Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
The New World Order, born in the womb of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, is disembarking in Mexico with such force that it is putting the brakes on the Morenista feast in one fell swoop.
Ignoring the parliamentary agreements made between political parties, which had agreed to resolve the issue of the energy law after June, the President abruptly changed his mind and ordered his party to vote on the initiative during Easter Week. That is, in about 15 days. And he defined his terms: he will insist on his initial proposal without negotiation with the opposition. Simply put, he is sending his initiative to the guillotine in Congress, knowing that it will be rejected. Why has he decided to sacrifice his initiative, so cherished until recently?
This decision is similar, by the way, to the one taken by Luis Echeverría, also during Holy Week, to devalue the national currency, assuming that under cover of this celebration, the fact would be disguised to some extent. It failed Echeverría as it will also fail López Obrador.
Weighing the costs of his obvious love of Putin and Russia against Mexico’s economic and political reality as a member of the USMCA and the community of North America, López Obrador does not have much room to choose on which side is the country. He has opted for a “dignified” retreat in the face of the dangerous tensions opened by the New World Order. And you don’t have to be a genius (the President is not) to know that there is neither utility nor any future in a priority alliance of Mexico with Russia. Especially if it means turning Mexico into an enemy of the United States, it is a matter of pesos and cents.
The first thing that stands out in this new world order is that political-military force is progressively replacing diplomatic relations and, consequently, defining the intensity of conflicts and their outcomes. This new Cold War is hostile and forces all members of the world community to define themselves.
During the Cold War between capitalism and socialism, Mexico could afford to play with certain neutrality between Washington and Moscow. But that was before the USMCA. Today, military and hard economic power prevail in international relations. And all this change in the world scenario is a direct consequence of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its consequent massacre of defenseless civilians. Today diplomacy is expressed in the fields of politics in war.
In a single day, the United States spoke directly to Mexico. And the tone reflects these changes in the global environment. It is not a matter of judging whether it is right or wrong. It is simply the reality. Mexico is not a colony of the United States, Russia, or China. But its economy, population, and interests are within the perimeter of influence of the United States and not in the spheres of influence of either Russia or China. That is the reality.
In a hearing before the U.S. Senate, General Glen Van Herck of the U.S. Northern Command stated two things critical to Mexico. First, Mexico is home to the largest number of Russian spies in the world, dedicated to finding ways to influence U.S. policy. Second, according to his information, he stated that there are verifiable links between Mexican drug trafficking and Russian espionage networks.
That same day, in an impromptu “U.S.-Mexico friendship” meeting in a legislative hall, U.S. Ambassador Ken Salazar warned about two situations. He pointed out that the energy law should not cancel previously signed contracts because it would violate the USMCA and insisted that Mexico should recognize Russia as the aggressor in the war with Ukraine. This is because the same Congress had established a Russia-Mexico friendship committee the day before, an event in which the Russian ambassador insisted that his country did not start the war and that its intervention in Ukraine is to stop the “fascists”.
In a video released by the White House that same afternoon, Vice President Kamala Harris accused “our neighbors” of “backsliding”, that is, of backtracking on their commitments to build democratic societies and turning to more authoritarian governance schemes, in a clear allusion to Mexico. She also defined their new partners to achieve economic and democratic progress in Central America and the Caribbean: Costa Rica, Panama, and the Dominican Republic. The exclusion of Mexico from the list of reliable countries illustrates the White House’s opinion on the democratic setbacks registered. It shows a lack of confidence in the Mexican government’s willingness to comply with the agreements.
These three facts, which are direct messages to López Obrador, all issued on the same day, take place in the context that Mexico flirts with Russia, does not apply sanctions to the aggressor country and wants, at the same time, “to take advantage of the USMCA so that investment flows to Mexico because it is a stable bet”, as the President said before the Mexican Bankers Association. But none of the investors trust him, nor do they believe in the sincerity of his apology about his interference in Banxico’s decisions.
The global political environment is becoming rough and aggressive. The United States and Europe confrontation against Russia and, eventually, China promises to divide the world into opposing camps militarily and economically. This is the first and most obvious, result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Democracy versus authoritarianism.
In this context, Lopez Obrador, realizing that he went too far in his infatuation with the Russians and, conversely, in his confrontations with the United States, has to make a symbolic but real sacrifice to balance the Mexican ship that threatens to sink. These are the times of the USMCA. Times to repair the deteriorated relationship with the United States. Even the Armed Forces are proposing the same.
The sacrificial lamb is AMLO’s energy initiative. Of course, the President will report that conservatives and neoliberals defeated it. He is already saying so. He will yield his position, but creating the impression that he did not lose but was forced to do so by the play of forces in Congress. But there seems to be clear that the relationship with the United States must be balanced. The President went too far in his insults to Washington and his fondness for Moscow.
The question is whether relations between our countries have not deteriorated too much, considering the contentious character that the New World Order is generating. Siding with Russia, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Iran is not the right place for a country that pretends to be a privileged partner of the United States.
The New World Order is going to be ruthless. Ambiguity and false neutrality will crush the neophytes who refuse to understand the seriousness of the new world’s circumstances. Mexico may bear the brunt of the international rearrangement with rulers thinking that they can move forward with tricks, maneuvers, and lies.
[email protected]
@rpascoep