The Situation in Mexico

[Puma]

Will the Peruvian government invade the Mexican embassy?​

Betsy Chávez, former prime minister of Peru during the Pedro Castillo administration, is currently in the Mexican embassy in Lima, where she requested and was granted political asylum on November 3, 2025. This situation sparked a diplomatic crisis between Peru and Mexico, as the Peruvian government broke off diplomatic relations with Mexico, declaring the Mexican ambassador persona non grata and refusing to grant Chavez the safe conduct necessary to leave the country.

Chávez faces trial for the alleged crimes of rebellion, conspiracy, and abuse of authority related to her role in an alleged self-coup perpetrated by Pedro Castillo on December 7, 2022. She was arrested in June 2023, and in September 2025, the Constitutional Court overturned her pretrial detention, ordering her immediate release, which led her to seek political asylum at the Mexican Embassy.

On November 21, 2025, the Peruvian judiciary issued a 5-month preventive detention order against her, along with an Interpol red notice for his international arrest.

This order gave rise to speculation that the Peruvian government would order the invasion of the Mexican Embassy, as happened in Ecuador on April 5, 2024, when a police and military operation violated the diplomatic inviolability established in the 1961 Vienna Convention. This event was described as an "invasion" by the Mexican government and the international community. This action was taken to capture former Ecuadorian Vice President Jorge Glas, who had been sheltering in the diplomatic headquarters since December 2023.

Given the precedent, Colombian President Gustavo Petro posted on X
​

If Peru attacks the Mexican embassy, Colombia will withdraw its embassy.​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1992033399595262064

The president of Peru's Council of Ministers, Ernesto Álvarez, denied on Thursday that his country could storm the Mexican embassy in Lima to arrest former Prime Minister Betssy Chávez.

​

 

[Puma]

This order gave rise to speculation that the Peruvian government would order the invasion of the Mexican Embassy, as happened in Ecuador on April 5, 2024, when a police and military operation violated the diplomatic inviolability established in the 1961 Vienna Convention.

Here we go. Peruvian President José Jerí said that political asylum has been misused, so he is considering entering the Mexican Embassy in Lima to capture Betssy Chávez.​

Peru's de facto president, José Jerí, did not rule out storming the Mexican embassy, where former prime minister Betssy Chávez is taking refuge, warning: "I am not limiting myself. If we have to enter the Mexican embassy, we will do so."

Jerí was not elected by popular vote to assume the presidency; he was president of Congress and was appointed to head the executive branch after the dismissal of de facto president Dina Boluarte on October 10.

Earlier this month, Peru broke off relations after learning that Mexico had granted asylum to Chávez.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1992643931734216713

There will be another invasion of the Mexican Embassy, this time in Peru, with increased security outside the consulate due to the risk of Betssy Chávez escaping. While the International Criminal Court has not sanctioned Ecuador, another violation of Mexican sovereignty is about to take place.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1992742684243767608

 

[Puma]

Former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador reappeared publicly to announce his book "Grandeza" (Greatness. López Obrador has written 21 books, including this one, ranging from political essays to his experience as president of Mexico.) . The former president specified that he will not tour the country to promote it because he is not a caudillo and "we must not overshadow the president," Claudia Sheinbaum, whom he asked to support after the attempted soft coup in November, which was also promoted by foreign interests.​

AMLO stressed that he would only take to the streets for three reasons:

● "if they attack democracy"
● to defend Claudia Sheinbaum's presidency.
● If there are attempts at a coup d'état.

AMLO said, "If they harass her, then yes, but I don't think that will happen; and to defend Mexico's sovereignty, because our country is free, independent, sovereign, we are not a colony of any foreign country."

Andrés Manuel López Obrador continues to enjoy very high popularity in Mexico, even after concluding his presidential term on October 1, 2024. According to recent polls from November 2025, his approval rating stands at around 80% a historic level that exceeds that of most of his predecessors at the end of their six-year terms and withstands campaigns against him. This figure is based on measurements by firms such as Morning Consult and Oraculus, which during his administration consistently ranked him as one of the most approved leaders in the world.

