Israel gave Ecuador the confidence to invade Mexico’s Embassy and beat up the Ambassador.

How Tel Aviv has set a precedent for future conflict.

Rules exist to protect people like you and me. That’s why laws are made, and that’s why we respect and follow them.

So that we protect ourselves from each other, to prevent us from reverting to our barbaric nature, to ensure man remains civilized.

But if we erode those laws, we erode the safety that keeps us safe from one another, and then it becomes a vicious, gruesome free-for-all.

What does this have to do with Ecuador?

The former vice president of Ecuador was staying in the Mexican Embassy. Why? Because he was fleeing corruption charges. You see, Jorge Glas faced corruption charges in which he was alleged to have taken bribes of up to $13.2m.

He was sentenced last year to 6 years but found himself out of prison in November. When he was sentenced again, he fled, hiding in the Mexican Embassy.

I don’t know whether Mexico has any connections to Glas, or if they formed some sort of deal, but he fled into the Embassy because he was seeking refuge under another sovereign nation.

And to arrest him and throw him in prison, Ecuador stormed the Mexican Embassy, beat up the ambassador, and forcibly dragged Glas out.

Now why the heck would you want to do that?

Ecuador could’ve easily gone through the diplomatic route and kept pressuring Mexico to release Glas. They could’ve resorted to putting political pressure on Mexico, and they would’ve been one step closer to solving their problem.

Now, what they have on their hands are a pissed-off Mexico and uneasy neighbors and allies, who are watching this whole scene play out and thinking to themselves whether it is okay to allow their embassies to operate in Ecuador or not.

One such country is Nicaragua, which immediately cut diplomatic relations with Ecuador, following the news.

Can we expect more countries to do the same? Possibly.

But the issue is, where did Ecuador get the confidence to do so? From Israel and from America.

From Israel because they broke the taboo in the first place. They bombed the Iranian Embassy in Syria, and attacking embassies is seen as a big no-no because that’s as if you’re attacking the state itself.

And they got a green signal from America because the right-wing Ecuadorian government cannot attack another country’s embassies without getting assurances from the US.

And this was part of a strategy from the US to overthrow anti-US governments across South America. A good evidence of this would be this user’s detailed thread in exposing how one Brazilian corporation, Odebrecht, has been at the forefront of many political scandals in South America, including ties to Jorge Glas.

But what does this mean for the future?

It means that if the US and Israel continue on the path they’re on, their own values based on human rights and international order will be made redundant.

If they can attack embassies, what’s to stop China or even Russia from attacking US embassies? If they can send weapons to a country actively conducting a genocide, what’s to stop China and Russia from doing the same?

International Laws? Well, they don’t matter anymore.

Nuclear weapons? Well, everyone seems to be having them these days.

Advanced weapons and tech? Well, they already have that.

There is basically nothing at this point that will stop other countries from breaking taboos similar to how the US and Israel are doing it.

Ecuador is the first country after Israel that has broken a taboo; they will definitely not be the last, and soon other countries will follow, because there is no tangible consequences to that action other than breaking of diplomatic ties.

This act by Ecuador and the subsequent silence by the US makes every country on earth feel extremely uneasy and uncomfortable.

If Embassies are violated like this, and it’s normalized, then what’s the point of opening them up in the first place?

What do you guys think?