With the United States President having just over 100 days in office, leaders and observers worldwide have already concluded that the threats routinely issued by the US president are largely bluffs and tools of pressure and diversion.
This can be seen in his impulsive, chaotic, and counterproductive tariff campaign, his insistence on annexing Canada, and the possible military invasion of Greenland, and also in his erratic zigzagging to have US forces directly intervene against organized crime in Mexican territory (one day a threat of unilateral action, the next a “generous” offer of aid).
Given this, one is tempted to ask: Now, who’s afraid of Donald Trump?
With the risk of his room to maneuver growing smaller, the man in the White House will be forced to defend his games by giving credibility to his threats, and to do so, he needs to carry out some of them. He’s done so by bombing the Houthis in Yemen and giving Netanyahu carte blanche to invade his neighbors and ethnically cleanse Gaza. However, these have been weak targets that can’t be used indefinitely to project fear.
Will he seek to attack a bigger target? Who would want to risk being the first?
A BACKFIRING INTERVENTION
President Claudia Sheinbaum remains steadfast and vigilant, even though virtually all analysts not subordinated to Trump’s political discipline are telling him that attacking Mexico is not only a bad idea, but would also yield terrible results.
Naturally, there are plenty of those who volunteer to feed his supporters’ confirmation bias, pleasing the boss: Fox News presents Trump’s claim that the Mexican president is afraid of the cartels as central, since his offer to support her militarily is a necessary measure to combat drug trafficking, while the Washington Examiner suggests that the refusal to accept aid will be seen as putting obstacles to security cooperation, and includes comments from analysts who support the idea of greater military involvement.
Those who have not shown unmitigated loyalty to the administration, however, point out the opposite, such as the International Crisis Group, which indicates that “none of the wartime or counter-terrorism instruments Trump has invoked has authorized the use of military force on Mexican territory,” and warns of the consequences:
“Launching drone strikes, special operations, or any other lethal action against criminal organisations in Mexico without the country’s consent could backfire and cause huge damage to the bilateral relationship. Any move by the U.S. would certainly be condemned by Sheinbaum’s political base and seized on by the opposition as a sign of weakness, requiring a decisive response. She could halt law enforcement cooperation or return to López Obrador’s laissez-faire approach to fentanyl trafficking. She might soft-pedal migration enforcement or kick the DEA, FBI, and other U.S. agencies out of the country. If better cooperation is what Trump wants from Mexico, military action would be the best way to stall it”.
NEITHER FEAR NOR RECKLESSNESS
It would seem, at first, a show of force would serve Trump to satisfy his base and garner applause, but it would be as self-indulgent as it would be short-lived.
That, however, is a significant risk: that the US president might use force just to pretend he’s doing something, as has happened in other cases, and that he’s also successful. And, reportedly, some of his officials are considering violent action, and even the CIA is assessing the risk of collateral damage to U.S. citizens and the possibility of retaliation by criminal groups.
“The Mexican government shouldn’t just assume that [unilateral military action] couldn’t happen, regardless of how bad an idea it would be on many levels,” said Cecilia Farfán-Méndez of the Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime. “All scenarios should be planned for.”
Despite his reputation as a misogynist, Trump’s tone toward Sheinbaum, which had been complimentary, has been descending into the disdain with which he usually treats other leaders—and into machismo—by describing her as a woman “so afraid of the cartels that she can’t even think straight.”
However, there is still too little to proclaim a fundamental change in his attitude toward her. And the Mexican president continues to maintain the dignified, adult-in-the-room demeanor that has quickly earned her praise in foreign countries, while, in her own version of judo tactics, she leverages her rival’s strength not against him but to demand results from Mexican law enforcement agencies that aren’t always loyal to the institutions.
Some may think that Claudia Sheinbaum isn’t afraid of Donald Trump. Whether or not that is true, she operates with the wisdom that it is not possible to tame a lion with fear or recklessness.
Related: An Economy Without Immigrants? Republicans Propose Replacing Them with Minors
Mexican Press Agency is part of ALMA, which is dedicated to news and information about Mexico and Mexicans in the United States and is a fiscally sponsored project of Social Focus, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Redwood City, California.
