Sheinbaum’s monologue diplomacy is meeting Washington’s deaf ear
by David Agren, writer-at-large.
Shortly after rumours started that Ovidio Guzmán – son of imprisoned Sinaloa cartel boss Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán – might plead guilty on drug trafficking charges and accept a deal with US prosecutors to turn state’s witness, influencers for Mexico’s ruling party settled on a narrative for denouncing the US government’s actions: It was negotiating with terrorists.
President Claudia Sheinbaum repeated that narrative, too. From the podium of her mañanera press conference, she objected to the deal with the younger Guzmán, while noting the lack of cross-border coordination in the plea bargaining process and reiterating her opposition to the Trump administration’s designation of six drug cartels as foreign terror organizations. "They have a policy of not negotiating with terrorists,” she said. “They decided to designate certain criminal organizations as terrorists. So let them report whether there's an agreement or not."
Sheinbaum’s comments didn’t go unnoticed. Jeffrey Lichtman, Ovidio’s lawyer, plainly stated why the Mexican government wouldn’t be a party to any plea agreement: a lack of trust dating back to 2020 and the decision to send former defence secretary Gen. Salvador Cienfuegos back to Mexico after he was indicted on drug charges in the United States.
The war of words heated up as Sheinbaum, who doesn’t let any slight go unanswered, called Lichtman’s comments “disrespectful” and promised to…
The roots and costs of Mexico’s vast informal economy
by Macario Schettino.
For some time now, there has been a belief that previous generations lived better than today's. Many young people, for example, complain that they cannot afford to buy a home in a central location, as their parents or grandparents did. In the United States, there is nostalgia for the 1950s — a nostalgia that, as always, erases the negative parts, such as racism and discrimination against women, among other things.
In Mexico’s case, this nostalgia was fed in classrooms when emphasis was placed on something called the “Mexican economic miracle,” or by its local name: desarrollo estabilizador (stabilizing development). The story goes that from 1946 to 1971, Mexico achieved very high growth rates (6% annually, 3% in per capita GDP), and nostalgia paints a picture of orderly, clean cities with abundant jobs.
As with all legends, there’s some truth — but not too much. In Mexico, during the time being referred to, the country was still essentially rural. It wasn’t until 1960 that half the population lived in cities, and it was precisely that process of urbanization that began to complicate everything. Cities could not expand their infrastructure at the same rate as the population was growing, and even less so when the demographic growth rate exceeded 3% annually. By the 1970s, medium and large cities in Mexico already had belts of poverty and “lost cities”: towns swallowed up by urban expansion.
If in the 1960s it seemed like there were jobs for everyone, it was because only half the population lived in urban areas. As that urban population grew, the myth of full employment began to fade. To prevent this urban growth from spinning out of control, Mexico took on excessive external debt in the 1970s — just as all Latin American countries did — taking advantage of abundant petrodollars and the end of restrictions on international capital flows. In 1981, with anti-inflationary programs in the US and UK, everything collapsed.
Since then…
There’s a lot more driving Mexico City’s gentrification than bad gringos
by David Agren.
The acerbic signs and graffiti criticizing gentrification in Mexico City’s fashionable neighbourhoods were certain to capture international attention.
“Spanish is spoken here,” “Mexico for Mexicans,” and, “Go home,” read three of the screeds.
Social media couldn’t get enough of the disorderly protests – with the familiar masked vandals infiltrating yet another march and smashing up storefronts. The Mexico City police were curiously absent. An easy narrative of Americans abroad wearing out their welcome, while ICE cruelly rounded up Mexican migrants in cities such as Los Angeles.
The Department of Homeland Security jumped in with its own snark, posting, “Oh,” above an X Post with protester graffitiing the words, “Not your home,” and a protester waving a sign in English admonishing, “Pay taxes, learn Spanish, respect my culture.
Much of the international media, meanwhile, focused on the core matter of gentrification, which has spread through leafy neighbourhoods such as Roma, Condesa and Juárez – among others – over the past 15 years, driving up rents and forcing some long-term residents to move as their homes became short-term rentals.
The easy hook for any story on gentrification are…
These are Mexico’s five new public security laws, and this is what they do
by Alexandra Helfgott.
President Claudia Sheinbaum has accelerated the momentum initiated by her predecessor to overhaul Mexico’s approach to public security. Her administration has pursued a strategic transformation of the country’s security framework. While these laws are framed as tools for enhancing transparency and accountability, critics argue they threaten the rule of law and civil liberties.
This shift began under President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), who in 2019 created the National Guard, a civilian force meant to replace military deployments following the 2006 launch of the War on Drugs. AMLO and allies described the Guard as a temporary force crucial to restoring accountability in security efforts. However, the Guard’s role quickly expanded, taking over customs and border control, infrastructure projects like Tren Maya, and migration enforcement. It evolved into a central pillar of Mexico’s security strategy. Just before leaving office, Congress approved a constitutional reform placing the Guard under military control (Sedena), following a failed 2023 attempt blocked by the Supreme Court.
Less than a year into office, Sheinbaum has embraced continuity, introducing over 20 bills in an extraordinary congressional session. Several of these will significantly alter public security policy, sparking concerns about increasing surveillance and militarization.
These are the five new laws and reforms that will fundamentally transform Mexico’s national security approach…
Sheinbaum is facing Trump without a compass
by Luis Rubio.
Editor’s note: Mr. Rubio is a political analyst and Chairman of México Evalúa.
—
Trump sees no need to adhere to the traditional forms and rules of diplomacy. His “mandate” is clear, and he assumes it as absolute truth. If one adds to that his tactical way of acting (with no strategy whatsoever), the result is a bull in a China shop who recognizes no limits to his actions—except what works for him. If one observes how he has handled matters like Russia-Ukraine, China, Iran, Canada, NATO, etc., it becomes evident that he strikes first and then looks for a way to negotiate an exit. Those who have succeeded in dealing with him are the ones who offer a dignified way out, as has happened with NATO, China, and even Iran. That rather obvious lesson has not been learned by Claudia Sheinbaum’s government.
For Trump, there is a specific set of objectives he wants to achieve, which are key to his electoral base. Among those, Mexico plays a central role in two: migration and drugs, especially fentanyl. Biden promoted legislation regarding fentanyl, which Trump is now using to attack financial transactions and institutions allegedly involved in the commercialization, financing, and money laundering related to this drug.
Trump and his operators have a univocal and simplistic (not to mention oversimplified) view of the issues they prioritize. They fervently believe they can solve the fentanyl problem by bombing a few labs, or the migration issue by expelling people who are illegally present in the US. Their actions involve no consideration of causes, market dynamics, or whether the proposed actions are susceptible to solving the problem. Trump believes he has the power and is convinced he can use it to solve these issues—by force if necessary.
If one looks at how he operates, it's fairly obvious how to respond…
Editor’s note: On Mexico’s rapid, breath-taking descent into total surveillance
by Andrew Law, founder and editor.
In 2014, Luisa Alcalde — now Morena’s party president — blasted then-President Peña Nieto’s telecom reform on Twitter: “Signal blocking, prior censorship, data retention, geolocation all in the hands of #Segob.” A decade later, her critique fits just as well with the sweeping intelligence and security laws passed last week by her own party under President Claudia Sheinbaum.
The new laws mandate a centralized national platform compiling every citizen’s and company’s personal data: telecom records, banking info, healthcare, education, vehicle registrations, court records. All of it. With no independent court oversight, no meaningful access restrictions, and the possibility of real-time geolocation.
At the same time, Congress pushed through reforms to the National Guard that, as we report this week, all but erase the line between military and civilian authority.
Ana Lilia Moreno of México Evalúa tells me the changes mark one of the most disruptive shifts in Mexican public life since…
Mexico’s democratic transition turns 25 - or only 7, if you ask Morena…
by David Agren, writer-at-large.
Morena supporters marked one of their movement’s many anniversaries on July 1: the seventh anniversary of the ruling party’s founder, former Andrés Manuel López Obrador, overwhelmingly winning the 2018 election.
AMLO’s win brought the left to power, though critics accused the new president of governing like a conservative with his initial agenda of austerity. And supporters claimed AMLO’s win finally brought democracy to Mexico, despite multiparty elections being held at all levels of government throughout this century.
“This July 1st, we proudly celebrate the day of the revolution of consciences. Long live the Fourth Transformation!” President Claudia Sheinbaum posted on X.
The so-called Fourth Transformation (4T) – as AMLO christened his movement – diligently marks anniversaries, which offer pretexts for a populist movement to mobilise its base and herd social-benefits recipients to rallies.
Mexico also marked a major anniversary – unrelated to AMLO – which passed uncelebrated: Former president Vicente Fox ended one party rule on July 2, 2000, ousting…
Mexico’s government is using the disappeared to build a surveillance state, families say
by Madeleine Wattenbarger.
