One way or another, most Americans have a view on Mexico. More often than not, such views are formed on the basis of recent drug violence, illegal immigration, or spring break in Cancun. But whatever your view, you cannot deny that our fate is inextricably linked to theirs. So its surprising then how little attention Mexico receives from US foreign policy community, beyond drugs and immigration.
Our foreign policy and security experts understandably fret about the current economic chaos, global terrorism or the challenge from an increasingly assertive China. They’re not wrong in doing this. However, if the State Department’s purpose is to pursue a foreign policy that secures America’s interests, and more importantly its security, it cannot ignore 100 million people sitting on our southern borders. Mexico deserves more than just being seen as a border patrol problem.
Having just returned from the country, I must admit that I have been taken aback by Mexico’s size, diversity, and potential. A stable and prosperous Mexico represents an enormous opportunity for US businesses. Already trade between the two countries is a staggering $350 billion, making it one of our largest trading partners, and that could grow dramatically. In the coming decades, Mexico will need to expand most areas of its infrastructure; its people will need every conceivable form of consumer good; and America’s service companies could find scores of millions of new customers. So before we go changing NAFTA, lets think about the bigger picture. All in all, a prosperous Mexico promises a source of years of robust growth for corporate America in the face of a relatively mature US domestic market. Furthermore, favorable access to Mexican minerals (including oil) should be a strategic priority.
As much as Mexico’s prosperity offers great opportunities, an unstable or weak Mexico poses even more profound challenges to the United States. You can choose your friends and allies, but you cannot choose your neighbors. Mexico’s shared border with the US, guarantees that a faltering economy will result not just in lost opportunity, but also in millions of economic refugees that will stream across our borders. And the impact of this could be enormous, both financially and socially. At the same time, the US treasury will inevitably be forced to loan or bailout the Mexican government – a frightening thought given our own fiscal deficits.
Simply put, we cannot afford Mexico to fail. And we benefit greatly if it succeeds.
From a geostrategic perspective, there are other reasons that foreign policy planners need to look at Mexico in a larger context. If drugs can find their way across the Rio Grande, why not terrorists? Mexico is our soft underbelly. Staying on the topic of terrorism and the Middle East, why are they no Mexican troops in Iraq or Afghanistan? Are we always so sure that Mexico is there for us? And if we are not engaged, you can be rest assured that countries like China will be. China is systematically planting its flag (whether through commerce, canals or corporate takeovers) in other countries across Latin America. Why not Mexico? We already regard two Latin American countries, Cuba and now Venezuela, as major foreign policy headaches. Can you imagine what would happen if a Hugo Chavez were elected President of Mexico instead of Venezuela, and aligned against us globally? How would the talking heads on cable TV react if Ahmedinajad showed up in Mexico City or Cancun as opposed to Caracas?
So whatever you think of our southern neighbor (and I happen to think very highly of it), can we afford to ignore it as a strategic priority?
