Mexican Narco-State

Mexican Narco-State

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Although it has been pointed out that imperialist semiotics establishes inescapable marks on its enemies and spaces of conquest, this argument is inaccurate when it comes to arguments such as those pertaining to the Sinaloa Cartel, which claims to have controlled the Mexican state for at least fifty years. The magnitude of this accusation has not been grasped by the Mexican government or the idea of ​​building justice in our country.

Amid the disturbing revelations stemming from drug trafficking captured in the United States about the corruption rooted in the Mexican state, the country faces a crucial moment that demands a firm and coherent response. These statements, which suggest drug trafficking has controlled the power structure for decades, cannot be ignored. However, the solution lies not in foreign intervention, but in strengthening its own institutions and reaffirming national sovereignty. Mexico must take the initiative, demonstrating its capacity to face these challenges autonomously and effectively.

Collaboration with the United States is essential, but it must be based on mutual respect and strategic cooperation, not subordination. Instead of an invasion of US justice, a common front must be established against organized crime, sharing intelligence, technology, and best practices. This proactive approach will allow the Mexican government to wage a head-on fight against drug trafficking and corruption without relinquishing control over its own destiny. The country's governability is at a crossroads, and the only dignified way out is through a profound reengineering of the state. Superficial reforms are insufficient; a break with past practices is required to build a new public administration. The fight against drug trafficking can be the convening of a National Agreement for stability, reconciliation, and economic growth in the country.

Claudia Sheinbaum's administration has the monumental task of leading this transformation. It must implement public policies that not only combat crime but also discourage the economic gravitation toward the United States that fuels immediate crime. By offering collective incentives and opportunities through solid social and economic programs, the Mexican state can create a more resilient social fabric that is less vulnerable to the lures of crime. The challenge is enormous, but the opportunity to consolidate a more just and sovereign Mexico is even greater. This is not about giving in, but about demonstrating the nation's strength and capacity to overcome its own crises.

The way the United States is building evidence to pursue justice based on accusations and testimonies is similar to the progressive phenomena that are affecting the structure of kyriarchy in Mexico.

After the cartels themselves declared they were corrupting the political power structure in Mexico, there isn't much left to say. The enormous task is to rebuild the country and public administration. The idea of ​​a narco-state requires a rethinking of

government reengineering. Reforms are meaningless; an institutional breakdown is essential to achieve the desired transformation.

Venezuela for Ukraine

 Venezuela for Ukraine

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

In the current geopolitical realignment, the threads of power seem to weave a new and complex plot. The recent pressure exerted by the White House on Venezuela is not an isolated act, but rather emerges as a strategic lever following the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska. This bold move suggests a resurgence of the Monroe Doctrine, which seeks to reaffirm its traditional influence in Latin America, while, at the same time, Russia focuses its attention on Europe, delimiting its sphere of influence to the confines of the Intermarium.

The pulse of history shows us how regional blocs are reconfiguring their alliances, recovering designs prior to the neoliberal era. This dynamic fosters a new form of interventionism, forcing leftist governments and those with progressive sympathies—from Nicaragua and Bolivia to Mexico and Brazil—to reconsider their ties with Russia. In this context, the resurgence of the figure of "Mister Danger" takes on notable relevance, as it appears to be reclaiming its former territories of influence.

The pressure on Caracas, although intense, appears to be of a different magnitude than that of other nations. One only needs to observe the concentration of military forces and naval vessels off its coast to perceive the gravity of the situation. However, this pressure does not compare with the open and direct interventions that marked the 20th century in Latin America. There is speculation about the end of "Castro-Chavismo," but Nicolás Maduro's resilience in the face of previous crises raises doubts about the true scope of this offensive. It is possible that Trumpism is only seeking a far-reaching oil or other extractivist agreement, a pact that, if finalized, could even strengthen the Venezuelan regime, transforming it into a vassal of the United States.

For US foreign policy, the concept of "narco-states" has become the direct justification for its interventionism, transcending mere ideologies. The collusion between governments, mafias, and cartels, of which Venezuela and Mexico are clear examples for Donald Trump, has become a pretext for interference. Apparently, this phenomenon represents a real threat that demands to be combated, although the role of civil society in this drama is still uncertain. The conscription of the Venezuelan population, called for an imaginary confrontation against a supposed invasion, reveals the lack of preparation of these regimes to establish strategic defenses against imperialism. Mexico, in this arena, must closely observe the course of events in Venezuela, as it represents a window into what its own future might hold.

