Mexicans, At the Cry of War

ByMexico Solidarity

This editorial by Francisco Ortiz Pinchetti originally appeared in the August 15, 2025 edition of Sin Embargo.

We must enlist as soon as possible. It’s time to defend the Homeland. Our Commander-in-Chief had warned us very clearly: as the National Anthem says, she said, and if a foreign enemy should dare to profane your soil with his tongue, “Think, oh beloved Homeland, that heaven has given you a soldier and a female soldier (sic) in each son.”

You dare!

Be careful not to mess with our most precious values. “Assemble the steel and the bridle,” what the hell. And may the Earth tremble to its core at once to the resounding roar of the cannon, of course.

This Trump guy thought he was a tough guy. “Mexico does what we tell it to do,” he said. Something like, “Mexicans do our bidding for us.” And that’s already sinking in. The President went too far. The response was not immediate, but it was resounding: “Let the world know: in Mexico, the people rule,” President Sheinbaum warned, reiterated, sculpted in bronze at the end of a visit to the Fourth Section of Chapultepec Park at noon this Thursday.

“Just in case anyone had any doubts,” Claudia clarified, concluding this statement—with a hint of “I’m talking to you, useless person”—spread through her social media, which will go down in history and be known to future generations as The Declaration of Chapultepec.

There’s no shortage of stateless people [unpatriotic – Editor] who are already claiming that “unfortunately,” the facts prove the Republican right. They must be the adversaries of the 4th Transformation, who then, then, want to take advantage of any disagreement with our friends from the North to attack the country, the good people, the President, her movement, and above all, her godfather from Tabasco.

The truth is that the relationship between Mexico and the United States has always been a complex dance of diplomacy, economics, and power. This is especially true in the current circumstances. However, in the context of President Donald Trump’s recent statements and the Mexican government’s forceful actions on security, this dynamic has reached a new level of tension.

The US president’s remark—or rather, slander—that “Mexico does what we tell it to do” is not just a provocative comment, but a direct challenge to a nation’s sovereignty. President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, for her part, has maintained a firm stance, summarizing her vision of the relationship with the principle: “coordination yes, subordination no.” As it should be, I say.

However, when analyzing the official facts and figures, the line between the two concepts becomes dangerously blurred, revealing a complex landscape of interdependence.

The surrender—not extradition—of alleged criminals is a clear indicator of the collaboration between the two countries. A group of 29 drug traffickers in February and another group of 22 more a few days ago. The Attorney General’s Office (FGR), in a clear sign of response to Washington’s demands, has accelerated the surrenders, bringing the total to 51 individuals so far this year. This not only demonstrates active coordination, but also a political will to comply with the United States’ security agenda. Or does it?

These sudden prisoner transfers (which some disrespectfully call “offerings”), although presented as a sovereign decision to guarantee national security and arguing that the prisoners could be exonerated by trivial judges, are interpreted abroad as a direct response to pressure exerted by US agencies such as the DEA and the FBI, according to US and European media.

The fight against fentanyl, a public health issue in the United States, is another key point on this tense agenda. The overdose crisis in the United States has made this issue a top priority for the Trump administration, and Mexico’s response has been forceful. The Mexican government has responded with actions such as locating and destroying hundreds of clandestine laboratories and seizing more than 1,300 kilograms of fentanyl over the course of 2025.

These results, while a positive step in the fight against drug trafficking, are also a tangible way to show the United States that Mexico is committed to an issue of vital importance to them. This reinforces the perception that Mexican actions are heavily influenced by the demands of its northern neighbor, to put it mildly.

The coincidence of dates is also an eloquent indicator, say the ill-wishers.

On the other hand, Mexico’s immigration policy, in particular, has become the most effective tool of pressure in the bilateral relationship. The clearest precedent was set in 2019, when Donald Trump’s threat to impose tariffs of up to 25 percent on all Mexican products if the migratory flow was not halted forced a radical policy change in the fledgling López Obrador administration. As a result, Mexico deployed the National Guard to its southern border. This policy, which began as a reactive measure, has become a pillar of the country’s containment strategy.

The presence of a US military drone flying over Mexican national territory northwest of Mexico City was revealed on the internet earlier this week, forcing the government to respond.

Immediately after the first telephone conversation between Sheinbaum Pardo and Trump on February 3, the Mexican president sent 10,000 troops to the border… as part of an initial agreement to avoid or at least postpone the imposition of tariffs.

More recent data confirms this trend. In early 2025, a dramatic reduction in the number of migrant encounters at the US-Mexico border was observed. An analysis by the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) attributed this drop to the Mexican government’s tightening of its enforcement measures against migrants in transit. This policy, which has been criticized by human rights organizations, demonstrates that the Mexican government has the capacity to act decisively to align its interests with those of the United States—when the pressure is strong enough.

Despite statements staunchly defending our sovereignty, and after rejecting just last Monday, August 11, any possibility of a U.S. air intervention in our territory (precisely when she alluded to the National Anthem and made her patriotic warning), President Sheinbaum accepted, in the face of documented evidence of a U.S. drone flight over Valle de Bravo, that such flights have indeed been approved in Mexican territory, although only for “particular matters” of investigation related to organized crime and at Mexico’s request.

Of course, anyone can skate; but this fact demonstrates direct collaboration in which the Mexican government authorizes the operation of foreign equipment in its country, something that has been a constant demand of Washington’s security policy.

The fact is that President Sheinbaum Pardo now finds herself at the center of a diplomatic dispute. While she has defended Mexico’s sovereignty with her stance of “coordination yes, subordination no,” the facts suggest that this line is constantly blurring. Actions such as the mass surrender of drug lords and collaboration in the fight against fentanyl, although presented as autonomous decisions, are in practice a response to the demands of a partner unafraid to use its power to get what it wants.

The future of the bilateral relationship will depend on how the ruling administration manages to balance this scale. Mexico’s sovereignty, more than a declaration, will be a daily exercise that must be demonstrated in action. The question that remains is: How far is Mexico willing to go in its “coordination” before the world realizes it has crossed the line into subordination? My god.