Fighting for Sovereignty: Mexico vs U.S.

On February 20th, 2025, President Trump announced in Executive Order 14157 that “Tren de Aragua, Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), Cártel de Sinaloa, Cártel de Jalisco Nueva Generación, Cártel del Noreste (formerly Los Zetas), La Nueva Familia Michoacana, Cártel de Golfo (Gulf Cartel), and Cárteles Unidos” (Marco Rubio) are global terrorist organizations recognized by the United States government. This move surprised Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, who was not consulted about this decision. 

Many think that President Trump made this move to lay the groundwork for a possible invasion of Mexico in which the U.S. would take unchecked militant action to intervene in the cartel crisis. This is because, under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) of 1996,  the president and secretary of state declaring a foreign entity a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs) authorizes the U.S to combat these groups in any way it sees fit. However, this would be seen by the United Nations under the UN Charter Chapter VII as a threat to peace and security and, as such, a classified act of aggression not just against the cartels but also the Mexican people. 

Given the nature of the U.S. history of the war on drugs and terrorism, it is clear that if presented with a motive, the United States will intervene militarily in the presence of protecting against terrorism. This was confirmed by Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, in a press statement that “Terrorist designations play a critical role in our fight against terrorism and are an effective way to curtail support for terrorist activities”(Marco Rubio). Although not said outright, Rubio insinuates that this action will help them to take militant and financial action legally over the cartels, outright threatening the sovereignty of Mexico unless talks commence and President Sheinbaum can convince President Trump that she can deal with the situation independently.

Following the executive order, Sheinbaum made it clear that “The Mexican people will under no circumstances accept interventions, intrusions, or any other action from abroad that are detrimental to the integrity, independence, or sovereignty of the nation… (including) violations of Mexican territory, whether by land, sea, or air,” (Reuters). Meaning that she not only sees the criminalization of cartels in Mexico as a possible underhanded threat from the U.S. government, but her government and the Mexican people will not fear or accept any imperial pursuit by the United States.

Given President Trump’s agenda and President Sheinbaum’s statement, talks must occur or unnecessary conflict could proceed. The fearful alternative of war and the social and economic decline that comes with it would be catastrophic, given the proximity of Mexico to the U.S. and the relationships held between the two nations. Trade and important deals like USMCA could be compromised by an intervention that limits trade and economic prosperity for both nations.  Not to mention, the nearly forty million Mexicans living in the United States could complicate this situation further. The profound relationship between these nations transcends borders, and internal conflicts within the U.S. will ensue.

It is imperative to both societies and economies that conflict doesn’t occur. Deals need to be made to ensure that the U.S. history of militant intervention in the protection against terrorism doesn’t repeat itself.

Related