Alaska Puts the Intermarium at Risk

Alaska Puts the Intermarium at Risk

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The vision of the Intermarium, the age-old idea of a federation of countries between the Baltic, Black, and Adriatic Seas, has been proposed as one of the historic solutions to Eastern Europe's vulnerability; however, this region has historically been the epicenter of conflicts dating back centuries. The fundamental problem with the Intermarium is that it has never achieved true cohesion. Historically, each country in the region has prioritized its own interests in the face of a common threat, be it Russian, Ottoman, or German imperialism. The scars of ethnic, religious, and territorial divisions run deep.

Only with the end of the Cold War has Eastern Europe achieved an autonomous and consensual existence in the face of the hegemonies that threaten it. Atlanticism and Zbigniew Brzezinski's model, with its concept of a "lock on the Heartland," became the United States' strategy to contain Russia. This lock was built on NATO and the US military presence in Europe. The results of the US-Russia summit in Alaska suggest that Donald Trump, playing the role of Russian Doll, has called into question Russia's isolation. Trump's questioning of NATO funding and his ambiguity regarding Western collective defense were shattering the lock that keeps Eastern Europe secure; now, after the meeting with Vladimir Putin, the failure of Atlanticism can be taken for granted. The Russian bear is on the loose and can advance wherever it wants.

This has direct consequences. The Intermarium countries, which depend on North American support to resist Russian pressure, feel vulnerable. Trump's empathy toward Russia could encourage Vladimir Putin to act more boldly, knowing that the guarantor of regional security might not intervene. The risk is not only an invasion of other Eastern European countries, but also an intensification of Russia's "hybrid warfare" (cyberattacks, disinformation) to destabilize its neighbors. The lack of internal cohesion in the Intermarium, combined with a less engaged United States, creates the perfect breeding ground for a new round of conflicts.

In this context, the old wounds of Eastern Europe could reopen. The theses of thinkers like Vivianne Forrester, although controversial, demonstrate how geopolitical ideas, even the most speculative, can ignite the space into an inferno, as happened with the fires of antisemitism and other forms of exclusionary nationalism.

Cadets Always Have a Sad Heart

 Cadets Always Have a Sad Heart

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

A new logic is taking hold in the complex relationship between Mexico and the United States, one that seems to be confirmed by the handover of drug lords to Washington. Far from being an act of mere cooperation, this dynamic confirms that President Sheinbaum's administration is complying with US demands to avoid a greater threat. Donald Trump, with his rhetoric and actions, not only seeks to solve the immediate problem of drug trafficking, but, in a masterstroke, attempts to dismantle the future scenario that George Friedman proposes for the year 2080, in which the demographic and political power of the Mexican-American community in the United States defeats the US federal government.

Emilio Lezama's (El Universal) analysis of Trump's possible military intervention, which focuses on dismantling the drug trafficking structure, is the prelude to Trump's deeper strategy. However, Friedman's vision goes beyond military conflict. Friedman suggests that the United States' defeat will not come on the battlefield, but rather from its own inability to integrate the growing population of Mexican origin, which will consolidate and align itself with Mexican interests, rendering future military intervention unworkable. For Trump, this demographic and social threat is the real enemy. Therefore, his interventionist strategy in Mexico seeks to separate the actors. His goal is to segment the Mexican population into two groups: criminals, whom he is fighting, and "good" citizens. By directing military operations and unilateral interventions outside of US states with large Mexican-American populations, Trump avoids the polarization of a demographic base that could turn against him, as happened in Los Angeles, California. His message is clear: the fight is against drug trafficking and corruption in Mexico, not against Hispanics who live and work legally in the United States.

On this playing field, the Mexican Army and Navy have adopted a stance of pragmatic cooperation, an act reminiscent of the diplomacy of the Carrancistas in 1914-1916 and the Sonora Group in 1920-1929. In those years, figures such as Venustiano Carranza, Álvaro Obregón, and Plutarco Elías Calles understood that US recognition and support were vital to consolidating their power and stabilizing the country. The current cooperation, although painful for national sovereignty, is a similar calculation. The Morena government knows it lacks an institutionalized party, an effective social movement, or the military power to confront a direct intervention by the Yankee Empire, and any resistance would lead to an asymmetric conflict with high costs for the civilian population.

In this context, the corruption of the Mexican political class, including members of Morena, serves as an additional justification for US interventionism. While Morena politicians don't behave like the allies of Porfirio Díaz or Victoriano Huerta, who fled the country to Alfonso XIII after being defeated in a civil war, their pragmatism resembles them and could open the door to a new modus vivendi. The opposition, far from being a counterweight, could take advantage of this fragile situation to infiltrate the government in the near future, creating a de facto system in which power is shared or negotiated under Washington's conditions.

