CONSEQUENCES OF THE 9/11 TERRORIST ATTACKS ON THE U.

S
MEXICO BILATERAL AGENDA DURING THE FOX BUSH
ADMINISTRATIONS

Introduction
The terrorist attacks committed on September 11, 2001 in the United States will

probably remain as one the darkest episodes in contemporary American history, in which

approximately 3,000 civilians were assassinated in these acts committed against the

emblematic World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C.1

These unexpected assaults represent a negative impact in the image that the world had had

of the United States the previous years. After the bipolar system during the Cold War, the

United States was seen as the only global superpower due to its alleged supremacy in

militarily, ideological, political and economic terms.2 Nevertheless, considering the role of

the United States as the hegemonic power in international politics, the 9/11 attacks created

a before and after in the perception and threat that terrorism represents to international

relations.

The September 11 attacks occasioned severe consequences on the course that the recently

established administration of George W. Bush appeared to be developing. The immediate

and major consequence was that, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, the American

1 Patterns of Global Terrorism, accesed May 13, 2017,

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/report/2002/patterns-of-global-
terrorism2001-01.pdf

2 Ivvan Morgan, The American Economy and Americas Global Power, London
School of Economics and Political Science: 1
http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/pdf/SR009/morgan.pdf
foreign policy established national security as its main priority 3 and other topics that were

in the course to be discussed before 9/11 occurred, were placed as secondary priorities or as

out-of-discussion for the new reality of the U.S that now was concerned to take all the

possible actions in order to prevent future attacks against its territory.

One of the immediate effects of this change of priorities in the American foreign policy,

was a turning point in the manner in which the U.S Mexico relationship was improving

between the end of the 20th century and early 21st century with the new administrations of

Vicente Fox and George W. Bush. For decades, Mexico considered its geographical

proximity to the United States as a disadvantage.4 Porfirio Daz once said that: Poor

Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United States 5 making evident that Mexicans felt

threatened of being located in the proximity of one of the most powerful countries in the

world. Nevertheless, despite of decades of political tension, globalization created new

opportunities of cooperation between these countries. With the signing of the North

American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1994, the economic ties of the U.S, Mexico

and Canada were strengthened.6 NAFTA was reasonably effective in reducing barriers to

3 Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United
States, National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States,
accessed on May 10, 2017
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Exec.htm

4 Rory Carroll, So far from God, so close to the US: Mexicos troubled past
with its neighbor, The Guardian, February 2, 2017
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/01/donald-trump-us-mexico-
relations-history

5 Carroll, So far from God, so close to the US: Mexicos troubled past with its
neighbor.

6 Susan Kaufman Purcell, The Changing Nature of US-Mexican Relations,

Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 39, no.1 (1997): 142.
trade and investment, and Mexico became one of the most important trading partners of the

United States. Hence, during this decade the U.S and Mexico held a relatively friendly

relationship that appeared to be on a promising course to consummate progresses after the

Fox Bush administrations.

However, the terrorist attacks from September 11, severely damaged the positive progress

that both countries had made the previous years. The discussion on issues of immigration,

trade agreements and cooperation against drug trafficking between the U.S and Mexico in

the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks became stranded due to the new priorities on the American

side.

This research project will cover a background of the relation between the US and Mexico

before 9/11, the effects that this event had in their bilateral agenda, and a brief Realist

analysis of the post- 9/11 reality of the U.S- Mexico relationship.

U.S Mexico Relations

If the history of the relationship between the United States and Mexico could be

summarized in a single word, a possible choice might be thorny. And it is no surprise that

many writers and journalists constantly make reference of the complexity of this relation,

which has experienced positive as well as negative periods during the course of the decades

that have favored or worsened their relations. 7

7 James Cooper, The Complicated Relationship: A Snapshot of the U.S.- Mexico

Border, California Western School of Law, last edited May 13, 2010
http://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1070&context=fs
As said before, in previous times in history Mexico has perceived its geographic proximity

to the United States not as an advantage, but rather as a curse. And there are no surprises of

this, since the closeness to the U.S costed half of its territory to Mexico and the country is

in clear disadvantage against the U.S, resulting in being constantly influenced to adapt to

their terms.8

The geographical closeness between these countries play an important role in which many

issues arise in this relation that should be addressed, and yet many of them have been

neglected for decades due its complexity. For Mexico, it is crucial to have a favorable

relationship with the United States since, despite the negative factors described above, it is

a unique opportunity to improve the prosperity of the country by creating economic ties

with them, as well as an important destination for low-skilled workers that pursuit a better

life for their families, and in which the Mexican economy benefits from remittances. 9 On

the other hand, the United States perceives Mexico as a source of cheap labor that at times

has helped the American economy to recover (after World War II, for instance); also the

United States is in favor of a friendly relation with Mexico in order to protect its southern

border from criminals and drug trafficking organizations.

8 Sandy Goodman, Poor Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United
States, Huffpost, accessed on May 9, 2017
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sandy-goodman/poor-mexico-so-far-from-
g_b_170899.html

9 M. Angeles Villarreal, U.S.-Mexico Economic Relations: Trends, Issues, and

Implications, Congressional Research Service, last edited April 27, 2017
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32934.pdf
NAFTA was signed in 1993 and it offered a unique opportunity to Mexico to export its

products to the US and Canada, and improve the economic performance of the country.10

Secondly, migration has been a controversial topic between these countries for decades and

no agreement had been reached. Large-scale migration from Mexico to the US dates back

to early 20th century because of labor demands in the US and political unrest in Mexico 11

The wave of Mexican migrants to the US is described in different stages in which

agricultural laborers were allowed to temporarily work in the country, however, when the

program ended, many people attempted to reach the so-called American Dream in an

attempt to get a better life quality for their families by entering and working in the US

illegally.12 As the illegal Mexican population dramatically increased, the US attempted to

limit the flux by increasing the security in the border.

In the beginning of the 21st century, both the US and Mexico held presidential elections that

appeared to be promising for an improvement of their relation. On the one hand, Mexico

expelled the Institutional Revolutionary Party after more than 70 years of holding the

power in the country.13 The elected president from the opposition, Vicente Fox from the

National Action Party, offered Mexicans a fresh possibility to aspire for a change. The

10 Kaufman, The Changing Nature of US-Mexican Relations.

11 Jie Zong and Jeanne Batalova, Mexican Immigrants in the United States,
Migration Policy Institute, last edited OCtober 9, 2014
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/mexican-immigrants-united-states-0

12 Daniel T. Grisworld, Fixing the Problem of Ilegal Mexican Migration to the

United States, CATO Institute (2002): 17
http://obamaimmigrationreform.org/_documents/research-and-
policy/immigrant-workers/4.DanTGriswold-WillingWorkers.pdf

13 Opposition wins Mexico election, The Guardian, accessed on May 10,

2017 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/jul/03/mexico
relations among the U.S and Mexico seemed to be promising since the beginning when the

newly-elected president of the U.S, George W. Bush, did his first State visit to Mexico with

its Mexican colleague, Vicente Fox in his ranch where they discussed key issues of the

countrys relation such as trade, migration, education and illegal drug trade. 14 The apparent

good relations that the two presidents had in the beginning of their presidential terms, made

many believe that the relation between the two countries would positively improve during

their terms, and that one of the most important and thorny issues between then, illegal

immigration, would finally be addressed in an attempt to reach an agreement on it.

All in all, the U.S Mexico relationship is characterized for being complex and constantly

changing, with times when both countries have prosperous and stable relations and other

periods when the disparity of opinion in some issues affects their general relation. One of

the most important issues that make their relation very complicated is migration which has

been critical and not being fully addressed in previous presidential terms. Nevertheless, the

newly elected presidents of Mexico and the United States in 2000 and their apparent

willingness to sustain a favorable relationship, in which many believed both countries

would reach a historic improvement of their relations, and some others even believed that a

migration agreement would had been achieved. Despite of the high expectations, the events

of 9/11 in the U.S represented a turning point that had a deep impact on the American

foreign policy and that eliminated the possibilities that some important issues would be

discussed if there was interest in both sides.

14 Philippa Thomas, Analysis: Bushs first foreign trip, BBC News, accessed on
May 10, 2017 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1174957.stm
 September 11 Attacks and their impact on the U.S Mexico

Relations

In the morning of September 11, 2011, the news channels began their transmission by

mentioning the particularly sunny weather that morning, without imagining that a horrific

event was approaching.

These tragic events left a painful scar in the United States memory and they marked a

before and after in the countrys foreign policy. Now the foreign policy was focused mainly

in securing the country from further terrorist attacks and hunting who they believed it was

responsible for them - Osama bin Laden, in which the U.S launched their war on

terrorism under the ruling of George W. Bush launched the same day that the attacks

occurred.15

One of the most affected countries of this change of direction of the American foreign

policy was, probably, its southern neighbor, Mexico. The United States and Mexico have

had a complex relation regarding topics related to immigration, trade and drug trafficking

that has been problematic in some periods of time, however, the NAFTA agreement was an

important step that appeared to be promising for a future free movement of goods and

people. Mexico and the U.S had new presidents in the beginning of the 21 st century and

they both had a personal friendship and the American counterpart had himself a close

relation to Mexico since his brother was married to a Mexican woman, he spoke Spanish

and he had been to Mexico.16 Both administrations seemed to be willing to address and

probably reach an agreement on immigration, as well as a stronger ties in trade and fight

15 Michel Chossudovsky, 9/11 and Americas War on Terrorism, Centre for

Research on Globalization, (2016) http://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-and-
america-s-war-on-terrorism/24975
against drug trafficking. Thus, the relation U.S- Mexico was in positive terms at the end of

the 20th century and it appeared to be in even better conditions with the Bush and Fox

administrations in which the bilateral agenda seemed to be on its way to experience historic

improvements, however, the 9/11 attacks made the U.S change its priorities.

Firstly, all the hopes for an immigration reform or program for temporary workers in the

US vanished. During one of his speeches during his campaign in 2000, George W. Bush

declared that: We can all learn from the strength, solidarity, & values of Latinos.

Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation. New

Americans are to be welcomed as neighbors and not to be feared as strangers. 17 This was

probably a good move to gain the votes of the Latino community, which was a growing

minority. And when elected, he appeared to have willingness to discuss the topic of

immigration. Unfortunately, after 9/11 the U.S immigration and border control became a

major element in the new American foreign policy.

After the atrocities from 9/11, migration from border with Mexico, became a security

problem for the U.S. In this period of uncertainty and paranoia, any external body became a

threat to the U.S, and immigration from the south was not an exception. Immigration

created great concern because it became linked to terrorism. And as a consequence, the US

invested in massive militarization of the southern border compared to the border with

Canada. It was believed that the border with Canada did not represent much threat since

16 Alfredo Corchado, Once solid, the George W. Bush-Vicente Fox partnership

faded after 9/11, Dallas News, accessed on May 12, 2017
https://www.dallasnews.com/news/mexico/2013/04/26/once-solid-the-george-
w.-bush-vicente-fox-partnership-faded-after-911

17 George W. Bush on Immigration, Issues 2000, accessed on May 13, 2017

http://www.ontheissues.org/George_W__Bush_Immigration.htm
Canada had a proper system that would be able to expel terrorist groups from entering the

U.S.18 On the other hand, the southern border was seen as weak and as an easy way in

which Al-Qaeda or other terrorist groups might attempt to penetrate the U.S and commit

new attacks.

The border was no longer seen as an opportunity of economic prosperity, but rather as a

security concern for the U.S. After 9/11, a new fence across the border built and the number

of patrols inspecting the border dramatically increased, as well as new technology to have a

tighter border control and chase immigrants was developed. 19 Thus, the impact of the 9/11

attacks was tremendous that the U.S experienced a phase of paranoia of everything and

everyone from outside that might represent a threat for the nation, even if the border was

not used as the entry point by Al-Qaeda and neither any Latino was involved in the attacks.

