Commentary: My wife and I spent a recent afternoon having lunch in Juarez, Mexico and buying odds and ends. As we ate our lunch, I talked to my wife about my first trip to Juarez as boy, when my father took my mother and me on a mini-vacation to Carlsbad Caverns and to Tularosa, where a brother of his had moved. On this trip, he made a last minute decision to drive to El Paso, park the car, and have us walk into the Juarez tourist zone. As I was telling the story to my wife, it suddenly struck me that my parents were the first relatives on either side of my family to have been in Mexico since my ancestors settled in northern New Mexico four centuries ago. My wife, who is from an old village in Taos County, remarked how it was weird that it was the same case for her parents.
I have worked in Mexico for the past 26 years on either side of the border, and I feel equally as comfortable on either side. My family is American through and through, with various uncles and relatives, including my father, having served in the military and built successful businesses throughout the U.S. So it struck me as disturbing that a group of Mexican politicians, led by former presidential candidate Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, are proposing a lawsuit to nullify the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican-American War of 1846 to 1848. As part of its terms, the U.S. paid $15 million for Mexico to cede what are now the American states of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and parts of Utah, Nevada, Colorado, and Wyoming – essentially the greater part of the American West and Southwest.
Cárdenas is the son of former Mexican President Lázaro Cárdenas, who is famous for having nationalized PEMEX, and promoting a spirit of general Mexican nationalism. Cárdenas Jr. has participated in politics most of his life, and is one of the pillars of Mexico’s leftist movement.
In his proposal, he states that the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was illegal and a lawsuit can be brought before the Court of International Justice to return the territory Mexico lost after the war. Most legal experts say that such a lawsuit stands no chance of success for reasons involving precedent, time, and a signed treaty between the U.S. and Mexico.
It is obvious that Cárdenas and the Mexican left are making a statement more than believing that this type of a lawsuit against the U.S. can be successful. This seems to be a game of tit-for-tat to push back against President Donald Trump’s disparaging comments about Mexico pertaining to immigration, the building of a border wall, and the North American Free Trade Agreement. By proposing a lawsuit, Cardenas’s group is stating that the U.S. committed the first intrusions and invasions, to the extent that some of the most lucrative real estate in the world today was stolen from Mexico at the hands of an aggressive. As Trump demonizes Mexico for taking advantage of the U.S. in terms of jobs and immigration, this group is sending a message back that if he wants to play that game, Mexico can play one-upmanship.
From an obvious standpoint, there is no way the U.S. is going to ever consider ceding such a huge part of its territory, not only for strategic, but for financial purposes. When added together, the Gross State Products of the U.S. border states (California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas) equal almost $4.4 trillion, about four times the size of Mexico’s entire economy. If the border states were counted as a nation, their GDP would only rank behind the U.S. China, and Japan. Ceding them to Mexico would remove almost 25 percent of the entire U.S. economy.
It’s sad that two neighbors which share such a long history, culture, and interests can come to a point where vitriol and lawsuits create a spirit of distrust and antagonism. What disturbs me the most is the lack of understanding that Washington, D.C. and Mexico City can demonstrate pertaining to the Mexican-American border. The D.C. executive branch folks believe that a border wall will settle immigration problems, NAFTA has been bad for the U.S., and that Mexico should be treated as an adversary rather than an important partner. Very little feedback has been solicited from those of us who live on the border, benefit from cross-border trade, and interact positively with our neighbors in Mexico every day.
By proposing a lawsuit to return lost territories, Mexican politicians offend the tens of millions of Americans living in the West and Southwest, and thus possibly making them suspicious of Mexico, where suspicion may not have previously existed. It also is offensive to the thousands of original Hispanic families in the this region whose ancestors settled in what are now U.S. border states before Mexico declared independence from Spain and became a republic. There is scant hope that many of these citizens, original settlers, or newly arrived are going to willingly give up their U.S. citizenship or way of life. The lives of these people seem to be an afterthought in Cárdenas’s effort.
Perhaps, I am taking the proposed lawsuit too seriously, as it is obviously a way to pick back at the U.S. after a bitter presidential campaign and the uncertainty about where the U.S. stands with Mexico. However, actions on both sides are exhibiting cracks in the U.S.-Mexico relationship that are making pettiness the order of the day. The beautiful thing is that cracks can be repaired and a stronger, more successful relationship can be forged when both sides treat each other with respect, and realize that a shared future together is the best path to success.
Jerry Pacheco is President of the Border Industrial Association. His columns appear in The Albuquerque Journal.