Sheinbaum's leftist government broke off relations with Ecuador

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum broke off relations with Ecuador and conditioned their restoration on the departure of President Daniel Noboa. This decision came after the police intervention at the Mexican embassy in Quito, where former Vice President Jorge Glas was arrested.

Far from a diplomatic resolution, Sheinbaum turned a bilateral disagreement into an ideological crusade. The president has followed the line of her predecessor Andrés Manuel López Obrador, but now she has hardened it, demanding ideological affinity to maintain relations with other countries.

The socialist president justified her decision by alleging a "violation of sovereignty" Mexican. However, she ignored the fact that Glas had convictions for corruption, which makes his asylum a political gesture rather than a humanitarian one. This stance reveals that, for the Mexican government, political refugees only matter if they are on their side.

Meanwhile Mexico goes to international courts, it uses the diplomatic break as a political punishment. What should be a channel for dialogue becomes a tool of ideological pressure. Diplomacy is diluted between ideological whims and partisan favoritism.

From Ecuador, the perception is clear: Mexico acts arbitrarily, using its foreign policy to reinforce its alignment with the Latin American socialist bloc. This behavior, rather than protecting national interests, reinforces a narrative of sterile confrontation.

The so-called "4T" turned Mexican foreign policy into an extension of the internal discourse. Instead of promoting dialogue, understanding, and conflict resolution, Sheinbaum has opted for isolation against governments that do not share her ideological line.

While several countries in the region seek to rebuild bridges with Ecuador after the incident, Mexico self-excludes under the pretext of dignity. However, what seems like an act of sovereignty is actually a refusal to accept the rules of international diplomacy.

The attitude of the Mexican government contrasts with the political maturity required for bilateral relations. The ideological use of embassies, asylums, and diplomatic breaks weakens Mexico's credibility and projects an image of intolerance. This type of decision is not limited to the bilateral level. The blockade on Ecuador sends a dangerous message to the region: if you do not share the ideology of the socialist bloc, there is no possible dialogue. Thus, an exclusive diplomacy is institutionalized, where national interests are subordinated to ideological positions.

The region needs bridges, not trenches. And every time a country closes its embassy or breaks relations over ideological differences, it loses relevance on the international stage. Mexico, under Sheinbaum, is moving away from its historical role as a regional articulator.

Meanwhile, Ecuador has maintained a firm and legalistic stance. The capture of Jorge Glas was not a whim, but an action endorsed by the Ecuadorian justice. Conditioning relations on the departure of a democratically elected president is a dangerous precedent.

The diplomatic break imposed by Sheinbaum is a demonstration of how Latin American left prefers dogma over dialogue. And as long as this continues, Mexico will continue to lose voice and influence in Latin America.

The decision of Sheinbaum's government shows how Latin American socialism prioritizes ideology over national interest. Ecuador, on the other hand, defended the rule of law against external pressure, strengthening its image as a sovereign and coherent country.