Alienating Mexico at the United States’ peril

Growing up in Mexico during the 1980s, I was taught that the United States was an enemy to be feared, an imperialist power that had stolen the better half of our country. For decades, generations of Mexicans like me were spoon-fed anti-American views in school.

That mindset slowly began to change after the North American Free Trade Agreement went into effect in 1994. It led to high levels of economic cooperation and cultural appreciation. Mexico became a top tourist destination for its northern friends. State visits by US presidents turned into a cause for celebration instead of concern, and for many Mexicans, the ugly American became an indispensable partner. I began to boast that my three children, born to a Mexican mother and Canadian father, and with an American grandfather, were symbols of North American integration.

However, today, as a result of President Trump’s on-again-off-again tariffs and aggressively anti-Mexico stance, the two countries risk sliding back to viewing each other as enemies. By browbeating Mexico and inflicting the pain of a protracted trade war, he risks alienating a necessary ally and friend. If Trump stirs up historical anti-American sentiments and loses Mexico’s cooperation, he won’t get the border control and war against cartels that he wants. Alienating Mexicans is self-defeating.

President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico said as much in her response to the US’ 25% tariffs on Mexican imports. “No one wins with this decision,” she said at a news conference on the morning of March 4. That evening, Trump addressed Congress; referred to immigration as an invasion, and used bellicose language about the need to fight a war on Mexican drug cartels. Never mind that Mexica just days earlier had sent cabinet members to Washington to discuss security and cooperation and that Marco Rubio expressed appreciation for Mexico’s actions to secure the common border. Trump moved the goalposts again, suggesting Mexico had not done enough, and Sheinbaum was hung out to dry.

Sheinbaum has bent over backwards to appease Trump and avoid the imposition of tariffs. She sent 10,000 Mexican troops to the border, closed down a significant number of fentanyl labs and expatriated 29 cartel leaders to the US. She allowed American spy planes and drones to fly into Mexican territory. In response, the White House has continued to denigrate a friend and an ally.

Trump’s executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America was also viewed as an affront. Sheinbaum sent a letter to Google, explaining the historical and legal roots of the name that Mexicans cherish.

All of this is a shame because so many gains of the past are threatened. Along with the beginning of warmer relations, NAFTA, now the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement, brought economic benefits for both American and Mexican consumers, lowering prices for goods produced on both sides of the border. Mexico turned into a manufacturing powerhouse and an integral part of supply chains that brought better and cheaper products to the US market. Mexican avocados and tomatoes became staples in American households, while Mexicans became avid purchasers of American products.

Free trade also had significant political ramifications in Mexico. Previously, the country’s economy had suffered the brunt of disastrous populist policies that led to decades of economic crises. During the 1980s and early 1990s, recurring cycles of devaluation, inflation and large-scale job losses spurred immigration to the US. NAFTA helped bring an end to this instability through the creation of rules and regulations that prevented future Mexican presidents from enacting protectionist trade barriers to score political points. US investment was welcomed.

Better relations led to more collaboration on multiple fronts, including efforts to control illegal immigration and the development of the 2007 Merida Initiative to combat drug trafficking and violence that worsened in Mexico at the turn of the 21st century.

Free trade was not without its downsides, most importantly the loss of US manufacturing jobs as companies relocated to Mexico. But Trump’s dream of forcing factories back to the US by imposing tariffs reveals how little he understands the depth of North American integration. The declines in the US stock markets underscore how companies deeply invested in trade and supply chains with Mexico are reacting to Trump’s move and the threat of an economic recession.

The weaponization of tariffs to extract concessions, including accepting the deportation of migrants from other countries and pressuring Mexico into shunning Chinese investment, is a daily threat. However, Mexico has little room to manoeuvre, given that it is dependent on the US market for 80% of its exports. According to many predictions, Trump’s tariffs will force the country’s economy into a tailspin.

And while Canada has readied itself with retaliatory tariffs, Mexico is in a complicated position. Leftist factions of Sheinbaum’s party could pressure her to take a more combative stance toward Trump, or she could risk being viewed as weak. But a more confrontational position risks inciting Trump’s wrath, with unforeseen consequences. A recent poll published in the newspaper El Financiero found that Mexicans are increasingly pessimistic about relations with the United States, with positive views dropping to 33% in January 2025 from 61% in August 2024.

So who would benefit from a US-Mexico divorce? Russia and China, for a start. Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, would like nothing more than to see a drug-ridden and unstable Mexico increasingly at odds with the US, given that his goal has been to increase Russia’s sway in the Global South. And China is poised to take advantage of investment opportunities, markets and geopolitical influence in a country the US used to view as a close friend.

Trump may believe that alienating Mexico is a small price to pay to make America great again. But given the need for collaboration to address a porous border, entrenched cartel activity and the continued flow of fentanyl, his bullying could backfire. Trump’s goal of 'America First' could lead not to greatness but to just 'America Alone' in an increasingly hostile neighbourhood.

©️The New York Times Company