Consular ID card program. CPD Blog. 4 February. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/public-consular-diplomacy-its-best-case-mexican-consular-id-card-program.
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2021). Public-Consular Diplomacy That Works: Mexico’s Labor Rights Week in the U.S. CPD Blog. 6 October. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/public-consular-diplomacy-works-mexicos-labor-rights-week-us.
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2022). Public-Consular Diplomacy That Heals: Binational Health Week Program. CPD Blog. 8 June. https://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/blog/public-consular-diplomacy-heals-binational-health-week-program. 
 
​Manor, I. (2022, January 25). Are Consular Tweets a New Form of Crisis Signaling? 
Exploring Digital Diplomacy blog. https://digdipblog.com/2022/01/25/are-consular-tweets-a-new-form-of-crisis-signaling/

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 dedicated to all individuals and institutions participating in the IME's activities and programs through its 20-year history. 
 
On Sunday, April 16, the Institute of Mexicans Abroad (Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior) celebrated its 20th anniversary. On that day in 2003, the government of Mexico published the Decreet that established this new diaspora engagement institution in the Federal Registry.
 
The Institute, also known as the IME (for its acronym in Spanish), revolutionized the relationships between the government of Mexico (especially the executive branch of the federal government) and the Mexican community in the United States and Canada. For the first time in history, Mexican migrants and second-generation and National Hispanic organizations sat at the table by participating in the IME's Advisory Council (known as the Consejo Consultivo del IME or CCIME). 
 
The IME also profoundly transmuted the role of the consulates and hometown associations in their host municipalities and states, engaging with a wide variety of actors from businesses and local authorities to civil society organizations and institutions. They developed effective and long-lasting partnerships to cater to the needs of the Mexican community in North America. Their activities can be classified as a successful public diplomacy effort (Márquez Lartigue, 2023).
 
Background
 
Even though migration to the United States has been a constant in some states in Mexico for over a century, significant changes dramatically transformed the situation in the late 1980s and through the 1990s.
 
The combination of several factors metamorphosed Mexican migrants from temporary workers into a permanent diaspora: 

1. The regularization of more than 2.3 million Mexicans was a result of the enactment of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which generated a boom in family reunification, including the arrival of a significant number of women and children. It also allowed them to travel freely to Mexico and get permanent jobs in urban areas.
2. The migration circularity ended due to greater immigration enforcement operations through the 1990s that resulted from the criminalization of migration violations and growing anti-immigrant sentiments.
3. The expansion of Mexican migrants from all regions of Mexico and their dispersion in every corner of the U.S. turned migration from a regional to a national phenomenon on both sides of the border.
4. Mexico's economic downfall and one of the longest economic booms in the U.S.

 
Besides, the government of Mexico reformed its consular system, including the establishment of the Program of Mexican Communities Abroad in 1990, expanded its consular network, and granted greater autonomy to consular officers to actively engage with Mexican community leaders, local and state authorities, and civil society organizations (González Gutiérrez, 1997). Government officials encouraged the establishment of Hometown Associations and confederations among migrants and Migrants Care Offices (Oficinas de Atención a Migrantes) by Mexican provincial and even municipal authorities. 
 
After the failure to negotiate a migration accord with the U.S. in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the government of Mexico created the National Council for Mexican Communities Abroad in the summer of 2002. One of the council's tasks was to receive recommendations from consultative mechanisms (Diario Oficial de la Federación, 2002).
 
The establishment of the IME
 
In the autumn of 2002, Mexican consulates across the United States and Canada invited migrant community leaders to participate in the selection process of an advisory board that was going to be established as part of the IME.
 
Ayón (2006) explains that the IME was added to traditional consular programs such as documentary services (passports, notary public, and visas) and assistance to distressed citizens because the Institute could "plan, handle, propose, and pursue national and binational strategic goals and respond to the challenges that transcend the consular district" (p. 132).
 
IME's first Executive Director indicated that the institute had three primary functions: information dissemination, empowerment of the communities, and provision of innovative new services that go beyond regular consular programs (González Gutiérrez, 2009).
 
Regarding information distribution, the IME had three major programs: 

1. "Lazos," an electronic information bulletin distributed to more than 12,000 people with news of interest to the migrant community in Mexico, the U.S., and Canada.  (González Gutiérrez, 2009, p. 96). Nowadays, the monthly digital bulletin is called Casa de México. 
2. The Jornadas Informativas, or as Laglagaron (2010) translated the termed Migrant-Focused Conferences (p. 19), conveyed leaders across North America on specific topics from gastronomy to financial education to share experiences and information. This program was also part of the empowerment activities.
3. The network of HTAs and community leaders connected with the consulates and the federal government through the activities of the CCIME.

 
The consular network began offering social services through partnerships with non-governmental organizations, authorities, and even businesses. These services centered on non-traditional areas such as education (Plazas Comunitarias -Basic Adult Education- program, scholarships -IME Becas-, and exchange of teachers, among others), health (centered around the Ventanillas de Salud or Health Desks and the Binational Health Week); financial education and investment of remittances (Financial Advisory Desk -Ventanilla de Asesoría Financiera-, the Three-for-one program, and Directo a Mexico. 
 
The most important task was the empowerment of the Mexican community through the CCIME and participation in the information and services agendas (Ayón 2006, p. 132). 
 
In many ways, the government of Mexico, through its consular network, was already working on most of these programs before the creation of the IME. Notwithstanding, the key innovative aspect of the institute was its advisory council. For the first time, its approximately 120 members from across the U.S. and Canada gathered at least twice a year to prepare recommendations about policies directed at Mexican migrants in North America. The first director of the Institute, Don Cándido Morales, was also a migrant from Oaxaca living In California. 
 
Even though the CCIME had limited responsibilities centered on presenting non-binding recommendations, it provided a national platform for migrant leaders. On the one hand, they meet and engage each other, strengthening their advocacy and organization skills. It was an executive leadership training academy (Ayón, 2006, p. 135). On the other hand, it opened the doors to authorities on both sides of the border at all levels. It facilitated their engagement with civil society and, for some, in political activities. 
 
Giving Mexican migrants a voice and visibility through the CCIME was helpful as it helped expand many of the IME programs, such as the Health Desks and the creation of IME Becas. Also, many board members advocated enacting the overseas absentee vote implementing law in 2005 and the migrant demonstrations of the Spring of 2006.
 
The IME has evolved thought its 20 years of existence, but most of its core functions continue to this day. In 2022, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs launched the 2022-2024 Action Plan for Mexicans living overseas, which contains nearly 40 activities. 
 
IME's successful public diplomacy
 
Without using the term public diplomacy, the IME's activities can be defined as such. Its programs encompass Professor Nicholas Cull's (2019) five elements of public diplomacy listening, advocacy, cultural activities, and educational exchanges. Even there was some international broadcasting in the form of electronic information bulletins.
 
Interestingly, the target audiences were migrants themselves. However, it did not stop there; through its many undertakings, consular offices engaged with all sorts of people and organizations and slowly built long-lasting partnerships. Thus, nowadays, the IME "has about 2,000 partners in Mexico and the USA" (Mendoza Sánchez & Cespedes Cantú, 2021).
 
Another contribution of the IME was that many countries, from Uruguay to Morocco and Türkiye to Colombia, requested meetings and attended some of its activities to learn more about the country's diaspora engagement programs. (Laglagaron, 2010, p. 39; Délano, 2014). The IME generated soft power for Mexico's diplomacy soft power, as it attracted attention around the globe.
 
It has also generated consular partnerships with other Latin American consulates in programs like Binational Health Week and Labor Rights Week that are celebrated across the U.S. every year. With the countries of the Northern Triangle of Central America, several consulates established consular coordination schemes known as Tricamex. 
 
One of the most outstanding achievements of the IME was reducing the barriers between the government and the migrants. After years of hard work, little by little, it has gained the community's trust, which was very little. Significant investments in the modernization of documentary services have also resulted in better quality services. 
 
The Institute also gave way to the rise of Mexico's public-consular diplomacy. To learn more about its origins and features, read my practitioner's essay in the Journal of Public Diplomacy titled Beyond Traditional Boundaries: The Origins and Features of the Public-Consular Diplomacy of Mexico. 
 
References
 
Ayón, D.R. (2006). La política mexicana y la movilización de los migrantes en Estdos Unidos.  In Carlos Gónzalez Gutiérrez (coor.), Relaciones Estado-diáspora: La perspectiva de América Latina y el Caribe. Tomo II, (pp. 113-144). Ciudad de México. Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores.
 
Cull, N. J. (2019). Public Diplomacy: Foundations for Global Engagement in the Digital Age. (Kindle Edition).
 
Délano, A. (2014). The diffusion of diaspora engagement policies: A Latin American agenda. Political Geography, 41, 90-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polgeo.2013.11.007.
 
Diario Oficial de la Federación. (2002, August 8). Acuerdo por el que se crea el Consejo Nacional para las Comunidades Mexicanas en el Exterior. https://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=721574&fecha=08/08/2002#gsc.tab=0
 
Diario Oficial de la Federación. (2003, April 16). Decreto por el que se crea el Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior, con el carácter de órgano administrativo desconcentrado de la Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. https://www.gob.mx/ime/documentos/decreto-por-el-que-se-crea-el-ime
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (1997). Decentralized Diplomacy: The Role of Consular Offices in Mexico´s Relations with its Diaspora. In Rodolfo O de la Garza and Jesús Velasco (eds.), Bridging the Border: Transforming Mexico-U.S. Relations, (pp. 49-67). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. 
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (2006). Introduccion: El papel de los gobiernos. In Carlos Gónzalez Gutiérrez (coor.), Relaciones Estado-diáspora: La perspectiva de América Latina y el Caribe. Tomo II, (pp. 13-42). Ciudad de México. Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores.
 
González Gutiérrez, C. (2009). The Institute of Mexicans Abroad: An Effort to Empower the Diaspora. In Dovelyn Rannverg Agunias (ed.), Closing the Distance: How Governments Strengthen ties with their Diasporas, (pp. 87-98). Washington, DC. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/closing-distance-how-governments-strengthen-ties-their-diasporas
 
Laglagaron, L. (2010). Protection through Integration: The Mexican Government's Efforts to Aid Migrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/default/files/publications/IME_FINAL.pdf
 
Márquez Lartigue, R. (2023). Engaging migrants in the Mexico-US diplomatic relationship: The Institute of Mexicans Abroad. Working paper presented in the ISA 2023 convention. Unpublished. 
 
Mendoza Sánchez, J. C., & Cespedes Cantú, A. (2021). Innovating through Engagement: Mexico’s Model to Support Its Diaspora. In L. Kennedy (ed), Routledge International Handbook of Diaspora Diplomacy (Kindle Edition). Routledge.
 
Terrazas, A. and Papademetriou, D. G. (2010). Reflexiones sobre el compromiso de México con Estados Unidos en materia de migración con énfasis en los programas para la comunidad de mexicanos en el exterior. In Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Mexicanos en el Exterior: Trayectorias y Perspectivas (1990-2010), (pp. 107-139). Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, Instituto Matías Romero.
 
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.
 

 
Maribel (not her real name) went with her family to a Mexican consulate in the U.S. She was there to get a health referral to have a free mammogram at the local health clinic. Besides, her youngest kid, Jaime, needed eyeglasses, so she got a voucher for free prescription glasses from a well-known grocery store. On the same visit, Eduardo, a Guatemalan citizen and Maribel's partner received screenings for blood glucose and blood pressure. All these services were provided by the Ventanilla de Salud program (VDS -Health Desk/Window-)[i], a public-consular diplomacy effort that will celebrate its 20th anniversary next year.
 
Since its creation as a pilot program in Southern California in 2003, the VDS at the Mexican consulates (and mobile units) has provided more than 45.8 million health-related services to 18.3 million people. Its services are not exclusively for Mexicans, so many more people, including U.S. citizens, have benefited from this effort.
 
The VDS does not solve all the health-related barriers and issues faced by the Mexican migrants in the U.S.; however, it certainly alleviates some of their anguish and distress.
 
Background.
 
The primary motivation behind establishing the VDS is the unequal access to health services in the U.S. by Hispanics in general and undocumented migrants in particular, even after the enactment of the Affordable Care Act of 2010. In 2016, 24 million persons did not have health insurance, and the percentage of Hispanics uninsured of the total grew from 29% in 2013 to 40%. In 2019, two out of five Mexican migrants did not have insurance (38%), “compared to 20% of all immigrants and 8% of the U.S. born.”[ii] Two years later, the percentage of uninsured Mexican migrants diminished by 1% to reach 37% in 2021.[iii]
 
In the United States, an uninsured person typically pays full price for medical expenses, while an insured individual will receive negotiated discounts from their insurance, so the cost drops dramatically.
 
The passing of Proposition 187 in California in 1994 significantly impacted the Hispanic community, not only the undocumented Mexican population, although it never came into force.[iv] Most migrants stayed away from medical services due to the fear of being taken away by immigration authorities and the confusion regarding immigration’s public charge, particularly during the Trump Administration.[v]
 
Besides, the creation of the Binational Health Week in 2001 by the government of Mexico and the Health Initiative of the Americas (HIA) gave a big push for establishing a permanent health office at the Mexican consulates that could also provide information year-round (Link to the blog post about the Binational Health Week).
 
However, it was not that easy, as the VDS required having non-official personnel inside the consulate. Raúl Necochea López details the difficulties that had to be overcome to open the Health Desks in the consulates´ offices, as it was “a significant departure from the established restrictive norms about the use of consular resources,”[vi] The biggest issue was the permanent presence of non-consulate personnel at the consular premises.
 
After some time, finally, in February 2002, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mexico accepted the idea, and a pilot program proposal was developed. In 2003, the Consulates of Mexico in San Diego and Los Angeles opened the first VDS as a pilot project. After their initial success, the Ministry of Health of Mexico has provided funds for the program since 2006.
 
Taking advantage of the hundreds of persons that visit the consulates every day was a determining factor for the health institutions in establishing a permanent health office at the consular premises. It provided access to hard-to-reach populations in a secure and culturally appropriate environment. “A key factor in the [partner organizations’] ability to reach this population is the fact that the consulate is generally considered a trustworthy space in the sense that a person´s migration status will not be at risk.”[vii]
 
What is the Health Window?
 
The VDS is a designed space inside the consulate, generally in the public waiting area, attended by personnel of the local partner. The Health Desk provides health-related information and personalized counseling, makes referrals to a health clinic and other specialized services, and offers the opportunity to receive different types of screening. “The VDS program is a multistrategy approach to providing personalized assistance and outreach to Mexican immigrants unfamiliar with the U.S. health system.”[viii]
 
The Health Desk program is a public-private partnership with the participation of Mexico´s Ministry of Health (providing funding and overseeing the program), the Institute of Mexicans Abroad (IME) through the consular network, and local government and non-government health care organizations, such as community health centers, hospitals, universities, migrant-serving institutions, and pharmacies. The local partners provide human and financial resources and knowledge, while the consulates offer a space for their activities.
 
“The aim of this initiative is to build a network of informational windows [Health Desks] to increase knowledge about health and access to services for Mexican migrants and their families residing in the United States.”[ix]
 
The VDS provides the following general services, which vary depending on several issues, most notably the available local resource and existing partnerships:

• “Personal counseling on preventive health
• Health screening [and immunizations]
• Referrals to health services (local health clinics)
• Personalized navigation of health insurance programs.”[x]

 
As the program evolved, more organizations began offering health-related services, from a wide variety of screenings and immunizations to access to quitting smoking programs and referrals to community health clinics. In 2015, the VDS served 1,525,504 persons who received 415,509 screening and 63,084 vaccinations.[xi]
 
The VDS provided a wide variety of information, including health insurance, domestic violence, hypertension, diabetes, substance abuse, obesity, birth control, and mental and women´s health, among other topics.[xii]
 
The evolution of the Heath Desk.
 
