Skip to main content

Guardian, Comment is Free, Mexico

A Mexican muddle

The US has no choice but to develop a constructive and supportive relationship with southern neighbour

Mexico and the United States share the problems of violence and drug trafficking just as they share the other problems and benefits of such a close relationship. Understanding of the issues involved in bilateral Mexican–US relations can boost a politician's career. In 1997, William Weld even gave up the governership of Massachusetts for the chance to be appointed ambassador to Mexico. John Negroponte was ambassador to Mexico and subsequently rose to become the first Director of National Intelligence. The current Director of National Intelligence, however, has shown himself to be rather less adroit.

In two appearances before the select committee Dennis Blair triggered alarm bells when he said that "Mexico City" was losing control of its territory. Most people assume he meant the government of Mexico and not the City of Mexico, but, as Carlos Ramirez, a Mexican political analyst has noted, Blair has not clarified.

Blair's fudged comments elicited a sharp response from the Mexican president, Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, who called the director's accusations "absolutely false and absurd". Calderon challenged Blair to come and see for himself. "But don't just come here on holiday," he said, "That is what most Mexico analysts seem to do."

Calderon added: "We suffer from being situated next to the largest consumer of drugs in the world and the world's biggest arms dealer." Echoing Calderon's accusation at the Elliot School of International affairs at George Washington University, the Mexican ambassador, Arturo Sarukhan, said there are 12,000 shops along the border on the US side where drug dealers can buy guns.

The result is that the US is arming the drug cartels, and not only that. Fernando Gómez Mont, the interior minister, and Patricia Espinoza, the secretary of foreign affairs, both point out that corrupt elements in the DEA and US Border Patrol are currently impelling the drugs trade forward.

Now the Obama administration seems to have taken a step back and its attitude has become rather more conciliatory. Obama sounded unenthusiastic in response to a request by the Governor Perry of Texas to deploy the national guard along the frontier. Obama said he would study the proposal, but that the US had a big frontier with Mexico and that he was not interested in militarising it. In contrast to the comments of Dennis Blair, US air force general Victor Renuart said last Tuesday that he didn't consider Mexico was losing the fight against drug traffickers and that progress was being made against corruption.

In recent decades the US has recognised the vital importance of developing good relations with Mexico. The Nafta trade agreement was ratified in 1992 and in 1995 Bill Clinton came to the aid of Mexico with a successful multibillion financial rescue package. Even Bush made a valiant attempt to help solve the seemingly intractable problem of illegal immigration by trying to regularise the status of illegal immigrants through a guest worker scheme.

But now it is the turn of the Obama government to be constructive and show its good will. Mexico has taken on the drug traffickers. It needs the US to take full responsibility for its share of the problem and help Mexico combat the drug trade.

The US might blow hot and cold about its special relationship with Britain, but it has no choice but to develop a constructive and supportive relationship with Mexico.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Aerogramme from Lisa and Richard

To: Mr & Mrs J. Hall, Box 49 Eikenhof (TVL) Johannesburg Afrique du Sud. 28.3.76 Dear John and Nola, Today a week ago we were still in New Delhi with Eve and Tony and the boys and the whole thing looks like a dream. We arrived on the 28.2 in New Delhi and were happy to see the whole family fit and in good health. The boys have grown very much, Phil is just about the size of Tony and the twins are above average. We stayed untill the 22nd March, as our visa ran out and we did not want to go through all the ceremony of asking for an extension. It also got hotter and I don't know how I would have supported the heat. The extra week would also have passed, so we decided not to go to all the trouble with the authorities and leave on the 22nd. I cannot tell you how happy we have been to see such a lovely family, so happy and united. It is rare to experience sucha thing and we have both all the reasons to be proud of them (when I say goth I mean you and us ). There is su

Guardian books blog fringe: Norman Mailer

FLASHING THE GUARDIAN -- A BOOKS BLOGGERS' REBELLION :  The unheroic censor with a death wish Part 1: In which Norman Mailer stars in an experiment in search engine optimisation By ACCIACCATURE 3 February 2009 When Norman Mailer died in 2007, informed opinion – in the blogosphere, people who had read at least two of his books – was split. The army of readers who saw him as one of the most despicable misogynists writing fiction in the 20th century was perfectly matched by warriors on the other side, who raged that the label wasn’t just unwarranted but tantamount to heinous calumny. Before commenters returned to bitching-as-usual, tempers were lost on literary sites all over the net in debating temperatures high enough to bring to mind tiles burning off space shuttles re-entering Earth’s atmosphere. After I'd agreed to a spontaneous suggestion by our good friend Sean Murray -- a pioneer and stalwart of the comments section of The Guardian’s books blog – that we re-

Guardian: Kate Harding's reactionary censorious blog on CiF

It should go without saying... ....that we condemn the scummy prat who called Liskula Cohen : "a psychotic, lying, whoring ... skank" But I disagree with Kate Harding , (in my view a pseudo blogger), posting her blog in the Guardian attacking bloggers. It's a case of set a thief to catch a thief. The mainstream media is irritated by bloggers because they steal its thunder and so they comission people like Kate Harding , people with nothing to say for themselves, apparently, other than that they are feminists, to attack bloggers. I'm black. So I can legitimately attack "angry white old men". I'm a feminist, so I have carte blanche to call all anonymous bloggers "prats." Because yes, that is her erudite response to bloggers. No I don't say that the blogging medium can't be used to attack progressives in whatever context. Of course it can. But to applaud the censorship of a blogger by a billion dollar corporate like Google, and moreov