AMLO's reappearance marks a game changer for the opposition and factions hoping to erode Sheinbaum's popularity. AMLO is popular not only among older adults (65+) but also among young people under 34, so it is certain that movements hijacked by the right, such as Gen Z Mexico, will not be as successful as expected. They will have to come up with other strategies, because it is clear that the right cannot win legally at the polls.
​

 

[Puma]

Claudia Sheinbaum has publicly expressed support for Venezuela, particularly in defending its sovereignty against perceived U.S. aggression under the Trump administration. This aligns with Mexico's longstanding foreign policy of non-intervention and diplomatic ties with the Nicolás Maduro government.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1995649014402896328

According to political analysts, Obrador's latest message was directed at three actors:

1. Trump's interventionism and the international right wing
2. The Mexican opposition seeking a soft coup
3. Oligarchic groups, mainly Salinas Pliego.

This support for Obradorism may have served as the basis for Sheinbaum's position on the situation in Venezuela.​

 

[Puma]

Latin America facing the storm​

Alexander Duguin

Trump is threatening to invade Venezuela, Colombia, and Mexico simultaneously under the pretext of fighting drug cartels. It seems he is starting his own war. If he had chosen Canada and Greenland as his targets, he would have deserved our full support. It would have been a blow to globalism. But now he is merely following the dictates of pure imperialism, a direct intervention.

The attack on countries that are clearly leaning toward multipolarity is a blow against us, against humanity in general.

Israel attacked Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, and Syria. And the Islamic world remained silent, allowing this to happen.

Now the United States is preparing to invade three countries of Latin American civilization at once. If they act according to the principle of "every man for himself," this will reinforce the hegemony of the West for some time to come.

The countries of Latin America must unite and issue an ultimatum to the United States. Now, all together, all the BRICS countries, we must show that we are the global majority.

In a reply to Alexander user Sony Thang wrote about the unity that Latin America needs.

If Venezuela, Colombia, and Mexico formed a military alliance, the Western hemisphere would change overnight.

Not because three nations suddenly became stronger,

But because the illusion of American inevitability would be shattered.

The greatest weapon the United States ever built was not the aircraft carrier. It was the belief that resistance is futile.

An alliance like the one you describe would do what the Arab world never did in Gaza. It would replace outrage with organization.

It would turn moral anger into strategic coordination. It would confront power with power instead of grief with statements.

Washington fears that more than any missile.Because the moment Latin America stands as a bloc, the Monroe Doctrine dies. The era of unilateral U.S. control collapses. The hemisphere stops being America’s private hunting ground and becomes a political arena where sovereignty finally has teeth.

And yes, if China and Russia supply them with capital, technology, intelligence, and deterrence capabilities, the calculation changes completely. Not because Beijing or Moscow want a war. But because they understand a truth the Arab world forgot:

The only thing that restrains empire is the cost of attacking its opponents. Gaza was destroyed because the price of destroying it was zero. Iraq was invaded because the cost was manageable.Libya fell because no one would raise the stakes.

But Venezuela survived because China, Russia, Iran, and the Global South made sure the cost of regime change was not cheap. Even with sanctions, even with blockades, even with sabotage, Washington did not get the victory it expected.

Now imagine that multiplied across a hemisphere. A Latin American alliance with serious backing would do more than defend borders. It would expose something the United States cannot emotionally tolerate:

Sovereignty. Coordination. Partnerships that do not depend on American permission. That is what terrifies Washington.

Not socialism.
Not trafficking.
Not rhetoric.
Not elections.

Just the sight of former subjects becoming equals. If Russia and China help build that, it is not because they want conflict. It is because they recognize an emerging world where the United States no longer decides which nations are allowed to be independent.

And once that world appears, even for a moment, it never disappears again.

 

[Puma]

Trump threatens Mexico with tariffs for failing to deliver water​

Trump claims that Mexico owes more than 800,000 acre-feet of water for failing to comply with the treaty over the past five years, which is severely affecting crops and livestock in Texas. He demands that at least 200,000 acre-feet be released by December 31, 2025, with the remainder to follow "soon thereafter." If this is not complied with, he authorizes 5% tariffs, with the warning that "the longer Mexico delays in releasing the water, the more our farmers will suffer."

