What was DeSantis thinking?

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 13/09/2023 (755 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

What exactly was Republican presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis thinking during the late August GOP debate in Milwaukee? Was he trying to channel Donald Trump — or did he just have a temporary brain freeze?

During a discussion of U.S. drug policy and its devastating impact on American society, DeSantis uttered something about Mexican drug cartels being the main source of the problem. He then took it a step further, when he was asked if he would send U.S. Special Forces into Mexico, by saying bluntly: “Yes, and I will do it on day one.” He went on to add: “The president of the United States has got to use all available powers as commander-and-chief to protect our country.”

Perhaps the governor would benefit from a refresher course in Mexican-U.S. history. Let’s start with the fact that the U.S. seized one-half of Mexican territory during the 1846-48 Mexican-American War. Besides inflicting heavy losses on both Mexican troops and civilians, the defeat translated into the confiscation of nearly all of present-day California, New Mexico, Utah, Arizona, Nevada and Colorado.

Then there are the Mexican Border Wars of 1910-1919 that also led to deadly clashes between the two sides. After Pancho Villa’s revolutionary forces killed almost two dozen Americans in New Mexico in March 1916, U.S. President Woodrow Wilson ordered U.S. soldiers to enter Mexico in search of Villa. The so-called “Punitive Expedition” from 1916-17, which involved some 10,000 U.S. Cavalry and led to the disruption of official diplomatic ties, left a huge and lasting stain on Mexican-U.S. relations.

Clearly, the U.S. invasion of Mexico in 1916 had a profound impact on how Mexico thought about its U.S. neighbour, national independence and territorial sovereignty. These events cast in stone a number of key Mexican foreign policy principles — namely, that it cannot countenance U.S. attempts to dictate Mexican decision-making processes, that it will defend Mexican sovereignty at every turn and that there is no place for U.S. interference in the domestic affairs of Mexico.

Much of this was subsequently codified in the core foreign policy tenet of Mexican President Venustiano Carranza (1917-20). The 1918 “Carranza Doctrine” was based on the principles of non-interference, the peaceful resolution of international conflicts and respect for state sovereignty and self-determination. As the doctrine itself clearly articulates: “Nationals and foreigners are equal before the sovereignty of the country in which they live.”

Not surprisingly, the Mexicans were not amused by DeSantis’ recent “get tough” outburst. While there was no immediate response from Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, he made his thoughts clear on this matter in early March.

At that time, he said angrily that the Mexican government was “not going to permit any foreign government to intervene in our territory, much less a government’s armed forces intervene.” He also made it very clear that Mexico “does not take orders from anyone” and that in addition “to being irresponsible, it is an offence to the people of Mexico.”

In his own effort to interfere in U.S. domestic political matters, López Obrador said that he would engage in a public information campaign to educate Mexican-Americans on the Republican Party’s proposal to intervene militarily in Mexico. If Republicans try to “use Mexico for their propagandist, electoral and political purposes, we will make a call to not vote for that party,” he said defiantly.

It is hard to imagine how raising the ire of neighbouring Mexicans is helpful to advancing U.S. national interests. There is obviously a great deal at stake for the U.S. when it comes to border management alone: immigration flows, trade and investment and narco trafficking.

Indeed, any intervention from U.S. military forces would precipitate an immediate termination of Mexican assistance on controlling undocumented migrants from crossing the U.S. border. Right now, the Mexican National Guard is operating in southern Mexico to deter asylum seekers from Central America, the Caribbean and South America from entering the U.S.

It is also worth remembering that Mexico is at, or near, the top as America’s largest trading partner. I’m assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that DeSantis would want the Mexicans to continue in that same vein.

Look, I’m not suggesting here that illicit fentanyl and synthetic opium entering the U.S. via Mexico is not a serious security and public health threat to the U.S. What I am saying is that trying to militarize the issue and to talk about it in terms of sending American troops into Mexico is destined to end in another failed U.S. “war on drugs.” It will also serve to close off cooperation with one of your most important allies in combating that deadly scourge.

DeSantis, then, needs an intensive history lesson on Mexican-U.S. relations before ever embarking upon such a counterproductive proposal down the road. Sending in U.S. Special Forces anywhere in Latin America has never worked well for Washington in the past. And there is no reason to think that it will work any better under a DeSantis Administration acting unilaterally.

Peter McKenna is professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown.