Mexico-U.S.: The New Limits
Published in El Universal
(Mexico) on 4 March 2011
by Editorial (link to original)
(Mexico) on 4 March 2011
by Editorial (link to original)
Translated from
by Esther French.
Edited by Jessica Boesl.
Beyond the protocols and rigorous speeches, the meeting between Presidents Felipe Calderón and Barack Obama put on the table a long-postponed theme — that is, the rethinking of the limits of bi-national cooperation, in light of the gains reached in the fight against organized crime in Mexico.
From our side, urgency is growing for the United States to assume its responsibility in the consumption of addictive drugs, in the control of arms trafficking and in the detection of money laundering, in order to diversify the fight against the cartels, which cannot be reduced to the beheading of those organizations, as the U.S. is accustomed to simply advising.
Neither does there remain, outside of the agenda, the theme of U.S. diplomatic representation in Mexico, which must be revised as a function of the real utility that it has so that bi-national cooperation flows in an expedited way.
On the part of the U.S., there have also been extraordinary petitions, such as the application for analyzing the convenience with which the deployed agents of that country can carry arms after the assassination of Jaime Zapata. President Calderón said that he will speak of the case with the Senate of the Republic in order to increase the security of the diplomatic body assigned to our country, but stay within the law.
Tensions and relaxed periods are normal in diplomacy, much more so in such a complex relationship. What appears to be a fact is that the moment has arrived to explore new definitions of the way both nations deal with a common problem that, instead of resolving itself, is refining itself: How to advance with innovative solutions, without compromising the sovereignty of either of the two countries.
Perhaps a good example of good will and negotiating capacity is the material advance of cross-border transport announced yesterday, in which, it is said, there already exists a “clear path” to resolve the bi-national dispute that dates back to 1995. Over the years, the problem has remained immovable. Neither side dared take a step to help the agreements, which have now finally been made.
Effective stewardship — not just declarative — and new limits of cooperation will be the central themes of this stage, in a fight that Mexico cannot undertake alone because it is a multinational problem with variables beyond the exclusive control of Mexicans.
From our side, urgency is growing for the United States to assume its responsibility in the consumption of addictive drugs, in the control of arms trafficking and in the detection of money laundering, in order to diversify the fight against the cartels, which cannot be reduced to the beheading of those organizations, as the U.S. is accustomed to simply advising.
Neither does there remain, outside of the agenda, the theme of U.S. diplomatic representation in Mexico, which must be revised as a function of the real utility that it has so that bi-national cooperation flows in an expedited way.
On the part of the U.S., there have also been extraordinary petitions, such as the application for analyzing the convenience with which the deployed agents of that country can carry arms after the assassination of Jaime Zapata. President Calderón said that he will speak of the case with the Senate of the Republic in order to increase the security of the diplomatic body assigned to our country, but stay within the law.
Tensions and relaxed periods are normal in diplomacy, much more so in such a complex relationship. What appears to be a fact is that the moment has arrived to explore new definitions of the way both nations deal with a common problem that, instead of resolving itself, is refining itself: How to advance with innovative solutions, without compromising the sovereignty of either of the two countries.
Perhaps a good example of good will and negotiating capacity is the material advance of cross-border transport announced yesterday, in which, it is said, there already exists a “clear path” to resolve the bi-national dispute that dates back to 1995. Over the years, the problem has remained immovable. Neither side dared take a step to help the agreements, which have now finally been made.
Effective stewardship — not just declarative — and new limits of cooperation will be the central themes of this stage, in a fight that Mexico cannot undertake alone because it is a multinational problem with variables beyond the exclusive control of Mexicans.