The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Trump and Mexico Negotiating
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As I mentioned in my recent Taki’s Magazine column on Mexico, the landslide election of socialist nationalist AMLO in Mexico might provide Trump with some dealmaking opportunities, whether before or after AMLO comes in in December.

If you are Mexico, which of your neighbors would you prefer to be on neighborly good terms even if it peeves your other neighbors: the United States of America or various Central American banana republics? Now, of course, under the previous American administration, that question didn’t come up much for Mexico because the Obama government wanted to flood America with Central American future Democratic voters. But now under a pro-American American government, Mexico is facing a choice of whom to please: the United States or Guatemala.

And now from the Washington Post:

U.S. and Mexico discussing a deal that could slash migration at the border

By Joshua Partlow and Nick Miroff
July 10 at 3:32 PM

MEXICO CITY — While President Trump regularly berates Mexico for “doing nothing” to stop illegal migration, behind the scenes the two governments are considering a deal that could drastically curtail the cross-border migration flow.

The proposal, known as a “safe third country agreement,” would potentially require asylum seekers transiting through Mexico to apply for protection in that nation rather than in the United States. It would allow U.S. border guards to turn back such asylum seekers at border crossings and quickly return to Mexico anyone who has already entered illegally seeking refuge, regardless of their nationality.

U.S. officials believe this type of deal would discourage many Central American families from trying to reach the United States. Their soaring numbers have strained U.S. immigration courts and overwhelmed the U.S. government’s ability to detain them. The Trump administration says the majority are looking for jobs — rather than fleeing persecution — and are taking advantage of American generosity to gain entry and avoid deportation.

“We believe the flows would drop dramatically and fairly immediately” if the agreement took effect, said a senior Department of Homeland Security official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss negotiations with the Mexican government, which the official said had gathered momentum in recent weeks. …

The senior DHS official said the U.S. government has signaled to Mexico that it would be prepared to offer significant financial aid to help the country cope with a surge of asylum seekers, at least in the short term. The investment, which would be paid through the U.S. security-assistance plan for Mexico, the Merida Initiative, would quickly pay for itself, the DHS official argued.

“Look at the amount of money spent on border security, on courts, on detention and immigration enforcement,” the senior official said. “It’d be pennies on the dollar to support Mexico in this area.” …

The winner of the July 1 presidential election, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has yet to weigh in publicly on the issue. Roberto Velasco, a spokesman for the incoming foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, said that the new administration does not “have a position yet since we don’t know the details of the proposal or the negotiations between the two countries.”

 
Hide 51 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:

    @Steve – you’ve really gotta read this one: https://center.cpr.org/

  2. Lot says:

    This is needed also to stop African migration via Mexico. Border towns of Mexico used to have 0.000% African populations. Now they are quite visible. Mostly but not all the extra dark Mali looking ones, and about 90% young men. They aren’t there to learn Spanish and become Mexican, but to migrate to the USA. For now the numbers are small, but they can and will surge if the vanguard isn’t stopped.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    , @AnotherDad
  3. Dan Hayes says:

    It is rather interesting that AMLO, the fire-breathing radical, may, just may, prove more conducive to both American and Mexican interests than the Wall Street Journal‘s Mexican stooges who have been running Mexico into the ground for lo these many years!

    Or so one can hope.

  4. IHTG says:

    They’re doing this with Nieto’s lame duck government, not with AMLO, though.

    • Replies: @Svigor
  5. Another Mexican extortion/con job. Mexicans don’t give a crap about Guatemalans, they beat the tar out of them and chuck them back when they find them (unless fomenting an invasion of America). Note there’s nary a peep about the unrelenting flow of heroin, cocaine, meth, and Fentanyl, nor about repatriation of the 20,000,000 Mexican nationals squatting in America.

    We ignored H Ross (Squeaky Dwarf Texan) Perot and got what we asked for. Funny how so many here praise Buchanan but forget Perot.

  6. This kind of an arrangement strikes me as a form of a Danegeld. The United States cannot enforce its borders against emotionally-appealing Central Americans so it will pay Mexico to do so. (Rather like the EU paying Turkey to keep Arabs out.) It puts the government receiving the Danegeld in the position of being able to manipulate the flow of people to extract increasing concessions from the U.S./EU.

    I’m inclined to the advice of Rudyard Kipling in his poem Danegeld:

    It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
    For fear they should succumb and go astray;
    So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
    You will find it better policy to say: –

    “We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
    No matter how trifling the cost;
    For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
    And the nation that pays it is lost!”

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    , @Lot
    , @Olorin
  7. @eah

    Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) results from the dramatic divergence between sufferers’ mental models of reality and base reality. Their mental models no longer provide reliability in predicting what might happen tomorrow, next week or next year, resulting in psychological and physiological stress responses. Lashing out at others is a common stress response, so Americans might become targets just by being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

    • Replies: @The Anti-Gnostic
  8. Kind of a Berlusconi/General Kqahfafee arrangement eh?

  9. Barnard says:
    @Lot

    Some of them are coming from Caribbean Islands through Mexico also. It is puzzling to me why Mexico wants to be conduit for illegal immigration to the U.S. from other countries. It is easy to see why they want to offload their own problems, but what is appealing about allowing thousands of others to pass through Mexico in route to the U.S.?

    • Replies: @Sarah Toga
  10. peterike says:

    Looks like a lot more winning coming from here, too.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2018/07/11/new-uscis-policy-will-carry-harsh-consequences-for-applicants/

    The author is of course soiling his diapers over the “dire consequences” of this policy, but it sounds pretty awesome to me.

    • Replies: @27 year old
  11. Svigor says:

    MEXICO CITY — While President Trump regularly berates Mexico for “doing nothing” to stop illegal migration, behind the scenes the two governments are considering a deal that could drastically curtail the cross-border migration flow.

    I like how the media perpetually presents this kind of thing as if incongruous. As if (((Big Media))) has no clue about publicly bullying people to get what they want. It’s not complicated; you publicly berate Mexico, and then part of your private negotiations can be the attenuation of the public beration.

    The proposal, known as a “safe third country agreement,” would potentially require asylum seekers transiting through Mexico to apply for protection in that nation rather than in the United States. It would allow U.S. border guards to turn back such asylum seekers at border crossings and quickly return to Mexico anyone who has already entered illegally seeking refuge, regardless of their nationality.

    Wow, keeping Hispanic, mestizo/indio immigrants in an Hispanic, mestizo/indio country, rather than letting them into an Anglophone, far less mestizo/indio country…genius!

    The senior DHS official said the U.S. government has signaled to Mexico that it would be prepared to offer significant financial aid to help the country cope with a surge of asylum seekers, at least in the short term. The investment, which would be paid through the U.S. security-assistance plan for Mexico, the Merida Initiative, would quickly pay for itself, the DHS official argued.

    This will (privately) drive the Democrats apeshit*. They’re gonna do everything they can to scuttle this. Because those dollars will go much, much further in Mexico than they will in America. You set up a nice fat flow of that sweet, sweet gravy, and the Mexicans will make damned sure it keeps flowing. They won’t have Big Media, or an army of activists and lawyers, gumming up the works, either. And their rules of engagement will be a lot more liberal than in America; the more cost-effectively the Mexicans solve the problem, the more lucre winds up lining their pockets. It’s not like in America, where if you don’t spend your budget, you lose it.

    *: they might try the “Trump wants refugees to be abused by the cartels” line.

    “Look at the amount of money spent on border security, on courts, on detention and immigration enforcement,” the senior official said. “It’d be pennies on the dollar to support Mexico in this area.” …

    Indeed.

  12. Svigor says:
    @IHTG

    Set the gravy pipeline in stone while they still can?

  13. MBlanc46 says:

    Trump fancies himself a great deal maker. It’s time for him to get dealing.

  14. istevefan says:

    The senior DHS official said the U.S. government has signaled to Mexico that it would be prepared to offer significant financial aid to help the country cope with a surge of asylum seekers, at least in the short term.

    Why does Mexico need financial assistance to cope with its southern border? First, Mexico is the world’s 11th largest economy. Second, its southern border is not nearly as extensive as our southern border. Hence, it should not require too much of them to adequately fence off their southern border to put an end to this farce.

    • Replies: @FX Enderby
  15. AndrewR says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    What part of “this will likely save the US govt billions in patrol, enforcement, detention and deportation costs” do you not understand?

    Perhaps you think we should just threaten or blackmail Mexico instead of bribing them a relative pittance? You clearly haven’t thought this out.

  16. anon[414] • Disclaimer says:

    Hell yes. It’s the law when applying for refugee status or asylum. Use the laws you have, not just whine about the laws you wish you had.

  17. Lot says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    Paying off barbarians worked for hundreds of years for the Romans and Byzantines. Dear Mr. Goth and Mr. Hun, here’s a gold coin, please leave the Thracian countryside alone, and there are plenty more if you go off and fight the Persians/Arabs/Turks for us.

    • Replies: @HunInTheSun
  18. eah says:
    @eah

    OT (totally)

    I bet you didn’t know FIFA had a “diversity boss” — or that this person presumes to have authority to tell broadcasters where they may and may not direct/focus their cameras.

