Cuenca High Life logo

Ecuador News

Ecuador’s ambassador to the U.S. resigns over surveillance flights disagreement

Ecuador ambassador to the U.S. Francisco Carrión submitted his resignation Tuesday, saying he disagreed with the government’s decision to allow U.S. surveillance flights without a signed agreement. “These flights have been conducted over Ecuadorian territory since September 2018 without rules or restrictions,” he explained.

Former ambassador to the U.S. Francisco Carrión

In its announcement that Carrión has stepped down, the government claimed that it had requested his resignation in an effort to improve relations with the U.S., particularly in trade-related matters. President Lenin Moreno’s private secretary, Juan Sebastián Roldán, said that the president had requested the resignation in the interest of “enhancing relations with the U.S. and creating a more fluid business exchange.”

Carrión called Roldán’s statement “nonsense,” saying that his views on the surveillance flights had been known to the government for months. “I made it clear I would resign without a detailed agreement allowing the flights and without a cessation of the flights until that time,” he said. “We were making significant progress in the area of trade during my ambassadorship so this was never an issue.”

Carrión added that he did not receive a request to step down before submitting his resignation to the president. “It is strange they say they requested my resignation after I had submitted it,” the ambassador said.

Citing security concerns Carrión did not provide details about current surveillance operations by U.S. aircraft over Ecuadorian territory but said he considered it “poor management of the country’s sovereignty” to allow them without a signed agreement. “My concern has been transmitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on several occasions that negotiations with the U.S. are in progress and no agreement has been signed.”

According to earlier announcements by the foreign ministry, the flights have been permitted over Ecuadorian territorial waters in the Pacific, including the Galapagos.

Carrión said there appeared an eagerness on the part of the government to please the U.S. “at all costs and I disagree with this approach.”

Prior to his appointment to the U.S. ambassadorship in 2018, Carrión had served as Foreign Minister, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador to Spain and permanent representative to the UN.

76 thoughts on “Ecuador’s ambassador to the U.S. resigns over surveillance flights disagreement

    1. If he ran for President, Moreno would lock him up and charge him with terrorism. That’s what he’s been doing with all the potential presidential candidates who oppose him.

    2. Lucila: I don’t know enough to agree or disagree, but judging from the reasons for his resignation, I am impressed.

  1. Bravo, Ambassador Carrión!

    Please let us know when the next overflight is scheduled and we can all step outside, look up to the sky, and give a great big one-finger salute to The Stable Genius, Pompeo, Pence, Abrams, Esper and the rest of the warmongering jackals in DC.

    1. Warmongering? I guess Iran should just be allowed to kill more people and create more terrorist cells and the rest of the world should just sit ideally by and watch the terrorists get bigger and meaner.

      Is that really what you would like to see happen because that is a gaurantee if no one stands up to killers, beheaders and religous zealots that hate Westerners and feel that they should obliterate them all in the name of religion .

      1. “…if no one stands up to killers…and religous (sic) zealots that hate…and feel that they should obliterate them all in the name of religion.”

        It’s not only Pompeo who is a religious zealot and dispensationalist; it’s also Pence and Esper, among others. And these are the guys who are leading Little Donnie around by the nose.

        We live in truly scary times.

        Makes me thankful to be living in peaceful and tranquilo little Ecuador every day.

      2. The “killers, beheaders and religous zealots that hate Westerners and feel
        that they should obliterate them all in the name of religion”are Wahabists like Bin Laden was. They are educated, financed and sheltered by Saudi Arabia, the US’s best friend in the Gulf.

        Iran are Shiites. They have been fighting against the Wahabists for decades. They were fighting ISIS when the US was still sending them arms. Once again, you root for the wrong side.

