The Inter-American Dialogue’s Mexico Program convened a private roundtable under Chatham House Rule to examine recent developments in Venezuela and their potential implications for the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The discussion brought together policymakers, experts, academics, and public officials from both countries to assess geopolitical, economic, and security dimensions of the issue.
Participants noted that despite recent political developments in Venezuela, fundamental questions regarding legitimacy, authority, and governance remain unresolved. The direction of U.S. policy toward Venezuela was viewed as consequential for the broader region, including for Mexico, which has historically emphasized constitutional principles of non-intervention and the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
The roundtable revealed deep ideological differences regarding how the United States should seek to influence Mexico’s posture on regional and bilateral issues. Some participants argued that the United States should employ greater leverage, including the use of the USMCA or the threat of a unilateral military strike, to extract concessions from the Mexican government on matters related to security cooperation, trade, and migration. Others cautioned against instrumentalizing the agreement, warning that such an approach could undermine trust, generate uncertainty, and put the broader bilateral relationship at risk.
There was also substantive debate over Mexico’s longstanding commitment to the Estrada Doctrine. While some participants underscored non-intervention as a core and consistent pillar of Mexican foreign policy, others questioned whether Mexico has adhered to this principle in practice, citing past instances in which it was perceived to have intervened in the internal affairs of other countries. These disagreements reflected broader tensions over norms, consistency, and credibility in regional diplomacy.
Across these debates, participants emphasized the depth of U.S.-Mexico interdependence—across trade, migration, security, and energy—and the risks posed by unilateral actions. There was broad agreement that effective responses to transnational challenges, including organized crime, illicit arms flows, and migration pressures, require sustained bilateral cooperation and a shared-responsibility framework.
Energy and economic integration also featured prominently. Participants discussed structural challenges in Mexico’s energy sector, the importance of investment certainty, and the central role of the USMCA as a stabilizing framework. While widely viewed as a critical tool in the bilateral relationship, concerns were raised about unpredictability and the need for clearer, more consistent dialogue as the review process approaches.
A recurring theme was an “understanding gap” between Washington and Mexico City. Participants agreed that deeper mutual understanding of political constraints, policy processes, and domestic priorities on both sides is essential to managing regional volatility and strengthening the U.S.-Mexico partnership.
The discussion concluded with consensus that sustained engagement, institutional respect, and pragmatic cooperation remain vital to addressing the regional implications of Venezuela while preserving a resilient bilateral relationship.
This event was by invitation only.