The 1944 Water Treaty was signed during World War II and obliges Mexico to deliver 1.75 million acre-feet of water annually from six tributaries of the Rio Grande to the US. In exchange, the US delivers water from the Colorado River to Mexico. Compliance is measured in five-year cycles to accommodate climatic variations. Texas depends on this water to irrigate some 300,000 acres of farmland in the Rio Grande Valley,.

Mexico has accumulated a deficit of more than 800,000 acre-feet since 2020 due to extreme droughts in Chihuahua and Coahuila, which have reduced Mexican river flows. In November 2025, Mexico delivered only a fraction of what was required, and is expected to fail to meet the 2020-2025 cycle.

Mexico faces a dilemma: releasing water could worsen its own water crisis (droughts are affecting millions in the north), but 5% tariffs would impact key exports such as cars and agricultural products.
​

● is Trump's demand for water a coincidence after Mexico's water law was reformed?

Mexico recently passed the National Water Law, which reforms the 1992 law, establishing water as a human right and strategic asset, seeking public and community control, and prohibiting its privatization and black market trade.

The main objective of this reform is a paradigm shift, the goal being to stop viewing water as just another commodity and start recognizing it as a strategic asset. The 1992 law (Neoliberal period) turned water into a commodity and opened the door for concessions to be sold or rented between individuals, creating a black market that leads to speculation, hoarding, and, of course, waste.

The new law prohibits the sale of concessions, and the State seeks to regain control over the resource. The idea is very simple: water should be allocated according to the country's strategic needs, not according to how much an individual or company can pay. This phrase sums up the new philosophy perfectly, breaking completely with the logic of speculation. Water that is not used for the purpose for which it was concessioned returns to the hands of the nation to be reallocated, not to be sold on the black market.

This is why the big hoarders and companies are upset: their multimillion-dollar water sales business is over. Among these hoarders is the Mexican-American LeBarón family, which in the past accepted Donald Trump's offer to send the US military to Mexico to "wipe organized crime off the face of the earth."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1191708046126399488

The LeBaron family is one of the main mobilizers and manipulators of farmers protesting against Sheinbaum's reform.

On the corporate side, Coca-Cola is affected by and involved in Mexico's National Water Law. The company has permits to extract millions of cubic meters of water annually from aquifers in various regions, which is a source of controversy, especially in areas with water stress.​

The transnational corporation Coca-Cola monopolizes one of the most important resources for human life in Mexico: water. Data from CONAGUA show that the US-based soft drink company has permission to extract 28.2 million cubic meters of water per year. The aquifers it exploits are located in Yucatán, Tabasco, Quintana Roo, Querétaro, Campeche, and the State of Mexico. Contralinea​

● Trump's National Security Strategy: A New Monroe Doctrine

Last week Trump released his "National Security Strategy." The modern NSS is, to a large extent, the Monroe Doctrine adapted to the 21st century:

●Same central idea: the Western Hemisphere is the natural and priority zone of influence for the US.

●Same objectives: prevent rival powers (formerly Europe, now mainly China and Russia) from having a dominant political-military or economic presence in Latin America and the Caribbean.

For Latam, this NSS signifies a return to "modern" interventionism: fewer direct occupations, more economic pressure, selective military action, and rewards for allies.

According to political analyst Viridiana Rios, Trump's security strategy spells bad news for Mexico.​

The document states that the United States will use all its economic and political power to open up business opportunities for its companies and ensure its dominance in Latin American markets, including by obtaining the majority of public contracts. In dependent countries such as Mexico, Trump goes further and orders his diplomatic corps to demand exclusive contracts for US firms.​

It also points out that the United States will seek to sell us energy as an instrument of control to "project its power" when it deems necessary. Furthermore, while recognizing the need for nearshoring, it explicitly states that it will use its intelligence service to prevent non-US entrepreneurs from developing advanced technology or high-value products, considering this a threat to its prosperity.​

In short, the United States seeks to have as few Mexican entrepreneurs as possible, except for those engaged in manufacturing with such low added value that they are of no interest to US companies.​

I have summarized the most important elements, but the question remains: is Trump's demand for water a coincidence after Mexico's water law was reformed?

​