Tweet
El PAN DE MUERTO Mexicano
Trump y el Arte de La Solución
Por Por Shannon K. O'Neil
THE_BREAD´S DEATH:
The Mexican Standoff
Trump and the Art of the Workaround
By Shannon K. O'Neil
Listen to Article
For most of the twentieth century, Mexico and the United States were distant neighbors. Obliviousness and neglect from the north was met with resentment and, at times, outright hostility from the south, leaving the two countries diplomatically detached. Yet as the twenty-first century approached, this wariness began to fade, replaced by cooperation and even something resembling friendship. The détente began in the early 1990s, when Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari and U.S. President George H. W. Bush developed a shared economic vision, culminating in the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the largest free-trade agreement in the world and the first to include countries with mature economies (the United States and Canada) and a country with a still emerging economy (Mexico). Bush’s successor, Bill Clinton, embraced the rapprochement, shepherding NAFTA through Congress and later rescuing Mexico from a financial crisis. And although Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush, failed in his attempt at comprehensive immigration reform, he succeeded in working with his Mexican counterparts, Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderón, to transform the U.S.-Mexican security relationship for the better. President Barack Obama reaffirmed and expanded bilateral cooperation by deepening the two countries’ economic integration and supporting Mexico’s efforts to establish the rule of law and improve the security of its citizens.
During the past 25 years, connections between the two countries have proliferated at the state and local levels as well. Governors have set up trade offices and sponsored repeated commercial visits. Law enforcement officers have trained together and conducted joint operations. Universities have initiated cross-border research projects and exchanges. Mayors have embraced sister cities and held joint events and conferences; San Diego and Tijuana even explored a shared bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics.
But that quarter century of partnership is now faltering, thanks to U.S. President Donald Trump’s overt hostility to Mexico and Mexicans. The invective began during Trump’s campaign, during which he called NAFTA “the worst trade deal in history” and claimed that Mexico was “killing us economically.” He attacked Mexican immigrants to the United States, painting them as “criminals” and “rapists” that steal jobs and threaten American lives. He pledged to establish a “deportation force” to rid the nation of millions of “criminal aliens.” And his bellowed promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border—and force Mexico to pay for it, no less—served as a frequent climax at his rallies, often eliciting the loudest cheers from his supporters.
Since Trump took office, his approach to Mexico has alternated between insincere flattery and in-your-face aggression. Even when talking up his “tremendous relations with” and “love” for Mexico, he has prioritized the border wall, bidding out the project and asking Congress for $1.6 billion to jump-start construction, while still maintaining that Mexico will somehow pay for it, ultimately. (So far, Congress has demurred.) On immigration, Trump has spared the so-called Dreamers—young people, mostly from Mexico, who were brought to the United States illegally when they were children—from his earlier threats to deport them. But he has also ordered the Department of Homeland Security to step up raids in immigrant communities and has lashed out at so-called sanctuary cities, which block their local law enforcement agencies from sharing information about residents’ immigration status with DHS. The Trump administration has also threatened to send anyone caught crossing the southern border illegally back to Mexico—regardless of their actual nationality. And Trump’s hatred of NAFTA has endured, although his threats to pull out of the deal altogether have been replaced by a plan to renegotiate its terms.
Faced with this unprecedented belligerence, Mexico has few options—and even fewer good ones. The best approach would be to avoid confronting Trump—not by capitulating to him but by going around him. To salvage the hard-won gains of the last two and a half decades, Mexico needs to venture outside the Beltway and deepen its already rich connections to U.S. states, municipalities, businesses, civic institutions, and communities. This approach is being pursued (with some early success) by the United States’ neighbor to the north, Canada. And it might work even better for Mexico, which has more grass-roots connections to American society than does Canada.Indignation and anger over Trump’s rise have begun to reshape domestic politics in Mexico.