    Broadcasters have been ordered to stop their cameras zooming in on “hot women” in the crowd at football matches, Fifa’s diversity boss says.

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    , @MichiganMom
  19. @Lot

    While I agree with the sentiment I can’t easily cite any major instances where the Western Empire paid off Goths they preferred them as allies in the later empire and when that didn’t work out the result at Adrianople was catastrophic. As for the Huns, the Romans only ever fought them, culminating at the Catalaunian Fields in 451 AD.

  20. @Dr. Krankenschmaltz

    That’s about what I’d say as well. Trump is a game-changer to people who were sure the game was carved in stone and would never, ever change, ever again. To such people, it’s the equivalent of a God-is-dead moment. They are having an existential crisis. The more unhinged are having actual manic breaks.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  21. @Stan d Mute

    I certainly don’t forget his prescient vision of the future that has now become our present. I voted for the man twice. I wouldn’t piss on Bill Clinton if he was on fire.

    And I also don’t forget that Buchanan worked for the sainted Reagan, who gave us the Great Amnesty that got the whole shittin’ deal really rolling back in the 80s. And Reagan had no fucking excuse, having been present at Ground Zero, California, and not caught a damn clue about what was in store for us if the Immivasion from Mexico wasn’t stopped, cold. Also a man I wouldn’t piss on if he was on fire.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  22. MBlanc46 says:
    @Stan d Mute

    I thought that Perot had lost his marbles when he complained about the FBI spying on him. We now know that he was almost certainly right.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
    , @Jim Don Bob
  23. Olorin says:
    @Diversity Heretic

    This kind of an arrangement strikes me as a form of a Danegeld.

    Maybe.

    Or maybe more like public policy overlaid on remittances. Which after all is the unspoken element of the immigration issue (both legal and il-).

    https://tradingeconomics.com/mexico/remittances

    https://www.bbva.com/en/growth-u-s-mexico-remittance-corridor/

  24. @MBlanc46

    Running against President H.W. ‘Deep State’ Bush, yeah. He was also right about NAFTA. He was also right about GM during the GM/EDS debacle. He was Trump minus any charisma, but with bigger balls (he raced powerboats and took on GM singlehandedly) and more impressive business sense. We got what we asked for and deserved with Slick Willie instead.

    • Replies: @cynthia curran
  25. @MBlanc46

    I thought that Perot had lost his marbles when he complained about the FBI spying on him. We now know that he was almost certainly right.

    Hmmm. Never thought about that, but I wouldn’t put it past the bastards. Good point.

    • Replies: @Stan d Mute
  26. Joe H says:

    Incidentally, the political movement put together by AMLO, Movimiento de Regeneración Nacional or Morena, translates as National Regeneration Movement. It sounds a lot like Make America Great Again or American Renaissance, doesn’t it?

  27. Jim Given says:

    Now illegal immigrants have become “migrants”.

    Does that suggest they will all go back home to their respective countries when harvest time is over?

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  28. @JerseyJeffersonian

    I voted for the man twice.

    Ditto. I would have voted for him if all he ever did was forfeit $700,000,000 just to speak his mind about Roger Smith and General Motors (three years before ‘brave’ Michael Moore took up the subject). Building and selling two multi-billion dollar companies, taking on Deep State Bush, taking on Treason Johnny McCain over POW/MIAs, exposing NAFTA for what it was, saving Steve Jobs, and having balls like the Dodge brothers in powerboat racing were just icing on the cake. We could have avoided the economic collapse and gutting of our manufacturing sector, but America voted for Willie the Rapist instead. Perot was the only candidate in my lifetime I actually voted for (as opposed to voting against the other guy).

    I suspect Perot was the inspiration for Trump although he never got Perot’s endorsement. I only hope now that Perot outlasts Treason Johnny and has a chance to take a whiz on his grave..

  29. @Jim Don Bob

    BTW, wasn’t it CIA rather than FBI? Makes more sense given Deep State Bush’s history.

    In either case, maybe Ron Unz will pick up on it given his interest in Treason Johnny and Deep State shenanigans.

  30. @eah

    Broadcasters have been ordered to stop their cameras zooming in on “hot women” in the crowd at football matches, Fifa’s diversity boss says.

    I can see why if those three 6s are the best they can find.

    • Replies: @Escher
  31. @Barnard

    what is appealing about allowing thousands of others to pass through Mexico

    Mexican men get to rape all the foreign females as they pass by. No prosecutions. Nobody can do anything about that.

