Safe Third Country Myth Analysis

**In the midst of President Sheinbaum’s administration chaos, the “Safe Third Country” designation presents challenges as mass deportations loom, impacting Mexico’s migration landscape. Stay informed with TJGringo.com.**

**The “Safe Third Country” Delusion: An Analysis**

As we wrap up the year amid the chaos and mishaps of President Sheinbaum’s administration, one of the most significant blunders seems to be her stance on migration issues in relation to former U.S. President Donald Trump’s policies, particularly concerning the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement). The looming threat of mass deportations to Mexico involves not only Mexican nationals but also thousands from other countries. Previous experiences, like those in 2019, indicate that such deportations could lead to humanitarian crises, especially in border cities like Tijuana.

Under Trump’s previous term, Mexico was declared a “safe third country,” a designation that the then-president of Mexico, López Obrador, swiftly accepted without fully considering the implications for deportees and those denied entry into the United States. This decision left many Mexicans and foreign nationals stranded at the northern border. Initially, López Obrador seemingly endorsed migration by allowing foreign nationals into Mexico through Chiapas, but soon reversed this approach, effectively making Mexico a de facto immigration officer for the United States.

Now, President Sheinbaum claims Mexico will remain “solidary” but will repatriate deportees to their countries of origin. According to current strategies suggested by the now Secretary of Economy, Mexico should not be a “safe third country” but merely a transit point for deported individuals—a strategy inundated with ambiguity and negligence.

There are only two valid stances on foreign nationals sent to Mexico: either Mexico accepts them despite lacking the infrastructure and resources, or it demands that the U.S. adhere to the principle that deportees should manage their own entry processes. If Mexico invoked the principle derived from Article 32 of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the U.S. would be obliged to deport individuals directly to their countries of origin.

Beyond migration, recent criminal enforcement measures, such as operations in Sinaloa, seem to be driven more by negotiation requirements with foreign governments rather than a genuine commitment to the rule of law. These actions are part of a broader strategy to ensure a favorable environment for the USMCA 2.0 negotiations.

It is hoped that this international treaty negotiation pressure will lead to the restoration of autonomy in Mexican institutions and a truly independent judiciary.

**Secondary Article: Rising Concerns as Mass Deportations Loom**

With mass deportations on the horizon in 2025, cities like Tijuana and Mexicali are preparing for potential humanitarian crises. Local governments are analyzing the possibility of setting up shelters to accommodate the expected influx of deportees.

The Coparmex, a prominent employers’ association, has expressed its support for the recent increase in the minimum wage, which could play a crucial role in mitigating the economic impact of increased arrivals. Meanwhile, officials in Mexico’s government are pushing to address structural deficiencies and to ensure better integration of deported individuals into society.

Additionally, advocacy groups continue to urge the Mexican government to demand more responsible deportation procedures from the United States, aligning with international law principles. The year ahead promises numerous challenges, as Mexico grapples with maintaining sovereignty and addressing the complex realities of international agreements and their implications on domestic policies.

For further updates, stay connected with TJGringo.com.