Carlos Sada feels like a horse at the starting gate, "with an adrenaline rush" before his arrival in Washington the first week of May. The new Mexican Ambassador to the United States speaks softly, but he is pretty clear in following the mandate of President Enrique Peña Nieto.
"Mexico will not be used as a punching bag to serve no one's interests in the United States".
His statement is a clear reference to the attacks from Donald Trump, Republican hopeful to the White House, as well as to the politicians that attack Mexico and Mexicans every four years in their campaigns.
The new representative of Mexico in Washington can not hide his happiness after his smooth ratification process at the Mexican Senate with no votes against. “That speaks of a shared responsibility," he said. He is also happy because it only took him eight days to obtain the approval of the U.S. Department of State.
In an interview with EL UNIVERSAL, he expressed his disagreement about the lack of a U.S. ambassador in Mexico and the fact that the U.S. Senate has not ratified the appointment of Roberta Jacobson. "It weakens the communication between the two governments," he explained.
With 25 years of diplomatic experience in North America - 21 in the United States and four in Canada -, Sada knows the ins and outs of American politics. We are not interfering in the U.S. presidential process he says, in response to the possibility of Trump presenting such a scenario.
However, he has a clear strategy to defend Mexican interests from the anti-immigrant diatribe unleashed by Trump: Mexico will respond to each of his blows with data about the economic contributions of Mexicans living in the U.S.
What will you tout as the main topic for the relationship with the United States?
We have outlined eight principles derived from the strategy that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is defining through Minister (Claudia) Ruiz Massieu. We start from the most basic, but very important goal of increasing the mechanisms for the protection and empowerment of our community. We have a huge community that a lot of times is not perceived objectively. Why? Because we are 35 million Mexicans and Mexican-Americans and people automatically think that the 35 million have some degree of vulnerability, which is not true, because out of those 35 million, 23 million are American citizens and of the remaining 12, six million are legal residents, i.e. they have their papers in order and the other six million are those who do have a greater degree of vulnerability. But we must not forget none of those Mexicans.
We all have the obligation to protect them in our 49 consulates. And that is why the first axis of this strategy is to reorganize the consulates so that we can offer all possible options to our community.
And we have recently been emphasizing something we have done, but not so systematically, for those who have the legal residence. Not all Mexicans have the possibility becoming American citizens because they have not spent five years in the U.S. as required by the government. But there is a large percentage of them, three and a half million, that would eligible to do so.
It has not been promoted a lot and we Mexicans are somewhat apathetic about taking the next step. They get to be legal residents and they think that with that they are fully protected, but it is not true. A person who committed an offense 20 years ago, even if he is a resident, can be arrested and deported and have his family split apart.
If legal residents commit an offense they can be deported, but citizens are not, apart from having all the rights given by citizenship, such as access to better credits, universities and jobs. We want our people to become bi-national and build bi-national societies. Mexican nationality cannot be waived and Mexicans can have two, three, four, five or as many nationalities as we want.
So, we need our consular network, the 49 consulates, to work with the same strategy and above all to convince our fellow citizens that the best way to be protected is coming to Mexico with a Mexican passport and returning to the United States with an American passport. That is the way it works best.
Not doing so leads to this diatribe that we are seeing and you are coming at a very complicated moment in the midst of an electoral process in which a presidential hopeful, Donald Trump, is using an anti-Mexican rhethoric.
Indeed, it is precisely for that reason because we had not had planned a medium and long term strategy. I hope that the current situation leads us to think about how we want to be seen by the American society.
I must say that these negative effects are not embraced by the majority of the population. If you do a survey -and there are many surveys about the perception of Americans- about undocumented immigrants, 63-64% are in favor of some degree of regularization of Mexicans. Why? Because they contribute, because they are needed, because they know that they are a fundamental part of the productivity of American economy and also because our people are extraordinary: loyal and great workers and this cannot be erased overnight, it is there.
But speeches like those of Trump lead to new stereotypes: the drug trafficker, the criminal that abuses their women. How to counteract this speech, that contrasts with the new stereotype of a Mexican who works, contributes and pays his taxes in the United States?
That is precisely the challenge, to change the argumentation and position the permanent contributions from Mexicansthrough communication campaigns, public relations and also reaching the right people. This cannot be a government action only, it has to be a concerted effort with different players in both the United States and Mexico. I believe no Mexican likes to be offended, but that has happened because we have not sent a consistent message.
Today, for every dollar that Mexico exports, not only to the United States but to any part of the world, 40% stems from American integration. Forty percent of that dollar comes from U.S. products that we assemble. A lot of products come and go six or seven times from one side of the border to the other. This is the economic integration that we are experiencing.
Who talks about this other than official sources or some people who know about the subject? Very few people and Mexico happens to be an extraordinarily sophisticated country.
We have a series of actors that we have to bring together systematically, not as a response to a specific situation. Mexico is brought about in every campaign and it is very easy that politicians attack Mexico for their own benefit without any consequence. This does not happen with other ethnic groups so this means we have not being able to respond adequately.
How can this have consequences? How can we make Trump's rhetoric have consequences?
At this moment, with solid arguments. For example if you talk about economic bilateral transit, both economies obtain benefits, it is not one sided. Exports to Mexico create more than six million jobs in the United States and new opportunities emerge because of what is happening in Mexico and because of foreign direct investment. Mexico has more trade agreements than the United States and Mexico can reach more countries than the United States because of our country's determination to open its economy.
Then, a German company that invests in Mexico is not only helping Mexico, but is also benefiting the United States. And we have to consider it as a regional concept, we have to aware that we are competing with the world, with all the economies. We have to understand that what happens in Mexico is beneficial for the United States.
So, it would seem that the strategy is to respond to each blow from Donald Trump or any other politician who wants to discredit Mexico with information and data?
That is just fair. It is not a matter of getting on the ring to respond in the same way. We will not give in to provocation. But we will address issues with data, with solid information that strengthens our credibility because we have a very deep relationship and our level of friendship is also top-notch. Americans are very generous in accepting our people, but there is this segment that is being polluted by anti-immigrant speeches and it is precisely here where we have to act, because it goes against the most vulnerable Mexicans.
We recently published an interview with the Minister of the Interior, Miguel Ángel Osorio Chong, and previously with President Enrique Peña Nieto in which they somehow disqualified the attitude of Donald Trump in regard to this rhetoric of attacking Mexico in an electoral context. Were you given any instructions (by President Peña Nieto) on how to deal with this character? How to face him?
Not in particular, just to defend the interests of Mexico and Mexicans, and that has a very wide connotation from which we can plan specific actions, such as those that I just mentioned and, of course, design more actions to help our people be less vulnerable.
For example immigration is perceived differently in each state. For example in California -and I mention it several times because it is the mecca of Mexicans in the United States- local authorities have changed the laws to benefit undocumented migrants.
On May 1 a new provision will come into force (a bill presented by a U.S. senator) that will give Mexicans under 19, including undocumented immigrants, free medical insurance. This does not exist in the rest of the U.S. Issuing driver licenses for Mexicans was authorized in 15 states through local legislation. "Dreamers" get economic support for talented kids.
This is the result of local work and I would like to say that we have a very high degree of trust in the local lawmakers who have done this work in an extraordinary way, which has protected the interests of large communities of Mexicans and Mexican Americans.
They are the ones that we obviously have to protect. If they are victims of injustice our role is also to work with local authorities. We have to react to campaigns accordingly. The instruction that President Peña Nieto gave me is to protect the interests and physical integrity of Mexicans at all costs.
Ambassador, if you met Donald Trump face to face, what would you tell him about Mexico, about his speech?
If I had the chance I would tell him that he is being unfair to Mexico as a country. Our country contributes to the U.S. productivity. It is a country that has generated an integration that has taken a long time creating a different concept of society and harmony between the two countries. I would tell him that what he is doing generates negative reactions in some segments of the population, and that it also generates reactions in Mexico. There is no need for insults and this sort of speech only causes damage. It seems to me that there is a degree of irresponsibility.
There have always been highs and lows in the bilateral agenda in topics such as immigration and drug trafficking. What will be the agenda in drug trafficking? What about human rights, thinking about Ayotizinapa but also about the recent video in which members of the Mexican army and the Federal Police torture a Mexican citizen?
Security is a dual responsibility or a shared responsibility because it has to do with organized crime, drugs and weapons. I believe that we must put all the ingredients on the table. I know many of the institutions in both countries that are trying to achieve progress in these topics. We should not think that it is the sole responsibility of the United States or Mexico.
Weapons are a very sensitive issue in the United States. As you know, the second constitutional amendment gives all Americans the right to bear arms, this was decided by them and obviously we respect their Constitution, as we ask them to respect ours. But we don't like that some of these weapons are exported to Mexico without any controls and that generates situations of violence with sophisticated weapons in our country. It seems to me that we make some progress on this subject.
About human rights I believe that it is also a question of organized crime. There are situations that are much more complex but I think that all Mexicans and Mexican authorities are committed to make progress in human rights. It is not an easy situation. I have seen several of the reports from the U.S. Department of State, like the most recent one, that speaks well of Mexico in general terms and the progress achieved. Naturally there are cases in which human rights are violated, as it unfortunately happens in the rest of the world.
About the video those guilty were punished and it seems to me that Mexico is convinced that we must continue to make progress in the subject of human rights.
Do you see Ayotzinapa in the agenda?
Not necessarily. These cases have repercussions throughout the world and it has been very visible. I think that what we Mexicans want is to have a definitive conclusion, we are all interested in having clarity on this subject.
We have had the information, we have also had the mandate to communicate which are the steps that have been taken and obviously it seems to me that the Government of Mexico is committed to provide information with the utmost clarity.
About your profile, what do you bring to the bilateral relation and how does having that kind of contacts in your own country helps you?
The relationship is very intense. We can not make, especially at this time, a stop to start training. In my case, I think I know how the political system works thoroughly, how local economies are moving and how the actors move in the states.
So I am taking a baton on the fly: on my first day we have part of a strategy to talk to lawmakers who are key to both parties to talk to the business groups that matter, to discuss with the Executive power with which we have a permanent relation: the Department of State, the Department of Justice… in charge of different topics.
I will not see what is going on, but how we can immediately open these contacts and communication channels because it is often due to lack of information from the major players in the U.S. and, especially, the connection has to be done through the executive power, something that is done permanently.
It is a complicated situation, the relation with the United States has never been easy because it involves a lot of issues and interests, but I have lived in many places in the United States, I have traveled with governors from the United States to Mexico several times. I will not see what this is about, I know how the mechanisms work.
What will be your work as an ambassador so that Mexico is not seen as supporting one of the candidates to the U.S. Presidency? How to achieve that balance?
We do not interfere in the political or domestic processes. We are very respectful of the decisions of the American people, and we want the same respect when we have elections.
What we are doing is something that happens systematically, not only in the case of Mexico but also in many other countries with presence in the U.S. There are rules to convey messages to lawmakers. If I talk to a senator of either party I will explain to him that his state has companies that export to Mexico and, therefore, create jobs.
I think that with solid arguments can move forward on this agenda and change the perspective on things. Possibly, they are the issues that we have not developed consistently.
So it is part of our responsibility and this does not mean meddling in domestic affairs and elections, but simply we will explain what is Mexico and how things are.
The question stems from the premise that Trump could say "Mexico is meddling in the U.S. election."
There are no arguments to support any such statement. We are very respectful, we understand perfectly well how things are handled, how they handle their dialogue with the Mexican government, the various institutions that have a presence do the same following rules, which are very clear. We are allies, I think we are the best allies of the United States: a hard-working country, Mexicans who have an extraordinary craftsmanship that is recognized, economic integration, in many places also social integration. When we cross the border we carry our values with us: family, integration, religion, apart from our gastronomy and culture. That is what must be understood and avoid preconceptions.
In this strategy, the private sector is crucial because exports benefit those who sell but also those who buy. So that is why we want to incorporate more actors in this strategy, not only the government.
The role of the private sector is essential. Bilateral trade amounts to almost 600 billion dollars a year; 1.3 billion dollars cross the border every day.
What we want to avoid is that every year, every four years, Mexico becomes the favorite villain in local campaigns.