  32. Sounds good . . . but . . .

    A wall will remain after AMLO is out of office.

  33. @Jim Given

    Now illegal immigrants have become “migrants”.

    Some babe on NPR tonight was rattling on about how Kavanaugh was a threat to “women’s reproductive health services”. The debasement of the language continues.

  34. @peterike

    We need to learn from our successes with private prisons (create a profit motive and a business lobby which lines up with our domestic policy goals – blacks off the street) and apply this to immigration.

    We should start contracting out immigration enforcement and especially deportations.

    Write juicy contracts for second or third tier major defense contractors, the guys that aren’t on GD, Raytheon, Booz, etc level yet but would like to get there. The big fish likely won’t touch this because they are a. converged and b. more plugged in to the swamp/deep state/blue empire/whatever. So here’s your chance to step into the big leagues guys.

    Congressmen can to be shown, via wining and dining and trips, just how beneficial immigration enforcement is for their district in terms of jobs, etc.

    MAGA and get rich doing it.

    After a while if this works, we’ll have to create some incentive structures which tie out to lower overall levels of immigrants, otherwise the lobby will seek to maintain a flow of immigrants for them to catch. But we’ll cross that bridge when we get there.

  35. @Stan d Mute

    Yes, a man I, too, voted for, as opposed to voting for as the one I assessed as the “lesser of two evils”.

    I think that The Borg was actually afraid of Mr. Perot, so they pulled out the threats and innuendoes in response.

    And his outliving Bill Clinton would be a fine thing. Not as fine as his having been elected, and having had the chance to chase the money lenders out of the temple, or making a Supreme Court appointment or two, but it would be some consolation.

  36. @Stan d Mute

    Also, to add to your list, he hired men to successfully extract his employees from Iran during the Islamic Revolution. My hat is off to him…

  37. Escher says:
    @Jim Don Bob

    You have high standards!

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
  38. Medvedev says:

    Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has yet to weigh in publicly on the issue

    Why would he need time to weight it in?
    Sure, he’s not some kind of White supremacist, racist, sexist, xenophobic bigot who would deny them entry and stay in Mexico.

    It’d be pennies on the dollar to support Mexico in this area.

    Why would they need pennies from us? Mexican people should be glad to get “undocumented immigrants”, refugees and asylum seekers, cause these are wonderful, hard-working people who will benefit Mexico.

  39. Trutherator says: • Website
    @Stan d Mute

    Perot was false packaging. He did good by his employees in Iran. But his 1992 run for president was meant only to throw the election to Clinton.

    Note that as soon as it looked like he might even win the election, and still kept getting stronger numbers, he quit. Days later the polls went back to suggesting Bush would win re-election, so he announced he was in the race again.

    That’s also why Swarzenneger ran for governor in California when Grey was recalled, to “steal” the seat from McClinton.

    Jesse Ventura was, is, a more honest maverick, IMO. After he took office, a panel of 20 guys from the CIA grilled him on how he had won the election! And later endorsed Ron Paul…

  40. Pepe says:

    With the landslide election of AMLO, there are some signs that Mexico might be waking up from a generational funk. A generation of neo-liberal, technocrat globalism and open borders, in which Mexico competed in the global race to the bottom for low wage manufacturing jobs. And shipped one third of its citizens to the US. When Mexico stopped even trying to be a real country, and the politicians didn’t even try to hide their corruption.

    Whether this awakening will achieve the desired results remains to be seen, but it should at least be acknowledged and supported.

  41. @Stan d Mute

    Most of the Midwest was not as smart as the south. The south gets the foreign car companies and keeps wages a little lower and no unions. In fact the Midwest is kind of sucks now. Trump bend over backwards for them and they are supporting Dems for senate not Republicans. In fact the Midwest big states are losing population to Florida, Georiga, and the Carolinas. Thousands of retiree whites are leaving Ohio, Pa, Michigan, and Wisconian for warmer weather in the south. Recent polls show the Republicans doing better in Florida, Georgia, and the Carolinas than Ohio, Pa, Wisconian, and Michigan because older whites are dumping those states.

  42. @Escher

    You have high standards!

    Which is why I have been single most of my life.

    Those women are not unattractive, but they are not what I would consider “hot”.

  43. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @The Anti-Gnostic

    Trump will finish his visit to the UK more popular than he started. The unhinged protests will ensure it.

    • Replies: @Tyrion 2
  44. @eah

    Reading the article I saw that you need special ID to enter the stadiums. But we shouldn’t ask for ID to vote?

