Barack Obama pays his second state visit to Mexico, the first during the administration of President Pe\u00f1a Nieto. Normally, expectations tend to increase about possible announcements that could chart a new direction for the bilateral relationship.\u00a0 However, hardly any visit from an American President has resulted in something that wasn\u2019t already contemplated on agreements or policies agreed well in advance of the aforementioned tours. In 2013, the conditions of this relation are focused on two main fronts: in Mexico, the current government\u2019s intention to modify the relationship with the USA, reduce what it perceives as foreign interference of American security agencies in Mexican politics as well as to improve the country\u2019s image and present it as a center for development that can be attractive to investors instead of a decided (but clumsy) warrior against organized crime; in the United States, Obama is fully dedicated on his party regaining control of Congress in 2014, an agenda that includes the migration issue (which, is presumed to benefit Democrats) but that does not include relevant topics for Mexico such as gun control. The key question is not: what should we expect out of this visit?, but: how will the bilateral relation continue to develop?<\/p>\n
Since the end of the 1980s, three major topics have dominated the bi-national agenda: trade, security and migration. What has changed is the priority order of these factors. In the administration of Carlos Salinas, the economic issue had its climax with the NAFTA negotiations. When Vicente Fox was President, the migration topic collapsed, mainly due to the internal dynamics of U.S. Congress and the reluctance of several of its members. With Felipe Calder\u00f3n\u2019s government the agenda consisted of one single issue \u2013 security \u2013 leaving \u201ceverything else\u201d behind. Nowadays, moving on from the trend featured on the last administration towards a more hopeful one in terms of Mexican wellbeing and development will not be easy especially when there is a perception in Washington that the new government not only wants to abandon the security agenda, which is still regarded as very important, but also intends to completely exclude the U.S. from the topic.<\/p>\n
As for now, the speech is clear: Mexico is successfully walking through a reform path. Nevertheless, reality is different. Not only are approved reforms coming through at a critical time in its implementation (one only has to go to Guerrero or Michoac\u00e1n) but security continues to be the main source of concern of both American citizens \u2013 according to a recent survey from the Chicago Council published on Foreign Affairs \u2013 and, despite its silence, the Mexican government. In an interview for the Washington Post, Sergio Alcocer, Assistant Secretary of Foreign Relations for North America, described a relevant change in the bilateral cooperation with the return of the \u201cone-stop window\u201d to deal with security through the Ministry of Interior. Likewise, the M\u00e9rida Initiative would change its focus of strengthening security institutions for a more preventive approach.<\/p>\n
According to Foreign Minister Jos\u00e9 Antonio Meade, Mexico should be able to put several issues on the table and not just focus in one. That\u2019s true. The fact of the matter is that there are issues whose dynamics are so rehearsed that they practically operate in a natural way: mainly, economic interaction. Can the relation be focused on \u201csimple\u201d issues while leaving the most complex problems aside? We don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n
The main issue is, or at least it should be, the negotiation of a trade agreement between the United States and Europe. At this moment, Mexico has only one critical matter: it needs to establish a negotiation between NAFTA members and the European Union. Other result means the country will lose big. If Mexico stays within the agreement, its potential as an exporter to Europe will grow exponentially because everything produced in North America will suddenly satisfy the rules of origin. If Mexico stays out, the synergies between the USA and Europe could leave it isolated, just like it was before NAFTA started in 1994. There is no bigger issue for Mexico this week.<\/p>\n
CIDAC<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Barack Obama pays his second state visit to Mexico, the first during the
\n administration of President Pe\u00f1a Nieto. Normally, expectations tend to
\nincrease about possible announcements that could chart a new direction
\nfor the bilateral relationship. However, hardly any visit from an
\nAmerican President has resulted in something that wasn\u2019t already
\ncontemplated on agreements or policies agreed well in advance of the
\naforementioned tours. In 2013, the conditions of this relation are
\nfocused on two main fronts: in Mexico, the current government\u2019s
\nintention to modify the relationship with the USA, reduce what it
\nperceives as foreign interference of American security agencies in
\nMexican politics as well as to improve the country\u2019s image and present
\nit as a center for development that can be attractive to investors
\ninstead of a decided (but clumsy) warrior against organized crime; in
\nthe United States, Obama is fully dedicated on his party regaining
\ncontrol of Congress in 2014, an agenda that includes the migration issue
\n (which, is presumed to benefit Democrats) but that does not include
\nrelevant topics for Mexico such as gun control. The key question is not:
\n what should we expect out of this visit?, but: how will the bilateral
\nrelation continue to develop?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":4717,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[21,30],"class_list":["post-3142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-weekly-political-analysis","tag-eua","tag-political-analysis"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3142"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4609,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3142\/revisions\/4609"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4717"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cidacmx.org\/eng\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}