Otto Granados Roldán
The presidency of Claudia Sheinbaum (CS) will face the most difficult challenge of her novel mandate amid disadvantages of varying magnitude that make it difficult for her to concentrate on the design, formulation, and execution of her relationship with the Trump administration. The season has been abundant in sayings, opinions, ideas, and advice from all sides on the technical, legal, political, and operational aspects of the most delicate chapters – security, borders, migration, and trade – but at the same time, there is no sign that the government has a specific, robust and organized strategy to deal with the scenarios that will arise around each of these issues, nor a high-level team with the necessary skills to implement it.
To begin with, let’s remember the context of almost zero economic growth, public finances on bread and water, deterioration of the rule of law, and the crisis of violence in which the new Mexican administration began so as not to fall into the temptation of attributing everything that happens to Trump’s arrival.
Faced with this burden, the president has not yet presented a genuine government program, elaborate and comprehensive, except for various actions in the same vein as her predecessor – increasing social spending and giving artificial respiration to public entities in a coma – and a set of good intentions aimed at boosting the economic recovery. As the baton is passed in the White House, the CS government will have to rigorously assess the consequences of Trumpism 2.0 because, speaking every morning to the domestic gallery, where she feels comfortable, she did not have the incentive to understand how the highly complex bilateral relationship operates or to consider that she will now have to play in the big leagues. But it is one thing to verbalize this challenge with verbal crutches and to behave with the commonplaces of a government accustomed to controlling the podium and another to control the hard facts.
Trump’s cards have been face up for a long time, and there is no deception: “What you see is what you get,” as the 1970s song by The Dramatics goes. A certain US president used to say that you govern for re-election in your first term and for the history books in your second. If this is the case, and assuming that Trump does not seek a third term (in these surreal times, anything can happen) in open violation of the US Constitution, it is very likely that he does indeed want to deliver on his promises regarding the southern border, migration, international terrorist organizations, tariffs, the Panama Canal, among other things. Of course, another thing is whether he can.
What could a pragmatic, judicious, and, as far as possible, intelligent Mexican government do in that theater? For the time being, as it does not have much room for maneuvering and time is running out, she should leave the sovereignist, nationalist, and patriotic harangue, which excites the troops and lubricates the networks but does not provide real solutions, take things very seriously, concentrate on a real strategy and reflect on its critical components. In politics, common sense helps.
The first thing is to think and be better collectively. With a dose of political humility, a desire for harmony, and recognition of her limitations, the president could informally convene a technical group of good minds – including her phobias and nemeses – plural, capable, specialized, and with direct experience of the binational terrain and in certain labyrinthine issues, such as trade (in the CUSMA/USMCA/T-MEC alone, the list of tariffs fills more than a thousand pages) or the migratory aspect (which in Mexico is a no man’s land), to hear reasonable points of view on how to tread the fine line, to understand the mental and political process of an extravagant and dangerous powerful figure and how to weave a stable relationship with him and his administration. CS may or may not listen to what she hears, but the exercise can be useful in exhibiting confidence and, hopefully, gathering good ideas—nothing to lose.
The second is to clear up a genetic question in fledgling governments: who is in charge? The Constitution says that the Executive directs foreign policy. Still, since there is a tangle of bureaucracies, regulations, egos, interests, and skeletons in the closet below, it needs a director in chief with political skill, intellectual depth, and, if possible, technical skill, a primus inter pares who coordinates the agencies involved in the bilateral relationship and who, in fact, under the presidential leadership, conducts the orchestra so that it plays like a Symphonic orchestra and not like a chaotic mariachi.
In Mexico, the rivalries and conflicts between the Foreign Ministry and the substantive departments are inveterate, especially when it comes to the bilateral agenda. In theory, the Foreign Ministry holds the reins. Still, it generally lacks political and budgetary muscle and, these days, clout because its head has no real diplomatic experience (at the UN, the permanent representative merely follows voting instructions, reads rigid texts sent from Mexico and little else), does not know Washington or its highly complex policymaking, and in the same or worse circumstances is the current ambassador, who for all effect, he has not existed during these years. Neither of them sends any message, unlike their counterparts who clearly embody the profile desired by the new head of the White House.
It is worth repeating a question: Who will be in charge of day-to-day affairs under Trumpism 2.0? And will that be enough to work in a wildly tangled environment like the US administration’s?
This is where the third subject comes in: having a GPS. It is said that when Henry Kissinger wanted to talk to Europe, he found that “nobody tells me which phone to dial”. Does Mexico know who to call today in the District of Columbia? As often happens, there are hundreds of volunteers who try to sell the president a bill of goods and tell her they know “the friend of a friend of a friend” and so ad aeternum. From there to, confusion is just one step.
In terms of federal agencies alone, for example, Washington is more like an archipelago than a continent (there are 441 of all kinds according to the Federal Register https://www.federalregister.gov/agencies), and knowing which door to knock on can make all the difference. Mexico will need a very efficient GPS to identify its key interlocutors in the offices and wings of the White House and the State Department, as well as in the key agencies of intelligence, national security, justice, energy, and a long etcetera. It will be difficult for her to do it alone with her current team, assuming she keeps them, and she will have to invest (read: resort to and hire) experts and professionals in this game of chess, as many foreign governments and almost all states in the United States often do.
Consider another strategic ecosystem: Congress. Although it has a majority in both chambers, Trumpism 2.0 will be tempted to continue implementing its decisions through “executive orders.” Still, some issues will face legal obstacles in the courts or legislative chambers. Mexico must identify the political genealogy (and interests) of the most influential legislators and committees and move easily and skillfully to the highest possible level in the Capitol.
An example. According to Bruce Ackerman, from Yale University, Trump’s absolute control of the House of Representatives, even with a majority, seems uncertain. There are 31 Republicans who “are members of the Freedom Caucus and just over 100 who identify as MAGA Republicans”, the most radical conservatives, but that adds up to just 135 seats out of 436 members in total. Ackerman calculates that they will be able to pass presidential initiatives “only if there is support from a majority coalition made up of pragmatic centrists from both parties, no matter how much pressure Trump applies” (https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/can-us-institutions-withstand-trump-2-0).
The outlook, as can be seen, is complicated. It will not be a walk in the park for the CS government, no matter how much it stirs up the incendiary rhetoric of its legislators, how much its approval rating is one thousand percent, how much it insults its opponents and blames neoliberalism every day, or how much it calls on its followers to wrap themselves in the national flag. Perhaps that may boost self-esteem, but it will not solve the specific problems of a bilateral relationship that has been and will continue to be the most important for the country for many decades.
Whoever engages in politics, said Max Weber, “agrees with the diabolical powers that lurk around all power”. And this is a matter of politics and power. Mexico will have to work with impeccable precision and act on all fronts in the US to construct an intelligent and effective strategy that yields concrete results for the national interest.
Further Reading: