The decision by Mexico and Peru to reestablish diplomatic relations marks an important step toward normalization in intergovernmental relations in Latin America, which have been strained in recent years due to ideological divisions. At the heart of the crisis between the two countries was the decision by former Peruvian Prime Minister Betssy Chavez to seek asylum at the Mexican Embassy in Lima in November 2025. The fact that Chavez was allowed to travel to Mexico and that the two countries reestablished diplomatic relations immediately afterward demonstrates that the parties are prepared to maintain relations on a pragmatic basis without completely setting aside their political differences. This normalization, which took place shortly after Keiko Fujimori assumed the presidency in Peru, can be viewed as one of the first significant indicators of the foreign policy Lima will pursue in this new era.[i]
The political crisis in Peru that unfolded in December 2022 lies at the heart of the dispute between Mexico and Peru. Then-President Pedro Castillo’s attempt to dissolve Congress and establish an emergency government triggered a serious constitutional crisis in the country. Castillo was removed from office and arrested that same day, but the events transcended Peru’s borders and evolved into an ideological debate between left- and right-wing governments across Latin America. While Mexico adopted a critical stance toward Castillo’s removal, the Peruvian government viewed this as interference in the country’s internal affairs.
The continued support of Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration for Castillo has also contributed to the ongoing ideological divide between the two countries. From Mexico’s perspective, the issue is not limited to Castillo’s political future. The country’s long-standing tradition of granting political asylum in Latin America has also been a decisive factor in the Chávez case. Consequently, while the granting of asylum to Chávez can be viewed by Mexico City as a continuation of its historical diplomatic tradition, from Lima’s perspective, it amounts to a challenge to the decisions of the Peruvian judiciary.
The outcome of the Betssy Chavez case is therefore noteworthy. By allowing Chavez to travel to Mexico, the Peruvian government removed the most significant obstacle to resolving the diplomatic crisis. However, Lima’s statement that it reserves the right to request Chavez’s extradition in the future indicates that Peru has not entirely abandoned its legal position. Thus, the parties have developed a formula that allows them to overcome the diplomatic impasse without having to accept each other’s fundamental political positions. While Mexico upholds the principle of granting asylum to Chavez, Peru continues to defend the legal validity of the conviction against him.
It is also significant that the normalization of relations took place immediately after Keiko Fujimori took office. There are significant differences between Fujimori’s political stance and the ideological position of the Sheinbaum administration. Nevertheless, the new Peruvian administration’s swift reestablishment of relations with Mexico can be interpreted as a sign that Lima will not shape its foreign policy solely based on ideological affinities. From Peru’s perspective, Mexico is not only one of Latin America’s largest economies but also a key actor in regional diplomacy. Therefore, a prolonged diplomatic rift between the two countries could have acted as a constraining factor for Peru’s regional interests.
The step taken by the Fujimori administration can also be viewed as an effort to reduce the capacity of domestic political crises to shape Peru’s foreign policy. Following the Castillo crisis, Peru’s disagreements with certain left-leaning Latin American governments have caused the country’s foreign policy to be significantly influenced by domestic political polarization. The new administration’s normalization of relations with Mexico indicates the emergence of a more pragmatic approach aimed at preventing political disagreements from dictating the entirety of diplomatic and economic relations.
On the other hand, normalization is also yielding significant gains for Mexico. By facilitating Chávez’s entry into the country, the Sheinbaum administration is not backing down from its stance on political asylum and is not altering its political approach toward Castillo. Nevertheless, by agreeing to reestablish diplomatic relations with Peru, it is striking a balance between ideological solidarity and interstate interests. This situation demonstrates that while ideological affinities remain important in Mexico’s Latin American policy, diplomatic pragmatism has not entirely disappeared.
The emphasis on “international law” and “the principles of the United Nations Charter” in the two countries’ joint statement is also no coincidence.[ii] These statements allow the parties to bring the dispute into the framework of international law without directly reigniting past accusations of interference in each other’s internal affairs. In this way, normalization is achieved without creating the impression that one party has accepted the other’s political position. From a diplomatic perspective, this approach establishes a compromise mechanism that prevents both governments from being perceived as having backed down in the eyes of their respective domestic publics.
The Mexico-Peru rapprochement can also be assessed in the context of broader Latin American balances of power. In recent years, changes in government in the region have been seen to directly affect interstate relations. Differences in views between left- and right-wing administrations on issues such as Venezuela, Cuba, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, relations with the United States, and regional security occasionally lead to diplomatic tensions. However, the example of Mexico and Peru demonstrates that ideological differences do not necessarily lead to a complete breakdown in bilateral relations.
This situation is particularly significant in light of the shifting political balances in Latin America. While the inauguration of the Fujimori administration in Peru represents one of the key elements of the region’s shift to the right, Mexico, under Claudia Sheinbaum’s leadership, is maintaining its leftist stance. Consequently, the reestablishment of relations between the two countries demonstrates that while the right-left divide in the region plays a decisive role in interstate diplomacy, it has not evolved into an insurmountable polarization. The interdependence emerging in areas such as economic relations, regional organizations, migration, security, and trade is compelling governments to cooperate despite their ideological differences.
However, it can be said that the Chavez case has not been fully resolved. Peru’s reservation of the right to request his extradition in the future keeps open the possibility that the legal process could once again turn into a diplomatic dispute. The fundamental difference in perspective between Mexico’s classification of Chavez as a political asylum seeker and Peru’s recognition of the conviction against him as legitimate persists. Consequently, the current compromise is based not on the parties reaching a common assessment regarding Chavez, but rather on their success in separating this dispute from the rest of their bilateral relations.
In conclusion, the reestablishment of diplomatic relations between Mexico and Peru represents one of the most notable examples of the shift from ideological polarization to pragmatic diplomacy in Latin America. From the perspective of the Keiko Fujimori administration, this decision signals Peru’s desire to normalize its regional relations and steer its foreign policy away from the legacy of the Castillo crisis. The Sheinbaum administration, meanwhile, has managed to reopen diplomatic channels with Peru without altering its political stance on Chávez and Castillo. Therefore, the fundamental importance of normalization lies not in the elimination of the parties’ political differences, but in preventing those differences from dictating the entirety of interstate relations. The Mexico-Peru example demonstrates that, even during a period of intensified right-left competition in Latin America, diplomatic pragmatism continues to serve as a functional tool for regional relations.
[i] Bosotti, Rorey. “Mexico and Peru Restore Diplomatic Relations after Asylum Row”, BBC News, bbc.com/news/articles/cz7dy1l3e77o, (Date of Access: 09.08.2026).
[ii] Ibid.
