Future Outlooks for 21st-Century Mexico

Future Outlooks for 21st-Century Mexico

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Commemorating national independence compels us to take stock of the ideas and projections of figures such as Lorenzo de Zavala and Lucas Alamán. Their insights remain strikingly relevant, particularly in a context where U.S. influence over the Mexican economy and political landscape is undeniable. Although they held differing visions, both thinkers offered perspectives that—if carefully considered—can shed light on the nation's current dilemmas.

Lorenzo de Zavala, a key figure in the struggle for independence and the formation of Texas, held an ambivalent view regarding Mexico and its destiny on the continent. He believed Mexico should operate under U.S. tutelage—driven not merely by economic interests, but by a form of Manifest Destiny. A pragmatist and a liberal, Zavala saw the U.S. trajectory as both a refuge and an opportunity for his country. To him, the emergence of "Spanglish-ness"—that cultural and linguistic blend defining today's U.S. communities—represented a natural progression. This vision, viewed in his time as either treason or realism, is reflected today in economic dependency: Mexico relies entirely on the U.S. economy, and millions of Mexicans work in the United States, sending home remittances that sustain a significant portion of the Mexican economy. Zavala warned that Mexico needed to understand its destiny and capitalize on its proximity to North America, even if doing so entailed a loss of sovereignty.

Conversely, the politician and historian Lucas Alamán believed that the key to Mexican power lay in its access to the Caribbean, specifically Cuba. Alamán viewed Cuba as a "lock" capable of opening or closing doors for Mexico, thereby determining the country's influence in the Gulf of Mexico and, by extension, its security and international prestige. For Alamán, the Caribbean island was a crucial factor in either Mexico's greatness or its vulnerability. In the current landscape—where the United States contemplates its influence in the Caribbean and Cuba remains a key piece of regional geopolitics—Alamán’s warning takes on unsettling relevance. A potential U.S. intervention in Cuba, coupled with the strategy of figures like Marco Rubio—who seeks to link Florida with the Caribbean and South America—could translate into an attempt to curb Mexican influence in the region by building a bridge that sidelines Mexico as a regional power.

Both figures, therefore, offer complementary analyses: Zavala, who foresaw integration with and dependence on North America, and Alamán, who warned of the Caribbean’s geostrategic importance to Mexico. Current reality shows Mexico undergoing a process of cultural and economic hybridization; while U.S. influence has become entrenched, this has not resulted in a definitive loss of the country's identity or sovereignty. The insight to be drawn from these 19th-century visionaries is that the nation must learn to navigate its destiny intelligently—accepting its ties to the United States while simultaneously defending its place in the Caribbean and Latin America.

In a world where geopolitical dynamics are accelerating and regional spheres of influence are being redefined, the warnings of Zavala and Alamán serve as beacons guiding our understanding of the present. The key lies in transforming that dependence into a strategic advantage, without losing sight of the history and ideas of figures who still have much to say about Mexico’s future.

Mexamérica without Trumpism

 Mexamérica without Trumpism

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Can Mexico live apart from the United States in a more multipolar world? Economic and social evidence indicates that the answer is no, at least not in the short or medium term without facing a major crisis.

Although the international system is evolving toward greater competition among powers and China has increased its economic and geopolitical influence, Mexico maintains a level of integration with the United States that is unparalleled with any other country.

Talking about a separation between the two does not simply mean replacing a trading partner, but rather transforming an economic model built over more than three decades.

Trade dependence is the first indicator.

Around 83% of Mexican exports are destined for the U.S. market, while China represents only about 2% of national exports.

This means that if preferential access to the U.S. market were to disappear, Mexico would have to find buyers for hundreds of billions of dollars' worth of manufactured goods, a task impossible to accomplish in just a few years.

No economy, not even China or the BRICS countries, currently has the capacity to absorb that volume of Mexican exports.

However, the relationship goes far beyond trade.

Mexican industry is part of a single North American production platform.

Sectors such as automotive, aerospace, electronics, and machinery operate through supply chains that cross the border multiple times before a finished product is completed.

A car assembled in Mexico may incorporate engines manufactured in the United States, electronic components from Asia, and parts produced in Canada.

This integration allows for reduced costs and increased competitiveness compared to other regions of the world.

Breaking these chains would mean rebuilding suppliers, infrastructure, and industrial processes that have taken decades to consolidate.

Foreign investment confirms this dependence.

Approximately 39% of all foreign direct investment received by Mexico comes from the United States.

Including Canada, North America represents practically half of the productive investment that comes to the country.

This is not just about financial capital; This investment also incorporates technology, patents, training, innovation, and access to international markets.

Replacing these flows would require other economies to be willing to invest with the same intensity and stability, something that is not currently the case.

In the social sphere, remittances represent another fundamental component.

Millions of Mexican families depend on money sent by workers who reside primarily in the United States.

Although remittances are not the main source of gross domestic product, they do sustain consumption and the local economy in numerous municipalities and states.

A significant reduction in these flows would have immediate effects on employment, regional trade, and poverty levels.