        1. You are NOT seriously rooting for IRAN. They just shot down a Ukrainian airplane a few days ago with most of the passengers being Canadians. INNOCENT PASSENGERS

            1. Latest news JUST IN: Iran shot down a Ukrainian airliner with two Russian-made surface-to-air missiles on Wednesday.

                1. In your quest to stick for Iran you are forgetting something very important…Iran has said numerous times they will retaliate and the daughter of Soleimani herself warned the US of “dark days”. It is no longer conjecture when US has been warned.

                    1. It’s interesting when your focus is on a word used yet you gloss over the fact that Iran is a big threat and avoid that more pressing discussion

                    2. A conjecture is an educated guess that is based on known information. The known information is that there are many threats from Iran.

                    3. Ad hominem typically refers to a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument

                    4. There’s an old, now fairly shopworn aphorism usually attributed to Will Rogers that I think was voiced expressly for you, Esmeralda:

                      “If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging.”

                      You’re horribly outclassed and making yourself look more foolish with each passing cut-and-paste bloviation.

                      Stop digging.

                    5. Iran is shooting down planes and your only response is to insult me. Well that is a very weak response to the recent disaster.

                    6. In a continuation of a never-ending string of unwarranted, wanton, unjustified and (I would hope) unintentional murder of innocent civilians, the United States yesterday killed or wounded more than 60 Afghan citizens with an errant “oops” drone strike. I don’t recall ever seeing you comment, much less express your revulsion and horror, at the millions of innocent men, women and children the US has unintentionally killed in the Middle East.

                      Is it that you don’t feel their lives and the Canadian deaths you mourn are equal?

                      Where’s the proportionality, Esmeralda?

                      Stop digging. You’re just continuing to bury yourself more and more.

                    7. The disaster has been constant since the US overthrew their democratically elected government and installed a brutal dictator.

                      BTW, the US also shot down a passenger plane taking off from that very same airport. Your thoughts?

                    8. Iran’s leadership has now taken responsibility for the tragic mistake and has apologized profusely.

                      Compare that to how US leadership under GHW Bush responded to a very similar error in 1988 when the US shot down Iran Air Flight 655 killing 290 passengers and crew:

                      “I’ll never apologize for the United States of America–ever–I don’t care what the facts are.”

                      Furthermore–regarding the millions of hapless, innocent men, women and children we have killed in the Middle East by mistake (otherwise known as “collateral damage”), have you ever seen a US official come out and apologize for our murderous mistakes?

                      Now THAT, Esmeralda, is insulting.

                    9. What is insulting is to say, oh well I’m sorry that the plane was shot down. It is like saying sorry makes it all better. It does not make it better. The innocent passenger plane SHOULD NOT been shot down at all.

                    10. Sometimes I wonder if you can actually read.

                      So heartfelt and sincere apologies for a tragic mistake are insulting (Iran) but arrogantly and hubristically huffing “I will never apologize regardless of the facts” (GHW Bush) in an identical situation that resulted in even more deaths and was far less excusable (and awarding medals to the cretins responsible for the grievous error) is just peachy keen, huh?

                      Where do you get this stuff, Esmeralda?

                    11. Two suggested articles for your reading pleasure, Esmeralda:

                      1. Iran’s admission of its tragic mistake over the downed Ukrainian airliner reminds us who the real barbarians are at


                      Iran’s admission of responsibility is not the action of a barbaric state. It is the action of a government that values the sanctity of life, and which places a premium on the dignity that should be afforded the dead. It is difference between a cultured people and one reared on genocidal violence and racism.

                      2. Daesh terror group praises ‘allied’ US for assassinating Gen. Soleimani at

                2. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says intelligence now indicates the Ukrainian passenger aircraft that crashed outside of Tehran on Wednesday, killing everyone on board — including 138 people destined for Canada — was shot down by an Iranian missile.

                  “We have intelligence from multiple sources, including our allies and our own intelligence. The evidence indicates that the plane was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile,” he said during a news conference in Ottawa.

          1. You are not seriously rooting for the religious fundamentalist dictators in Saudi Arabia who funds and arms terrorists who have been killing Americans for the past 20 years?

            Oh yeah, you are.

            Whether or not Iran shot down that plane remains to be seen. However, for the record, the US shot down a plane full of innocent passengers that was taking off from that very same airport and they did it on purpose. That’s not conjecture, it’s not a conspiracy theory, it’s verified historical fact. I’m sure you’re not aware of that fact and I’m sure you won’t take the time to look it up because you would NEVER take the time to find out the truth about anything.

              1. The US still refuses for shooting down a civilian plane taking off from that same airport. Your thoughts?

                1. I have not yet heard you say you are disgusted with Iran shooting the Ukrainian plane with many Canadians on board. Your thoughts on that? If we hear any more deflecting and regurgitating what happened in the past 100 years we will assume that you are on Irans side.

                  1. Who is this “we” you claim to speak for?

                    BTW, I have not yet heard you say you are disgusted with the US for overthrowing democracies across Latin America and installing and arming dictatorships that were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

                    By your reasoning, since you haven’t spoken out against it, it must mean you’re in favor of it. In other words, you support murderous dictatorships and the systemic subversion of democracy. How do you live with yourself?

                    1. The US is known for overthrowing dictators and installing and arming the people that want democracy and that are suppressed and being killed and maimed by their iron fisted cheating, stealing, lying dictators (like Assad in Syria). The Syrian people kept asking and asking the US to please come and help them because Assad and his band of thugs (and his allies like Iran) decimated their own country in the name of keeping power – and Russia helped Assad. So to suggest that Syria is a democracy is absurd.

                      Like I said l we were not interested in deflecting and regurgitating but we are certainly interested in your thoughts on the plane that Iran shot down.

                    2. [yawn] Claiming I suggested Syria is a democracy is an absurd deflection.

                      But again, the US overthrew democratically elected governments and replaced them with murderous dictators in almost every country in Latin America and you have NEVER once expressed any disgust. By your own reasoning, that means you support it. This article is about Ecuador but you seem determined to make every conversation about Iran. Why is that? Is it because you cannot justify the hundreds of thousands of people murdered IN THIS REGION (not the other side of the world) in the name of preserving US hegemony?

                      I don’t have any thoughts on the plane Iran shot down. Some guy at a surface-to-air missile battery made a mistake and innocent civilians were killed. The same thing happened when the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian airliner mistaking it for an Iranian F-14. Iran admitted their error and apologized. The US refuses even to this day to apologize or even admit they made a mistake. When asked if he would issue an apology, George H.W. Bush proudly proclaimed that he would NEVER apologize for the US.

                      So I’m sure Trump won’t apologize for the 10 civilians killed in a US airstrike last week in Afghanistan. When the US does it, it’s just collateral damage, right?

    2. And then there are the anti US zeolots that can never seem to see or say ANY thing good about the US who is always being asked by other countries to protect them. The US is dammed if they don’t protect and dammed if they do. There will ALWAYS be the cronic complainers and whinners that run and hide when it comes to standing up to the terrorists.

      Our maybe we should be all hugging the bad guys (terrorists and the jailbirds alike) hoping they will change when we know darn well punishing them is most often the only thing that changes bad behaviors.

      1. You are so right (as always) Esmeralda.

        Killing hundreds of thousands of totally innocent civilians and causing the displacement of millions is a surefire way to guarantee that that none of the affected parties will ever harbor the least bit of anger or resentment and will produce peace, harmony and kumbaya world wide.

        Do you EVER stop to think how you would feel if you were on the receiving end of the US magnanimous gift of incendiary democracy?

      2. The so called pacifists clearly have little or no knowledge of history. Churchill was vilified by them in the 1930s they much preferred Chameberlain. See where it got them then.Working on a rerun. Sad.

        1. I would argue the counterpoint, i.e., that many (most? the lion’s share of?) saber-rattling interventionist warmongers have little or no knowledge of history or–to be kind–they believe what they have been (mis)led to believe throughout their lives.

