US pressures Mexico as China gains influence

Mexico, China and the US military: the battle for the backyard

Washington does not tolerate competition on its southern border. Words attributed to US Senator John Kennedy—that without the United States, Mexico would be eating canned cat food and living in a tent—have triggered a conversation mixing geopolitics, colonial history, and an uncomfortable question: how much real room does Mexico have to choose its partners? The underlying issue is not commercial. It is about sovereignty.

What Senator John Kennedy said about Mexico

The phrase that has inflamed tensions appears in a post replicating political statements: without the people of America, Mexico would be eating canned cat food and living in a tent in the backyard. This is how it is reproduced. Commenters read the text as just another humiliation in an asymmetric relationship, with some adding that it is not an isolated gaffe but the logic of those who view their neighbor as subordinate. Others respond that the problem is not the rhetoric, but the habit of tolerating it.

Plans to deploy the US military in Mexican territory

The message starting the conversation claims Washington intends to deploy its army in Mexico under the pretext of fighting cartels and, incidentally, take over the country. This is an attributed claim, not a confirmed announcement. Based on this, a more uncomfortable argument unfolds: that the US could not impose anything on a Europe that stopped acting as a subordinate, and that its power rests precisely on that submission. The repeated conclusion is uncomfortable for Brussels: no one forces anyone, and trinc along is a choice.

Mexico, BRICS, and the trade linking Asia and the Americas

One of the most repeated lines points out that Mexico is flirting with the BRICS and that Washington cannot allow this. In the background lies a historical argument with traction: that the Viceroyalty of New Spain was one of the territories with the highest wages in the world and that Mexico was the center of Hispanic global trade, with the route connecting China, the Philippines, Acapulco, Veracruz, Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Europe. From this, it is inferred that the US is not interested in a prosperous Mexico. The quote attributed to strategist Zbigniew Brzezinski—"we don't want a Japan south of the border"—is used as proof of this logic, adding that if the country connected with China, Indonesia, or the Philippines, the regional balance would shift abruptly.

The Black Legend and anti-Hispanic rejection described by travelers

Here the ground is slippery. It is argued that anti-Hispanic nationalism has multiplied in Mexico in the last five years, fueled by political discourse and schools, and that the label "Latino" replaces "Hispanic" because it avoids naming Spain. Someone claiming twenty years of visits to the country states the phenomenon has accelerated, pointing to President Andrés Manuel López Obrador's discourse—with support he places at 60%—as one of its drivers. Opposing this, another current responds that Hispanism is today a utopia and that those truly colonizing the region come not from Madrid, but from Beijing and governments that bow to it. The dispute remains open.

Fentanyl, cartels, and shared responsibility

It is claimed, without any supporting evidence, that China manufactures all the fentanyl consumed by the US and distributes it through Mexican cartels; the accusation extends to theories about vaccines lacking scientific backing. Against this, others place the origin of the problem in consumption and medical prescription within the US, recalling that incivil has not solved it. The model invoked is Salvadoran: it is argued that with political will, trafficking can be dismantled overnight, but one must want to do so. Here, the discussion on military intervention clashes with that of domestic consumption.

What Europe plays in all this

Less than it seems, according to some messages. The circulating thesis is that European submission, particularly Spanish, aligned with the Anglo-Saxon power, does not respond to real threats but to a lack of will. It is even suggested that when the dollar loses strength, migration flows will change direction and Americans will cross the border heading south. It is a hypothesis, not data, but it orders much of the anger.

---

Can the outcome be predicted? Difficult. If US pressure grows, it is likely Mexico will accelerate its approach to Beijing rather than slow it down, though antiestéticar of trade retaliation could also bring it back into line. The only thing that seems settled is that the dollar no longer works as the sole argument in this conversation.