Energy security also demonstrates this close interdependence.

Mexico imports large quantities of natural gas, gasoline, diesel, and other fuels from the United States.

Much of the electricity used by Mexican industry depends indirectly on this energy supply.

An abrupt interruption would raise production costs, fuel inflation, and reduce the competitiveness of the national economy.

The phenomenon of migration and drug trafficking demonstrate that the bilateral relationship cannot be understood solely through the lens of trade.

Migration acts as an economic engine, generating employment for millions of Mexicans and producing remittances, while the U.S. market is the primary destination for drug trafficking organizations.

This shows that both countries share structural problems whose solution requires cooperation, regardless of any existing political differences.

In this context, China has significantly increased its commercial presence in Mexico.

The Asian country supplies machinery, electronic equipment, industrial inputs, and consumer goods, but purchases relatively few Mexican products.

This results in a profoundly unbalanced trade relationship.

Although China represents a world-class manufacturing power and an increasingly influential player, it is not yet a viable alternative to the economic integration that Mexico maintains with the United States.

All of this is happening while the international system is transitioning toward a more multipolar order.

It is possible that the United States will face a relative decline. The United States may face a relative decline compared to the dominance it exercised after the Cold War, but this does not signify a collapse of its economic or technological capabilities.

Likewise, China’s growing prominence does not automatically imply absolute dominance over the international system.

Both countries will continue to compete for global influence, while mid-sized economies will seek to maintain relations with both blocs.

Mexico cannot exist apart from the United States without incurring extraordinarily high economic and social costs.

Interdependence regarding trade, industry, finance, energy, and migration means that both countries are part of the same economic ecosystem.

The real challenge for Mexico lies not in replacing the United States with China or another power, but in gradually diversifying its markets, strengthening its technological capabilities, boosting productivity, and reducing vulnerabilities—all without severing the integration that currently serves as the primary engine of its economy.

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.

Mexico's Need for North America

 Mexico's Need for North America

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The question regarding the form of US military intervention in Mexico depends only on time; everything seems to indicate that the geopolitical circumstances of the United States and the constant Mexican chaos will turn the Trumpist threat into concrete facts. Mexico's revolutionary nationalism and the second tier of the Fourth Transformation find themselves at a historical moment where the presence of the United States is more than necessary in the face of national vulnerability in the hurricane of changing international relations and the advance of criminality in the country, which constantly surpasses governability in various entities and the capacity for order at different levels of the State. The situation has reached such a point that there is no longer any form of respect or fear for the police or national security forces; governability simply vanishes. A social sentiment has begun to develop regarding the positive effects of US armed intervention, and once the process is carried out, perhaps the authorities will also decide to integrate their functions into the North American condition. The climax of Mexican nationalism has only served to confront the gravitational reality of the Mexican-American dynamic.

President Sheinbaum's ability to govern can only be strengthened by explicit material, military, and economic support from North America. Perhaps the Fourth Transformation is experiencing a Thermidor similar to the Mexican Revolution, and the United States is required to impose the control that the president has been unable to achieve. The powers that be and political actors of the past are betting on a situation of confrontation with President Sheinbaum, which is incomprehensible in terms of political activism, but logical from the perspective of a fierce struggle for power.

President Claudia Sheinbaum faces—like all heads of the national executive branch—harassment from the political groups that formed part of her coalition and presume they have the right to seize their share of power. That condition is impossible at this time, but Mexican cliques accustomed to greed, infiltration, and cover-up are unable to understand the risks facing the country in the face of global changes. The main reasons for Claudia Sheinbaum's conflicts are friendly fire, figures like Ricardo Monreal, Adán Augusto, and Lopezobradorism. Even the governors and local politicians loyal to these tendencies display a voracious particularism and ultra-factionalism that makes it impossible to distinguish who the allies supporting the president are. Morena is dynamiting Morena and the country in the mad race to protect shreds of power, caciques, clienteles, and corporations.

The Mexican political class has become a coven, but its ability to negotiate with authoritarian enclaves and invisible powers is complicated for Mexico. The Morena governors, in particular, are a strange mix of feudalism and satrapy, vying to surpass the previous PRIANRD governors in malice.

Mexican politics is determined by force. The Sonora Group, for example, had to impose itself with enormous violence against both insiders and outsiders; Not even General Porfirio Díaz contrasted his comrades in such a way; he simply assigned them the opposition of time, and during the PRI-TO regime, the United States was always the executioner and arbiter. The PRI culture inherited by Mexico is none other than that of Mars, and only the president of Mexico seems unaware of this. Has Donald Trump understood this? I hope so; otherwise, Mexico will become the Michoacanazo or Culiacanazo of Yankee imperialism.

