Trump Wants To Attack Mexico?
Why is the media not talking about this more?
.jpg){kind=link}
Not enough people are talking about Donald Trump’s desire to go to war with Mexico. You read that correctly. Trump has threatened time and again to use military force against suspected cartel members within Mexico’s borders without the Mexican government’s consent (the Mexican government is strongly opposed).
Under international law, this is a prima facie violation of Mexico’s sovereignty and may even be considered an act of war.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
Isn’t MAGA the isolationist party that doesn’t want to defend Ukraine?
It’s hard to reconcile the desire to wage an offensive war against Mexico and its drug cartels, and MAGA’s complete indifference to what happens in Ukraine. In fact, many MAGA politicians have actively shared Russian propaganda and Putin talking points to Ukraine’s detriment.
So why do the JD Vances of the world want to attack Mexico? Why are they isolationist when it comes to European security (which historically impacts U.S. security), but recklessly hawkish against America’s bordering neighbor and largest trading partner?
Trump and MAGA are simply out of solutions.
They are rightly outraged about the amount of fentanyl pouring into America. They are understandably incensed by the senseless deaths it has caused, especially in red states and more rural communities. But instead of addressing the crux of the problem, which we’ll get to below, they’d prefer to wage war if the Mexican government can’t handle it themselves.
These are huge geopolitical threats for a major U.S. political party to be making during a presidential campaign that most mainstream media outlets have completely ignored (or at least deemphasized).
Instead of trying to collaborate with the Mexican government to arrest and extradite suspected cartel members, MAGA wants to use the military nuclear option. The Biden administration recently demonstrated how a nonviolent collaborative approach can be effective by arresting two suspected high-ranking members of the Sinaloa Cartel.
Even Trump’s former Ambassador to Mexico, Christopher Landreu, completely disagrees with him (although he’s not alone amongst the vast majority of former Trump administration officials who refuse to work with or support Trump again).
Ambassador Landreu warned that the offensive use of military force in a neighboring country like Mexico would only make matters worse. In his words, it would create a new “quagmire”, as did U.S.-led military interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Given Trump’s seriousness about using military force inside Mexico, it’s important to understand the grave consequences such a decision would likely bring.
In addition to a quagmire, expect significant economic damage and more migrants
Want to avoid exacerbating the migrant crisis at the U.S. border? Don’t attack Mexico within its borders without its permission.
It should be common sense that if you threaten the safety and security of the local population - which a military strike against cartels who live in those communities would undoubtedly cause - people will try to flee. This tragic story has played out in every war zone around the world since the dawn of time.
And here Donald Trump and Republicans generally poll better than Democrats on fixing the border.
Has anyone asked those voters about Trump’s military ideas against Mexico? I often wonder whether voters in these polls are also reminded that bipartisan border security reforms were ready to go until Trump killed them so he could hammer Democrats on the border issue until November.
Migrants and politics aside, the most consequential threats from an attack on Mexico would be economic. In addition to being America’s largest trading partner, millions of American jobs depend on U.S.-Mexico trade. Any type of war or political instability with Mexico would roil markets and compromise all of these economic interdependencies.
It’s insane to think we even have to write and say this stuff.
What could actually be done to address cartels and the drug trade instead?
I am never one for highlighting flawed thinking without proposing solutions of my own. And in this case, there are two great - albeit difficult - solutions to addressing some of America’s challenges with Mexico, in addition to greater collaboration with the Mexican government and its security forces.
First, we need to address the giant elephant in the room - the American demand that’s fueling the cartel’s drug trade. Why are so many Americans buying fentanyl or other drugs laced or cut with this potent chemical?
They feel down and out. Broken. Hopeless. Angry. Left behind.
America must get real with its drug-addicted population on its own soil. By eliminating or reducing American demand for cartel drugs, America will eliminate or at least mitigate the cartel problem.
This is obviously easier said than done. But a greater effort needs to be made to invest in many of the rural communities afflicted by drug abuse. Whether that’s economic and/or mental health investment, we must work harder to give the people who feel disadvantaged, depressed, and left behind a little hope in this world.
That starts by first giving the problem adequate attention. Currently, drug addiction is not getting its due.
Second, we need to talk about guns. Want to reduce the cartel violence and threats they pose to local communities in Mexico and the U.S.? Pass and enforce stricter (and more uniform) gun control laws in the United States.
Mexico already has relatively strict gun laws, but the problem is that many of the cartels’ guns come from, you guessed it, America. So long as the NRA has the influence it does on the Republican Party, this — unfortunately — will never change.
Yet instead of addressing these issues (American drug abuse and American guns) head-on, Trump continues to flirt with the idea of using the U.S. military to invade and/or attack the cartels within Mexico’s borders.
Playing with geopolitical fire
One of the greatest geopolitical blessings that the United States enjoys, aside from its two giant oceans, is its friendly relations with its neighbors to the north and south. But the isolationist party of world peace (i.e., MAGA) is apparently willing to sacrifice that before even trying to address what’s fueling this crisis on its own soil.
Any proposal to attack people within Mexico’s borders - suspected cartel members or otherwise - should not even be considered without Mexico’s permission. Anyone proposing such a policy should be berated for its reckless lunacy and forced to explain how it would avoid the inevitable consequences to follow (economic, political, military, cultural, etc.).
Some MAGA politicians, supporters, and apologists will surely excuse this policy as a “negotiating chip.” That Trump isn’t being serious. That this rhetoric is only meant to force Mexico to cooperate more and police itself better.
Threatening to violate another country’s sovereignty with military force is not a negotiation tactic that ends well. For either side.
If threatened and not acted upon, America loses enormous credibility while appearing as the geopolitical bully many understandably accuse her of being (especially after the War in Iraq, Vietnam, etc.).
If threatened AND acted upon, America loses enormous credibility with every one of its allies, in addition to its peaceful geopolitical position at home and stable economic relations with Mexico. Migrants will flood America’s borders. American jobs and commerce will be lost for decades.
More people need to question Trump and MAGA politicians about their clear position on this issue. Because amidst all of the crazy things proposed in Agenda 47 and Project 2025, this may be the craziest. And that’s saying something.
For more great stories on law and politics, check out The Political Prism.