Experts say threats of sanctions against Ecuador for embassy raid will soon turn to reconciliation

Despite threats of sanctions against Ecuador for its raid on the Mexican embassy, most international law experts believe the conversation will soon turn to reconciliation. “Situations like this one always begin with angry rhetoric but eventually calm down and talks begin to repair the damage,” says Carlos Estarellas, former government minister and law professor.

Ecuador Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Alejandro Dávalos made a presentation before the Organization of American States on Tuesday.

“Today, you hear threats of sanctions and penalties but soon there will be negotiations, clarifications and apologies,” Estarellas added. “I doubt there will be any serious action taken against Ecuador.”

On Tuesday, Ecuador presented its explanation for the embassy invasion and the arrest former vice president Jorge Glas at an Organization of American States (OAS) meeting in Washington, D.C. “It is my country’s intention to begin discussions to resume bilateral relations with Mexico and to overcome the difficulties of the current situation,” said Ecuador Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Alejandro Dávalos at the conclusion of a 27-minute presentation. “Ultimately, we want a full reconciliation with our friends from Mexico,” he said.

Although OAS representatives were unanimous in condemning Ecuador’s embassy raid, several mentioned “legitimate concerns” regarding Glas’ claim of political asylum.

Dávalos urged the OAS and the international community to “review and update rules of diplomatic asylum in recognition of the rising threat of transnational organized crime.” He also suggested that Mexico’s decision to grant asylum to Glas was based on ideological, not human rights, concerns.

According to international business consultant Esteban Santos, the OAS will probably issue a formal criticism of the raid but will not impose penalties on Ecuador. “The OAS does not have the authority or the inclination to punish a country. Their mission is to resolve disputes in the region,” Santos says.

Santos said smaller regional organizations, such as the Bolivarian Alliance and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States will likely recommend stronger action against Ecuador. “These are small, mostly insignificant groups so I doubt their proclamations will carry much weight.”

He added: “There have been a number of random demands for sanctions, such as suspending the EU trade agreement and barring Ecuador from regional football competition, but these are not serious.”

Santos also doubted the impact of Mexico’s suit against Ecuador in the UN International Court of Justice. “These cases take years to resolve and usually fail to get the desired result,” he said. “Ecuador has its own experience with this in two actions against Colombia, one involving a cross-border invasion against FARC, the other about the spraying coca crops that affected Ecuadorian farmers. Nothing was resolved.”

Farith Simon, University of San Francisco law professor, agrees with Santos and Dávalos and points out that multi-nation sanctions are usually imposed for a “wide-ranging pattern” of abuses, not for a single incident. “As unjustified as Ecuador’s action was, it does not warrant strong diplomatic or economic sanctions,” he says. “Consider the actions against Iran, Russia, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua and you see they were taken following a series of condemnations.”

Simon adds that sanctions are often based on ideological differences. “I disagree with the U.S. sanctions against Cuba and some of those against Venezuela and I certainly see the political backdrop to Ecuador’s raid and the arrest of Glas but I don’t see this going beyond the current level of anger. I think this will calm down in the coming days and weeks.”