This situation leaves Mexico in a dilemma where peace is bought at the cost of sovereignty and autonomy. In this scenario, President Sheinbaum and the armed forces are playing a game in which the only possible victory is to avoid all-out war.

Is the Mexican monsoon the tears of cadets Manuel Azueta, Juan de la Barrera, Juan Escutia, Francisco Márquez, Agustín Melgar, Fernando Montes de Oca, and Vicente Suárez? Mexican youth should not seek solace in the ghosts of a broken sovereignty, but in the recognition of a geopolitical reality. The time of sacrifices on the altar of the nation is over (Regina). The blood spilled at Chapultepec and Veracruz is not the end point, but the beginning of a history that now demands to be rewritten. There is no honor in defending the ruins of a lying and traitorous political class, Santanistas who sell the homeland in installments while paying homage to the ghost of an empty nationalism, as Sergio Aguayo says in the Pantheon of Myths and Alejandro Filio poetically expresses in that verse of disillusionment: The patio, the great ceremony, the homeland the tricolor light, then the betrayal of he who steals, dishonors and sells us our rights and our voice. The pain of deception must make the adolescent republic mature; Mexicans must stop seeing the United States as an invader and begin to understand it as a destiny: 50 million Mexicans can't be wrong!

Donald Trump. TACO with rich pollo or big chicken

 Donald Trump. TACO with rich pollo or big chicken

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Now then? Apparently, the impulsive Trump seems determined to invade Mexico to stop not only drug trafficking but also the decline of his electoral standing in the American public opinion.

However, his idea has been taken up by the Morena narrative to unite the country and generate the historic anti-Yankee Mexican nationalism.

In the dizzying scenario of binational politics, the apparent threat of a military invasion of Mexico, outlined by the impulsive Donald Trump, has taken on a double life.

It's complicated for everyone, especially for the societies of both countries; drug use continues to grow indiscriminately in North America at the same time as violence in Mexico.

No government seems to take the externalities of the drug phenomenon seriously.

The relationship between Mexico and the United States must be reconsidered from the geopolitics of the Brzezinski Model. Of course the United States needs a Japan downstream of the Rio Grande! Mexico cannot continue to be the laboratory of violence for North America, nor the purgatory of the American dream.

If Mexico falls, the United States falls as well; Mexico is a huge flank for destruction and the worst tragedies in the Yankee Empire. There are the scientific prospects of Friedman, Fukuyama, and Zakaria. Have Mister Carrot and his assistant secretary, Pretty Fly Blondie, read them?

The MAGA project is increasingly descending into absurdity and seems to aim for the opposite of hegemony and strengthening. Has Donald Trump become Mexicanized? The United States has all the capacity, energy, and strength to end the drug phenomenon; at least from the perspective of drug consumption and production, to regulate it in a sensible way.

However, excessive pentagonism requires Mexico to be the North American Sicily and the Petty Cash Box of the Narco-Empire.

Can Trump control American pentagonism? It seems not.

Irresponsible incursions into Latin America have only meant increased levels of emigration and drug trafficking for the United States. If Trumpism acts wrongly, it will only exponentially complicate a relationship that is becoming virulent and conflictive.

The idea of North America is irreversible in the immediate geopolitical vision (2080). The question is whether the United States wants to be the protagonist of the new bloc to restore Western culture, or whether it will witness the dismantling of the American Union in the nine nations that will easily succumb to Asian, Chinese, or Muslim culture.

How long will Trumpism govern seriously?

From the Sierra Morena, descending like Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga

 From the Sierra Morena, descending like Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The manifest rupture of the dominant coalition in the Fourth Transformation and the departure of López Obradorism to the Old World, particularly Spain, resonates with an echo that is neither of the Revolution, nor of the indigenous peoples, nor of Juárez's liberalism. It is the echo of the "homeland of the Creole," which Severo Martínez captured in ink and which today, with crushing irony, seems to be the true roadmap of the progressive national left. Martínez taught us that the homeland was not forged by the mestizo, nor by the indigenous, but by the Creole minority who, clinging to their Spanish heritage and colonial privileges, built a nation for themselves, on the backs of those below.

