Category World News

Despite growing threats from her counterpart, Donald Trump, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has once more rejected the possibility of American military action on her country’s soil.

Sheinbaum was asked about Trump’s statements from the morning of Tuesday, when he expressed his anger toward Mexico and pondered taking swift action.

Sheinbaum responded in Spanish, “It won’t happen,” saying.

She then went on to say that she had spoken to Trump’s and Marco Rubio’s secretary of state “many times” about her position.

She explained that “He has suggested or said, “We offer you a United States military intervention in Mexico or whatever you need to combat criminal groups,” on several occasions.

She reiterated her position that no outside intervention would be permitted on Mexican soil, despite her assurance that she would cooperate with the US military and share intelligence with them.

Sheinbaum continued, “We do not consent to any foreign government intervention.” On the phone, I told him. I’ve said it before to Marco Rubio and the State Department.

Trump’s response

Her remarks follow a Monday meeting between Trump and Gianni Infantino, the president of FIFA, in the Oval Office. The Republican president addressed the growing military campaign against drug cartels and criminal networks in Latin America using the occasion.

Trump responded in the affirmative when a reporter inquired about his potential “potentially launching strikes in Mexico.”

“To stop drugs,” That’s fine with me. Trump remarked, “We must do everything to stop drugs.” Over the weekend, I took a look at Mexico City. There are some significant issues there.”

The US bombing campaign that started on September 2 was then mentioned by him.

83 people have been killed in alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and the eastern Pacific Ocean as a result of at least 21 deadly missile strikes.

The military campaign has been criticized as an unlawful extrajudicial killing by UN officials and other legal experts.

Trump, however, suggested that Mexico’s campaign might eventually include strikes on land-based targets.

Would we proceed as we have done to the waterways if we had to? You’re aware that almost no drugs are entering our waterways anymore, Trump continued.

Would I use land corridors to do that? I’d say it without a doubt. Look at the destruction of families as we save 25, 000 American lives every time we knock out a boat.

There is no factual justification for Trump’s repeated use of that statistic, which is 25, 000.

Deaths from fatal drug overdoses have decreased in recent years, according to preliminary data from the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, with 73, 960 deaths reported during the 12-month period ending in April.

Additionally, the Trump administration has not established a link between the bombed vessels and the link between them and drug trafficking.

Although families in nations like Venezuela, Colombia, and Trinidad and Tobago have claimed that their loved ones vanished following the attacks, the identities of the victims are largely unknown. Some claim that their relatives were fishermen alone.

In October, two survivors were repatriated: one to Colombia and the other to Ecuador, where they both released the man without charging him with a crime.

Trump has long threatened to expand his bombing campaign to include targets from the land. However, he declined to specify whether, should he choose to strike Mexico, he would ask for permission.

He said to a reporter in the Oval Office on Monday, “I wouldn’t answer that question.” I’ve been in Mexico lately. They are aware of my position.

Let me just put it this way, he later said. With Mexico, I’m not happy.

describing cartels as “enemy combatants”

Trump has proclaimed extraordinary powers since taking office for a second term to support his increasingly violent actions against drug cartels, even going so far as to say that the US is at war with traffickers.

In the US, only Congress can declare war. However, a rumored secret order allowing the military to combat the cartels was signed by Trump in August, which sparked new concerns in Mexico.

Sheinbaum stated to her constituents that there would be “no invasion” at the time.

Then, on October 2, Trump wrote to Congress in a memo outlining his administration’s legal justification for the ongoing attacks in the Caribbean and the Pacific, calling Latin American cartels “enemy combatants” in a “non-international armed conflict.”

Trump has referred to a number of drug cartels as “foreign terrorist organizations” throughout his second term, but international and domestic law does not support that claim.

Trump reiterated his assertion that the US is engaged in an armed conflict in his Oval Office remarks on Monday.

Every drug lord’s address is known to us. Their address is known to us. Their front door is known to us. We are completely knowledgeable about each and every one of them. Our country’s citizens are being killed. Trump remarked, “That’s like a war.”

There has been renewed interest in the US’s right to send armed forces into Mexico in recent years because of its long and contentious history of military intervention in Latin America.

For instance, former Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis, a well-known Republican figure, announced that he would send US special forces to Mexico to combat drug-trafficking cartels in 2023.

DeSantis was joking about his presidential plans when he stated to Fox News that “I will do it on day one.”

Fears that Trump might spearhead such a movement date back to the first year of his presidency, from 2017 to 2021, when he first thought about using the term “foreign terrorist organization” designation.

Sheinbaum’s successor, former Mexican president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, had to avenge concerns that Trump would subsequently engage in international intervention.

Sheinbaum denied any US intervention on the table on Tuesday by echoing Lopez Obrador.

Brazil’s response

The 20th meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is scheduled to bring the two-year conflict to a head.

The conference is scheduled to vote on whether to enact stronger restrictions on Brazilian hardwood.

The tree has been designated as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) since 1998.

However, a proposal from the Brazilian government would place Brazil in the top tier of trade restrictions and increase its CITES protections.

The international trade of endangered species is regulated by CITES, which includes both plants and animals.

The third is the least restrictive: Export permits for a species from that country are required if it is endangered in a particular nation.

Wherever the species is extracted is required to obtain export permits, according to Appendix II’s stricter regulations. Brazilwood is one of the most threatened species in this group.

However, Brazil wants to move Brazil up to appendix one, a category for threatened species.

Except for non-commercial use, the trade of plants and animals in that appendix is largely prohibited. However, in that situation, both import and export permits are necessary.

Brazil asserts in its proposal that the plant’s extinction must be fought for by the upgraded restrictions.

There are still about 10,000 adult Brazilian brazilwood trees. According to the proposal, illegal logging has been a significant factor in the population decline that has decreased by 84 percent over the past three generations.

According to the proposal, “Selective extraction of Brazilwood continues to be a practice both inside and outside protected areas.”

The bow-making industry for musical instruments is the destination of these woods, according to “every case recently discovered.”

According to the report, “520 years of intense exploitation” have resulted in “the complete exclusion of the species in several regions.”

45 businesses and bowmakers were fined in one operation that the Brazilian police launched in October 2018.

Nearly 292,000 unfinished wood blocks intended to be bows and blanks were seized.

According to another investigation conducted between 2021 and 2022, police came to the conclusion that an estimated $46 million in profits had been generated by the illegal brazilwood trade.