          Most ashamedly, I admit that I used to be one of them.

          Many modern day historians who have been able to search through voluminous records and who are further removed from the immediate post-war emotions and the completely biased, distorted analyses of the causes and run-up to WW2 paint an entirely different picture of Churchill…and it’s not a pretty one at all.

          You ask rhetorically to “see where it got them.” While the counterfactual can never be tested or proven, you might want to try doing a little research yourself into history written not by the victors immediately following the war attempting to justify their deeds and misdeeds, but rather history written more recently from a more objective and–I would argue–more honest viewpoint.

          You could start with Pat Buchanan’s Churchill, Hitler, And The Unnecessary War [ ]. If that’s not enough, check out The Costs of War; America’s Pyrrhic Victories edited by John V. Denson [ ].

          Actually, if you read nothing else, read the essay by Ralph Raico (Chapter 12 in The Costs of War) entitled Rethinking Churchill at []

          Here’s the closing summary of Raico’s Rethinking Churchill essay:

          There is a way of looking at Winston Churchill that is very tempting: that he was a deeply flawed creature, who was summoned at a critical moment to do battle with a uniquely appalling evil, and whose very flaws contributed to a glorious victory — in a way, like Merlin, in C.S. Lewis’s great Christian novel, That Hideous Strength. Such a judgment would, I believe, be superficial. A candid examination of his career, I suggest, yields a different conclusion: that, when all is said and done, Winston Churchill was a Man of Blood and a politico without principle, whose apotheosis serves to corrupt every standard of honesty and morality in politics and history.

          Want more? Try Day of Deceit; The Truth About FDR And Pearl Harbor by Robert B. Stinnett [ ] or The New American Militarism; How Americans Are Seduced By War by Andrew J. Bacevich []

          If that’s not enough, I can recommend dozens more…just ask. I sincerely hope that we’re not “working on a rerun” which would indeed be far worse than WW2. And that’s exactly why I am NOT a pacifist but I AM a radical non-interventionist. There’s a huge difference that I hope I don’t need to explain.

      3. As long as trump, pence et al are leading the U.S., it will be an evil country. Do you support them?

        You misspelled “zealots”, “anything” is one word, “chronic” is misspelled as is the first word in your last paragraph, which should never begin with a conjunction anyway. That leads me to ask if you were educated in the United States?

        1. I was in a hurry and went back to fix them and they were not available. So bite me

          It used to be we thought that people who went around correcting other people’s grammar were just plain annoying. Now there’s evidence they are actually ill, suffering from a type of obsessive-compulsive disorder/oppositional defiant disorder (OCD/ODD). Researchers are calling it Grammatical Pedantry Syndrome, or GPS.

    3. FedUpExpat,please do not include me in your thoughtless comments ” and we can all step outside, look up to the sky, and give a great big one-finger salute”. I too am a expat that does agree with the purpose of the overflights. Notice where the flights are located, ” the flights have been permitted over Ecuadorian territorial waters in the Pacific, including the Galapagos”.
      Living in a small coastal fishing village I have observed plenty of issues with the gasoline and drug smuggling on the coast.Very problematic to say the least.The purpose of the flights are to enhance Ecuador in it’s effort to combat the severe problem that does exist. The US offers and is using AWAC planes to track the narco traffickers and to relay information to the Ecuadorian Navy and Coast Guard.This is a joint effort in the hope of ridding this very problematic issue that plagues the Ecuadorian coast, and ruins countless families.

        1. Couldn’t possibly be what Moreno agreed to give up in return, could it?

          Can you spell A-s-s-a-n-g-e?

      1. You know, Mr. Delgado, it seems that when one government edict creates problems it always requires about a dozen more edicts, government actions, restrictions and enforcement mechanisms and all the attendant mistakes and costs to fix the problem that the bleeping government created in the first place.

        One of my favorite authors, Robert Higgs–a fellow at the Independent Institute–wrote an excellent book on this very topic called Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes In The Growth Of American Government [].

