Few international partnerships carry the weight and complexity of the relationship between the United States and Mexico. Bound by shared geography, intertwined histories, and deep cultural connections, the two nations are more than just neighbors. This intricate bond, particularly evident in states like Texas, shapes the very fabric of the region. However, even the closest relationships can face moments of discord, and a significant diplomatic rift has recently emerged as Mexico pauses diplomatic ties with the US.
The outgoing Mexican President, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, widely known as AMLO, announced a pause in diplomatic engagement with the embassies of both the United States and Canada. This decision follows diplomatic concerns voiced by both countries regarding López Obrador’s controversial plan to overhaul Mexico’s judicial system. The Mexican president has expressed strong disapproval of what he perceives as foreign interference in Mexico’s domestic affairs.
Carlos Gutierrez Mannix, a political science lecturer at the University of Texas – Rio Grande Valley, characterizes this diplomatic maneuver as largely symbolic. The core of the disagreement lies in López Obrador’s proposal to introduce the direct election of judges in Mexico. President López Obrador argues this reform is essential to combat deep-seated corruption within the judicial branch. “One of the main proposals within the reform of the judiciary is to have direct election of judges,” Gutierrez Mannix explained. “The Mexican president said that this reform will actually lead to getting rid of the corruption that has ridden the judicial department for many decades.”
However, this proposed change has sparked concern in Washington. The U.S. government fears that electing judges could expose the Mexican judiciary to undue political influence and further corruption. Gutierrez Mannix elaborates on this perspective, stating, “But the United States is, I think, a bit afraid that if they do this, they’re going to open up the judiciary to politics as usual. And we know in Mexico, ‘politics as usual’ often means a lot of corruption, a lot of money coming from dark places.”
The contentious judicial reform has already ignited significant domestic opposition in Mexico. Thousands of judges and court personnel have engaged in strikes to voice their protest against the proposed changes. Adding fuel to the fire, the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico publicly criticized the reform last week, labeling it a significant threat to the integrity of Mexican democracy. Gutierrez Mannix emphasizes the impact of this statement: “And last week, the U.S. ambassador publicly called this change a major risk to the functioning of Mexico’s democracy — a very incendiary statement.”
President López Obrador’s political strength is bolstered by strong nationalist sentiments within Mexico. His appeal to national sovereignty resonates deeply with the Mexican populace. Gutierrez Mannix notes, “The current Mexican president is extremely popular, and a lot of that popularity, in part, comes from his heightened nationalist rhetoric and his heightened messaging towards the public that Mexico should be independent and sovereign.” While the appointment of Ken Salazar as U.S. Ambassador, with his Mexican heritage and Spanish fluency, was initially seen as a positive step towards fostering cordial relations, the judicial reform issue proved to be a breaking point. “And when the United States sent the current ambassador, Ken Salazar, it was a good gesture because he is of Mexican descent, he speaks Spanish. And the relationship between him and the president has been very cordial, because Salazar is very good at being very diplomatic and not getting into certain topics. But I think this topic just went over the board, and I think it was a point where Salazar just felt like, ‘okay, I can say this because this is our position.’ It seems as if he didn’t measure exactly what the response from López Obrador would be.”
Critics of the judicial reform worry about the potential for the ruling Morena party to exert excessive influence over the courts if judges are elected. Gutierrez Mannix explains the concern: “Once elections occur and once those elections are for judges, Morena will take a vast majority of them,” he said. “The courts will be co-opted by allies of the president.”
The U.S. stance is also informed by its own experiences with electing judges at the state level, which has revealed potential pitfalls. “But I think a large reason for this stance from the United States is because the United States has experience with electing judges at the state level. And we have all different types of evidence that tells us that direct elections can be dangerous. Direct elections can lead to a judiciary that’s mostly representing the powerful and the wealthy.” In the Mexican context, a key fear is the vulnerability of judicial elections to manipulation by criminal organizations. “In Mexico, that’s the fear, right? That a lot of the current elections are co-opted by dark money, by drug cartels,” Gutierrez Mannix points out. “And the moment the judiciary is open up to democracy and to elections, it will also be corrupted by drug cartels, right? Because what better opportunity, if you’re a criminal, than to have direct elections and be able to position those judges directly in the judiciary and then count on them in the future?”
Despite the diplomatic tensions, Gutierrez Mannix emphasizes the symbolic nature of Mexico’s actions. “This is very symbolic. It doesn’t mean much. Staff is not being asked to leave. They’re not being asked to censor themselves,” he clarifies. “The president is not going to talk to the ambassador directly until he wants to. It’s a way of applying pressure to the United States and to Canada while at the same not causing an international problem, but also at the same time gaining some public support.” Interestingly, the judicial reforms themselves appear to have considerable public support within Mexico. “Most people are actually in favor of the reform,” Gutierrez Mannix states. “Most people think the judiciary is very corrupt and that it’s been co-opted by the very wealthy, and that it’s become a bureaucracy that’s not representative. And the president has been very good at weaving this message.”
This diplomatic pause occurs as López Obrador’s presidency nears its end. His successor, Claudia Sheinbaum, is slated to assume office on October 1st. Sheinbaum is expected to largely continue López Obrador’s political trajectory, including his nationalist approach. “One of the things that the president-elect Sheinbaum has been very strategic at doing is making sure that the thread of the story between López Obrador and her is not broken – that she’s seen as a continuation of this growing nationalism, too,” Gutierrez Mannix observes. While Sheinbaum is anticipated to be more pragmatic in her approach, the current diplomatic episode serves as a crucial lesson for U.S. diplomacy moving forward. “It’s just going to be a precedent for the next U.S. president,” Gutierrez Mannix concludes. “And so the next U.S. president will understand that Sheinbaum is a continuation of AMLO. And they really just have to be careful in what they say and what they say publicly for their diplomacy at the end of the day.”
References
Original article link: https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/27/americas/mexico-us-canada-judicial-reform-intl-latam/index.html
