Sheinbaum exhibits disparities in Ken Salazar’s statements

Alma E. Muñoz and Emir Olivares

La Jornada Newspaper
Friday, November 15, 2024, p. 3

President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo pointed out yesterday that the United States ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, incurs disparities declarative, because first declare one thing and then another.

In response to the diplomat’s criticism of the current government and that of Andrés Manuel López Obrador on security matters, Sheinbaum stated that Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country and there will be no subordination. He also noted that Foreign Minister Juan Ramón de la Fuente has contact with Salazar.

On the other hand, yesterday the president also considered that has no future the proposal of the Prime Minister of Ontario, Canada, Doug Ford, to want to remove Mexico from the North American Trade Agreement (T-MEC). We complement each other, we do not compete with each otherhe stressed.

This Thursday morning, the President maintained that there is coordination with the United States and the high-level dialogue must continue, as there was between Joe Biden and López Obrador.

They called it the Bicentennial Dialogue, on different topics: drug trafficking, arms trafficking, because it is from one side and the other, migration and security.

So there is and will continue to be coordination, because we have a common border, said Sheinbaum Pardo. there has to be high-level dialogue, which allows us to coordinate on different issues that matter to both countries. In addition, we are business partners. But subordination, not that, he specified.

He indicated that both nations work together and there is a relationship of equals, between two independent, sovereign countries, that we share a lot: families, culture, economy, also problems and we coordinate to solve them.

To a question about Salazar’s statements last Wednesday, the president mentioned: There are differences between what the United States ambassador says one day and what he says another. Such was the case, for example, with the reform of the Judicial Branch. On one occasion he said he thought it was good; a week later, it was going to be very bad for Mexico.

Then, in the Treasury Room, some contradictory statements from the US representative were transmitted.

After highlighting that the Foreign Ministry sent a diplomatic note due to the ambassador’s recent statements, Sheinbaum Pardo asked: Which one do we listen to, the one from yesterday or the one from a few months ago? There has to be consequence, there has to be logic in the statements one makes.

Regarding the Canadian minister’s approach, the president recalled that when the T-MEC was signed, “Mexico advocated for Canada, because there was, at some point in the negotiation, the intention of the United States that the signature would only be with Mexico. At that time, Mexico said: ‘no, we are three countries’, and it was signed again with the three. So, that proposal has no future.”

He added that there is no need to worry about the review – not negotiation – of the treaty in 2026. Its benefits for the United States are many and that will be one of the great topics for discussion. It will include, he highlighted, that our countrymen hold in a lot the economy of that country.

He stressed that Canada also benefits from the T-MEC. For example, with Mexicans who go to work to that nation.