After its initial success, the VDS expanded rapidly like other successful consular programs. Eleven consulates established Health Windows between 2004 and 2007. And, from 2008 to 2011, an “additional 38 VDS opened for a total of 50 affiliated with the Mexican consulates that work closely and in partnership with local health-care organizations.”[xiii]
 
Two circumstances helped in the fast expansion of the program. The first one was the creation of a health commission of the Institute of Mexicans Abroad´s Advisory Council -CCIME- in 2003. The advisory council was the first of its type in the government of Mexico.[xiv]
 
The second situation was the increase in the reunification of women and children in the U.S.,[xv] significantly changing the demographics and needs of the Mexican migrant community. Health care has become increasingly critical for new migrant families. For example, in 2013, women were 63% of the people served by the VDS.[xvi]
 
An additional advantage of the Health Desk was that the IME organized several Jornadas Informativas (specific topic conferences) centered on health issues. It later created a special meeting of all VDS partner organizations, which was unique to the program. In December 2020, the 17th Annual meeting of the Health Desk program took place online due to the pandemic.
 
In 2012, a Health Advisory Board was established with nine members to define the priorities of the VDS and make recommendations to promote the program´s sustainability. The board was one of the first to be established to strengthen the programs implemented by the IME.
 
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the VDS played a crucial role in providing information to the community via social media and other forms of communication. In 2021, Mexico´s consular network in the United States helped provide 80,000 COVID-19 vaccines[xvii] not only to the Mexican community but also to Hispanics and from other countries.
 
Through the years, the VDS has continued to evolve. For example:

• In 2019, it established the Continuous Information and Health Report System of Mexicans in the United States (Sistema de Información Continua y Reportes de Salud de los Mexicanos en Estados Unidos -SICRESAL-MX), a unified database for reporting the VDS activities, managed by the Mexican section of the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission.
• In 2021, it expanded its services by establishing the Mental Health Window pilot program in 12 consulates.

 
The results of the Heath Desk.
 
From 2003 until August 2022, the VDS served 18.3 million persons and offered 45.8 million health-related services, as described in Table 1, with the collaboration of around 600 local partners.
 
Table 1. Ventanilla de Salud Program: persons serviced, and health-related services provided from 2003 to 2022
Period                                                                    Persons                             Services
2003-2017                                                         10 million*                         18.4 million**
September 2017-August 2018                 1.5 million                           5.8 million
January-July 2019                                         700,000                               1.8 million
September 2019-August 2020                2.0 million                         6.0 million
September 2020-August 2021                3.0 million                         8.5 million
September 2020-August 2022               1.1 million                           5.3 million
TOTAL                                                                18.3 million                     45.8 million

Note: A single person can receive multiple services. According to the Institute of Mexican Abroad, between 2003 and 2019, the VDS served 22 million persons who received 8 million health-related services. Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior (2021). Ventanillas de Salud (VDS). 21 November.
Sources: *2003-2017. Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior, 2017. Las Ventanillas de Salud reciben el premio de la OEA a la Innovación para la Gestión Pública. Boletín Especial Lazos. 11 October. **The number of services only includes from 2012 to 2016. Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior, 2018. Resultados Programa VDS. 26 November 2016; updated March 2018.
09/2017-08/2018: Sexto Informe de Labores, SRE. 2018, p. 190; 01-07/2019; Primer Informe de Labores, SRE. 2019, p. 136; 09/2019-08/2020: Segundo Informe de Labores, SRE. 2020, p. 157; 09/2020-8/2021: Tercer Informe de Labores, SRE. 2021, p. 145; 09/2021-08/2022: Cuarto Informe de Labores, SRE. 2022, p. 142.

 
The impact of the VDS is more significant considering that health issues affect the family on both sides of the border, as illnesses and other health problems can result in a reduction of income and an increase in expenses.
 
Besides reaching out to millions of Mexicans in the U.S. through the VDS program, the consulates of Mexico have established long-term alliances with a wide range of health-related organizations, such as the American Cancer Society, the National Institute for Health, Georgia Lighthouse Foundation, and Emery University´s Rollins School of Public Health.[xviii] The program has also strengthened its collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Alliance for Hispanic Health.[xix]
 
Recognizing the great benefits that the VDS provided, in 2017, the Organization of American States granted the “Inter-American Award on Innovation for Effective Public Management” in the Social Inclusion Innovation category.[xx]
 
The opening of the VDS was a defining moment in Mexico´s public-consular diplomacy, as it allowed, for the first time, the permanent presence of community health organizations personnel inside the consular premises. Shortly after, other groupings, such as the banking and financial sectors, assigned people to the local consulate. Various consulates also opened new specific-purpose windows focused on educational opportunities and financial education. More recently, some three consulates have created new desks to provide specialized care to indigenous migrants.
 
Conclusions.
 
The Ventanilla de Salud or Health Desk program is another example of an innovative public-consular diplomacy of Mexico, working as a bridge between the Mexican community living in the U.S. and its network of health partners.
 
Health referrals and screenings are not typical consular assistance programs. However, the VDS was a groundbreaking way for the government of Mexico, together with local partners, to care for the needs of the Mexican community in a country without universal health care. The VDS also initiated the consulates' transformation into community centers.
 
The VDS helps the Mexican community in the U.S. to alleviate their barriers to accessing healthcare and solving health-related issues. A visit to a Health Window in a Mexican consulate can be a life-changing event or at least an opportunity to learn how to navigate the U.S. health system.
 

 
[i] Other translations of the VDS program are Health Stations or Health Windows. Here it Desk and Window will be used.
[ii] Israel, E. and Batalova, J. 2020. Mexican Migrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute. 5 November.
[iii] Rosenbloom, R. and Batalova, J. 2022. Mexican Immigrants in the United States. Migration Policy Institute 13 October.
[iv] Márquez Lartigue, R. 2022. Public-consular Diplomacy that heals: The Binational Health Week Program. Blog about Consular and Public Diplomacies. 5 March.
[v] Marina Valle, V., Gandoy Vázquez, W. L., and Valenzuela Moreno, K. A. 2020. Ventanillas de Salud: Defeating challenges in healthcare access for Mexican immigrants in the United States. Estudios Fronterizos, 21. July.
[vi] Necochea López, R. 2018. Mexico´s health diplomacy and the Ventanilla de Salud program. Latino Studies (16), p. 483.
[vii] Délano Alonso, A. 2018. From Here and There: Diaspora Policies, Integration and Social Rights beyond Borders, p. 78.
[viii] González Gutiérrez, C. 2009. The Institute of Mexicans Abroad, An Effort to Empower the Diaspora. In D. R. Agunias (Ed.) Closing the Distance. How Governments Strengthen ties with their Diaspora, p. 94.
[ix] Dávila Chávez, H. 2014. Comprehensive Health Care Strategy for Migrants. Voices of Mexico. Num. 98, Winter, p. 96.
[x] Secretaría de Salud and Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. 2019. Strategy: Ventanillas de Salud, p. 7.
[xi] Rangel Gómez, M. G., et. al. 2016. Ventanillas de Salud: A Program Designed to Improve the Health of Mexican Immigrants Living in the United States. Migración y Salud, p. 100.
[xii] Rangel Gómez, M. G., et al. 2017. Ventanillas de Salud: A Collaborative and Binational Health Access and Preventive Care Program. Frontier in Public Health. 30 June.
[xiii]  Rangel Gómez, M. G., et al. 2017. Ventanillas de Salud: A Collaborative and Binational Health Access and Preventive Care Program. Frontier in Public Health. p. 3. 30 June.[xiv] Délano, A. 2009. From Limited to Active Engagement: Mexico’s Emigration Policies from a Foreign Policy Perspective. International Migration Review, 43(4), p. 791.
[xv] Durand, J., Massey, D. S. & Parrado, E. A. 1999. The New Era of Mexican Migration to the United States. The Journal of American History, 86(2), p. 525-527.
[xvi] Rangel Gómez, M. G., et al. 2017. Ventanillas de Salud: A Collaborative and Binational Health Access and Preventive Care Program. Frontier in Public Health, p. 2. 30 June.
[xvii] Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. 2021. Tercer Informe de Labores, SRE, p. 146.
[xviii] Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior 2018. Alianzas Estratégicas. Published 24 November 2016; updated March 2018.
[xix] Dávila Chávez, H. 2014. Comprehensive Health Care Strategy for Migrants. Voices of Mexico. Num. 98, Winter, p. 98.
[xx] Organización de Estados Americanos. 2017. V Premio Interamericano a la Innovación para la Gestión Pública Efectiva 2017. Acta Final de Evaluaciones. Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. 2017. Las Ventanillas de Salud reciben el premio de la OEA a la Innovación para la Gestión Pública. Boletín Especial Lazos. 11 October. Instituto de los Mexicanos en el Exterior. 2017. La OEA hace entrega de Premio Interamericano a las Ventanillas de Salud. Press Bulletin. 19 December.

