La evolución de la agenda de seguridad Mexico-Estados Unidos Security in Parts: The Evolution of the Mexico-United States Security Agenda (original) (raw)
Related papers
Mexico's Insecurity in North America
hsaj.org
This paper will argue first that Mexico's incapacity to develop a coherent national and regional security framework has paralleled Mexico's inability to undergo a reformation of the Mexican State, and with it, of national security reform. Second, rather than true democratic ...
Boletín Informativo de la Asociación Mexicana de Estudios Internacionales, 2016
Today, insecurity at different levels and different forms of violence affect greatly the Latin American societies and thus it’s also disturbed regional governance, that’s prevents to consolidate Latin America as an inclusive and harmonious area of peace. However, this problem is not new and, at different times, the Latin American countries have implemented various strategies to address the challenges of continental security. To understand how security strategies with actors and issues that cross this region are articulated, scholars of the international system have developed and made use of various theories or approaches that illuminate important aspects of the complex reality of Latin America region. In this sense, historical-intellectual context of the end of the Cold War helped catapult the constructivist approach to the center of international studies, explaining better the fundamentals of world politics. Constructivists argues that the structures of human association are determined by shared ideas and not just by material forces, so these ideas build identities and interests of the actors, as opposed to the other theories that assumed it as given by nature. In light of these considerations, this paper aims to explore and highlight some reflections on the construction of regional security in Latin America from Constructivist approach of International Relations.
Mexico's National Security Paradoxes and Threats in a Geopolitical Context
Politics & Policy, 2019
This article examines Mexico's national security paradoxes and threats in a geopolitical context from a politico-historical perspective into a contemporary setting. It argues that, despite Mexico's nascent democratic transition, none of the various elite groups in power have been able to conceive a broad, democratic security doctrine. On the contrary, realpolitik and regime security form the tradition and true nature of the national security permeating the political system. There are serious doubts that Mexico's next president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, will change this historical legacy. Despite the widespread desire for change, corruption and impunity are more prevalent than ever, setting the stage for conflict with the United States-the world's biggest drug consumer and the primary vendor of weaponry to Mexico's criminal organizations. This situation is exacerbated by Mexico's interdependence and shared geopolitics with its northern neighbor. The combination of these internal and external factors places Mexico's future in question.
2018
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………….81 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………...86 "Life left us all where we were meant to be or where it was convenient to leave us and then forgot us, which is as it should be." Roberto Bolaño, The Savage Detective Introduction: All These Events Really Happened "Covert operations are important, illegal manipulations of society done secretly" 1 John Whitten, CIA official Mexico's relations, within academic contexts of historical cause and effect changes over time, tend to stem from its association with overtly imperialist overlords. These ranged from Spain to the United States, to a revolving door of Mexican-born, invader caudillos that assumed power through violent uprisings from the early 19th century to the early 20th century. 2 Once the record of these tumultuous phases passed through the digestive system of academics and amateur historians alike, Mexico slowly took a backdrop to the geopolitical powerhouses of World War II and the Cold War. The state became "an exceptional country", 3 achieving authoritarian civilian control by 1950. 4 Perceptions of active conflict dictate the focus of typical foreign policy, regardless of its overt or covert nature. This in turn has the potential to shape the general framework of assimilating and pureeing information for the masses. Mexico in particular has had a corybantic and varied historyfrom its inception at the hands of Spanish rapists and murderers, like Hernando Cortés, up until the present, in which the Mexican general election between José Antonio Meade and Ricardo Anaya Cortés is set for 1 July, 2018. What these invasions have in common is an outright military presence, imparted throughout the regions of Mexico, and a standard assumption of occupation. Far less well-known, however, is the invasion of covert intelligence agencies at the highest levels of government. New CIA files have proven that three Mexican presidents-López Mateos, Díaz Ordaz, and Echeverría Álvarez
2009
In a couple of brushstrokes, we could affirm that our present international setting is delimitated by: 1.1. The incomplete US hegemonic decadence. 1.2. The present impossibility of a global substitute. Points 1A and 1B allow for the presence of foreign elites in the US sphere of influence: Europe (with a leadership crisis herself) and Japan, and importantly, the People’s Republic of China. At the hemispheric level: 2.1. The rapid incorporation of the Mexican economy to North America. 2.2. The affirmation of some regional integration agreements; chief among them, the Mercosur. Direct consequence of 2.2 is the progressive consolidation of a regional sphere of influence centered on Brazil, and the strengthening of regional international entities like the Organization of American States under South American leadership. Mexico seems to walk north while South America goes in the other direction. This is naturally effecting the Mexican security policy. A reversal of roles between Mexico an...
