Mexico as a Pillar of North America

 Mexico as a Pillar of North America

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The idea that Mexico is a “middle power” is, at best, rhetorical excess and, at worst, a dangerous delusion.

The reality is harsher: Mexico operates as North America’s maquiladora region, a supplier of labor and logistics that the “Empire” could, if it so chose, replace or discipline through immediate control.

History does not lie: attempts to challenge Washington’s geopolitical gravity have ended in collapse, from the decline of Porfirio Díaz to the financial disaster of José López Portillo.

Today, the country is lost in a “halo effect” of populism that prioritizes spectacle over strategy.

While figures like Omar García Harfuch, aka “Batman,” or the defense of a “paper sovereignty” in the face of the Cuban crisis serve to fuel the domestic narrative, the real world is heading toward an unprecedented security and supply crisis.

The inconvenient truth is this: if the United States falls, Mexico disappears.

There is no Plan B in Beijing, no salvation in Moscow, no refuge in Tehran.

Latin American elites have historically used the people as cannon fodder to buy time and protection, but this capacity for manipulation is exhausted by hardship.

The Chilean path demonstrated that the only peaceful and successful coexistence with the North arises from order and institutions, not from sovereignist tantrums.

Mexico must aspire to be the "Little House" of North America; an integration that responds not to cultural supremacy, but to the relentless dynamics of regional capitalism.

Our geopolitical margin is narrow: either we democratize and use soft power to influence the bloc, or we will be absorbed by the force of events.

Beneath the surface of what analysts like Carlos Ramírez and Luis Carlos Ugalde call "Populist Neoliberalism" or authoritarianism lies an inescapable reality: we are a tributary state and a critical security zone for Washington.

The viability of the 21st century lies not in "romantic diversification" toward transatlantic or Asian horizons—which only deepen our deficit and vulnerability—but in the consolidation of our North American identity.

In this scenario, Marcelo Ebrard's strategy is not just diplomacy but an imperative for survival.

Mexico and Canada must reclaim Robert Pastor's vision: a community of interests that transcends geographical proximity.

Attempting to replace this bloc with support from Europe or Asia is a systemic miscalculation.

Our logistical structures are designed for continental integration; any attempt at isolation will only fragment the resilience that the most dynamic market on the planet provides us.

The strength of the balance of payments is the clearest indicator for decision-making.

While intra-North American trade sustains our stability, our relationship with Asian giants tends to weaken our financial maneuvering.

Globalization has been reconfigured into a profound regionalism where proximity is the supreme strategic asset.

The ruling party is entering a labyrinth of sterile factionalism and local strongmen who neglect the general welfare. The need for figures who prioritize the viability of the state over the rhetoric of conflict is emerging.

In this chaos of centrifugal leadership, technical management and strategic integration become the only tools capable of safeguarding the future.

Faced with the imminent crisis due to the situation in the Middle East, will Mexican society be able to accept a technical “Oppenheimer,” or will it choose the resentment sown by populism and “go down with the captain” rather than be saved by the expert?

The path to true freedom is not built with rhetoric, but with the order that only technology can guarantee.

In this urgent scenario, Marcelo Ebrard Casaubón stands as the Oppenheimer of national survival: the technical expert capable of harnessing the "bomb" of prosperity through a cordial and strategic relationship with the United States.

While the noise of populist attacks fades in the face of scarcity, the echo of reason points to Ebrard as the necessary architect to safeguard the economy and manage our inseparable membership in the Northern bloc.

Mexico has no time for further ideological distractions; its viability depends on leaders who prioritize the effectiveness of data over the narrative of conflict.

It is time to act as the strategic partners that geography and capital dictate, under the guidance of the one who holds the key to external harmony, or accept the consequences of becoming a forgotten and impoverished periphery.

The moment of truth has arrived.

Ebrard adheres to social liberalism

 Ebrard adheres to social liberalism

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The video presentation entitled "El Camino de México" that seeks to promote Marcelo Ebrard's career as a public figure, actually shows the distance that the former Mexican foreign minister has from the principles that distinguish the government of the Fourth Transformation. The material seems to be aimed at an electoral sector that seeks the economic integration of Mexico with the United States, the promotion of capitalism and the development of technological modernization in the areas of government security and education. It explains little about any social work that the former Head of Government of CDMX has carried out, even the issue of public transport that could have been useful, was not taken into consideration -for example, the issue of the Metro-.