THINGS GO SOUTH
The about-face in Washington’s approach to Mexico is taking place at a time when Mexico has never been more important to the U.S. economy and to Americans themselves. Mexicoprovides a huge proportion of the vegetables on their tables, the parts in their cars, and the caregivers for their youngest and oldest citizens. NAFTA helped usher in this interdependence, influencing the way that thousands of companies buy, sell, and make things on both sides of the border. Trade in goods between the two countries skyrocketed, from around $135 billion in 1993 to over $520 billion in 2016, adjusting for inflation. Meanwhile, Mexican exporters came to prefer U.S. suppliers over all others, buying, on average, 40 percent of their inputs from the United States, compared with 25 percent from Canada and less than five percent each from Brazil, China, and the EU. Prior to NAFTA, that figure for the United States stood at just five percent. In that sense, U.S. trade with Mexico hasn’t “killed jobs,” as NAFTA’s critics argue; it has instead ramped up sales of U.S. goods south of the border that support some five million U.S.-based jobs.
Meanwhile, immigration has deepened interpersonal bonds between the citizens of the two countries. Some seven million Mexicans settled in the north between 1990 and 2007. That immigration wave has receded in recent years; since 2009, over 140,000 more Mexicans have left the United States than have come to it. But around 11 million still reside in the United States, in addition to nearly 25 million Americans of Mexican heritage. And the movement has gone both ways: over one million U.S. citizens currently make their homes in Mexico, the largest diaspora community of Americans anywhere in the world.
These ever more encompassing ties mean that Trump’s outbursts, threats, and vilification of Mexico have reverberated throughout the country’s economy, society, and politics. Mexican markets have taken the most immediate blow. The peso plummeted following Trump’s victory, falling further than any other emerging-market currency during the first quarter of 2017. Foreign investment also sank as Trump criticized companies, including Carrier and Ford, for moving jobs south of the border (or planning to) and the companies responded by postponing, scaling back, or canceling those plans. Overall foreign direct investment in the country fell by 20 percent in 2016 as Trump marched toward the GOP nomination, with the largest declines concentrated in trade-oriented sectors. After Trump’s victory in the general election, forecasts for Mexico’s 2017 economic performance turned pessimistic.
Trump y el Arte de La Solución
Por Por Shannon K. O'Neil
THE_BREAD´S DEATH:
The Mexican Standoff
Trump and the Art of the Workaround
By Shannon K. O'Neil
Listen to Article
For most of the twentieth century, Mexico and the United States were distant neighbors. Obliviousness and neglect from the north was met with resentment and, at times, outright hostility from the south, leaving the two countries diplomatically detached. Yet as the twenty-first century approached, this wariness began to fade, replaced by cooperation and even something resembling friendship. The détente began in the early 1990s, when Mexican President Carlos Salinas de Gortari and U.S. President George H. W. Bush developed a shared economic vision, culminating in the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the largest free-trade agreement in the world and the first to include countries with mature economies (the United States and Canada) and a country with a still emerging economy (Mexico). Bush’s successor, Bill Clinton, embraced the rapprochement, shepherding NAFTA through Congress and later rescuing Mexico from a financial crisis. And although Clinton’s successor, George W. Bush, failed in his attempt at comprehensive immigration reform, he succeeded in working with his Mexican counterparts, Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderón, to transform the U.S.-Mexican security relationship for the better. President Barack Obama reaffirmed and expanded bilateral cooperation by deepening the two countries’ economic integration and supporting Mexico’s efforts to establish the rule of law and improve the security of its citizens.
During the past 25 years, connections between the two countries have proliferated at the state and local levels as well. Governors have set up trade offices and sponsored repeated commercial visits. Law enforcement officers have trained together and conducted joint operations. Universities have initiated cross-border research projects and exchanges. Mayors have embraced sister cities and held joint events and conferences; San Diego and Tijuana even explored a shared bid for the 2024 Summer Olympics.
But that quarter century of partnership is now faltering, thanks to U.S. President Donald Trump’s overt hostility to Mexico and Mexicans. The invective began during Trump’s campaign, during which he called NAFTA “the worst trade deal in history” and claimed that Mexico was “killing us economically.” He attacked Mexican immigrants to the United States, painting them as “criminals” and “rapists” that steal jobs and threaten American lives. He pledged to establish a “deportation force” to rid the nation of millions of “criminal aliens.” And his bellowed promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border—and force Mexico to pay for it, no less—served as a frequent climax at his rallies, often eliciting the loudest cheers from his supporters.
