On the Interpellation of the Chancellor

The great challenge for the Foreign Ministry is to understand what the national interest is in terms of foreign relations, something that goes beyond economic relations or public security.

It is clearly unusual for a chancellor to be interpellated, but it is a sign of the times we live in, a time when foreign relations, national security, and defense have gained importance, which is very characteristic of the current world, one that this administration expected would be focused on seeking economic growth and improved public security.

I am sure the President had very good reasons for asking Pérez Mackenna to lead the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, just as he did with Fernando Barros Tocornal in National Defense. Ministers are exclusively trusted by the President, the only elected authority in the executive branch, and in the particular case of these ministers, all indications suggest that it was their extensive and distinguished careers in the private sector that brought them to their positions in public administration. The President saw something in them that motivated him to ask them to accompany him in his government over individuals who might have come from the areas they have been asked to lead.

The chancellor arrived with the mandate to support the government’s priorities in public security and economic growth from the ministry he leads. I believe there are no doubts or reservations regarding the performance of the chancellor and the Foreign Ministry in this regard. They have gone above and beyond to attract investments to Chile, which benefits all Chileans and not just a few. In public security, the main initiative that has been successfully implemented is the Santiago Agreement of May 28, 2026, initially signed by Ecuador, Peru, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, and later by Paraguay and Uruguay, aimed at a united regional response to transnational organized crime. This agreement is critical for our national security and all indications suggest it will be supported by the initiative known as the Shield of the Americas, from which resources for logistics and intelligence will come. We gain nothing from being successful against crime further north if we do not apply ourselves in the Southern Cone of South America.

As in all matters, particularly in these times, one prepares for one thing and ends up playing another game. Before taking office, we already had the noise of the so-called ‘Chinese Cable,’ which could have occurred in any previous government due to the absence of investment screening mechanisms. Also, before assuming office, the United States and Israel attacked Iran, driving up oil prices. Obviously, these events forced us to make adjustments before getting started, but thanks to the professional teams at the Foreign Ministry, they did not turn into major events; however, they did provide a reality check to the government about the world they were entering, one where there is a clear dispute for global hegemony, which particularly impacts Chile due to our historical strategic relationship with the United States and a fundamental economic relationship with China.

Some may be bothered that the government of Chile has joined the Shield of the Americas, which is merely an agreement on security, economic matters, and general coordination. It is an agreement and not a treaty, and one that the majority of public opinion supports. It does not impose obligations beyond making the best efforts. Clearly, it is a political agreement signed only by 15 countries in the region. It does not cede sovereignty, and I would wager it will allow access to intelligence and logistical resources that will enable better and more effective efforts against transnational organized crime. That said, I would suggest improving the quality of communications on the matter, as sometimes a lack of clarity and transparency can create the impression that something else is being sought.

I assume that the interpellation is not a reckoning for the lack of support for Michelle Bachelet’s candidacy, something that many did not see as viable from the beginning due to the lack of support her name had in China and the United States. Time will tell if it was a mistake, but for now, it is clear that she will make her presence known in Chile, with some wishing she were seated in the UN Secretary-General’s office in New York rather than exercising leadership in the world of the left.

I assume that the interpellation is not a reckoning for the government’s reaction to the unfortunate statements made by Argentine authorities, which reflect much of that country’s internal disorder, its DNA, and the fact that they are already campaigning for the elections in October 2027, where wrapping themselves in the Argentine flag and the cause of the Malvinas is something that pays off and unites Argentina. Chile reacted well, prudently, with clarity regarding what is in the national interest. Having Argentina as a neighbor is not simple; it is a relationship that requires clarity and firmness, as well as prudence and a long-term perspective. They will continue to be our neighbors whether we like it or not, and we must transform what separates us into factors of unity. We must also avoid being dragged into the conflicts they have with the United Kingdom over the Malvinas – Falklands, and being part of that, only because it may be useful to us.

The great challenge for the Foreign Ministry is to understand what the national interest is in terms of foreign relations, something that goes beyond economic relations or public security. It is about prioritizing neighborly relations, understanding that we have had a historical strategic relationship with the United States that will not change, and that our main economic relationship is and will continue to be for a long time with China, a fundamental relationship. Everything else is unfortunately secondary and not a priority; it helps, but will never have the importance of the aforementioned relations. The government understands this, and the president will soon travel to Bolivia and China among other destinations. That is consistency. It is also consistent with the national interest to have attended the UN General Assembly, an organization that is useful to Chile’s foreign policy, but is not an end in itself. Multilateralism serves us and allows us to give more strength to our foreign policy. It is a tool that enables us to leverage our position.

Judge for yourself whether Chancellor Francisco Perez Mackenna has done well or poorly. Everything indicates that he is doing well despite the very different game he thought he would be playing, one that ceased to be economic and became primarily political and focused on national security.

RICHARD KOUYOUMDJIAN
Executive Vice President AthenaLab