When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
CLARIN

Donald Trump Tears Down Old Right-Left Divide On Free Trade

Trump's vow to end NAFTA and bring back factories to the U.S. isn't typical right-wing ideology. Or is it that we've misunderstood the purpose of ideology?

Crossing from Los Ebanos, Texas to Ciudad Diaz Ordaz, Mexico
Crossing from Los Ebanos, Texas to Ciudad Diaz Ordaz, Mexico
Rodolfo Terragno

-OpEd-


BUENOS AIRES — What is good for the United States is not always bad for Latin America. This is in part because no one thing is good for every sector in a country. What makes importers rich in a nation, for example, may impoverish exporters.

American conservatives believe that the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, a deal between the U.S. and Mexico, would "de-industrialize" the U.S. and destroy its job market. They said that the agreement, which brings the two countries into a single market, would only favor Mexico by boosting the southern country's GDP and employment rate. They predicted the deal would enrich large U.S. corporations by allowing them to cheaply make their products in Mexico, which they could later sell for much higher prices in the U.S. This is possible because Mexican labor in U.S. dollar terms is very low.

So the U.S. right-wing was opposed to big companies it was supposed to represent in politics. In Mexico and throughout Latin America, the Left saw NAFTA differently. It denounced it as a North American colonial project that would turn Mexico into a commercial foothold, and not unlike a U.S. military base. The Left believes that companies would exploit Mexican workers and take their profits elsewhere, leaving nothing behind for Mexico.

At the same time, the Left thought that the U.S. right-wing's opposition to NAFTA was just rhetoric, merely intended to punish the Democratic administration of former president Bill Clinton, the architect of the deal.

President Donald J. Trump now proves otherwise. The opposition of the right-wing, of which he is a member, was genuine. Trump wants to "close shop" next door as a first step to achieve what he calls the economic independence of the U.S. He said that NAFTA was for the U.S. the "worst trade agreement in history."

And it's not just talk this time. Before taking office he began threatening U.S. car companies operating in Mexico with 35% taxes on cars they might bring into the U.S. from Mexico. He was particularly harsh on Ford, saying it was "an absolute disgrace" that Ford, a household name in the U.S., would take American jobs to Mexico. Bearing in mind that Trump's party controls both chambers of Congress, Ford for now cancelled a $1.6 billion investment in Mexico's San Luis Potosí. It will instead invest $700 million in Flat Rock, Michigan.

Trump signing executive orders, including one to pull U.S. out of TPP trade pact — Photo: White House

Trump used similar threats against General Motors, which exported nearly 500,000 vehicles from Mexico to the U.S. in an 11-month period in 2016. The company does not look like it is about to move from Mexico. Should it decide for good not to move back home, it may prompt the first clash between a conservative U.S. administration and a big corporation.

Mexico is rightly worried. The country is the world's eighth largest exporter of cars, trucks and car parts. The automobile industry there contributes to 18% of Mexico's manufacturing GDP (6% of all GDP), and employs 875,000 people. This was all thanks to the market created by NAFTA, which Trump wants to end — 72% of cars made in Mexico go to the U.S.

Trump's stand shows that ideologies are not static and can change with circumstances. Two decades ago, European social-democracy adopted privatization and spending cuts. Now, the right-wing in the U.S. is turning conservative ideology upside down.

You would assume a Republican government would defend the free market, work with big companies and promote exports. Yet, assuming he will run his presidency the way he talks, Trump would attack the free market, pursue state intervention in the economy, confront corporations and trumpet nationalism. In terms of the means if not the objective, the new U.S. president seems more left-wing than Right. Trump's economic policy of confronting multinational companies and making the U.S economically independent are similar to the discourse of progressive forces in Latin America.

Instruments can, after all, be used one way or another. Progressive forces have confused the means with the end throughout history. Ideology has to do with objectives whether it's wealth distribution, as is the case with the Left, or wealth accumulation that's propagated by the Right. Ideology is not about the means to these objectives.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

Migrant Lives

Dying To Get To America: Why So Many Missing Migrants Go Unidentified

Since the 1990s, thousands of migrants have tried to enter the U.S. by crossing the borders of Arizona and Texas, and many have died in the desert. Yet there is no unified DNA program to identify the remains of missing migrants. So who identifies them and how do they do it?

A group of migrants look for an opening in the concertina wire barrier south of Eagle Pass where a 1000-foot string of buoys has been placed in the river to deter crossing the Rio Grande River into Texas.

A group of migrants look for an opening in the concertina wire barrier south of Eagle Pass where a 1000-foot string of buoys has been placed in the river to deter crossing the Rio Grande River into Texas.

Bob Daemmrich/ZUMA
Rosario Marina, Verónica Liso, Gabriela Villegas & Andrea Godínez

TUCSON — A person who crosses the desert to reach the U.S. may die trying. If that happens, their body, name, country, story, will be erased and turned into bones in a matter of days. The place where they die, where those bones stay, determines their chances of being identified and returned to their family.

As of March 31, 2023, there were 2,059 cases of migrants reported missing on their way to the United States.

For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.

In recent years, the use of DNA has made it possible to identify migrants who died even 30 or 40 years ago. Scientifically, this is no longer a problem. The difficulty is in the lack of economic resources to perform the tests, the barriers to cross-referencing the DNA of the families with that of the person found, and the lack of unified protocols when a body is found on the border.

Since the 1990s, the main routes that migrants take to enter the U.S. cross two states: Arizona and Texas. The chances of identifying the remains of migrants who die vary depending on the territory in which they are found. Four Arizona counties share a border with Mexico: Cochise, Pima, Santa Cruz and Yuma. All except Yuma County depend on the Pima County Medical Examiner's office. This means that the remains of missing migrants are highly centralized in that one forensic office.

Keep reading...Show less

The latest