CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC Sacrificed for a Martyr

Ricardo Pascoe Pierce

The trade representatives of the United States and Mexico had a surly meeting, to say the least. The Mexican side reported nothing of what was discussed, although it acknowledged that the meeting took place in Washington. The US side, true to its style, published a summary of what, from its point of view, took place at the meeting.

For the Mexican Secretary of Commerce, Raquel Buenrostro, the meeting simply “took place”. For Ambassador Tai, a representative of the United States, the parties agreed to continue efforts to strengthen economic ties within the regulatory framework of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC.

Tai emphasized that the US expects a prompt response from Mexico to its concerns about the current administration’s energy policies that do not correspond to the national treatment spirit of the trade agreement signed between the three countries.

She added a new ingredient to the discussion: she called on Mexico to abide by the provisions of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC regarding hiring bonded laborers (known as forced or slave labor), suggesting that it is a labor practice that the Mexican government permits. The International Labour Organisation, of which Mexico is a member and signatory to its founding Charter, prohibits forced labor in all its forms. Article 23.12 of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC expressly refers to the prohibition of “forced labor” and contains a commitment by the three signatory countries to combat such practices.

Tai also said that Mexico is obliged, under the terms of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC, to enforce environmental laws regarding the maritime practices of Mexican companies that do not abide by seasonal bans on fishing for endangered species. She added that it would not be acceptable, under the current agreement, for Mexico to interrupt the free import of corn into our country.

Ambassador Tai said this was based on the principle at the heart of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC, which refers to equal national treatment of investments and goods within the borders of the three nations. This is the guiding principle of the agreement. Any discriminatory treatment of investments and goods by any of the three parties is considered a violation of the core concept of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC.

News reports describe a negative response from Mexico to everything Ambassador Tai has said. Secretary Buenrostro is basically determined to do the opposite of what Tatiana Clouthier tried and failed to do. She wanted to reach an agreement with the Americans and Canadians on energy. Clouthier failed because the “sovereignty trio” (Nahle, Romero, Bartlett) never accepted the condition of a national deal for the energy sector. The President does not accept it. They basically sabotaged what Clouthier was negotiating. Of course, it is obvious that it was precisely Clouthier who was deluded, as she could not recognize the true programmatic character of the government she represented.

The switch from Clouthier to Buenrostro on the Mexican side has meant that this sovereigntist trio has taken over the strategic lines of negotiation. And the conflict over the energy sector promises to escalate, as the deadline for resolving the conflict or going to litigation panels is before the meeting between the leaders of the three countries.

The date has been moved several times. It looks like it will be 7 and 8 January in Mexico City. However, it is clear that the conditions for an agreement between the three countries on the energy sector do not exist. And President López Obrador knows this. That is why he is applying the “flight forward” strategy. In this case, he deliberately tries to create additional conflicting positions to hide the original conflict with the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC partners. And so he wants to impose his narrative on the meeting.

The President is proposing to argue that the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC will have to be expanded to all of Latin America and the Caribbean. He knows perfectly well that it is impossible even to contemplate the proposal if he is not fully complying with the agreement. He wants to position himself as the representative of all the oppressed peoples of the continent. So he will offer them something impossible to accept to create a “morally justified” dispute with the United States and Canada in the face of a supposedly heroically integrationist Mexican vision.

López Obrador’s proposal is intended to challenge and confront the partners. And it serves to divert the narrative of the meeting towards a discussion of a trade agreement that does not correspond to the reality of Latin America and the Caribbean.

This is very similar to the boycott he promoted before the Democracy Summit in Los Angeles, California when he wanted to sabotage the dialogue between Biden and the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean.

Another conflict he is promoting is over GM maize. He wants to turn it into an ideological and political conflict between the perverse transnational businesses (gringos) and the native peoples whose purity is beyond doubt. For the first time, he explains that he is concerned about the health of Mexicans (I mean, because of the children with cancer and the solution to Covid with spells).

Defiantly, now, López Obrador says he wants to go to the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC panels to argue that Mexico will stop importing corn from the United States from 2024. The President insinuates that going to the panels is akin to going to war with Russia against Ukraine. As a challenge to the bad guys.

López Obrador is not going to the meeting with Biden and Trudeau to settle the issues he has pending. Instead, he is arming himself to arrive and surprise with proposals that, he thinks, will put him on some pedestal as a hero of popular resistance against the aggressions of the Empire. He will make essentially impossible-to-process approaches to them, and he knows it in advance. This, by the way, speaks to how desperate he is to have a legacy that surpasses his failure as a President defined by setbacks and lack of achievements. That’s what it’s all about: stealing the narrative and not answering any questions.

Tai’s surprising approach to Buenrostro was on the issue of forced labor in Mexico, which the US presumes Mexico engages in and does not curb, violating the content of the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC. One supposition leads one to believe that the US government considers that the contracts signed between Mexico and Cuba to import alleged doctors under conditions of virtual slavery would indicate that bilateral relations have fallen to a historic low point and that what reigns is mutual distrust.

All of this suggests that the scheduled meeting between the three leaders is unlikely to be viable at this point in time.

Could this be why Foreign Minister Ebrard plans a surprise trip to Washington on 15 December to try to save the January meeting and get the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC negotiations back on track? If so, the omen for him is dark because those who hold the upper hand are the members of the sovereigntist trio and a President whose only interest is martyrology.

[email protected]
@rpascoep

Further Reading: