To say that the summit between the EU and Celac that has been held this week in Brussels has been a historic success and a milestone because two blocks that had not sat at the table for eight years have promised to strengthen ties, signed some conventions and agreements bilateral agreements and 45,000 million euros have been promised in future investments would be exaggerating. To say that it has been a failure because the veto of a country, Nicaragua, to a paragraph has forced to put an asterisk in the final declaration, too. The truth is somewhere in between and depending on the approach. If at a technical level the parties can be more than satisfied, the political flavor that remains is somewhat more bittersweet. Progress has been made and the mere representation at the highest level is very good news, but the image that may remain is that of a meeting clouded by two contrary visions, and at times irreconcilable, of the world and geopolitics.
No matter how much the protagonists screamed selling the benefits and reproached “the speculations of the journalists”, it is not just one or two sentences. It has to do with the way of understanding the market, international relations, rules, the past and the future. The 27 Europeans and the 33 from Latin America and the Caribbean have spoken, negotiated and discussed. They have opted for economic and commercial ties, for improving diplomatic relations, for establishing some type of permanent structure so that appointments are now made much more frequently. They have addressed past grudges, from colonialism to slavery. But the refusal of Nicaragua, the only country in the region that even voted in the United Nations with Russia or North Korea in a resolution on the war, has muddied the last day.
For weeks it has been discussed because it became clear that Celac could not support the language proposed by European diplomats. It was not just Nicaragua, but Venezuela, Cuba, Brazil, Honduras, Bolivia. They all had problems, reservations. He touched himself, lowered himself a bit, but the 27 marked a limit. The reference to Ukraine seemed like a red line to them and they were planted: either there was a declaration only signed by the two presidents, Charles Michel for the EU and the prime minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines for Celac, or it was signed by all but one. And in the end it was like this: “This Declaration was supported by all countries with one exception due to their disagreement with a paragraph”, reads at the end of the 10 pages and 41 points.
Europe is very clear that Russia is to blame for the war in Ukraine. That it is an illegal, brutal and unjustified aggression. That the only possible answer is to help Kiev with everything it needs and for as long as it takes, while isolating Moscow in all international forums. That the fault of the problems of shortage of cereals is exclusively of Vladimir Putin. And that the pressure must be maintained at each and every opportunity. The problem is that many of its neighbors or trading partners, from Africa to Asia via Latin America, do not agree, or agree with many nuances and other emphases. And that is why the text does not mention Russia or condemn the aggression.
“We express our deep concern about the ongoing war against Ukraine, which continues to cause immense human suffering and is exacerbating existing fragilities in the world economy, restricting growth, increasing inflation, disrupting supply chains, increasing energy insecurity and and raising risks to financial stability. In this regard, we support the need for a just and sustainable peace. We also reiterate our support for the Black Sea Grain Initiative and the efforts of the United Nations Secretary-General to ensure its extension We support all diplomatic efforts aimed at a just and sustainable peace in line with the UN charter,” reads the famous paragraph of discord.