Since his incorporation into the technocratic team of Manuel Camacho Solís, Ebrard Casaubón appreciated politics as a managerial bureaucrat. That is to say, keeping due proportions in what is called Enlightened Despotism, Ebrard like Camacho, develop a strategic thinking of the government moving away from the influence that society has. Camacho opted for the integration of a compact group that would take over the main areas of the government and that would become essential to remove the direction and control of empirical politicians; what finally happened. Ebrard continues to be technotronic, now digital and cybernetic, trusting that artificial intelligence can replace empiricism even in relations with Yankee imperialism.

Marcelo forgets the lesson of politics, as Jesús Reyes Heroles said, it happens with many. The technocrat says how, but the politician says when. Both things are essential in a society like Mexico, a nation severely confronted between the republic of catrines and the republic of outcasts. Camacho Solís was the architect of an elite that seized power from power and sought transformation from within the system. Ebrard, as happened with Camacho, was expelled from the technocratic group and forced to engage in politics, to seek survival among the empiricists, and they did not do so badly.

Ebrard, like other candidates, should reflect on the political capacity that they have developed in these times and that has positioned them in the most competitive spaces to achieve the presidency of the republic. Márquez's Why did Camacho lose? should also be a bedside book for Ebrard Casaubón; Beyond getting closer to the cliques of the political group in power and the national oligarchy, it is also important to get closer to the masses, the formal attachment to the popular sectors and the serious construction of public policies for a people that has enormous social gaps .

The historic defeat of the Atlacomulco Group

 The historic defeat of the Atlacomulco Group

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

There is a perspective of the Mexican political system that considers the Atlacomulco Group central within the Revolutionary Family. Their survival can now be located in the business sector, highlighting their role in the media -particularly in the case of LatinUS- where they cultivate sensationalism to make politics and more money; whichever comes first.

For this reason, the triumph of Morena in the State of Mexico is highly significant. EDOMEX represents one of the entities with the greatest economic capacity in the country, as well as a high electoral profitability. However, it is difficult to accept the idea of electoral realignment, as well as a landslide victory for Maestra Delfina. The metropolitan area shared by CDMX and EDOMEX constitutes a political reserve for the opposition, which also shows the exhaustion of leftist governments in the area. However, the most important thing to note is manifested in the operational capacity of the PRI structure to generate a highly competitive process. Morena's triumph is irrefutable, although the PRI and the Atlacomulcos endured twelve rounds on their feet.

The case of Coahuila is not minor, although it wants to disdain it. The history of drug trafficking in the region provides data to understand that, in addition to votes, the opposition electoral alliance seeks investors and raw materials to stay in the fight against Morena. Adding the PRI resistance of EDOMEX and Coahuila, the Atlacomulco Group breathes and aspires, and will continue to steal a lot, indisputably.

For this reason, more important than the electoral outcome in both entities, it is necessary to point out the catalytic consequences that the event had within Morena. From the sensible electoral celebration they moved to the internal competition for the presidential candidacy, accelerating the succession times and breaking down the scenario, a bit, for López Obrador.

Despite the fact that Marcelo Ebrard's conduct confuses acceleration with rationality and Atlacomulco with Solidarity, it is important to point out that the times for the chancellor are more than exhausted. Gutiérrez Canet at some point compared him to Ezequiel Padilla and the similarity was not idle at all.

In accordance with the popular rhythm that the alternation and the pulse of the Moreno republic have followed, Ebrard is completely removed from this dynamic. It is not only necessary to point out the lack of nationalism that characterized his work as a diplomat, the complete absence in the defense of Mexico and the identification with the neoliberal economic model. It is that the SRE constitutes a political cemetery or institution designated for ostracism. Given the conditions of imperialism and colonialism that Mexico is experiencing, what can be done from there for the country is useless, when not, marked as foreign to the country. It does not mean that the SRE lacks competent personnel, it is that nothing can be done for Mexico from there. And the current foreign minister did not even make a worthy use of the weapons of the weak - as Sola Ayape and Loaeza say - international law and multilateral organizations. The SRE is the wet dog of the United States and its profile is unworthy for many Mexicans. Just remember the accusations against Ignacio Bonillas and Ezequiel Padilla for their technocratic pro-Yankeeism.

Although Ebrard is the project of the Atlacomulco Group, his candidacy is made for the citizen movement that likes to lose by abandonment and absence. Absence from Mexico as the one that marks Ebrard's trajectory in the last decade.

The defeat of the Atlacomulco Group encourages them to consider that Ebrard could be the next Ernesto Zedillo, but the script has already been leaked.