Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
Foreign intervention in Mexico looms as a possibility. The reasons are diverse and complex. Sheinbaum accuses the opposition of being responsible for this situation. Objectively speaking, the reasons—or lack thereof—for possible intervention lie in the policies of López Obrador’s administration and Sheinbaum’s administration so far, coupled with the Trump factor.
The president, in particular, has taken the radicalization of Morena’s political thinking a step further than López Obrador. He was dedicated to denouncing the opposition as conservative, posh, and backward. López developed moralistic ideas about how opponents are exclusively interested in money, as a sin, and are not interested in people, which is doubly sinful. He spoke of the moral degradation of the opposition.
But she has gone a step further in her effort to justify the electoral reform she will promote from the state, designed to perpetuate herself in power. She does not stop at López Obrador’s supposed moral indignation at the opposition’s brazenness and moral misery. She brands the opposition as a whole, without distinction, as traitors to the homeland.
According to Sheinbaum, the opposition is in open rebellion against the Republic and consciously seeks its destruction. She posits that the opposition has in its malevolent blood the instinct to destroy everything beautiful in Mexico and is allied with foreigners to overthrow the beautiful Mexican essence. These are her words: “And what do they (the opposition) want? What would they like? U.S. intervention in Mexico. That’s the truth.”
Is that the truth, according to Sheinbaum? The opposition, as ideologically diverse as the country itself, has never called for U.S. intervention in Mexico. From the left-wing opposition to Morenism to the right-wing opposition, what has been demanded of Sheinbaum’s government is that it correct its unstoppable drift toward authoritarianism, that it curb its alliance with drug traffickers, and that it accept that if it won with 55% of the vote, then it has 45% against it. This makes a serious and responsible political negotiation process between the opposition and the ruling forces necessary and obligatory. She continued her diatribe from the pulpit of the morning press conference: “What the opposition in Mexico has been seeking, and has been saying all these months, is to give the Mexican government a bad image in the United States.”
What image do Sheinbaum and her government think they are projecting to the whole world when they refuse to engage in dialogue with the internal opposition, or when they refuse to attend international forums because they do not want to face the criticism reserved for them by the international community for their failed economic policies and their alliances with dictatorships of all colors and flavors? She is incapable of explaining to the world why she does not denounce Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which is an act of violation of the sovereignty of an independent nation. At the same time, Mexico shouts from the rooftops that no one should violate Mexico’s territorial sovereignty. She is practicing a double-faced policy. That does not build trust; instead, it creates mistrust.
Once she had accelerated and heated her denunciations, the president finished off her attack on the opposition with a morning denunciation: “Since they don’t have popular support in our country—because they no longer have popular support—they believe they have to go outside to find it to affect us…there is no difference with 19th-century conservatism. They want outsiders to come and govern us. That is their position.”
Sheinbaum repeats the fantasy, which is her desire but not reality, that there is no opposition in Mexico. This is said by a president whose popular approval ratings are falling as the sloppiness and corruption of her government become evident. Everyone can see that she is the number one protector of the massive, blatant corruption during the previous six-year term. The Tabasco Group ruined the country with its corruption and its strategy of linking drug trafficking as the cornerstone of Mexico’s “peace” policy. The official defense of the corrupt of the past and present is the death blow to this government. Sheinbaum believes that these “accusations” against the opposition serve to justify an electoral reform that aims to ensure Morena’s perpetuation in power and thus prevent “traitors to the homeland” from ruling the nation.
Sheinbaum forgets that she won with 55% of the vote and 45% against. Illegal maneuvers allowed her to secure a qualified majority in the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies. But she makes the same mistake as every delusional politician in thinking that this qualified majority is real. It is not. Instead, it is the product of a factious use of state power to blackmail and threaten opposition legislators into pledging their loyalty to the state. The point is that the opposition has greater presence, moral and political authority in Mexico than Morena recognizes. Some are concerned about the 2027 elections. That is why they are putting Sheinbaum’s revocation of her mandate to a vote. Is it to remove her? Moral authority should not be confused with the power of imposition by the force of the state. They are two completely different categories. Morena can impose, but with reduced moral legitimacy.
Seen in this light, the debate over possible U.S. intervention in Mexico takes an entirely different turn. The party responsible for such a potential action is not the opposition, but the Morena government and its failed policies, which are leading Mexico toward a dangerous collapse. Its perverse alliance with drug trafficking and the corruption of the armed forces, together with the destruction of the government structures that were the backbone of a democratic republic (such as an independent judiciary, respect for the rule of law, and the autonomy of electoral and judicial bodies, accountability, and access to information), are the conditions that make Mexico a country suspected of being unreliable. What’s more, it is a country that can be considered a national security threat.
All these elements are the breeding ground that generates conditions for multiple international complaints against Mexico, not only from the United States. By classifying Mexico as a national security risk, they are evaluating all the actions of the Morena government over the last seven years. This is not the work of the opposition, which Sheinbaum says “does not exist.” It is the consequences of the failed policies shared by López Obrador and Sheinbaum that have led Mexico to find itself in such a compromised situation. Sheinbaum is wrong. The opposition is not treasonous. It is more loyal to Mexico than Morena is. The opposition raises the urgent need to correct the country’s course to avoid any hint of U.S. military intervention in Mexico. It involves making very tough decisions, which Sheinbaum either evades or fears.
The opposition proposes cutting the umbilical cord that links drug trafficking to the Morena government. The Armed Forces must be removed from all government projects, businesses, and public administration institutions and strictly adhere to their role as guarantors of the country’s national security, distancing themselves from corruption. It requires restoring checks and balances within the state’s functions and defending the autonomy and independence of the judicial and legislative branches from the executive branch. Accountability and transparency are the guarantors of good governance. Finally, dialogue between political forces and strategies for collaboration and dialogue must prevail at all levels of government, as well as unrestricted respect for the popular vote without interference, coercion, or manipulation by forces or governments.
This program is the best defense against military intervention by any force outside Mexico. But to continue on the path Morena is projecting is to place oneself objectively in the path of unwanted, foreign intervention.
@rpascoep
Further Reading: