Introduction
On January 3, the U.S. attempted to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, politicizing the T-MEC review process set for July 1, 2026. The issue shifted from a technical matter to one influenced by the political conflict between the U.S. and Latin American governments.
Mexico’s Stance and U.S. Response
Mexico, under President Claudia Sheinbaum, defended non-intervention and grounded its position in Mexican laws and international law. This stance adds weight to the U.S. government’s hardened negotiation position under Donald Trump.
The core issue transcends Venezuela; it’s about setting a precedent. If the U.S. can execute such a large-scale operation in the hemisphere, migration, fentanyl, energy, Cuba, tariffs, and rules of origin become bargaining chips.
The T-MEC includes a clause to exert pressure: if a country decides not to extend it, an uncertain cycle ensues, penalizing investment and supply chains. Trump promotes a narrative that Mexico cooperates when convenient but obstructs hemispheric security, thus negotiating commerce as a reward or punishment.
U.S. Congressional Criticism and Implications for Mexico
In the U.S. Congress, criticism arises from Republicans like Carlos Giménez of Florida, warning of “serious consequences for trade” if Mexico undermines U.S. policy. Republican María Elvira Salazar accuses Mexico of “propping up the Cuban tyranny” by sending oil to Cuba and calls for sanctions. Mike Waltz echoes this sentiment at the UN, while Fox News commentator Jesse Watters turns it into a rallying cry: Mexico must align with the U.S. or face the cost of non-compliance.
Cuba serves as the catalyst. President Sheinbaum stated on January 7 that Mexico did not exceed historical oil shipment levels to Cuba, but acknowledged becoming a key supplier due to Venezuela’s export blockage and Maduro’s capture. This makes Mexico an accused enabler of the Cuban regime by the U.S.
Under the Helms-Burton Act, supporting or benefiting from Cuban expropriated assets can lead to sanctions. The trigger is the “trafficking” of confiscated properties, which can initiate lawsuits and penalties by merely using or facilitating operations linked to Cuban state infrastructure.
Additional Pressure on Mexico
Mexico faces more pressure, with some Republican sectors advocating for U.S. military or law enforcement presence to combat Mexican cartels. This is politically explosive and legally unfeasible, as public security is reserved for the state, and the National Security Law restricts foreign agents.
Though direct U.S. operational presence is unlikely, it can create uncertainty, financial pressure, and trade threats via the T-MEC.
Key Questions and Answers
- What is the main issue at hand? The U.S.’s attempt to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has escalated tensions between the U.S. and Mexico, impacting T-MEC negotiations.
- How has Mexico responded to U.S. actions? Mexico, under President Claudia Sheinbaum, defended non-intervention and grounded its position in Mexican laws and international law.
- What are the implications for Cuba? With Venezuela’s export blockage and Maduro’s capture, Mexico has become a key oil supplier to Cuba, leading the U.S. to accuse Mexico of supporting the Cuban regime.
- What are the potential consequences for Mexico? A total sanction against Mexico is improbable due to interdependence, but selective sanctions align with Trump’s style, impacting investment, exchange rates, and growth.
