|
CounterPunch
March 14,
2003
The
Insulting Insinuations of the Bush Regime
Mexico
Must Stand fon Principles Not Interests
by CARLOS FUENTES
Mexico City.
Only days ago, Mexico's former foreign
minister, Fernando Solana Morales, said, quite rightly, that
on international matters principle corresponds with national
interest. The simple clarity of Solana's statement should destroy
the obtuse (and opportunist) argument that principles and interests
follow opposite paths.
Especially in Mexico's relationship with
the United States, the opportunists claim, principles should
be left aside in favor of our interests: commerce, immigration,
combating organized crime. If we want that agenda to succeed,
they argue, we should shelve our principles and look after our
interests. To do otherwise would bring about reprisals from the
U.S.
But they are wrong. The principles of
Mexican foreign policy have two sources: the constitution and
historical experience. The constitution calls for self- determination,
nonintervention and peaceful solutions.
Experience shows that by holding on to
those principles, we have always  won. The specter of a reprisal by the
U.S. against Mexico's political independence is nothing but a
ghost that proves to be imaginary when looking at the last 50
years. Mexico should remember that as it weighs its position
on the upcoming U.N. Security Council vote on Iraq.
Mexico actively opposed U.S. aggression
and intervention in Guatemala in the 1950s; in Cuba and the Dominican
Republic in the 1960s; and in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama
and Granada in the 1980s. During the Central American wars, Foreign
Minister Jorge Castaneda Sr. built, with French minister Claude
Cheysson, the Franco-Mexican accord that gave political status
to the Salvadoran guerrillas over the objections of the United
States. Then-Foreign Minister Bernardo Sepulveda was the engine
behind the Contadora Group -- Colombia, Mexico, Panama and Venezuela
-- that sought solutions for peace. In these last two cases,
Mexico's opposition to the U.S. was riskier than a U.N. vote
on Saddam Hussein.
In the face of open aggression and intervention
by the Reagan administration against Central America, Mexico
worked for a peaceful solution that took the initiative away
from Washington and placed it in the hands of the Central Americans.
Costa Rican President Oscar Arias' Nobel Peace Prize in 1987
is a testament to that. In all those instances when Mexico has
shown its independence, Washington signaled its anger but did
nothing against Mexico. It didn't do anything because it couldn't.
In the name of what?
What the U.S. should fear more that the
hypothetical weapons of Hussein is an internal crisis for its
southern neighbor.
A revolutionized and unstable Mexico
represents the most dangerous scenario for Washington because
it presents an undefensible southern flank. The relationship
between Mexico and the U.S. is one of mutual interest and advantage.
The border between the two countries is the most porous in the
world. Every day thousands of people cross it.
Mexican immigrants contribute to the
U.S. economy in agriculture, the service sector and in many other
jobs. In fact, they give more than they receive. The insulting
insinuations of the inexperienced U.S. ambassador to Mexico,
Tony Garza -- hinting of possible reprisals against Mexico on
immigration if Mexico does not vote with the U.S. on Iraq --
are absurd. Mexican workers are indispensable in the United States.
From the first day of the Vicente Fox-George
Bush relationship, everybody has been in agreement that, given
the legal and political obstacles in the United States, an immigration
accord would not be accomplished today or tomorrow but could
happen in the distant future. Dependence, then, is mutual. So
are responsibilities.
The North American Free Trade Agreement
brought a tremendous increase in commercial trade between the
U.S. and Mexico. Any reprisal on this front would result in the
United States cutting off its nose to spite its face. NAFTA generates
millions of dollars annually, and in the U.S., the wallet dominates
politics.
I don't see a serious case in which the
United States can hurt Mexico because of its independent international
stance. Let's get rid of this ghost that only scares the cowards
and the disingenuous.
Mexico's political independence in the
case of Iraq will contribute forcefully to what the world most
needs: a counterpoint to U.S. power. The real danger in our time
is not the miserable Hussein. It is a unipolar world dominated
by Washington. Creating that counterbalance is a political necessity.
