중남미

The article has the main goal to make a balance of Mexico’s Foreign Policy after three years when Enrique Peña Nieto’s government has started in Asia. At the same time, it aims to measure the positive impact of its achievements thanks to the favoring perception (mediate) of the international community surrounding the “Mexican Moment 2)”. We part from the expectancy that the conjunction and the link 3) of what has been done in the Internal Policy topic (political and economic reforms) with the activism in Foreign Policy that have contributed through a good campaign of international communication for the world to have the actual perception of Mexico. Nevertheless, the “Mexican Moment” is not the end, but  mean to consolidate the relations with our traditional associates like our North America Free Trade Association (NAFTA) fellows. so, to launch a real diversification of our economic and political relations with strategic regions, such as the case of Asia. In this way the national interest stated in the National Development Plan (NDP) of the actual administration would be accomplished. In this context, there is, in my point of view some significant changes if we compare with it to the past management.

The Counselor is with whom the president agrees, carves the critical route to accomplish what by means of the President’s judgment will be the national interest in subject. Same that we can obtain through the reading of the PND, specifically in the “Mexico con Responsabilidad Global” (Mexico with Global Responsibility), section, or by the interpretation of some pragmatically characterized actions of our diplomacy5) . In this context, I would like to enumerate what I consider as the three main changes of Mexican diplomacy since December 1st 2012 until today. First, a return has been made to what before the year 2000 was known as Mexico’s diplomatic tradition, stuck to seven basic principles6)  or instruments with which it operated more than 70 years ago.

I refer to the self - determination of peoples; the no intervention; the pacific solution of international controversies; the exclusion, threat or the use of the force in international relations; juridical equity of States; the international cooperation for development and the fight for international security and peace. The last, we can corroborate it with the actual activism and closure of the Ministry with countries in which if they had not ignored this principles, would not operate to restore diplomatic relations with them. In this we waste time and human resources that should be working on other priorities of the country. The cases of Cuba and Venezuela are notable.

Second, an effective job, that was lost, has been done in the alignment of the outward strategy with other departments and agencies of government. Cases such as ProMexico, Ministry of Finance and Economy, among others are prominent. Third, an effort to return to what was called “diplomatic job” has been done where although in some cases it has taken into account the ingredient or political naming of ambassadors, it’s appreciated that most of them have the necessary tools to perform efficiently and align to what President Peña entrusts them. Of course, there are exceptional cases that without wanting to justify them, they are common practices in most of the foreign ministries of the world. At this point, I will discuss the relationship of the "Mexican Moment" of which we have spoken with Asia.

Asia:

According to information from the Ministry of Economy of Mexico in the year 2014 there was a unfavorable trade balance in Mexico with our three major trade partners: China, Japan and Korea:  -$86,981.543 million dollars (total imports were $97,582.462) and the Mexican exports were just $10,600.927.  It seems that with Asia we are still maintaining a deficit that would have to rethink our trade policy towards the region which would be consistent with the idea planted in the present administration of President Peña to diversify our trade relations with the outside and stop relying on the U.S. market8). The figures for the trade balance with our three main partners in the region show a clear disadvantage with them.

In the case of China, who is our main economic partner in Asia and according to figures from the Economy Ministry of Mexico on the subject, we have a deficit in our trade balance of about -60,291.834 million dollars in 2014. The Mexican exports were $5,954.125 million dollars and imports were $66,255.959 million dollars. With Japan the picture is not very different even though we signed an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) in 2004, which entered into force on April 1st, 2005, and that, I believe, has not been exploited to a hundred percent. Only in 2014 we had a trade deficit with them of about -14,936.096 million dollars and the fees that protect the Agreement aren’t filled most and most employers prefer to focus in traditional markets because of the complexity of the market in that country. The Mexican exports were $2,608.474 million dollars and imports were 17,544.572 million dollars With Korea, the situation is quite similar in balance trade: -$11,753.614. The Mexican exports were $2,028.326 million dollars and imports were $13,781.931 million dollars. Here is the opportunity with China, Japan and Korea.

This is not easy, of course, goes beyond a simple statement or the use of FTAs that our country according Pro-Mexico, “has a network of 12 FTAs with 44 countries (FTAs), 28 Agreements for the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments (APPRIs) and 9 trade agreements (Economic Complementation Agreements and Partial Scope Agreements) under of the Latin American Integration Association (LAIA)" goes in the sense of generating the human resources capable to face the challenges of the international economic relations of Mexico, in this case with the Asiatic countries. We know that China, Japan and Korea are the main trading partners of Mexico in that region; however, with all of them we maintain a trade deficit, which far from helping our public finances, deteriorate them10).  This diagnosis seems a given fact. But here is where the problem lies. We could not move from diagnosis to implementation. What would we have to do so that our trade with the Chinese, Japanese or Korean market becomes in surplus? Good question. Each case represents a different scenario. To begin, we must consider each of these countries has its own characteristics (business culture). We can’t generate a generic business strategy in our policy toward the region; on the contrary, we must create one specific for each case. There is a difference between doing business in China than in Japan or Korea.

In addition to this, it’s needed that the stakeholders interested in extending or expanding economic relations with Asian countries (private sector and government) establish long-term policies on human resources topic or economic representatives specialists in each country. It is here where we are several years delayed compared to Asian countries. A sample of this delay is the policy in human resource training in both the government and companies, something they have launched more than two or three decades ago.

If we want to be successful with our products with partners in the Far East, we must begin to create and run a foreign economic policy where human capital undoubtedly must play a major role. If we do not act accordingly, we will continue to use the half of the benefit from the opportunities these countries offer to the Mexican exporting sector. Even though China is our largest trading partner in Asia, we don’t have a Free Trade Agreement with them; with Korea we're beating around the bush with a view to not sign it, and in the case of Japan, we have not taken advantage (odds) of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). If we do not give legal instruments to Mexican businessmen, and we don’t encourage them to venture beyond North America, in 2015 the scene of our foreign trade will be very similar to today’s scene.

Conclusions:

I conclude that there are tangible advances in foreign policy that aren’t only supported by the abroad travels of President Peña (international activism), but by the change of direction and return to what at the time was functional, also adapting smart strategies to operate it at the level of international relations of average power as it is today Mexico, which reinforces the notion and image in the world as the "Mexican Moment". This has been achieved through the impact in international media via diffusion (alignment) of the objectives (economic, political and social) achieved in Domestic Policy and its link to those pursued in the Foreign Policy. In this way, the "Mexican Moment" is the product of this close relationship in which structural reforms undertaken in Mexico during 2013 and seasoned by political agreements of various parties played an important role.

There are, I do not deny it, challenges for our diplomacy, such as our relocation in Latin America and the Caribbean; match asymmetries of our relations with America; pass the approach to partnership with the countries of the Pacific; regain lost spaces in Europe and regain our presence in Africa. I think we are not far to achieve this, however, the long-term vision, human and economic resources, specially in Asia, undoubtedly have to accompany any foreign policy strategy either traditional or pragmatic. This certainly will help the "Mexican Moment" to become the "Mexican Success".

_______________________

1) Adolfo Laborde is Professor of International Relations at Tec de Monterrey, Mexico, Santa Fe Campus. He is member of the National System of Researchers (SNI) from CONACYT, Mexico.
2) For more information about the travelled change by Mexico, and to reach what authors like Jorge G. Castañeda have reached, please consult the article A Transformed Society, Economy, and Government de O´Neil, Shannon in Foreign Affairs, in the number March - April 2013. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/author/shannon-k-oneil page consulted in July 2th 2015.
3) For this diagnosis I part from the reflections of the book: Schiavon, Jorge A.; Velázquez. Flores, Rafael, Editores. La política exterior de México, 2012-2018. Diagnóstico y Propuestas, AMEI, Mexico, 2012, 126. pp
4) For more information of the National Plan of Development consult: http://pnd.gob.mx Web page consulted in July 3th 2015.
5) About the first year of President Enrique Peña Nieto’s government, please consult: Laborde, Adolfo, Peña Nieto apostó por regresar por la diplomacia tradicional, in CNN Mexico, November 27th 2013: http://mexico.cnn.com/opinion/2013/11/27/opinion-pena-nieto-aposto-por-regresar-a-la-diplomacia-tradicional Web page consulted in July 2th 2015.
6) For more information about the basic principles of Mexico’s Foreign Policy, please consult: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/cedia/sia/spi/DPI-ISS-08-05.pdf  Web page consulted in July 2th 2015.
7) Ministry of Economy of Mexico: http://economia.gob.mx/comunidad-negocios/comercio-exterior/informacion-estadistica-y-arancelaria Web page consulted in July 6th 2015
8) About the opportunities that the market of Asia offer to Mexico, please consult: Laborde, Adolfo, Asia: oportunidades de diversificación comercial in Revista Negocios de ProMéxico, Vol. V, May, 2013, Mexico pp. 72-73.
9) For more information, consult the webpage of ProMexico: http://www.promexico.gob.mx/en_us/promexico/home Web page consulted in July 2th2015.
10) For more information about statics of Foreign Trade with Asia, please consult the web page about the topic of the Economic Ministry of Mexico: http://www.economia.gob.mx/comunidad-negocios/comercio-exterior Web page consulted in July 2th2015.