Before he had even sworn in as the 47th U.S. President, Donald Trump had already begun tackling the challenge of illegal immigration. On Truth Social, the president-elect shared his productive discourse with the freshly elected Mexican President, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo. A day prior to Thanksgiving, he revealed that the Mexican frontrunner had agreed to curb migration from Mexico, into the United States, thereby effectively sealing the Southern Border. They also explored possible strategies to curb the extensive inflow of narcotics into the U.S. and the ensuing consumption of these substances within the States.
This interaction painted a promising picture, indicating that Mexico was willing to stem the widespread migration by intervening in the process south of our border. Subsequently, though, reports emerged, suggesting that President Sheinbaum possibly tried to retract some of the promises made during the call. At least, that was the interpretation as per media sources, including Forbes.
The president-elect had put forth his concerns about the unchecked influx of drugs from Mexico into the United States in their conversation. Trump had earlier accused Mexico of enabling this and had even flagged the possibility of imposing a 25% tariff on all imports from the country. Post this dialogue, Sheinbaum provided a statement where she termed her discussion with Trump as an ‘excellent call’, during which she had delineated Mexico’s approach to the migration issue.
Sheinbaum informed Trump that no migrant caravans would reach the U.S. southern border since Mexico intended to handle them internally. She also shared this assurance via a subsequent tweet after Trump’s posts, and underlined her country’s comprehensive strategy in dealing with migration, while also ensuring respect for human rights.
The media coverage of the interaction gave the impression that Mexico was resisting taking additional action to stem northward migration, aligning closely with Sheinbaum’s statement. The Mexican President reiterated that no migrant caravans would reach the U.S. southern border, as Mexico was prepared to manage them internally. Trump’s insistence on a tariff threat was part of a larger strategy to bolster cooperation from the U.S.’s northern and southern neighbors.
The fundamental concern was the ongoing pressure on the United States to continually accommodate increasing numbers of illegal migrants. The belief was that both Canada and Mexico needed to play a more active role in addressing their respective immigration challenges. The imposition of tariffs was not a long-term element of Trump’s foreign policy, it was primarily used as a negotiation tactic.
Trump’s stance advocates for open and fair trade, asserting equal benefit for all parties involved. Prior to the Biden administration taking over, Mexico had been cooperative in addressing the immigration issue. The notable shift in strategy took place when the Biden administration took charge, which allegedly resulted in a surge of illegal immigration.
The tactical plan Trump proposed was relatively straightforward. The approach involved issuing a tariff threat, while simultaneously demonstrating a readiness to implement it if required. Given the dependence of Mexico on the U.S. for a significant portion of its exports, the threat of tariffs served as a convincing method to gain cooperation.
The Trump Strategy had three key steps: The initial step involved a threat of imposing substantial 25% tariffs, which held the potential to severely impact the Mexican economy. This was then followed by an anticipated threat of retaliatory tariffs from the Mexican President.
The final step played out when the President of Mexico took into account the significant disparity in economic dependencies. It was recognized that around 30% of her economy was linked to exports to the U.S., whereas only about 2% of the U.S. economy relied on exports to Mexico. This realization led to a rapid reassessment on her part and quick capitulation.
With his past experience, Trump has gained a clearer understanding of the effective negotiation levers and is better equipped to prod different countries into action. This approach aims to identify strategically significant aspects of these countries and use them to prompt them to take decisive action towards addressing mutual issues.