Future governments, but especially the democratic government
of the United States, will end up thanking France, Germany, Chile,
Mexico, Russia and China for their efforts to create a counterpoint
to the United States.
It is hoped that President Fox will have
in his mind Mexico's proud history on international affairs when
he decides how Mexico will vote in the Security Council. Now
is the time to maintain our principles to defend our interests.
Carlos Fuentes,
novelist and critic, is author, most recently, of "The
Years With Laura Diaz" .
Yesterday's
Features
Robert Creeley
Help!
William Cook
Rage Against the Regime!
Issam Nahashibi and Abdelatif Rayan
Bush's Iraq Deja Vu: the Reincarnation
of Failed 1930s British Policies
Anthony Gancarski
Ledeen's Big Score
Wendy Brinker
Guns, Oil and Drugs
Robert Jensen
Petróleo, Petróleo, Petróleo
Karyn Strickler
The Big Lie About Partial Birth Abortions
Mickey Z.
Of Patience, Forebearance and War
Linda S. Heard
America, Don't Let Us Down
Col. Dan Smith
Crunch Time for the Security Council
Paul de Rooij
A Glossary to Warmongering
Website of the Day
Give
War a Chance: the Anti-Peace Anthem
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- Turkish Delights: a Pre-War Diary by Tariq Ali;
- The Plot to Frame the
Zapatistas: Talkers
and Cowards;
- Drugging Kids: The Plague of Neuroleptics;
- The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal:
a New Investigation.
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
Or Call Toll Free 1 800 840 3683
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
Take a Bite Out of Phil Knight's Bottom Line: Buy No Sweat Apparel!
March 8 /
9, 2003
Edward Said
Who's
In Charge?
Bruce Jackson
Elegy
for Two Giraffes and a Zebra
Perry Anderson
The Casuistries of Peace and
War
Joanne Mariner
Patriot
Act II's Attack on Punishment
William Lind
A Warning from Clausewitz on 4th Generation Warfare
Sam Husseini
Why
So Long for Iraq to Comply? Follow the Policy
Forrest Hylton
Business as Usual in Bolivia?
David Lindorff
Race and the Death Penalty in Pennsylvania
Ben Tripp
Is There
a Eurologist in the House?
Anthony Gancarski
W's Personal Jesus
Jon Elmer
An Interview with William Blum
Douglas Valentine
The Clash of the Icons
Norman Madarasz
Radical Politics and the Writer:
Maurice Blanchot
Gordon Solberg
There's
Got to be a Better Way
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Engel, Bernard
Weekend Website
The
White House
February 28,
2003
Alexander
Cockburn
Meet
the New Yorker's Chief Hack: Jeffrey Goldberg
Saul Landau
Now
It's Personal
Michael Neumann
A Plea for Hysteria
Karima Bennoume
The UN: Tool for Peace or War?
The Black
Commentator
The Rev. Sharpton and the Soul of the Democrats
Jennifer Loewenstein
Don't Turn Off the War
Richard Levins
Cuba's Biological Weapons: Why the World Needs More of Them
M. Shahid Alam
Is This a Clash of Civilizations?
Clay Conrad
Juries
and Judges: What's Relevant?
Ben Tripp
Speaking in Tongues: a Guide to Gibberish in the Age of Bush
Eliot Katz
To Declare Preemptive War is to Declare a Bankrupt Imagination
Kurt Nimmo
Paying Through the Nose to Kill Iraqi Kids
Matt Vidal
George W. Bonaparte
Mark Zepezauer
Why the Right Hates America
Mickey Z.
The Anti----War Talk I Never Gave
Jerry Kroth
Jung and the Space Shuttle Revisited
Shyam Oberoi
Chronicle of a War Foretold
Ron Jacobs
What If the Firebombing of Baghdad Were a Nightclub Fire?
Poets' Basement
Eliot Katz and Jim Cohn
Website of
the Weekend
Defense
Tech
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|