    • Replies: @eah
  45. Tyrion 2 says: • Website
    @Tyrion 2

    Anecdotally, they don’t seem to have much sway with the public at large. Yesterday I was stood outside the tube station in a very multicultural and quite trendy area (Brixton) where there were two goons from the Socialist Worker’s Party handing out anti-Trump leaflets.

    The probably Afro-Carribean descent middle-aged man was repeating inane phrases through a megaphone. “Trump the number one racist”, “Trump the number one bigot” and so on, on loop.

    The older lady went round pushing the leaflets on the people entrying and exiting.

    Everyone ignored them, though many were polite to take the leaflet when offered.

    As I was stood there waiting for a while, the lady passed me by many times offering everyone one to all, except me, strangely. Perhaps the sunglasses were off-putting.

    She actually had a nice and kindly demeanour. I got the impression that she might be the megaphone shouter’s mother, especially when they interacted. They looked related.

    How sad she must feel having to nanny her son in his middle age. I’m sure thay she didn’t move to the UK for this!

    No doubt the fanatics will be out in full force on Saturday. It has been a beautiful heat wave for the last few weeks. This might mean things turn a bit nasty. A few tens of thousands of warmed-over protestors could cause quite a fuss. I notice Sadiq Khan is already telling them that the protests “must be peaceful”.

    Some of the most violent usual suspect protestors may not show up. Trump’s rhetoric on Iran has endeared him, a little, to the very many Sunni Muslims in London. At least, if Uber drivers’ opinions are anything to go by.

    The anti-establishment left also struggle to be as worked up against him as their words suggest. He’s hated by many of the people they hate.

    I’d wager that a big percentage of the march will be virtue-signaling Americans living in London. Then again, we have many “astroturf” type groups who tend to use what they believe to be popular single issue protest causes as an opportunity for entryism. That is to take moral leadership and gain the occasional recruit. They can certainly cause trouble. The aforementioned SWP is a classic example of such.

  46. @Anonymous

    and @Steve Sailer

    That’s a evocative article, I hope Mr. Sailer has a look.

    It’s interesting how:

    Exercising ones liberal rights in a liberal society, including: practicing one’s freedom of speech to argue against – things – , in favor of other – things – , to form coalitions around agendas and prosecute those agendas, to utilize means of organization including but definitely not limited to the expense of capital (namely because one is disadvantaged versus other parties that have more capital and do exercise it) …

    All of these things are now said to “equal”:

    “Power”

    And the new expectation being hefted upon those individuals who have the temerity to exercise “power” is that they are supposed to stand aside and “give up their power”.

    Not: … that newcomers are given the same “power”, and may exercise the same power, and do.
    No: … old-timers are expected to give up their “power”

    There’s a lot of onion strands to pull apart in that but I think one linguistic feature we need to start attacking is that when a certain group (the media, the “left”) says “power”,

    …what they really mean are “your rights”.

    And when they complain that you should gracefully give up your “power”, they are really demanding that we – give away – our rights.

    We should remind cohorts on either side that this is a lot like the “first they came for the … and I said nothing”.

    They want us to give up our rights. They are coming right out and saying so.

    Are we going to let that happen?

  47. eah says:
    @MichiganMom

    But we shouldn’t ask for ID to vote?

    No. It’s obviously racist. That’s well-established. But it’s not racist to presume non-whites are so lame they can’t deal with the tricky combination of voting and possession of an ID. Got it?

  48. @istevefan

    Because they are corrupt. Let’s use that to our advantage.

  49. @Lot

    This is needed also to stop African migration via Mexico. Border towns of Mexico used to have 0.000% African populations. Now they are quite visible. Mostly but not all the extra dark Mali looking ones, and about 90% young men. They aren’t there to learn Spanish and become Mexican, but to migrate to the USA. For now the numbers are small, but they can and will surge if the vanguard isn’t stopped.

    That’s a super important point Lot–thanks.

    The issue isn’t just the flow of working class Latinos from Central American into the US. Heck, we already have a population of such people as large as the Cental American population.

    No, much more dangerous is this starting up as a route for the rest of the world–most ominously a wave driven by Steve’s “World’s most important graph”.

  50. A important aspect here is that the US has basically zero dependency on Mexico. The US is the one nation that is well positioned to do true autarky. (There would be some immediate dislocation but we’re a large continental nation with essentially all the resources we need and a skilled workforce.) But we particularly have no reliance on Mexico.

    A simple statement that we respect Mexico and value our relationship, and hope for mutual cooperation, but expect it really to be mutual, coupled with some vague noises about the border crossings would be sufficient. Closing our border with Mexico would be a huge headache for them, but except for a few border towns, who be trivial noise to the US.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.