 |
TODAY Wednesday 9 July 1997 Each weekday. Conn Nugent on what's new in the world, on the site. |
newsroom
|
TODAY Wednesday 9 July 1997 Each weekday. Conn Nugent on what's new in the world, on the site. |
TODAY IN THE WORLD: Mexico
"Poor Mexico," said one her presidents. "So far from God, so close to the United States."
There is a Canadian nationalism, to be sure, though its confidence has been shaken in recent years. Conversations about national identity often seem to be a series of reactions to the annoying fact that foreigners tend to think that Americans and Canadians look and sound pretty much alike. Mexico is different: 100 million people; distinctive European/MesoAmerican ethnic spectrum; Spanish language; ancient history; influential culture; agrarian character; social stratification; and, not least, a nationalism forged by opposition to the hegemony of the north.
Not one American in a hundred knows the slightest thing about the conflict that we call the Mexican War while -- at least until very recently -- no Mexican could reach adulthood without absorbing a barrage of patriotic messages about the tragic invasions and loss of national patrimony in the 1840s. The Boy Heroes of Chapultepec (military cadets who died before yielding to US Marines); the Brigade of Saint Patrick (Irish-American deserters from the US Army who fought on the side of their fellow Catholics) -- these are well known figures in Mexican iconology. We remember the Alamo, sort of, a small battle from a different war.
I don't think it's a bad thing that Americans have little sense of history -- no memory, no grudges -- and we can take pride in being the Land of the Clean Slate. Our past with Mexico matters mostly because it matters to Mexicans; it informs a singularly Mexican sense of identity that might become more important to us as, willy-nilly, their country and our country become more intimate.
To a degree that would surprise many Americans, Mexicans accept but do not solemnize their northern frontier. They know that there is an international boundary, they concede that the US has the right to enforce it, but they also believe that history, kinship, and common sense confer on them a special status of appropriateness when it comes to inhabiting lands that once were Mexican, where Spanish is freely spoken, and where Mexican labor has always been indispensable. Mexican identity, therefore, is simultaneously based on a sense of differentness and a sense of belonging. More than 3 million Mexicans entered the United States last year to find long-term work; only about 100,000 would ever qualify as US citizens.
This week's edition of The Economist has an informative report on US/Mexican relations since the passage of the NAFTA treaty. (The startling Mexican elections of Sunday add a special element of timeliness, as does the submission to the US Congress of a report from President Clinton on the impact of the trade agreement.) NAFTA has had a mild impact on the American economy, the report says, but a major one on the Mexican economy. Mexican exports to the US have risen sharply (almost doubling in four years), and there's been a significant expansion of Mexican manufacture of automobiles and textiles. American finance and marketing have revolutionized Mexican household consumer patterns. There have also been negative economic consequences in Mexico not touched on by the free trade-loving Economist (some sharp declines in the small farm sector, for example), but if GDP is the criterion, then things are looking up for Mexican development.
Americans are relatively unimpressed. Though NAFTA won't be annulled, it hasn't spawned new progeny, despite the fact that Ross Perot apparently had it wrong that the treaty would suck high numbers of American jobs and spit them out somewhere south of the Rio Grande. NAFTA does seem responsible for some decent-pay job loss, however, and organized labor and some Midwest Democrats are opposed to new free trade agreements. So too are many environmentalists.
As a matter of fact, disappointment with the environmental side of NAFTA is often cited as a major impediment to new trade agreements. When NAFTA was being sold to American public opinion three and a half years ago, the environmental movement was divided. Those who sided with the President were able to tell their skeptical colleagues that they had wrung from the Administration important concessions on environmental protection. The final, ratified version of the treaty established a three-nation environmental commission to ensure that environmental degradation was not a by-product of North American free trade.
The Administration's promises to the environmentalists were effectively empty. The three-nation commission has little power and less money. Special US government initiatives for environmental protection along the Mexican border were announced with fanfare and then abandoned. Any enviro wanting a bitter joke should check out the bizarrely empty Website of the US-Mexico Border Field Coordinating Committee. The truth is that the Mexican environment, especially the Mexican environment along the border is in worse shape than ever, mostly to the detriment of Mexicans, but with inevitable consequences for Americans. The 18% annual growth in production from border maquiladora factories has impelled an increase in air and water pollution that can't be policed by hard-pressed Mexican regulators, and the boom in population along the border has caused many already-stressed Mexican sewage systems to hemorrhage completely. Mexican agriculture along the border (keyed to US markets) is pesticide-intensive and virtually unregulated.
Socially, culturally, educationally, Americans are lucky to have Mexico as a neighbor and have so many Mexican-Americans in our citizenry. Imagine if it were Germany that was south of Laredo (the influence on cuisine alone makes you tremble). But as economic relations ripen, environmentalists are going to have to play some political hardball about preserving nature on a continental basis.
TODAY ON THE SITE
As is often the case, Liberty Tree has someone on this case who knows 98% mas than I do. Su nombre es Ruben Kraiem, and his High Five on Mexico is an excellent summary of the recursos del Internet available to anyone who wants a crash course on cosas ambientales al sur del Rio Bravo.
Recent "Today" columns:
7/08: By the Sea, By the Sea
7/07: Huddled Masses
7/03: Three-Dot Environmentalism...
7/02: Bothersome Science
7/01: Forest for the Trees
6/30: Investing in Pessimism
6/27: Good Speech (Keep it Quiet)
6/26: Bleeping Joan of Arc
6/25: The World at 42nd Street
6/24: Il Faut Que Get a Grip
To access more "Today" columns, click "Archives" below.