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.

 
The following essay was one of the Public Diplomacy online course requirements offered by the DiploFoundation that I took in the Spring of 2013.
 
I only made some editing for clarity and grammatical accuracy.
 
 
Introduction
 
Mexico has had a long tradition of cultural diplomacy, and more recently, tourism and investment promotion; however, it has not developed a comprehensive approach to Public Diplomacy (PD) in a sustained way.
 
Besides certain times in its history, such as in the late 1890s, during the 1930s, and the negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in early 1990s, the Government of Mexico has not tried to influence foreign publics as part of its foreign policy beyond conveying a positive image overseas.
 
There are three reasons why: a) its foreign policy is based on the principle of non-intervention in other countries' affairs,[1] b) its foreign policy has mostly focused on Latin America, and c) its relationship with the United States.[2] Nonetheless, in recent years, as a result of the security crisis and the lack of significant progress in the domestic arena, the Government of Mexico is trying to implement a PD strategy to improve its image abroad and continue to be an influential member of the international community.
 
This paper will briefly analyze Mexico's attempts to instrument certain aspects of Public Diplomacy, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. In addition, there are some recommendations on how Mexico could finally instrument a comprehensive long-term PD.
 
Early efforts: investment promotion and cultural diplomacy.
 
After decades of civil unrest and financial difficulties, Mexico experienced economic development in the last quarter of the 19th Century. As part of its foreign policy, the Government actively participated in World Fairs to convey a positive image abroad to attract investment and immigrants from Europe and Asia.[3] This period ended abruptly with the Mexican revolution in 1910, which hurt its economy and image abroad.
 
After the revolution, in the late 1920s and 1930s, as part of Mexico's political realignment, the Government established significant cultural institutions and sponsored great works of art, including murals and other art forms, to legitimize the country's new regime. It engage in a forceful cultural diplomacy effort in South America.

In the 1930s and 1940s, Mexico had a film bonanza, later followed by TV programs and music,[4] spreading Mexican culture all over Latin America, thus gaining international standing in those countries.
 
In these two eras, Mexico had a concerted effort to gain international reputation and recognition to fulfill some of its foreign policy goals; however, these Public Diplomacy efforts were not sustained, except for an active but underfunded cultural diplomacy.
 
The Cold War: inward-looking development and lack of promotion abroad.
 
For most of the Cold War, Mexico had a reactive foreign policy, trying to avoid conflicts with the US and concentrating its diplomatic efforts in Latin America. However, in the 1960s and later, it became isolated as military dictatorships overtook democratic governments in the region, which were aligned with the US in the fight against communism. Nonetheless, Mexico continued to promote its cultural expressions abroad,[5] encouraged educational exchanges, and engaged in international cooperation as a donor.
 
At the same time, the US media and entertainment industries became dominant in most of the world, which presented a distorted image of Mexico around the globe, even though the country was a success story in terms of economic development.[6] In an analysis of Mexico's image abroad, Simon Anholt indicated that the country had deeper problems than the current violence crisis. He mentioned that the country's image overseas had primarily been defined negatively, except in Latin America, by the US media and entertainment industries.[7]
 
Post-Cold War: changes and missed opportunities
 
With the end of the Cold War, Mexico's foreign policy experienced significant changes, being the most important one the negotiation of the Free Trade Agreement with the United States and Canada. It was one of the rare occasions when the Government of Mexico consciously tried to influence US public opinion. Through a series of activities, including major cultural exhibitions[8] in the US, including hiring professional lobbyists, it engaged directly with US businesses, labor unions, and environmental groups, with the support of their Mexican counterparts, in a coordinated effort to successfully approve the agreement.[9]
 
As in the past, there was no continuity of these activities afterward. Moreover, when the economic crisis affected Mexico in 1995 (and the US offered a rescue package), there was no effort to mitigate the country's bad publicity and loss of reputation amongst the US and international public opinion.
 
In 2000, when Mexico successfully had a democratic transition, the country regained international status; notwithstanding, the so-called "democratic bonus" was not cashed out because there were no major internal reforms. The country's brand stagnated versus the rapidly changing positions of nations such as China, India, Brazil, and South Africa.
 
In 2006 a new administration took over and stepped up the combat against drug traffickers in Mexico. As a result, there was a considerable increase in violence, which became one of the few topics that the international media reported about the country, negatively impacting its image abroad.[10] According to the 2011 EastWest Global Index 200, Mexico occupied 192th place out of 200 nations, just above countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, and Libya.[11]
 
Recognizing that the country had an international image problem was an important step taken by President Calderon, even though it was long overdue. As a result, the Government created the "Marca País, Imagen de México" project[12] to show Mexico in a more balanced way and contextualize the violence stories. However, there were some problems with the project. It was coordinated by the Ministry of Tourism; therefore, its focus was mainly on tourism promotion rather than an overall Public Diplomacy strategy. In addition, it seldom coordinated its activities with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA).
 
A new administration, a new opportunity
 
Thanks to the arrival of a new administration in December 2012, a slight reduction in violent acts in 2012, and the approval of significant reforms, the dynamic of Mexico's image abroad is changing;[13] therefore, it is an excellent opportunity to be seized by the new Government.
 
Currently (2013), the Office of the Presidency, the MFA, the Ministries of Tourism and Trade, and ProMexico[14] hold bi-monthly meetings as part of an effort to improve Mexico's brand overseas. However, this interagency process is not a formal Public Diplomacy board that includes other actors, such as state and local authorities, businesses, universities, think tanks, and non-governmental organizations. In addition, it seems that the efforts of coordinating activities abroad are not incorporated in their respective actions and policies, thus limiting its implementation.
 
Policy Recommendations.
 
