Mexico Facing the Iranian Plot
Republican U.S. congressmen asked the Mexican government yesterday to "re-evaluate" its relations with Iran, as Barack Obama's government reported a plot said to be devised by Iranian agents to assassinate the ambassador of Saudi Arabia with the help of Los Zetas. Faced with pressure, the best thing for Mexico is restraint.
For the moment, there doesn't seem to be enough proof to close the case, despite there being a certain level of plausibility to it. This impression coincides with the fact that the Mexican government has made concise comments about the subject up until last night.
In separate interviews, the three majority groups in the Senate — PRI, PAN and PRD — asked the Mexican government to be alert to the possibility of the United States using a terrorist threat as a pretext for military intervention. It's sensible not to "buy into" a foreign fight and escalate a criminal matter into a diplomatic problem.
At these heights of inter-connectivity between North American nations, from the context of friendship between Mexico and the United States, it would seem impossible to think of an intervention that puts at risk the bonds that have grown from our close proximity. However, history has proven that when it comes to the internal interests of the world's greatest power, all other considerations end up coming in second.
Pakistan would be an example of the above. Despite being an "allied" government in U.S. discourse, Washington wasn't at all ashamed to carry out a military operation in Pakistani territory that ended the life of Osama bin Laden.
By offering the presence of U.S. soldiers on Mexican soil, Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry shows that this idea exists in more than one politician's way of thinking in that country.
Terrorism is not the same as organized crime. Although both are threats to U.S. national security, as the neighbor to the north admits, the way of confronting the former has been much tougher than in the case of drug trafficking. To confirm a connection between both factors would be opening the door to giving them similar treatment.
The above doesn't mean skimping on cooperation and help to the U.S. The only thing it implies is caution and decision-making based always on reliable information and, above all, in conjunction with national interests.
For the moment, there doesn't seem to be enough proof to close the case, despite there being a certain level of plausibility to it. This impression coincides with the fact that the Mexican government has made concise comments about the subject up until last night.
In separate interviews, the three majority groups in the Senate — PRI, PAN and PRD — asked the Mexican government to be alert to the possibility of the United States using a terrorist threat as a pretext for military intervention. It's sensible not to "buy into" a foreign fight and escalate a criminal matter into a diplomatic problem.
At these heights of inter-connectivity between North American nations, from the context of friendship between Mexico and the United States, it would seem impossible to think of an intervention that puts at risk the bonds that have grown from our close proximity. However, history has proven that when it comes to the internal interests of the world's greatest power, all other considerations end up coming in second.
Pakistan would be an example of the above. Despite being an "allied" government in U.S. discourse, Washington wasn't at all ashamed to carry out a military operation in Pakistani territory that ended the life of Osama bin Laden.
By offering the presence of U.S. soldiers on Mexican soil, Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry shows that this idea exists in more than one politician's way of thinking in that country.
Terrorism is not the same as organized crime. Although both are threats to U.S. national security, as the neighbor to the north admits, the way of confronting the former has been much tougher than in the case of drug trafficking. To confirm a connection between both factors would be opening the door to giving them similar treatment.
The above doesn't mean skimping on cooperation and help to the U.S. The only thing it implies is caution and decision-making based always on reliable information and, above all, in conjunction with national interests.