Mexican foreign policy during the government of Luis Echeverría (1970-1976): renewed global activism
The foreign policy of the Luis Echeverría administration (1970-1976) can be characterized to a large extent by renewed activism and growing geographical reach, with intense efforts to diversify Mexico’s foreign relations and greater participation in a number of international bodies. It sought to ava...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | México |
| Institución: | EL COLEGIO DE MÉXICO |
| Repositorio: | Foro Internacional |
| Idioma: | español |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:oai.forointernacional.colmex.mx:article/2950 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://forointernacional.colmex.mx/index.php/fi/article/view/2950 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | política exterior de México Luis Echeverría Álvarez (1970-1976) diversificación relación bilateral Estados Unidos relaciones multilaterales Mexican foreign policy diversification bilateral relationship The United States and Latin America multilateral relations |
| Sumario: | The foreign policy of the Luis Echeverría administration (1970-1976) can be characterized to a large extent by renewed activism and growing geographical reach, with intense efforts to diversify Mexico’s foreign relations and greater participation in a number of international bodies. It sought to avail of favorable conditions on the global stage, with the aim of expanding its range of independent action with regard to the United States, while also resolving immediate economic and political problems. However, in parallel, it tried not to abandon the relationship with the latter country, which maintained its primordial position thanks to the close and diverse ties between the two neighbors. Throughout this six-year period, the Echeverría government sought to avoid these multilateral activities—which implied taking positions distinct from or frankly opposed to the United States on a number of issues—negatively impacting on this bilateral relationship. However, this effort saw decreasing returns as Mexican positions and discourse at these organizations became increasingly radical. |
|---|