Mexico in North America: Less like them
By Antonio Ocaranza Fernández, CEO of OCA Reputación
When negotiated in the early 1990´s, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) implicitly suggested that Mexico would become more like the Anglo-Saxon democracies in the region. To approve the treaty, it was necessary to communicate its commercial and legal components, but more importantly, the attributes of the country with which the United States and Canada were partnering, addressing the questions: What kind of country is Mexico? What institutions does it have? Are its laws upheld? Is there a balance of powers? Are human rights respected? Is private property defended? Are criminals and organized crime pursued? Is it a real democracy? Are votes counted correctly? Is there free competition? In short, is México like us?
At that time, the obvious answer to many of these questions was no. During the 1980s, Mexico had suffered a serious image crisis in the United States due to the growing power of drug trafficking, especially following the murder of DEA agent Kiki Camarena, and, in 1990, with the statement by Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa that Mexico was the “perfect dictatorship.” Mexico’s public perception was severely damaged, and no one expected that greater bilateral integration would be positively received by Americans or Canadians. To them, Mexico was a country with cheerful people and beautiful beaches but with a corrupt and authoritarian government and a protectionist economy. It was far from being the ideal partner, much less an unattractive bride.
Therefore, the risky bet of Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and President George H. Bush was to dress up the bride and get their citizens to accept that greater economic integration would lead to Mexico´s transforming into a country like theirs.
And the bet paid off. Starting in 1990, Mexico underwent an unprecedented institutional transformation. Independent bodies emerged to meet the expectations of its trading partners. For instance, the National Human Rights Commission (1990) was created to punish abuses by authorities; the Federal Electoral Institute and the Federal Electoral Register (1990) were established to eliminate electoral fraud; the Federal Competition Commission (1992) was set up to promote a business environment free of monopolies or prevent the economic dominance of any company; the Federal Environmental Protection Agency (1992) was created to fend off polluting companies from setting up in Mexico; and the Federal Telecommunications Commission (1996) was formed to encourage the modernization of that sector. An institutional framework was built to address the concerns of Mexico’s trading partners and to make the country more like them.
Politically, six years after NAFTA came into effect, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which under various names had governed Mexico since 1929, lost the presidency, and a process of political alternation began. Between 2000 and 2024, five presidential elections took place, and three different parties governed the country. With the exception of the one in 2006, no 21st-century presidential election was viewed as fraudulent.
However, with the arrival of Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador to the presidency in 2018, several of the political decisions and laws that Mexico has implemented have caused great concern in the United States and Canada. The situation worsened with the June 2024 election, in which Claudia Sheinbaum, a close associate of Lopez Obrador, won the presidency by an overwhelming majority, and her party, Morena, secured absolute control of both chambers of Congress and the legislatures of most states in the Republic, sufficient to make constitutional changes without needing to negotiate with opposition parties.
In September the Mexican Cobgress approved constitutional reforms that allow for the popular election of Supreme Court ministers and judges; and it may shortly approve new reforms to integrate independent institutions that address competition, energy, telecommunications, or transparency issues, into the formal structure of the government; and that give preference to state-owned energy companies like Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) and the Federal Electricity Commission (CFE) over private companies from the United States and Canada. The checks and balances of a democracy will be weakened or completely eliminated.
What the United States and Canada now fear is having a partner in a Mexico with a hegemonic party that controls the Federal Congress and governs 24 of Mexico´s 31 states and Mexico City; that has eliminated autonomous bodies that serve as checks on government decisions; that has a judicial system susceptible to political pressure and organized crime; and that lacks a political opposition and civil society capable of counterbalancing the weight of the state machinery.
Internally, the only thing that can moderate the government is decorum, moderation, and self-restraint and, externally, the reaction of financial markets and the concerns of business sectors. Beyond that, nothing can stop the Government from continuing with the political and social transformation plan that the US and Canadian governments and business groups do not understand.
Those who hoped that the unintended consequence of a North American trade agreement would lead to the convergence of their nations now have the impression that the process is undergoing a worrying reversal. The three partners no longer share the same values and democratic practices. One of them has deviated from the course. Today, Mexico is becoming less like them.
CEO of OCA Reputación and former international press spokesman of the president of Mexico, Ernesto Zedillo
@aocaranza
A Spanish versión of this article can be found in Expansion.
