Background on the Situation
In a significant shift, the United States has included Mexico in its list of countries deemed adversaries in the fight against drug trafficking. This development, announced by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi before the Senate Appropriations Committee, carries substantial symbolic weight.
Bondi stated, “Mexico allows the flow of drugs that kill our children,” equating Mexico with Iran, Russia, and China. This declaration wasn’t part of a campaign but rather within the context of escalating geopolitical tensions. Although statistics from the CDC show a decline in fentanyl-related deaths, the rhetoric has shifted its focus from targeting drug cartels to holding states accountable.
Historical Context and Impact
Mexico, once perceived as a bridge between Latin America and developed nations, is now portrayed as a vulnerable flank of the continent. This isn’t due to its macroeconomic figures or role in the automotive industry, but rather its perceived failure—or lack of willingness—to control crime-related violence crossing its borders and affecting the neighboring superpower.
This narrative isn’t new, but its intensity has grown. President Trump fueled this discourse for years with the “narco-state” and “cartel control” over vast regions of Mexico. Now, in his second term, this rhetoric has transitioned from campaign fodder to established doctrine. As with any doctrine requiring enemies, Mexico has been singled out.
Consequences and Reactions
Designating a country as an adversary has repercussions across various fronts: reduced military cooperation, justified covert operations, veiled sanctions, and trade pressure. This declaration follows recent bombings in Iran and coincides with fentanyl being labeled an existential threat.
Invoking the protection of “American children” is a potent argument, difficult to refute and easy to wield. In Washington, when other excuses run out, the duty to protect is invoked.
Mexico’s Response
Mexico remains silent, fearing that a response might exacerbate punishment or forgetting that remaining nameless is another form of ceding sovereignty.
The real issue isn’t being labeled adversaries; it’s that no one in power acknowledges this as a form of aggression. Accusations, even with elements of truth, are part of a more dangerous narrative: one that prepares the groundwork for political, economic, or even military intervention under the guise of assistance or prevention.
Cartels aren’t defeated by silence, nor is sovereignty defended with protocol gestures while Mexico is grouped with Iran and China on the Congressional blacklists.
Call for Action
Mexico urgently needs to respond clearly and truthfully. Not to deny everything, but to prevent others from dictating the sole narrative about it.