The Mexican Pale of Settlement or The Pale region that is becoming increasingly hispanic

The Mexican Pale of Settlement or The Pale region that is becoming increasingly hispanic

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
June 20, 2019

https://www.semanarioelreto.com/single-post/2019/06/20/The-Mexican-Plea-for-Settlement-o-La-regi%C3%B3n-del-P%C3%A1lido-que-se-hace-cada-vez-m%C3%A1s-Morena

For a little more than a century, much of the Jewish community lived on the periphery of the Russian empire that was located between the Black Sea, the Baltic and even territories close to the Mediterranean. The end of the First World War and the triumph of the Bolshevik revolution, generated that this area was in a vacuum of power where the ambition of imperialism, the emergence of new nations and racist campaigns, detonated the Second World War and the War Cold The region is synonymous with perpetual violence and infinite hatred.

The south of the United States of America, territory stolen from Mexico, has become a Limited Settlement for all Mexicans in Latin America, Asia and Oceania. During the 19th century, millions of African slaves were slaughtered to build American wealth. With the advance of Anglo-Saxon economic and democratic liberalism, Africans were replaced by Hispanics. According to Samuel Huntington, or any other conservative analyst, Mexicans are a more serious challenge than Terrorism and seem to be about to build the Mexican American State.

The power of Mexican culture, especially surrealism and spontaneity, make it impenetrable and uncontrollable. The Anglo-Saxon values ​​yield to the Mexican symbols. According to Huntington, in the south and the east of the United States, the WASP (White Anglo Saxon Protestant) tends to be the stranger in his country.

Intervention is equal to inmigration and North America knows that it can not escape this axiom. France, with its selection of world champion football in 2018, must have recognized that the suicide of its white, Catholic and European model must yield to a reality that they provoked through colonialism. All empires observe as barbarians their colonized peoples. They bet even for its extinction. But it is a social regularity that these barbarians enter the metropolis and over time give new blood to the hegemony. It is also called elite circulation. Samuel Huntington glimpsed that part of the problem that now North America does not know how to solve and that, nevertheless, has in the option of multiculturalism a lasting solution.

The US migratory conflict has propelled the Executive Power of that country to supremacist politicians like Donald Trump; however, the geopolitical and hegemonic position of the United States has changed and can no longer recover its identity. However, the problems of a disorderly and overwhelming immigration have begun to infect the social pathologies that the countries of origin have and the superpower diminishes its governability, legality, health, order and citizenship. The responsibility has to do with the political elites and their incompetence, their ambition and longing for power. In the end, they do not defend a people or a race, they are a gang that seeks to enrich themselves and employ other opportunists.

If Donald Trump tries to be the Adolf Hitler that will take the Mexicans out of the limited settlement, we know how the story ends. Is the EU willing to balkanize the south and east of its territory? Will North America turn Mexico into the Poland of Hitler and Stalin? The problems derived from Mexican immigration in North America are related to the peculiar form of imperialism that has been practiced in Latin America. While the neoliberals, technocrats and pseudo fascists have the Yankee support to stay against institutionalizing the Welfare State in each of their countries, the result will be obvious. People prefer to emigrate and there will be no wall that stops their desire to reach North America to improve their standard of living and abandon the conservative narcomodernidad that only consolidates corruption and violence.

The Jimmy Carter experience and the IRCA of Ronald Reagan, can be a reference for the current situation. It is necessary that the United States implement policies to change the internal government of the expelling countries since a large part of what happens in Mexico and Latin America has been driven by US imperialism and the political class subordinated to them. North America has to stop supporting the Ayatolas of Neoliberalism in Latin America. They are responsible for a terrible period of poverty, corruption and violence. Until these groups cease in their desire to boycott their countries and mask liberalism is a patrimonialism without limits, only then, the Latin American republics can stabilize and contain the emigration.

The neoliberals are part of those old Nazi friends who served so much in the Cold War, but that was that expensive way. Is it not better to establish labor migratory treaties and conduct the expenditure of remittances in an effective way? Migrants, their countries of origin, have not returned much of the income for remittances they introduce. The ejector zones continue as usual; On the other hand, the states with the highest emigration rate disguise their metropolises with the façade of urban progress.

The solution is not to confront governments that little or nothing can cope with the magnitude of a problem that is global. The distribution of world income and the control of the economic, technocratic and criminal elites is the new task that the United States has at the forefront. If you let these situations pass, these cliques will not have any regard for the American people.

America must stop supporting the neoliberal façades that need caciques and drug traffickers for the political control of their countries, who do not accept the true market because they are not entrepreneurs but monopolists, who can not remove the influence of the cassock to think and behave . Likewise, it must allow the civic and participatory spirit to develop in the immigrants, instead of persecuting them with deportation, they must be encouraged to demand change and transparency from their countries, effective policies for modernization, immigrants can not continue financing factual powers so abusive and advantageous.

If the United States does not intervene in a positive way with countries that expel migration, then poverty will balkanize Yankee territory. George Friedmann, Robert D. Kaplan and Tom Clancy have warned it some time ago, the advance of the mafia cartels and the violence inside the United States is incredible. Will they be able to use extreme military force within their own country?

The Mexican polkos, who reveled in millions of dollars for allying themselves with the Nazis, surely expect Trump to build the IV Reich. Hopefully the president of the United States and American liberalism will learn from the past.