Considering that it seems there is confusion between Tourism Promotion/Cultural Diplomacy and PD, and there is a real need to try to engage foreign publics in order to counterbalance the bad image that is conveyed abroad, here are a few recommendations to instrument a genuine Public Diplomacy:
 
a) Establish a formal Public Diplomacy Board, such as the one in France or the United Kingdom, that will be responsible for evaluating Mexico's current situation and propose a course of action with definite goals and activities to accomplish them. The Board should incorporate important non-state actors and local and state authorities. Inside the MFA, a Public Diplomacy office should be established to coordinate and instrument the decisions made by the Board.
 
b) It would be wise to create a Public Diplomacy Handbook, such as the Australian one,[15] that not only explains what PD activities should be undertaken but provides advice in planning PD programs and showcases best practices. The publication of the handbook should be part of a training program for all government officials that deal with international activities.
 
c) Teaching Spanish is a great tool to promote the country's culture and values and a deeper understanding of its idiosyncrasy. The new Government has proposed the creation of "Institutos Mexico"[16] as a way to promote the nation's culture and teach Spanish overseas. The establishment of Confucius centers by China worldwide in partnership with local universities could be used as a model.[17]
 
d) Mexico's PD efforts should focus on specific countries that involve a comprehensive strategy that includes tourism and investment promotion, cultural exhibitions, people-to-people contacts, and educational exchanges. The effort should be made in the host country's language, so Mexico can "talk" directly to them, diminishing the use of English media and reaching a wider audience. The chosen countries should be regional leaders, such as the BRICS, Turkey, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, the UK, Spain, and Germany.
 
e) The Government should take full advantage of Information Technologies to engage with foreign publics directly. Mexico should study the US embassy's experience in Indonesia, which had a very successful online presence, through the engagement of Indonesian bloggers and linking real-life events (such as President Obama's visit), with its online activities.[18]
 
d) Mexico's MFA should fully incorporate to its PD strategy the activities of the Liaison Office with Civil Society Organizations,[19] the Institute of Mexicans Abroad,[20] and the Mexican Agency for International Development Cooperation.[21] These offices manage essential programs that have not been utilized to their full potential in the country's overall Public Diplomacy efforts.
 
e) The Government should establish a research program focused on Public Diplomacy to further promote knowledge about this issue, emphasizing Mexico's circumstances. The "Observatorio Marca España" project at the Spanish Elcano Institute[22] is a good example that should be considered.
 
Conclusions
 
Even though Mexico had substantial experience in cultural diplomacy and, more recently, tourism and trade promotion, it has only engaged in Public Diplomacy in rare instances due to its foreign policy principles.
 
The attention to the country's violence and its negative image abroad has renewed an effort to instrument a comprehensive Public Diplomacy strategy. In order to be successful, the Government has to have a long-term view, needs to improve its domestic situation, and requires investing sufficient funds in this endeavor. A key component for success is coordinating PD activities, collaborating with Non-State Actors, and better utilizing social media and information technology.
 
Rodrigo Marquez Lartigue
Public Diplomacy
March 26th, 2013.


[1] Luz Elena Banos Rivas, “Reflexiones sobre la diplomacia pública en México. Una mirada prospectiva” Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, No. 85, November 2008-February 2009, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. p. 154
[2] Pamela K. Starr, “Mexican Public Diplomacy: Hobbled by History, Interdependence, and Asymmetric Power” Public Diplomacy Magazine, University of Southern California Issue 2, Summer 2009 pp. 49-53. Available at http://publicdiplomacymagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/summer_2009.pdf [accessed March 15, 2013]
[3] Roberta Lajous Vargas, Las relaciones exteriores de México (1821-2000), El Colegio de México, 2012, pp 128-129.
[4] Andrés Ordoñez, “Diplomacia y cultura: Contenidos básicos para un reflexión pertinente”, Este País, June 3rd, 2012. Available at http://estepais.com/site/?p=38890  [accessed on March 24th, 2013]
[5] This is the time that Mexico started to organized important exhibitions abroad, and created the office of cultural exchanges at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Rafael Tovar y de Teresa, p. 192.
[6] For example, it was the first developing nation to hold the Olympic Games in 1968, and two years later was the host of the World Cup.
[7] Simon Anholt “Mito y realidad: la imagen internacional de México”, Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, No. 96, October 2012, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. p. 124
[8] Tovar y de Teresa, p. 188.
[9] Starr, p. 51.
[10] For a brief analysis of México’s media coverage in US newspapers see Guillermo Maynez Gil, “El Espejo roto: percepciones de México entre los extranjeros” Este País, No. 261, January 2013, pp. 8-12
[11] East West Communications, 2011 EastWest Global Index 200, Available at http://www.eastwestcoms.com/global.htm [accessed March 21st, 2013].
[12] To learn more about the project see Jaime Díaz and Mónica Pérez, “Marca México: una estrategia para reducir la brecha entre la percepción y la realidad”, Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, No. 96, October 2012, Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores. pp. 169-186.
[13] Recently, there have been important reports about Mexico’s economic achievements in mayor news outlets such as the Financial Times, the New York Times and the Economist.
[14] Mexico´s Export and Investment Promotion Agency.
[15] Australia Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Public diplomacy and advocacy handbook, August 2011. Available at http://www.dfat.gov.au/publications/public-diplomacy-handbook/ [accessed 18 March 2013]
[16] Mexico currently has 10 cultural centers: 4 in the USA (Miami, New York, San Antonio and Washington), 4 in Latin America (Belize, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Guatemala) and 2 in Europe (Spain and France). Cesar Guerrero, “La cultura en la imagen de México” Este País, January 2013, p. 21.
[17] Zhe Ren, The Confucius Institutes and China´s Soft Power, Institute of Developing Economies, JETRO, March 2012. Available at http://ir.ide.go.jp/dspace/bitstream/2344/1119/1/ARRIDE_Discussion_No.330_ren.pdf [accessed March 19, 2013]
[18] Matthew Wallin, The Challenges of the Internet and Social Media in Public Diplomacy, American Security Project. February 2013. Pp. 9-10. Available at http://americansecurityproject.org/featured-items/2013/the-challenges-of-the-internet-and-social-media-in-public-diplomacy/ [accessed March 20, 2012].
[19] The Liaison Office with Civil Society Organizations was created on January 8, 2009. For more information about the office in English see http://participacionsocial.sre.gob.mx/docs/dgvosc/brochure_sre_dgvosc.pdf  
[20] The Institute of Mexicans Abroad was created in 2003. For more information see http://www.ime.gob.mx/
[21] The Agency was created in 2011. For more information see http://amexcid.gob.mx/
[22] For more information visit http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/wps/portal/!ut/p/c5/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os3jjYB8fnxBnR19TE2e_kECjACdDAwjQ9_PIz03VL8h2VAQAidTU0Q!!/dl3/d3/L2dJQSEvUUt3QS9ZQnZ3LzZfM1RER1FLRzEwT1BVMTBJUjQ3TjJVUzBDVjI!/ [accessed March 23, 2013]

​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

 
I am excited to announce that I will be collaborating in the upcoming Public Diplomacy course that the DiploFoundation is offering in the spring of 2022. For more information about the course, check out this DiploFoundation webpage.
 
I did not know about the existence of the DiploFoundation until my ministry of foreign affairs offered one of its courses in late 2012. But what a great institution it is!
 
I already had experience with online education, as I graduated from the Global Master of Arts Program in 2008, offered by the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. However, it was a hybrid format, which allowed me to meet my classmates in three different residencies. For more about my experience, read my blog post, Remembering GMAP: Awesome learning and life experiences.
 
The DiploFoundation offers magnificent advantages for most people interested in diplomacy and other vital subjects, such as internet governance. Here are some of them:

1. FLEXIBILITY. While following a weekly cycle where each week is dedicated to a specific topic, Diplo’s online courses are designed so that you can attend to course tasks asynchronously, i.e., at the time that suits you best, depending on your time zone and lifestyle.
2. INTERACTION. The weekly online live interaction is a great way to connect with the lecturers and classmates. It is a bit chaotic and stimulating time, and it would be best if you were prepared to participate in the online debates fully. With the boom of video conferencing apps, Diplo also offers the opportunity to interact with colleagues using live connections.
3. EDUCATION PROCESS. The DiploFoundation has a collaborative approach to education that encourages participation and dialogue. The hypertext interactions, the pedagogical tool used in the courses, are user-friendly and engaging. Most of your classmates have experience and lots of knowledge, so it is a trove of treasures, and it allows you to share your own best practices.
4. DIVERSITY. The geographical and nationality variety of the lecturers and students makes the DiploFoundation hard to beat. I had classmates from many different countries, most living on other continents, so I had the opportunity to interact and learn from them.  Connecting with persons from diverse backgrounds that otherwise you might never know is formidable, and the Diplo opens the door for you.
5. FOCUS ON THE REAL WORLD. The courses are focused on the real world. For most diplomacy practitioners, it is hard to find time for professional development, and most are looking for learning opportunities that can immediately enhance their performance. Therefore, the courses’ focus on the real world is crucial, and the DiploFoundation does not disappoint. This does not mean that theories are not reviewed. In my Diplo studies, I learned tools that I applied almost immediately. For example, I studied social media apps and opened my Twitter account that I still use today.
6. TOUGH BUT FAIR. Anybody that tells you that the DiploFoundation courses are easy is not telling the truth. You have to engage in the class fully, but it is well worth it.
7. AMAZING LECTURERS. The heart of the DiploFoundation is its people, but mainly their faculty. The courses I took were taught by outstanding lecturers that are practitioners with real-life experiences in their respective fields. And as the DiploFoundation website states, “They act more as a ‘guide on the side’ than ‘the sage on the stage’”. The teachers and researchers are incredible sources of knowledge that students can tap from. Just browse the Diplo website’s People section to learn about the excellent team.

 
Another advantage is that The DiploFoundation also offers the possibility of obtaining a Master´s degree in Contemporary Diplomacy from the University of Malta, which is an excellent opportunity for anybody who does not have the chance to take time off work to get a full-time study degree.
 
Besides the incredible array of courses, the DiploFoundation has excellent research and resources, such as my favorite history of diplomacy and technology or the up-and-coming digital diplomacy and digital foreign policy.
 
In addition, the very active online web debates, conferences offer many opportunities to learn areas that might not be familiar. 
 
For those interested in internet governance and digital policy, the DiploFoundation is a powerhouse and the go-to institution. Besides, they are at the forefront of Artificial Intelligence and Diplomacy studies.
 
After the courses with the DiploFoundation, I had many ideas and questions but did not have enough time to work on them until last year, when I started my blog about Consular and Public Diplomacies. In a way, the courses I took with Diplo motivated me to create this blog. And to complete the full circle, the blog opened the door for me to join the DiploFoundation as a lecture starting in spring 2022!
 
I invite everyone interested in Diplomacy and Internet Governance to check out below the DiploFoundation courses and their research and ongoing activities. And hopefully, I will see you in the Public Diplomacy course that starts in February 2022.
 
Upcoming course (February 2022)
 
Public Diplomacy
 
Humanitarian Diplomacy
                               
Diplomatic Theory and Practice
 
Advanced Diploma in Internet Governance
 
Introduction to Internet Governance
 
Capacity Development
 
Artificial Intelligence: Technology, Governance, and Policy Frameworks
 
Here is an excellent video that clearly explains what entails to study at the DiploFoundation.

 
A couple of weeks ago, Mexico´s consular network in the United States, together with federal and state labor authorities, unions, community associations, and seven other consulates, successfully organized the 13th edition of the Labor Rights Week (LRW).
 
The LRW “is a joint initiative between the governments of the US and Mexico that seeks to increase awareness in Mexican and Latino communities about the rights of workers and the resources available to them.”[1] As the reader will learn, it started in 2009.
 
In 2021, the 50 Mexican consulates and 560 partners held 680 events with 520,000 persons and collaborated with the consulates of Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Peru.[2]
 
Besides, the Embassy of Mexico in Washington renewed national cooperation agreements with the Wage and Hour Division (WHS), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The Mexican consulates also updated 58 local collaboration agreements.[3]
 
The significant results of the LRW amid the Covid-19 pandemic confirm that it is an example of an accomplished public-consular diplomacy initiative executed by Mexico and its network of allies in the United States. This effort adds to the successful public-consular diplomatic effort by Mexico is its Consular ID card program.
 
However, the consular protection of Mexican workers in the United States has been a priority of the consular network since the 19th century.[4] In the third decade of the 21st century, it continues to be the focus of Mexico´s public-consular diplomacy.
 
In the case of consular assistance in incidents of labor rights violation, Mexico developed the LRW, a successful model of collaboration where the host country authorities cooperate with the consular network to promote the rights available to all workers regardless of their immigration status.
 
How this initiative started?
 
The origins of Labor Rights Week
 
After the failure to reach an immigration agreement between Mexico and the U.S., also known as “the whole enchilada”, partly due to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, both governments searched for opportunities for greater collaboration in new areas. One such field was labor rights.
 
An alternative reason for the greater attention to labor issues by the government of Mexico is proposed by Xóchitl Bada and Shannon Gleeson. They state that it was the pressure from Mexican community groups to have a proactive role in labor rights cases that resulted in greater collaboration with U.S. authorities.[5]
 
As a result, in 2004, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mexico (SRE) and the Secretary of Labor issued a joint declaration followed by signing letters of intent with WHS and OSHA. The statement was renewed in 2010 and 2014.[6]
 
After a few years of collaborating, in 2009, the SRE launched the first LRW, using the Binational Health Week as inspiration. In its first edition, fifteen consulates and 255 allies organized 199 events, with 18,788 persons. In total, 829 consular labor cases were registered.[7]
 
Since then, Mexico´s consulates across the U.S. have entered into more than 400 agreements with regional offices of labor agencies, including OSHA, WHD, EEOC, and others (see table 1).
 
The evolution of the LRW
 
As with other consular assistance programs, after the successful first experience, all Mexican consulates were involved in organizing events around the LWR.
 
During the week around Labor Day in the U.S., which is celebrated on the first Monday of September, Consulates and allies organize a wide variety of activities, from training at the consulate offices and workplaces such as canning factories and vegetable fields to individual consultations with labor lawyers, labor rights organizations, and unions.
 
As the collaboration expanded, the Embassy of Mexico in Washington signed agreements with the NLRB in 2013, the EEOC in 2014, and the Justice Department's Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC) in 2016. In many instances, the consular network replicated these deals with the agencies' regional offices, especially with the EEOC.
 
As part of this initiative, the SRE signed an agreement with the United Farm Workers in November 2019, the first of its type with a labor organization in the United States.
 
The Results of the LRW
 
Organizing a week of events focusing on labor rights has been very successful. More than 1.7 million persons have attended an event since 2009, including half a million this year alone, as the reader can see in table 1, at the bottom of the post.
 
Regardless of the political discourse, continuity of the effort has been crucial, creating trust among the consulates and labor authorities with workers, unions, and labor rights organizations.
 
Besides, an additional advantage is that new activities are proposed by consulates and partners every year, expanding and deepening the cooperation. For example, after a few years of the LRW, some consulates, with the help of their allies, offered workshops at different workplaces, including factories, restaurants, construction sites, and agricultural fields. They found out, though practice, that it was a lot easier to reach out to workers at their locations rather than asking them to go to a consulate or a church.
 
The LRW has been identified as an example of “practical joint initiatives” to protect the labor rights of low-skilled immigrant workers.[8] Mexico promoted the LRW in the 2nd Global Consular Forum meeting held in Mexico in 2015, and some scholars have noted the success and some of its deficiencies.[9]
 
It is well known that current public diplomacy strategies search to establish a long-term partnership between the receiving and the sending state. Therefore, the institutionalization of relationships with partners, through signing collaboration agreements and other forms, has demonstrated its usefulness in weathering changes of leaders and priorities of the different governments. It also has facilitated the continuity of the LRW, which has been vital to building lasting and successful relationships with allies and the workers themselves.
 
Nina Græger y Halvard Leira state that “the degree of [consular] care provided for citizens abroad is thus tied not only to political system, but also to the state capacity, the perceived necessity for domestic legitimacy and responsiveness of foreign host governments.”[10] In the case of the LRW, the interest of the Department of Labor and other authorities in promoting labor rights in the immigrant community, through collaboration with the Mexican consular network, has been essential in its success.  One of the most important results is turning the consulate into a trusted ally of local organizations and bridging them and the federal and state agencies.[11]
 
In a country such as the US that offers fewer protections for workers and has multiple labor regulations and authorities, the LRW is an excellent public-consular diplomacy effort with a focus on some of the most vulnerable workers. It is also a perfect example of the collaboration of the governments of the sending and receiving states with civil society organizations.