A polemical point of the reform to the General Disappearance Law passed by Mexican legislators this week is the use of a biometric CURP to search for missing people. The reform is part of a broad legislative package that includes a reform to the General Population Law, which establishes the use of a CURP with fingerprints and a photograph as an identification document obligatory for access to public and private services. The data will go into a Unified Identity Platform (PUI, by its initials in Spanish), which will, in theory, permit the authorities to locate missing people by their CURP.
A previous iteration of the biometric CURP proposal was backed by the World Bank, and similar initiatives were proposed by Felipe Calderón, Enrique Peña Nieto and former Secretary of the Interior Olga Sanchez Cordero. The reform comes out of a proposal presented by Claudia Sheinbaum on March 27, after disappearances in Mexico were thrown into the spotlight: search collectives found a ranch in Teuchitlán, Jalisco, where victims of forced recruitment were held, and the United Nations Committee on Forced Disappearance gave the official assessment that systematic state disappearances exist in Mexico.
After Sheinbaum presented the reform to the General Disappearance Law, the government held a series of feedback sessions with search collectives and victims’ families. Some of the families’ proposals appear in the revised law passed by the Senate. It will incorporate…
Textbook populism fueled Mexico’s debt and now it’s near breaking point
by Macario Schettino.
Editor’s note: Mr. Schettino is an eminent Mexican economist and retired professor at Monterrey Tech’s School of Government.
——
As the United States debates the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB), there may also be public discussion around that country’s fiscal sustainability. The US isn’t the only country struggling with the size of its debt — it's actually a very common issue among industrialized nations. But the issue is particularly important for Mexico.
Mexico has long been one of the countries with the lowest tax collection rates in the world, measured as a share of GDP. Prior to the 2013 tax reform, tax revenues were below 10% of GDP, supplemented by oil revenues and income from state-owned enterprises and agencies, bringing the total to about 18% of GDP. That was all the government had to fund its expenses — hence the poor coverage and quality of public services.
Although Mexico joined the global trend toward a welfare state starting in the 1960s, it never enacted a fiscal reform capable of funding its growing obligations. While many attempts were made, only one succeeded — in 1980, with the creation of a value-added tax. The next major reform came in 2013, raising tax revenue from 8% to 14% of GDP. With that, the government’s total revenues reached 22% of GDP.
Those revenues, along with a moderate deficit, allowed for spending close to 24% of GDP — still insufficient to fully meet the government's responsibilities at a reasonable level. However, under former President López Obrador’s administration, public spending increased significantly without a corresponding increase in revenues. As a result…
Mexico is paying a high price for its opposition parties’ malaise
by Gerónimo Gutíerrez.
Editor’s note: Amb. Gutíerrez served as Mexico’s Ambassador to the United States and also as Mexico’s Undersecretary for Governance.
Mexico’s political opposition today finds itself in a dire position. Since its founding in 2014, the ruling Morena Party has made extraordinary gains. It now holds the presidency, 23 of 32 governorships, comfortable majorities in the federal congress and 27 state legislatures, and, together with its allied parties (the Workers' Party, or PT, and the Green Party, or PVEM), has the power to enact laws and even amend the Constitution at will. President Sheinbaum enjoys exceptionally high approval ratings (around 70%), much like her predecessor, former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, did.
In recent years, Morena-led governments have taken actions that appear to significantly weaken institutional checks and balances, the separation of powers, and democratic norms. To be sure, Morena and the President reject this characterization — but critics, both in Mexico and abroad, make a persuasive case. For example, the Global Democracy Index published by The Economist now classifies Mexico as a hybrid regime, no longer even a flawed democracy.
In the 2024 election, the traditional parties (PAN, PRI, and PRD) received only 27% of the presidential vote, compared to the 60% won by Claudia Sheinbaum. Currently, the PAN governs just four states, the PRI only two, and both hold modest parliamentary groups in Congress. The PRD no longer exists. Movimiento Ciudadano (MC) appears to be the emerging party. It secured a significant 10% of the presidential vote in the last election and currently governs two states. However, it is hampered by internal inconsistencies and scandals, which raise serious doubts about its long-term potential.
Under these circumstances, it is only natural to ask whether the political opposition has pursued the right strategy to counter Morena’s rise — and if not, what that strategy could look like in the future. There are no easy answers, but perhaps a few sensible working hypotheses.
In a country where 43% of the 128 million population lives in poverty (according to 2022 official figures), machine politics work. The Morena governments have built a vast platform of social programs, including direct cash transfers that reach an estimated 25 million households. Opposition parties have wavered between timidly supporting these programs and criticizing their effectiveness, political bias, and fiscal sustainability. Unless they can clearly articulate where they stand…