        Maybe a better solution would be to address the root causes rather than slapping more bandaids on top of a pile of already soaked bandages.

        Just another “thoughtless comment” for your reading pleasure, JR. And check out Higgs book– yet another thoughtless comment.

        1. While I agree that “root causes ” need to be addressed. Sometimes bandages (first aid , primeros auxilios) are needed before primary hospital care. Especially in this particular circumstance.

          1. You may very well be right.

            The US surveillance overflights could be purely unselfish, generous Good-Samaritan-help-your-neighbor missions with no strings attached.

            And I could be the Tooth Fairy.

      2. Where has 50 years of drug prohibition gotten us? There are 9 US military bases in Colombia and 8 in Peru, the #1 and #2 coca producers on the planet. Meanwhile, we’re supposed to believe that a US presence in Ecuador, the only Andean country with zero coca production, is supposed to rid us of this very problematic issue that plagues the Ecuadorian coast and ruins countless families?

        Nice talking points, but it flies in the face of half a century of data to the contrary.

  2. Ecuador should not have anything to do with Americans, Gringo’s should also be screened before being allowed this county. If not it could result in a corrupt infestation.

      1. It does not matter if Ecuador is corrupt! Why would they want to allow more corruption to come in from all these Gringo’s. Give it a little thought and you will understand why your statement is soooo silly!

  3. Americans that do not pass the Ecuadorian Border Entrance Qualifications (i.e. those who support Trump) will be shipped off to Venezuela.

      1. Apparently so…. It is getting more and more obvious that our friend Osvaldo has a very, very “loose grasp” on the practicalities of what he proposes. Maybe we should direct him to the “Trade Balance” pages, that show that the U.S. is Ecuador’s largest net positive trade partner….. that’s a lot of shrimp, bananas, and cut flowers (the US doesn’t need the oil). God forbid any tariff action on any of those commodities that the U.S. can easily source elsewhere.

    1. Central and South Americans that do not pass the Border Entrance Qualifications as set up by Ecuador when trying to enter the USA, including those that do not support the POTUS, Donald J. Trump, should be shipped off to,…… ummm…where …… hmmm……….., how about where they came from?

      1. Maybe they should be just be denied entry, and turned around, regardless of who they “support”……. particularly since most are impoverished and uneducated, meaning that they will “support” anyone who gives them handouts and free stuff

  4. Moreno seems to be willing to please Trump at all costs. A shame for Ecuador and a loss of its sovereign rights.

    1. Do you really, really think, that “Trump” is somehow, some way, focused in any shape, form or manner, on Ecuador? Come on, get real. This is a shining example of egocentrism.

      I regret that I must be the one to tell you that Ecuador, in the scheme of things, is neither strategic, nor is it important, to U.S. interests. If you stop and think about it…. that is actually a good place to be.

      1. Yes, actually I do believe that trump and his minions are focused to some degree on Ecuador. We could easily prove it to you but of course, everybody knows you don’t do links, and when backed into a truth corner, you suddenly “stop caring” about the instant discussion.

        1. He’s too busy to read your comment but that doesn’t mean he isn’t too busy to reply to it at least once. If he’s really busy, he’ll reply multiple times.

      2. Trump as an individual doesn’t have to be focused on Ecuador. He has a multi-trillion dollar machine called the US government with millions of people who divide up the work so that they can focus on every single thing on the planet. Their career advancement hinges on their ability to do something that gets the bosses attention. That’s how large organizations work.

        As for Trump, he’s made it pretty clear for the past 3 years that he isn’t capable of “focusing” on anything. I doubt he can even tie his own shoes. His dementia makes Reagan’s look mild by comparison. That didn’t stop the machine from terrorizing Nicaragua throughout his entire term.

    1. Wrong. TDS is when Trump supporters believe that Trump is truthful. Clearly, they are deranged.

Comments are closed.