[1] Okano-Heijmans, Maaike and Price, Caspar, “Providing consular services to low-skilled migrant workers: partnerships that care”, Global Affairs, Vol. 5 No. 4-5, 2019, p. 436.
[2] Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores, “13th labor rights week comes to a close in Mexico´s US consulates”, Press Bulletin, September 6, 2021
[3] Ibid.
[4] Gómez Arnau, Remedios, México y la protección de sus nacionales en Estados Unidos, Centro de Investigaciones sobre Estados Unidos de América, 1990, p. 127.
[5] Bada, Xóchitl, and Gleeson, Shannon. “A New Approach to Migrant Labor Rights Enforcement”, Labor Studies Journal Vol. 40 No. 1, 2015, pp. 42-44.
[6] Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Joint Ministerial Declaration on Migrant Workers Signed by US Secretary of Labor, Mexican Secretary of Labor and Social Welfare, April 3, 2014.
[7] SRE, Derechos Laborales de Personas Mexicanas en el Extranjero: Semana de Derechos Laborales en Estados Unidos, Datos Abiertos.
[8] Okano-Heijmans, Maaike and Price, Caspar, “Providing consular services to low-skilled migrant workers: partnerships that care”, Global Affairs, Vol. 5 No. 4-5, 2019, p. 436.
[9] See, for example Bada, Xóchitl, and Gleeson, Shannon. “A New Approach to Migrant Labor Rights Enforcement”, Labor Studies Journal, Vol. 40 No. 1, 2015, 32-53
[10] Græger, Nina, and Leira, Halvard, “Introduction: The Duty of Care in International Relations” in The Duty of Care in International Relations: Protecting citizens beyond the border, eds. Nina Græger, and Halvard Leira, 2019, p. 3.
[11] Bada, Xóchitl, and Gleeson, Shannon, 2015, p. 45.

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.

Table 1. Summary of results of the Labor Rights Week 2009-2021

 
On September 2, 2021, this blog celebrated its first anniversary. It has been an exhilarating roller-coaster ride, with big ups, deep downs, and sharp turns. It has been quite an experience!
 
First, let’s talk about the big ups.
 
Learning a new skill is always challenging but doing it alone in the midst of a pandemic turned out to be a highlight. Never in the history of humankind learning something new has been so easy. From watching tutorials to reading blogs about blogs, the only requirement is time and perseverance. Of course, a good internet connection and a decent computer are essential nowadays.
 
Besides, you can now set up a blog or webpage in minutes using website builders’ platforms—no need for coding or SEO expertise. Choose and click, and you are done in minutes. In addition, today´s online trends are moving towards the intensive use of visuals, so I became a graphic designer with the help of online services such as Canva.
 
However, as always, nothing is as easy as it seems, and you can get stuck very quickly, so never underestimate the value of an expert.
 
The acme of this year has been writing about topics that I am passionate about that hopefully could be interesting to someone. Some of the ideas for the posts have been in my mind for a very long time, but I did not have the platform to publish them either an instant to create them.
 
It also has allowed me to connect with persons and ideas that otherwise could have been impossible. And some exciting opportunities rose too!
 
Now, the deep downs.
 
As in any roller-coaster ride, the car rises slowly to the top, and then it flies towards the bottom in nanoseconds. Sometimes, blogging felt exactly like that!
 
Technology can facilitate almost everything, but once you are stuck, there is no way out. So, even after a year, I must confess that I am still struggling with some issues as basic as how to embed the link into a Twitter post.
 
Another issue has been the topics of the blog. While public diplomacy continues to expand rapidly in the academic realm and real-world practices, issues related to consular diplomacy have not moved a lot in recent years. Even Google SEO tools know that very few persons worldwide are searching the web for the term consular diplomacy!
 
The life of a budding learner without institutional links and passwords can be brutal; like a child with no money outside a candy store, you can see them but cannot eat them. Fortunately, I have been able to get some books and articles as a professor or sometimes have to pay. There are so many things open access, but there is still much more behind the paywalls of publishing mammoths. And if you are curious as I am, it can turn to be quite frustrating.
 
And there is also the issue of the almost insurmountable language barriers. One of the reasons I write the blog in English is because some of the accomplishments and experiences of Mexico are not known beyond my colleagues. But, by doing these, I am keeping people that do not speak it.  As a compromise, I write in another platform a summary of my blogpost in Spanish.
 
There are always sharp turns in a roller-coaster.
 
Even the best-laid plan can turn south. When I write a blog post, I have an idea of the theme, but it gets complicated as I read and write, so there are sharp turns everywhere. Writers-block does exist, but not in the way I imagined!
 
Besides, life does not stop, so there are too many distractions, particularly when the specific blogpost is turning to be a hassle. The pantheon of dead blogposts ideas in my computer is proliferating rapidly.
 
And there are always surprises! A post that did not take much time could be a hit, while the most-researched piece, a big miss. Even a Twitter post that was written in a rush could outperform a supposedly well-though one. You just never know.
 
A year of blogging has been an exhilarating roller-coaster ride, and who does not like a good one?

 
1. Introduction
 
Recently, I had the opportunity to finally read the seminal book on Consular Diplomacy titled Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, edited by Jan Melissen and Ana Mar Fernández. This work allowed me to rethink what is Consular Diplomacy.
 
Ten years have passed since its publication in 2011. Since then, there has been more changes to diplomacy in general and the consular institution in particular. An example of the relevance of Consular Diplomacy today is the response of all ministries of foreign affairs to the COVID-19 pandemic that required a massive effort to repatriate and assist nationals stranded overseas as the world closed in March 2020. 
 
The book is divided into three sections:

1. Themes in Contemporary Consular Affairs,
2. The Consular Services of Great Powers, and
3. The History of the Consular Institution.

 
It includes articles about the history and recent developments of consular affairs of Spain, France, the Netherlands, China, Russia, and the United States, as well as consular experiences of the European Union.
 
The order of the book is a little bit odd because it starts with consular affairs´ contemporary issues and ends with the consular history of three European nations. However, it is a great read that has tons of fascinating information and ideas.
 
If you can only read a few chapters, I suggest checking out the following:

• “Introduction The Consular Dimension of Diplomacy” by Jan Melissen,
• “Chapter One Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy” by Maaike Okano-Heijmans, and
• “Chapter Nine The Many Past Lives of the Consul” by Halvard Leira and Iver B. Neumann.

 
In the introduction, Jan Melissen identifies four conceptual or empirical observations about the development of the consular institution:

1. The “Core function of consular affairs has radically been transformed through history…
2. One way or another the consular function has always been enmeshed with diplomacy…
3. The `consulate perspective´ has always been tied up with unfolding transnational relations instead of mere inter-state relations…[and]
4. The growth in the structural demand for different types of consular services responded to sweeping economic and social change in periods that were characterized by a thickening of international relations.”[i]

 
These four observations are beneficial for the reader, as they help navigate through the book´s twelve chapters and explore the concept of Consular Diplomacy.
 
2. Reconsidering Consular Diplomacy
 
After reading the book, one of the first things that hit me was that each country has a unique consular affairs history, from China´s recent interest in assisting its citizens overseas to the Netherland´s reliance on honorary consuls.
 
Learning the consular history of six countries gave me a different perspective of Consular Diplomacy in general, and specifically about the development and characteristics of Mexico´s Consular Diplomacy. I think this is one of the reasons that comparative studies in International Relations are so critical.
 
For example, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, millions of Russian citizens suddenly lived in foreign countries, which happened to Mexicans after the 1846-1848 Mexico-U.S. War. In both cases, the two countries' governments had to step up their consular work to assist and protect their nationals, now living abroad.
 
Another example is the problems raised from the extraterritoriality clauses of international treaties with Western powers. In Mexico´s history, foreign government´s interventions on behalf of their citizens were critical in shaping its foreign policy principles. Therefore, learning a bit about the origins of the Capitulations treaties signed between the Ottoman Empire and European powers was enlighten.
 