The relationship between Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga at the end of the Cold War is a case of "realpolitik" and, at the same time, of the Hispanic Creole connection. Fraga and Castro, despite being on opposite sides of the political spectrum (post-Franco Spanish conservatism and Cuban communism), shared

a defense of Hispanic heritage. Despite being a communist leader, Fidel Castro was a fervent defender of the Spanish legacy in Latin America. For him, Cuban identity was a "wonderful mix of Spaniards, Indians, and Africans." Unlike the indigenist current of other leftist movements in the region, Castro viewed mestizaje and the Spanish legacy as central elements of national identity, a heritage to be defended. This stance, which remained firm even during the height of the "Day of Indigenous Resistance," directly connected him to the Hispanist vision of the Spanish right, which also defended Spain's legacy and culture throughout the world.

Loris Zanatta, in his work "Fidel Castro, the Last Catholic King," establishes him as a leader who defended morality and tradition, a "king" who legitimizes himself through Catholic tradition and morality, seen as a manifestation of the persistence of the colonial legacy in contemporary politics.

Marcos Roitman criticizes the lack of an authentic ideological identity in Latin America. The region's political and cultural elite have become "cipayos" of their own identity, prioritizing their connection to the Spanish "motherland" over the construction of a genuinely Latin American political project.

The presence of Beatriz Gutiérrez Mueller in the Motherland, legitimized by the intellectual and academic circles that now don't know where to place their radicalism, triggers a lack of clarity about one's own identity and a tendency to take refuge in the former Ibero-American metropolis.

In the end, Lopezobradorism and the Fourth Transformation did not seek a Marxist utopia, but rather the reaffirmation of a Hispanic, autocratic, and paternalistic worldview, where the caudillo stands as the defender of morality and tradition, a "king" who guards the "mother country" against the evils of the world.

Lopezobradorism is committing the same capitulation that Roitman criticized: Hispanic criollismo, exemplified by Fraga and Castro, the Morena elite is behaving like a "sepoy" of its own identity, a "criollo" who, unable to build a truly Mexican project, prefers to surrender to the Spanish lordly life. The true "flight to Spain" is not political exile, but ideological. It is that of the officials and intellectuals of the 4T who, unable to generate their own model, are forced into internal colonialism by their populist incompetence.

The rupture of Lopezobradorism and pragmatic defection go beyond the Fourth Transformation. In the end, the gachupines that Roitman denounces are not those who come from outside, but those who have taken root in the thinking of those who, in their supposed struggle, have been unable to escape the "homeland of the Creole" or the scepter of their own "Catholic king."

Does Trump strengthen Sheinbaum within Morena?

 Does Trump strengthen Sheinbaum within Morena?

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

It doesn't seem that way; on the contrary. Although appearances suggest that President Claudia Sheinbaum has been strengthened by the ninety days of grace granted by Donald Trump, in reality, she faces a significant challenge in her relationship with the governors and internal groups within Morena. Despite her strengthened position, these actors are likely to continue to ignore her due to a pact of impunity and corruption in Mexico, where simulation has become institutionalized.

The trans-sexennial influence of López Obrador's administration and the notable absence of Claudia Sheinbaum indicate that power dynamics in Mexico are dominated by the "caciquil federalism" of local and de facto powers (Andrew Paxman). Governors have a considerable degree of autonomy and can resist or pretend to obey the directives of central power. The Morena governors and cliques play a game of "a thousand masks" with Donald Trump and the United States. Sheinbaum and the Morena governors interact in a game of mixed signals.

The relationship between Sheinbaum and the Morena power groups represents a scenario of "silent disobedience." The governors publicly abide by Sheinbaum's directives, but in practice, they continue their traditional governing practices. They act pragmatically based on their own interests and power groups, using the Morena party as a front for their agendas. Corruption is a reward system that allows elites to maintain the loyalty of their groups. The factions compete, but they do so within a framework of corruption that benefits all. Corruption is not seen as a weakness to be eradicated, but as a tool for governability and personal enrichment.

The president uses financial resources to obtain the loyalty and support of the governors. In return, the governors pretend to abide by federal directives. However, the economic crisis and rampant corruption reveal the message that has prevailed since Vicente Fox's presidency: it is necessary to unite the years of Hidalgo and Carranza. Political cliques in Mexico have turned political defection into religious fundamentalism because it is necessary to abandon ship without warning.

Mexican presidentialism cannot be reconstituted without the formal support of the United States, as in 1924, 1929, 1945, 1988, and 1994. The United States must take charge of its own backyard and abandon the idea of corrupt homeostasis. Federalism has turned Mexico into a failed state that will soon infect the United States and that, whether Donald Trump likes it or not, will have to subsidize with greater resources later; better to pay now than double or triple later; even the American public will have to consider Friedman's exponential 2080 in those payments.

North America should have understood that Mexico is its historical stepson, its disobedient son; But if he doesn't control it now, like Nero's mother and guardians, he will end up consumed by his irresponsible actions.