Challenges and Contradictions: Mexico and the US in North American Security Cooperation
North American Strategic Defense in the 21st Century:, 2018
Mexico approaches the future of the strategic defence of North America with an historical legacy and contemporary concerns markedly different than those of the US and Canada. Throughout much of its history the US-Mexico relationship has moved cyclically between divergence and convergence based on asymmetric interdependence of power and a distinctive notion of threats. Nevertheless, there is a deep, albeit not entirely uniform, perception in Mexico that the US is an external threat to Mexico's national security. Recent statements and policies emanating from Washington have rekindled these sentiments. The historical legacy of Mexico's involvement with the US in particular is essential in understanding how Mexico deals with what it nevertheless acknowledges as the need for increased collaboration on defence and security, bilaterally and trilaterally, with its two regional neighbours. The approach that it takes to this collaboration, in an uncertain global environment, must remain consistent with its national and regional interests, ensuring a clear respect for Mexico's sovereignty and role in the world. In explaining how Mexico approaches these difficult North American security challenges, this chapter draws upon the conceptual lens of Regional Security Complex Theory. It examines the difficulties that Mexico experiences in contributing to regional security. The chapter analyses the role of US hegemony, the strategic relationship between Canada, Mexico, and the US, and the asymmetric and historical differences in political culture and institutions among these North American neighbors.
Caught in the Security Middle: Mexico between the Americas
Over the past two decades, a multitude of solidarity pacts and economic blocs have been created in Latin America aiming to overcome the region's history of socio-political insecurity and address the challenges of globalization, but none have successfully implemented a supranational security framework. Zealously guarding their sovereignty, the governments of Latin American states have preferred temporary and ad hoc solutions for their regional security agenda, including intergovernmental committees, presidential meetings, and protocol-building workshops. 1 The rapid growth of the Pacific Alliance (PA)-which in its first year has already surpassed the economic output of Mercosur and successfully eliminated 90% of tariffs between its member states-raises two spheres of concern for security governance in Latin America. 2 Firstly, there is a growing ideological rift between the socialist-statist countries of Mercosur and ALBA, and the pro-neoliberal countries of the PA. This rift has contributed to political animosity and even sparked military confrontations between members of the two camps-the most recent incident being the Andean diplomatic crisis of 2008. Secondly, through the processes of economic integration and the liberalization of trade, the member states of the PA are increasingly exposed to transnational threats such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, and terrorism, and thereby risk exacerbating their domestic socio-economic problems. These issues must be addressed collectively and multilaterally in order for the PA to realize its vision of a seamless supply chain, and to ensure both the perception and reality of security for its member states' citizens, businesses, and foreign investors.
Mexico’s Evolving Security Cooperation Policy in Central America
Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International relations
Mexico has long attempted to enter the Central American sub-region for its own strategic interests. Besides, throughout the 20 th century, the "progressive" foreign policy ideology strongly influenced its approach to the republics of the Isthmus. The benefits from the mechanisms of building lasting civic peace during the 1980s Central American conflict won Mexico the reputation of a constructive negotiator in Latin America and beyond. However, with the security agenda and international system becoming more complicated, there are fewer levers for active foreign policy in the area. Mexico is struggling to "reset" its policy in the sub-region while experiencing serious security challenges at home and pressure from abroad, balancing between its dependence upon the United States and pretensions for independent mediumpower status. In this article we examine the search by Mexico for new security instruments in Central America, putting forward the issues of mutual development, migration and combat on violence. Particular attention is paid to the change in Mexico-U.S. relationship as regards Central America, both in matters of its domestic policy and international assistance efforts. It is concluded that the sub-region provides Mexico with wide opportunities not only to establish partnerships along the lines of regional cooperation but also use the smaller republics to the south as a model for solving its own security problems.
MEXICO’S FOREIGN POLICY: MULTIPLE IDENTITIES IN A SHIFTING WORLD
"The Road Ahead: the 21st Century World Order in the Eyes of Policy Planners". In an ever-changing and interconnected global context, foreign affairs ministries have become neuralgic centers for every State. Globalization, technological change, and increasing economic interdependence have given way to shared challenges that make cooperation more necessary and urgent than ever. We are living in an era of profound and fast-paced changes in the international system, marked by uncertainty and shared risks. The world faces a redistribution of economic, political, and social power. Terrorism, climate change, human displacement, and nuclear weapons stand out as some of the most alarming phenomena that call on globally coordinated solutions. Mexico is no stranger to this collective task.
A Critique of Mexico—US Relations: Beyond the Contemporary Impasse
2012
Though the preceding two articles on intergovernmental relations provide instructive insights, they share a crucial limitation that reflects a widespread tendency: the assumption that Mexico can be treated comparatively — without strong qualifications — as a 'consolidated' liberal democratic state in the sense that is valid for the US and Canada. Tom Keating does not need to deal with this question because o f his focus on a comparison o f Canada and the US. The discussion of Mexican—Canadian relations, on the other hand, for rather different reasons does not adequately address the profound significance of the fact that as a form of society or social formation Mexico is qualitatively different, with profound implications for the nature o f its politics. Nevertheless, in focusing on security issues, Athanasios Hristoulas can justifiably focus on intergovernmental relations relatively independently of the question of deeper differences. The precariousness of the assumption tha...