Since Trump took office, his approach to Mexico has alternated between insincere flattery and in-your-face aggression. Even when talking up his “tremendous relations with” and “love” for Mexico, he has prioritized the border wall, bidding out the project and asking Congress for $1.6 billion to jump-start construction, while still maintaining that Mexico will somehow pay for it, ultimately. (So far, Congress has demurred.) On immigration, Trump has spared the so-called Dreamers—young people, mostly from Mexico, who were brought to the United States illegally when they were children—from his earlier threats to deport them. But he has also ordered the Department of Homeland Security to step up raids in immigrant communities and has lashed out at so-called sanctuary cities, which block their local law enforcement agencies from sharing information about residents’ immigration status with DHS. The Trump administration has also threatened to send anyone caught crossing the southern border illegally back to Mexico—regardless of their actual nationality. And Trump’s hatred of NAFTA has endured, although his threats to pull out of the deal altogether have been replaced by a plan to renegotiate its terms.
Faced with this unprecedented belligerence, Mexico has few options—and even fewer good ones. The best approach would be to avoid confronting Trump—not by capitulating to him but by going around him. To salvage the hard-won gains of the last two and a half decades, Mexico needs to venture outside the Beltway and deepen its already rich connections to U.S. states, municipalities, businesses, civic institutions, and communities. This approach is being pursued (with some early success) by the United States’ neighbor to the north, Canada. And it might work even better for Mexico, which has more grass-roots connections to American society than does Canada.Indignation and anger over Trump’s rise have begun to reshape domestic politics in Mexico.
THINGS GO SOUTH
The about-face in Washington’s approach to Mexico is taking place at a time when Mexico has never been more important to the U.S. economy and to Americans themselves. Mexicoprovides a huge proportion of the vegetables on their tables, the parts in their cars, and the caregivers for their youngest and oldest citizens. NAFTA helped usher in this interdependence, influencing the way that thousands of companies buy, sell, and make things on both sides of the border. Trade in goods between the two countries skyrocketed, from around $135 billion in 1993 to over $520 billion in 2016, adjusting for inflation. Meanwhile, Mexican exporters came to prefer U.S. suppliers over all others, buying, on average, 40 percent of their inputs from the United States, compared with 25 percent from Canada and less than five percent each from Brazil, China, and the EU. Prior to NAFTA, that figure for the United States stood at just five percent. In that sense, U.S. trade with Mexico hasn’t “killed jobs,” as NAFTA’s critics argue; it has instead ramped up sales of U.S. goods south of the border that support some five million U.S.-based jobs.
Meanwhile, immigration has deepened interpersonal bonds between the citizens of the two countries. Some seven million Mexicans settled in the north between 1990 and 2007. That immigration wave has receded in recent years; since 2009, over 140,000 more Mexicans have left the United States than have come to it. But around 11 million still reside in the United States, in addition to nearly 25 million Americans of Mexican heritage. And the movement has gone both ways: over one million U.S. citizens currently make their homes in Mexico, the largest diaspora community of Americans anywhere in the world.
These ever more encompassing ties mean that Trump’s outbursts, threats, and vilification of Mexico have reverberated throughout the country’s economy, society, and politics. Mexican markets have taken the most immediate blow. The peso plummeted following Trump’s victory, falling further than any other emerging-market currency during the first quarter of 2017. Foreign investment also sank as Trump criticized companies, including Carrier and Ford, for moving jobs south of the border (or planning to) and the companies responded by postponing, scaling back, or canceling those plans. Overall foreign direct investment in the country fell by 20 percent in 2016 as Trump marched toward the GOP nomination, with the largest declines concentrated in trade-oriented sectors. After Trump’s victory in the general election, forecasts for Mexico’s 2017 economic performance turned pessimistic.
Comment