Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
On this National Independence Day, and given the international context, let’s look at why independence and sovereignty are related but different concepts. It is common to think that they are the same, but this is not the case. Independence is the condition of not being subordinate to another nation. One is independent or not independent. There are no nuances or subtleties. It is a relationship with the outside world.
Sovereignty, on the other hand, is a matter of a nation’s internal condition. It has everything to do with power, decision-making, and the internal authority of the nation. Who decides the course to be followed for a given period of time?
It is also true that to be sovereign and able to make decisions with the power of the people, a country must first be independent. Being independent answers the question, “On whom do we not depend?”, while being sovereign answers the question, “Who is in charge here?”
This reflection is essential because of the tense and politicized discussion about the current state of Mexico’s relationship with the United States, and vice versa. These days, we will hear many speeches about Mexico’s independence, in which the concepts of independence and sovereignty will be treated as if they were synonymous, when they are not.
In the complex and inevitable interrelationship between two neighboring nations such as ours, where neither questions the independence of the other, there are indeed different criteria for how to manage the sovereignty of decisions. And these different criteria are a source of ongoing diplomatic and political conflicts.
The backdrop to the bilateral relationship is globalization as a fact, and more specifically, deep economic integration. Globalization has led our nations to sign international agreements that commit us to conduct ourselves in a certain way, and with specific policies, within and outside our national borders on matters as diverse as maritime law, water, livestock, epidemics, the environment, airways, fishing, fiscal and tax policies, postal systems, types of electricity, types of gasoline in use, and human rights. The list of “sovereign” commitments that Mexico has agreed to respect throughout its long history is endless.
The USMCA defines Mexico’s legal, economic, political, and social relationship with the United States and Canada, due to the deep economic and social integration that exists between the three nations. And that integration implies, from the US perspective, addressing concerns about security and migration, while Mexico is concerned about the treatment of our fellow citizens living in that country, who number more than 10 million people, including both legal and undocumented immigrants, in addition to the undue tariffs imposed by Washington.
Mexico is an independent country, but it has the need and obligation to change, almost daily, its definition of the limits of “sovereignty,” given the fluctuating and evolving relationship between the three countries. There is no subordination, and nations pressure each other with the instruments at their disposal.
Recognizing that the United States has more powerful instruments of pressure than Mexico does not imply an act of subordination, but it does require a strategic response. It is necessary to recognize the limits of each action and the possibilities of progress or regression of the initiatives taken by the Mexican government.
In terms of security, there is extraordinary pressure from the United States, and it will be inevitable to give in to some U.S. demands. The same will happen concerning so-called “non-tariff barriers” and the revision of the USMCA. In response, Mexico must demand preferential immigration treatment for our fellow citizens, similar to the policy previously applied to Cubans arriving in the United States, and the strict application of the USMCA, without tariffs that seek to intimidate.
What matters more to Mexico: protecting its politicians turned drug traffickers, or safeguard its migrant citizens in the United States? The success or failure of Mexico’s positions will depend on the answer.
This is the real state of Mexican sovereignty in September 2025. It is time to map out the possible pressures, concessions, and demands until the end of this administration. What should we give and what should we demand, today and until 2030?
@rpascoep
Further Reading: