The replacement of chancellors in a government that has only been in office for eleven months is surely not a reassuring signal that the country sends to the world. Much more so, when it comes to a chancellor like Diana Mondino, who at all times showed alignment with libertarian ideas, but tried to soften with empathy Javier Milei‘s discourtesies towards other presidents.
The replacement of chancellors in a government that has only been in office for eleven months is surely not a reassuring signal that the country sends to the world. Much more so, when it comes to a chancellor like Diana Mondino, who at all times showed alignment with libertarian ideas, but tried to soften with empathy Javier Milei’s discourtesies towards other presidents.
The problem is how a government understands foreign policy. From 2003 onwards, except for the parenthesis of Macrism, they understood it as an ideological militancy and not as an instrument to build relationships and privilege the interests of the country, and not just the government. Yesterday, the new Minister of Foreign Affairs, Gerardo Werthein, stated: “In our country there is only one foreign policy, the one defined by the president.” It must be like this, always. International ties must be governed by values, political prudence and the expertise to measure the scope of each word that is spoken and each step that is taken. The reality of each country is complex enough to confuse foreign policy with internal struggle. That’s what career diplomats and experts in international politics are there for: to turn a strong idea into an accessible goal, with the least possible damage to our relationship with the world.
It is evident that the Argentine vote in favor of lifting the so-called blockade of Cuba by the United States could not have come from an order from Milei. And if there had been an order in favor of the blockade and Diana Mondino ignored it, she would have incurred such reckless disregard that it is difficult to understand. Sometimes, between the president and a minister there may be a broken telephone.
It is worth clarifying that the vote at the UN referred only to the commercial exchange between the US and Cuba and not to the human rights violations that have been committed in the Caribbean country for 65 years.
The official statement informing the forced resignation of Mondino is not encouraging for the diplomatic health of the country. It is correct that “the diplomatic corps must reflect in every decision the values of freedom, sovereignty and individual rights that characterize Western democracies,” but he anticipates an audit of diplomats to “identify the agendas inimical to freedom.” Precisely, the diplomat must be a cultured professional, who enjoys the greatest freedom of thought, but who operationally does what the president orders. And freedom of thought is essential, because the career diplomat must advise the government.
Suffice it to remember the sad spectacle of obedience that the ambassador to China Sabino Vaca Narvaja usually offered during the presidency of Fernández and Cristina Kirchner, when he reversed roles and seemed to represent Xi Jinping before Argentina.
President Milei is a firm defender of Western values, today questioned from within by many deconstructionist activists. In a world in the midst of realignment, Milei is determined to consolidate a privileged bond with Israel and the United States as a strategic direction. If we analyze the behavior of anti-Western countries, such as Russia, North Korea and Iran, and the growing competition between the US and China, which will surely accelerate in the coming years, diplomatic prudence must seek to firmly maintain values, avoid unnecessary ruptures, for example, with China, and carry out a strategy to promote foreign trade, technological development and the use of agricultural, livestock, mining and energy resources, which will strengthen our position in the world.
