OPINION | A more extensive, private and substantive discussion is needed between the US and Mexico

Editor’s note: Jorge G. Castañeda is a CNN contributor. He was Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico from 2000 to 2003. He is currently a professor at New York University and his most recent book, “America Through Foreign Eyes,” was published by Oxford UniversityPress in 2020. The views expressed in this commentary are solely from the author. You can find more opinion pieces at CNNe.com/opinion. (CNN Spanish) — Relations between Mexico and the United States have the double peculiarity of always being good, that is, institutional, stable and multifaceted, and almost always enclosing tensions of one kind or another. Since the post-war period between the two countries, the limits imposed by an inevitable coexistence have never been violated, not even when frictions reached unsuspected levels. This dynamic has worked again now, when despite disagreements on a large number of issues, the two governments — and both societies — are condemned to understand each other and, deep down, to lead the party in peace.
Mexico’s president snubbed his US counterpart a month ago by not attending the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles. Joe Biden turned the other cheek and invited Andrés Manuel López Obrador to Washington, a visit that took place on July 12. Although it was the third time that the two leaders spoke in person, in reality the relationship between them has not had the usual frequency and intensity until a few years ago. Just to give an example, it is enough to remember that the last visit of a United States president to Mexico was in 2015 with Barack Obama. It was expected that everything would go well, or in any case, that nothing would go wrong. Unfortunately there were minor hiccups. Intentionally or not, the Mexican visitor was ahead of the scheduled arrival time, in such a way that the American host did not receive him when he got out of his car, as is often the case with distinguished leaders. After the so-called “pool spray” in the Oval Office, during which a small number of journalists ask questions and take photos, while the leaders make a brief preliminary statement before entering their private meeting, the Mexican president pontificated for 31 minutes, while his counterpart barely spoke for eight minutes. In addition to the lack of courtesy and experience, the time that López Obrador took was a factor that made it impossible to hold the meeting of extended delegations, scheduled immediately after. It did not take place. And the meeting of reduced delegations (1+1) was not attended by the Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and its duration was also shortened; that of the heads of the Executive alone, with interpreters, was not carried out. Lastly, the date chosen for the meeting was strange, as Biden was scheduled for a four-day visit to the Middle East starting that same night. López Obrador had lunch and dinner with his Mexican entourage, without any local guests. Biden did not attend the meeting on Wednesday the 13th of Mexican and American businessmen for the same reason. Only representatives of three companies from the United States attended. The joint statement includes three Mexican commitments — purchases of powdered milk, fertilizers and investing US$1.5 billion in border security — but there does not seem to be a clear commitment from the United States, in particular on an increase in the number of visas. H-2, although AMLO has mentioned that Biden did commit. None of these incidents is of great importance. They are temporary, cosmetic and easy to forget for professional politicians like Biden and López Obrador. But they create an atmosphere, particularly with home audiences, that is always best avoided. Above all, to the extent that this set of small annoyances occurred against a background of relative tension. Over the last few months, disagreements, not insignificant, have accumulated between Mexico and the United States. A more extensive, private and substantive discussion could have contributed to coping with them more easily. Mexico has condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine at the UN, but maintains a position of neutrality outside the voting. It has not applied sanctions to Russia, nor does it support the suspension of that country from various bodies of the international community. He also insisted that Washington convene the three Latin American dictatorships — Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela — to the Los Angeles summit, and ignores Havana’s brutal crackdown on protesters on July 11 last year. Just a few days ago – again an episode more humorous than transcendent – ​​López Obrador threatened the United States with launching a campaign to dismantle the Statue of Liberty if Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, was extradited. Washington sees this as part of the eccentricity of a tropical president, and simply passes it off at a loss. On a more serious note, the Mexican government’s energy policy and treatment of foreign investors in general has caused a series of disagreements with US companies. Some have been negotiated individually; others are in litigation, but all come from opposing interpretations of the so-called T-MEC. The US Trade Representative, Katherine Thai, has repeatedly expressed her concern about the Mexican position. Various industrial chambers, pressure groups, business associations and some Mexican governors have done the same. Something similar happens with López Obrador’s position on the fight against drug trafficking and, in particular, on shipments of fentanyl from Mexico to the United States. Americans continue to die of opioid overdoses; Much of the fentanyl comes from Mexico, and despite the sporadic seizures celebrated by the media, AMLO’s policy of “hugs, not bullets” has not been understood by Washington. Mexican cooperation with the DEA has not yet recovered the levels prior to the arrest of former Secretary of Defense Salvador Cienfuegos, and the new laws in Mexico complicate, although they do not cancel, joint work. Lastly, but it is surely the most important, the migratory flows do not stop. It is well known that López Obrador agreed —explicitly or tacitly— with Trump and Biden that he would contain the entry of migrants from other countries to Mexico, hinder their transit through Mexico, and prevent them from crossing the border with the United States as much as possible. . In return, Washington would not question various aspects of Mexican domestic politics that might not be to his liking. Mexico has deployed up to 30,000 military and security personnel throughout the territory; it has accepted that up to 70,000 migrants wait indefinitely, and in dramatic conditions, for their asylum hearings on the Mexican side of the border; and has deported huge numbers of Central Americans to the Northern Triangle despite the dire living and security conditions in those countries. However, the flows do not stop. For the time being, this matter remains in abeyance, since a court ruled that waiting for the hearings in Mexico would no longer be an option. In May, the highest figure in decades of arrests of undocumented immigrants in the United States was reached. They include Central American families, but also an impressive number of Cubans —more than in the Mariel exodus in 1980— and, above all, Mexicans. So Biden’s fear that his political opponents will use the immigration issue against him has not been resolved by Mexican cooperation. Without the latter, everything could be worse, certainly. But Mexican efforts wear thin quickly; other fronts are left unprotected —for example, the fight against drug trafficking—; and the cost in image, in human rights violations and in financial resources is increasingly higher for Mexico. All this could have been the subject of exchanges, preferably alone, between Biden and López Obrador. Even childish claims about Assange would have had a place. For one reason or another, perhaps this was not the case this time. Mexico achieved few positive things in the visit, but paid a cost. Several Democratic senators published a draft resolution of their House demanding protection and respect for journalism in Mexico. And a dozen Republican members of the Senate did the same, but demanding respect for US investments in Mexico. The Mexican government has not reacted to these actions. Nothing is free when it comes to international relations, not even a hit-and-run trip to Washington.