May 20, 2003
Memo From Mexico, By
Allan Wall
Mexican Politicians Worry About National Interest
–Unlike, Say, Dennis Hastert
Mexican politicians may be
materially and morally corrupt – but at least they
worry about the national interest. With American
politicians, it’s the opposite…usually.
The Republicans in the House
International Relations Committee just came up with a
novel proposal that ruffled some feathers in Mexico. In
fact, it got a lot more attention here in Mexico than in
the U.S.
The Committee members
voted to link any migratory accord with Mexico with
the opening of PEMEX, Mexico’s oil monopoly, to American
investment.
This is big news. Whatever you
think of this particular proposal, it’s a great
breakthrough that some American lawmakers are actually
asserting that Mexico has to give us something
–
anything! - in exchange for opening the borders!
Thus far, the whole idea of a
“migratory” i.e. immigration accord was predicated on
the notion that the U.S. give Mexico veto power over
American immigration policy, with nothing in
return.
As Mexican commentator Luis Rubio
so aptly put it in a Reforma column:
“Migration was never formulated as a subject of
negotiation...we weren’t negotiating anything, but
demanding concessions from the Americans.”
(“Petroleo
y migración”, Luis
Rubio, Reforma, May 18th, 2003)
In Mexico, needless to say, the
response to the Republican proposal was predictable.
Politicos across the spectrum rushed to condemn it. They
indignantly emphasized that PEMEX is not negotiable.
President Fox
publicly rejected the proposal several times,
pointing out on one such occasion that PEMEX is “part
of our history.”
(PEMEX
no se vende, reitera Fox , El Universal, May 12th,
2003)
This of course is a ridiculous
argument – a lot of downright bad ideas are part of
history, particularly
Mexican history.
Foreign Minister
Derbez also rejected the proposal out of hand
(Responde
Derbez: PEMEX no se vende, Reforma, May 10th,
2003)
He
explained that migration is a bilateral issue but oil is
a domestic Mexican issue.
This is a commendably frank
statement of
Mexican government attitudes.
What’s mine is mine, what’s yours
is - bilateral!
Naturally, what the House
Republican proposal says about PEMEX is right on the
money: PEMEX “is inefficient, plagued by corruption
and in need of substantial reform and private
investment.” And, as the amendment points out,
reform of PEMEX could “fuel future economic growth,
which can help curb illegal migration to the United
States.” [My emphasis]
In all of Mexico, the only legal
gas stations are PEMEX stations. For the captive Mexican
customer, purchasing gasoline is more expensive than in
the U.S.A. Allegedly belonging to “the people” of
Mexico, PEMEX actually functions as a golden goose for
the government of the day. In the 2000 election,
PEMEX funds wound up in the coffers of the ruling
PRI party candidate.
Mexico has twice the oil reserves
of the U.S., but lack of capital prevents their
exploitation. PEMEX is forbidden to have private
partners in Mexican territory, but not abroad--which
causes bizarre anomalies like the export of Mexican
crude to Houston, Texas, where it is refined at a
Shell-PEMEX refinery and re-imported to Mexico!
Similarly, there are vast,
unexploited fields of natural gas in Mexican territory.
But again, they
can’t be properly exploited. So Mexico is a net
importer of natural gas from the U.S.
Vicente Fox knows all this. Before
he was president, Fox reportedly called for
privatization, at an Economist Magazine
conference in New York City. When the information was
leaked to Mexico, Fox promptly denied it. Subsequently,
he repeatedly promised not to privatize PEMEX.
Nevertheless, PEMEX is undergoing
some
limited privatization, albeit surreptitiously,
through subcontracting. And although
Economy Secretary Fernando Canales categorically
declared, during the Ballenger feeding frenzy, that
PEMEX “definitely will not be opened to foreign
capital.” (AP,
May 10th, 2003), exactly one week later, he
declared that “State monopoly of energy is no longer
necessary.” His proposal was vague - it envisions
the continued existence of PEMEX, but with room for
Mexican and foreign private sector investment. But it
could be a trial balloon. (Insiste
Canales en Abrir PEMEX a Inversión Privada,
Proceso, May 17th, 2003)
However, the problem is that Gringo
energy meddling will be counter-productive. It’s
widely believed here that the U.S. grabbed
Iraq for the oil. PEMEX itself was formed back in
1938 as a
response to foreign oil investment.
[VDARE.com note:
the American side of the story may be found
here, something about the Mexican government
stealing half
a billion- in 1938 dollars.]
As a practical matter, there is little
alternative for the U.S. but to wait for Mexicans to
reform their energy industry in their own way, and on
their own schedule, and with their own interests in
mind.
As a believer in
national sovereignty, I defend Mexico’s right to
manage its own energy policy.
But I also defend the U.S right to
manage its own immigration system.
The truth is that a “migratory
accord” is a much greater risk to the sovereignty of the
United States than any privatization of PEMEX is to the
sovereignty of Mexico.
We can’t expect Mexican politicians
to look out for the sovereignty of the U.S – that’s the
duty of American politicians.
But American politicians are not
doing their duty. Our lawmakers continue to promote an
immigration accord.
Just last week, the Mexican press
reported an interview with Speaker of the House Dennis
Hastert (“Necesario, Acuerdo Migratorio: EU”, May
16th, 2003,
Siglo de Torreon) in which the speaker spoke in
favor of not one but two (!) migratory accords with
Mexico – an “immigration accord” and a “workers accord,”
presumably dealing with illegals and guest workers.
Hastert refused to commit himself on the idea of an
oil-immigration deal.
Let’s hope that Mexico does
liberate its energy sector, for its own good. Meanwhile,
the U.S. must
reform its immigration system--for its own good.
American citizen Allan Wall lives and works legally in
Mexico, where he holds an FM-2 residency and work
permit, but serves six weeks a year with the Texas Army
National Guard, in a unit composed almost entirely of
Americans of Mexican ancestry. His VDARE.COM articles
are archived
here; his
FRONTPAGEMAG.COM articles are archived
here; his
website is
here. Readers
can contact Allan Wall at
allan39@prodigy.net.mx.