Halvard Leira and Iver B. Neumann´s explanation about why the Ottoman Empire granted European nations extraterritorial jurisdiction of their own citizens is excellent for understanding a different perspective from the traditional view of European imposition of those terms.[ii] The book clearly demonstrates that the Capitulations had a significant impact on the development of the consular institution, particularly its judicial attributions.
 
Before, I thought that Mexico´s consular institution was distinctive. However, after reading the book, now I realize that each country´s consular affairs had a specific evolution that is different from all others. Of course, there are common patterns and trends, but each nation experiences them in unique ways. The themes are similar, but the differences are in the details.
 
This new perspective is helping me to have a deeper understanding of the differences between the consular services offered by each country, such as the distinction of providing funds for the repatriations of human remains offered by Mexico to only assisting in the paperwork done by the U.S., Canada, and others.
 
This new understanding is making me rethink the concept of Consular Diplomacy, which is closely related to the history of the country´s consular institution.
 
Another realization is that every country, in general, has the same diplomatic objectives, but in consular affairs, it varies depending on its specific evolution and the relationship between the government and its citizens. Therefore, I believe that Consular Diplomacy is hard to generalize. There is a need to look deeper into what Melissen states as “the long-time neglect of the societal dimension of world politics and diplomacy”[iii] to grasp the idea of diplomatic activities in the consular realm.
 
3. The division between diplomacy and consular affairs persists but is narrowing
 
The second impression of the book is that the link between diplomacy and consular affairs has always been there, but it has changed as societies and the international arena evolved. Even today, after the rise of the Consular Diplomacy, the division between the two still exists.
 
There is not a single path for the relationship between the two. Each country has its own. However, the incorporation of consular responsibilities to the ministries of foreign affairs from the 17th Century onward is a common feature in most nations.
 
The consular history of the six countries demonstrates the highly complex interaction of the two services. To me, their amalgamation in the early 20th Century did not diminish the perception of consular affairs as a Cinderella´s service.
 
It is not till the end of the 20th Century, as Maaike Okano-Heijmans explains in “Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy”, that consular affairs become a true priority not only for the foreign ministries but the government as a whole.[iv]
 
It is then, when globalization speeded up, together with the digital revolution and the democratization of diplomacy, when Consular Diplomacy was able to break through its `glass ceiling´ and become an openly acknowledged core activity of foreign ministries.
 
The modernization and standardization processes that consular affairs have endured in the last 20 years to meet the ever-higher expectation of the public is a clear example of the new status of consular services.
 
Even after the unification of the diplomatic and consular services, most countries still see them as separate entities. The existence of two Vienna Conventions (one for each) is the perfect example of this division. By the early 1960s, when the conventions were discussed, the fusion of the two services was widespread. Why was it so difficult to merge both in just one convention?
 
4. A greater understanding of the evolution of the consular institution.
 
The book allows the reader to understand better the multiple responsibilities that consuls had, from being judges, tax collectors, trade promoters, and sometimes even chaplains.[v] No wonder there is still a lot of misconceptions about what consuls do nowadays. Even the word `Consul´, is still mixed up with `Counsel´ (law-related) and `Councilor´ (city authority), which in the past were some of the main attributions of the position.
 
Through centuries, and as the Westphalia state-system developed, the consular institution experienced a gradual process of specialization of its functions. Consuls slowly were stripped of some of their core responsibilities[vi] and focused on two critical issues of today´s consular affairs: documentary services and assistance to citizens in distress abroad.
 
At the same time, it seems that a process of homogenization took place in international relations that affected the consular institution. As the articles about the six countries exhibit, consular affairs worldwide suffered the same transformations and are now mostly limited to documentary services and the protection of their nationals. Maybe the concentration on these two activities helped in its rise to the top of the foreign policy agenda?
 
In contrast, there is not such massive evolution of the functions of diplomats. Since the early days, their fundamental responsibilities of representation, negotiation, and communication, including information gathering, have changed little, even with drastic advances in communications and transportation.
 
5. The connection between public and consular diplomacies
 
It is stimulating to see that Melissen links Public and Consular Diplomacies. “In spite of all their differences, consular work and public diplomacy are somehow kindred activities. To all intents and purposes, both are evidence of new priorities and changing working practices in foreign ministries.”[vii]
 
I think the association between public and consular diplomacies is particularly relevant in the visa policies that directly affect the country´s image among the other nation´s citizens, as the article about the EU´s visa policy clearly showcases.[viii]
 
I consider that, in some cases, both go hand-in-hand and are closer than we usually think. In the case of Mexico´s it may be one and the same, as I wrote in my blog post titled “Public-Consular Diplomacy at its Best: The case of the Mexican Consular ID program”. Besides, Diaspora Diplomacy is also related to Public and Consular foreign policy efforts.
 
The idea of the connection between Public and Consular Diplomacies needs to be looked at in a deeper perspective. Hopefully, I can do this in the not-so-distant future.
 
 
6. Conclusion
 
Jan Melissen wanted the book to “hopefully break some new ground”[ix], which I think it definitely did. Since its release, there have not been works of such dimensions;[x] therefore, it is still the standard-bearer of Consular Diplomacy and a must-read for anybody interested in the consular institution.
 
Consular Affairs and Diplomacy is an excellent contribution to the field of study, as it associates the history and development of the consular functions with contemporary tendencies of consular affairs. It also demonstrates the always present interrelation of diplomacy and consular services, regardless of its priority ranking.
 
In a time of a drastic reduction of the State in the international arena, consular affairs are an area that has experienced the opposite. This is partly because of the ever-growing demand and expectations of citizens abroad (and their families at home). Also, since the consular function was never part of the great division between foreign and domestic policies.[xi]
 
For me, the work made me think again about Consular Diplomacy, mainly as a result of the relationship between the government and its citizens, not just part of foreign policy and diplomacy.
 
There is definitely a need for more works like Consular Affairs and Diplomacy. Hopefully, there will be more coming as Consular Diplomacy continues to rise in the field of International Relations and Diplomacy studies.
 
You can also read additional posts about consular diplomacy, such as:

• Global Consular Forum: Consular diplomacy in the 21st Century
• Consular diplomacy: Cinderella no more, but not yet a princess
• Recent studies on consular diplomacy: reevaluating the consular institution
• Mexico´s public-consular diplomacy
• New publications on consular diplomacy

[i] Melissen, Jan, “Introduction The Consular Dimension of Diplomacy” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, Jan Melissen and Ana Mar Fernández (Ed), 2011, pp. 1-4.
[ii] Leira, Halvard and Neumann, Iver B., “The Many Past Lives of the Consul” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, pp. 225-245.
[iii] Melissen, Jan, “Introduction” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, Jan Melissen and Ana Mar Fernández (Ed), 2011, p. 2.
[iv] Okano-Heijmans, Maaike, “Change in Consular Assistance and the Emergence of Consular Diplomacy” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, pp. 21-42.
[v] See, for example the consular responsibilities of French consuls in Ulbert, Jörg, “A history of the French Consular Services” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, pp. 307-313.
[vi] For example, in France, with the creation of trade attachés in 1919, consulates were stripped from one of their original responsibilities: trade.
[vii] Melissen, Jan, “Introduction” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, p. 2.
[viii]  Wesseling Mara, and Boniface, Jérôme, “New Trends in European Consular Services: Visa Policy in the EU Neighbourhood” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, pp. 115-144.
[ix] Melissen, Jan, “Introduction” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, p. 1.
[x] Since the book´s publication, there are some very interesting works released, like the The Hague Journal of Diplomacy´s special volume dedicated to `The Duty of Care´, published in 2018, and Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior volume on Consular Diplomacy (2014), and the books La Diplomacia Consular Mexicana en Tiempos de Trump (2018), The Duty of Care in International Relations: Protecting Citizens Beyond Borders (2019), and Modern Consuls, Local Communities and Globalization (2020).
[xi] Melissen, Jan, “Introduction” in Consular Affairs and Diplomacy, 2011, p. 2.

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.