CELAC: Brakes, blocks, and divisions
Through his voice and gestures, Luiz Inácio Lula emphatically states that to confront Donald Trump, we must unite our efforts, as each country is weak on its own.
“Individually, we are nothing; together, we are very strong,” says the Brazilian president, gazing at his Mexican counterpart, Claudia Sheinbaum, who sits next to him at the Tegucigalpa summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) on April 9.
These seconds highlight the elephant in the room. The world is rocked by a sudden shift in era, and this region cannot make any collective decisions to weather the storm.
In reality, reaching any agreement proved challenging, even regarding some of the most sensitive issues, such as Haiti or migration. In recent years, the region has only seen an accumulation of conflicts originating from various sources.
The Catalog
Nicolás Maduro was absent from the summit, thus avoiding a divisive presence. Venezuela has no relations with Paraguay and Peru, and it has frozen relations with Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Panama, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay.
The origin refers to the maneuver that enabled Maduro to declare himself president without presenting official results from the July 2024 election. Both Colombia and Brazil continue to protest for the same reason.
Venezuela also has ongoing disputes with Guyana over the Essequibo territory and with El Salvador over the fate of Venezuelan migrants imprisoned in the concentration camp, dubbed a prison by Nayib Bukele, another whose absence avoided major disputes.
The maritime boundary conflict between Colombia and Nicaragua remains active, accompanied by recurring tensions. The meeting was also missed by dictator Daniel Ortega and his “co-president” Rosario Murillo, who spared it from yet another source of irritation.
Mexico has severed relations with Ecuador since the attack on its embassy a year ago, and its relationship with Peru has reached an all-time low following the arrest of former President Pedro Castillo in 2022.
Argentine Javier Milei was absent; perhaps his colleagues were grateful for this, as it allowed them to avoid any extravagance from the chainsaw-wielding radical.
Troubled Presidency
At the end of the most troubled presidency in CELAC’s brief history, only 11 out of 33 countries were represented at the highest level in Tegucigalpa.
President Xiomara Castro’s problems began early. In March 2024, she issued messages on behalf of CELAC successively:
- Condemning the Israeli invasion of Gaza and “terrorism in all its forms” (against those aligned with Israel, who sought to mention Hamas);
- Congratulating Russian President Vladimir Putin on his “convincing” electoral victory, which is obviously controversial.
- Calling for action regarding the crisis in Haiti and opposing “military intervention”- despite CELAC’s prior support for the international mission requested by the Haitian government, led by Kenya, and endorsed by the Security Council.
This ultimately resulted in the emergence of an opposition bloc against Castro. In a joint statement, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Dominican Republic, and Uruguay denounced these pronouncements.
The attack on the Mexican embassy in Quito in April 2024 prompted a virtual meeting of heads of state and government, attended by only ten leaders.
Castro announced a “Draft Special Communiqué” condemning the attack and calling for a commission to verify the health of former Vice President Jorge Glas, whose kidnapping by Ecuadorian forces was part of the conflict.
However, there has never been any record of the document’s approval or any action taken. In practice, the region continued to be indifferent to a significant violation of diplomatic immunity.
The Tegucigalpa summit concluded with a concise eight-point general statement. Castro coined the term “sufficient consensus” to sidestep reality: a majority supported the resolution, with three opposed (Nicaragua, Paraguay, and Peru).
Lula called for an end to the consensus rule because disagreements had paralyzed the entire process. However, the rule still exists, and technically, not even the eight points could have been approved.
With her attendance, Sheinbaum distanced herself from her predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who rejected diplomatic activism.
However, the Mexican president explained her attendance with one of those sentiments that leaders might think but do not have to express publicly: “We’re going because we love Xiomara very much… it’s hard to refuse, she’s very persistent.”
