What Caused the United States To Tighten Its Stance?
Yesterday, when I commented that the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement was over, I was referring to the toughened stance on the part of the U.S. government, which has thrown out issues that were not considered or had been ruled out, which in turn will prevent the treaty from being signed this year.
I also talked about how that change became evident during the negotiations in Washington Sunday afternoon and Monday morning, when it was announced that the U.S. government would be sending labor inspectors to Mexico to supervise compliance with labor agreements, as stipulated in the treaty.
On Radio Formula, Moises Kalach, who has firsthand knowledge, told me that the U.S. government had drawn five red lines that Mexico could not cross.
Late that same Monday night, the Business Coordinating Council issued a statement reporting the change.
The council revealed that Washington had recently submitted proposed amendments that no one here had previously mentioned regarding the USMCA. The council added that it was seriously concerned that there are some demands, relating to employment, that are extreme and totally unacceptable. The council said it felt that some of the involved parties are trying to add pressure so that there will be no agreement. Respect for Mexico’s sovereignty is non-negotiable, the council said.
These words carry a true sense of importance and dignity, which was absent in the official silence in the face of this crisis.
It was yesterday morning that Jesus Seade, while on a flight back to Washington, said in response to a question that President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has rejected any foreign interference and reaffirmed the argument for sovereignty, and recognized that the negotiation was at a standstill.
So, the USMCA negotiations will continue into 2020. It won’t be easy, either, with Donald Trump in the middle of running a reelection campaign and Mexico as his punching bag. The question that remains is what has caused the United States to tighten its stance with Mexico? What has not sat well with the United States?
I also talked about how that change became evident during the negotiations in Washington Sunday afternoon and Monday morning, when it was announced that the U.S. government would be sending labor inspectors to Mexico to supervise compliance with labor agreements, as stipulated in the treaty.
On Radio Formula, Moises Kalach, who has firsthand knowledge, told me that the U.S. government had drawn five red lines that Mexico could not cross.
Late that same Monday night, the Business Coordinating Council issued a statement reporting the change.
The council revealed that Washington had recently submitted proposed amendments that no one here had previously mentioned regarding the USMCA. The council added that it was seriously concerned that there are some demands, relating to employment, that are extreme and totally unacceptable. The council said it felt that some of the involved parties are trying to add pressure so that there will be no agreement. Respect for Mexico’s sovereignty is non-negotiable, the council said.
These words carry a true sense of importance and dignity, which was absent in the official silence in the face of this crisis.
It was yesterday morning that Jesus Seade, while on a flight back to Washington, said in response to a question that President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador has rejected any foreign interference and reaffirmed the argument for sovereignty, and recognized that the negotiation was at a standstill.
So, the USMCA negotiations will continue into 2020. It won’t be easy, either, with Donald Trump in the middle of running a reelection campaign and Mexico as his punching bag. The question that remains is what has caused the United States to tighten its stance with Mexico? What has not sat well with the United States?
Previous article![]( "A Republican in the Democratic Realm")
Next article![]( "US President Donald Trump Relishing Impeachment Fight")