Second, the late response of the Mexican governments to the attacks and the lack of support

to the Iraq and Afghanistan interventions probably occasioned that the U.S. isolate itself

from Mexico. The Mexican president Vicente Fox was widely criticized by the American

and Mexican media for not having made a speech to fully support the U.S. right after the

attacks and for taking too long to establish direct communication with its American

counterpart.20 On the other hand, Mexico lost the another opportunity of showing support to

the U.S during the Security Council, the unclear position of Mexico at the Security Council

18 Stephen E. Flynn, Rethinking the Role of the U.S. Mexican Border in the
Post-9/11 World, Council on Foreign Relations, last edited in March 23, 2004
https://www.cfr.org/report/rethinking-role-us-mexican-border-post-911-world

19 Securing and Managing Our Borders, Homeland Security, accessed on May

13, 2017 https://www.dhs.gov/securing-and-managing-our-borders

20 Corchado, Once solid, the George W. Bush-Vicente Fox partnership faded

after 9/11.
in regard of the future intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan. Thus, the improvements that

the relation between the U.S and Mexico made years before the attacks were spoiled when

the Mexican government did not show interest in providing unconditional support to the

U.S.

Third, the possibility of greater cooperation with Mexico and Canada was gone. During his

campaign, the Mexican president declared that he would pursuit to create and updated

version of NAFTA: NAFTA-plus.21 In this new version, the ties between the North

American countries would be deepened and they would extend to a social perspective,

resulting in a stronger and more competitive North America.

Another major impact of the attacks occasioned that the U.S. cooperated less about the drug

trafficking problem coming from Mexico. With the called border security, the U.S.

implemented never-seen-before measures to protect itself. And also Mexico offered help to

the U.S in an attempt to detain terrorists that might get in the country.22 Nevertheless, the

drug trafficking problem was placed as less relevant when the war on terrorism was

declared, and many argue that if the U.S would not had neglected this issue (or if both the

U.S and Mexico would had cooperate to control both drug trafficking organizations and

terrorism), the drug organizations would not had spread across the country and the war on

drugs that was launched in 2006 would not have happened. Thus, the 9/11 attacks certainly

21 Transcript: Vicente Fox on Fox News Sunday, Fox News, published on

January 12, 2004 http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/01/12/transcript-vicente-
fox-on-fox-news-sunday.html

22 Ginger Thompson, Threats and responses; After 9/11, Fox still waits for U.S
moves on Mexico, The New York Times, published on September 13, 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/13/world/threats-and-responses-after-9-11-
fox-still-waits-for-us-moves-on-mexico.html
provoked that some issues that were relevant and very important for both countries were

placed in a less-relevant category.

Realism in Post-9/11 United States

Analyzing this event through the classical theory of realism in International Relations is

probably the best way to understand the behavior of the United States after 9/11 and its

impact in its relation with its neighbor, Mexico. According to realism, States behave

according to their own interests even if this might have a negative impact in another State. 23

By saying this, after the 9/11 attacks, the United States adopted as their main interest

safeguarding its national security at any cost and the declared war against terrorism and

against any possible threat against world peace.

One of the core principles of realism is related to security. According to this, the each state

has the obligation of ensuring national security by any means because of the absence of a

centralized authority to protect states from each other, each state has to responsibility to

acquire the means to survive on its own.24 Thus, realism supports the idea that America

became increasingly concern with its national security in order to prevent further attacks in

its territory. Also, it supports the decision of the U.S of going to war with Afghanistan and

Iraq as an attempt to hunt Osama Bin Laden who was believed it was the person who

planned the attacks. Also, the United States became increasingly concern with its own

security by launching new measures in the southern border as an attempt to prevent terrorist

23 Daniel Anzures, The US-Mexico War on Drug Trafficking and Realism, last
edited April 6, 2016: 6-7.

24 Anzures, The US-Mexico War on Drug Trafficking and Realism, 6-7.

from using this weak point as an easy entry to the U.S. Also immigration became a problem

that the U.S wanted to get rid of after the attacks, immigrants were prosecuted and the plans

for a lighter process of visa procedures was out of question. Thus, after 9/11 the United

States followed one of the core principles of realism which says that the state has to place

national security on top of everything else.25

For the realist theory, national security should always be on the top of the national foreign

policy of each states agenda, and justify the use of power resources, including force, if the

states perceives any threat from the others. Thus, realism supports the decision taken by the

U.S to militarily intervene in Afghanistan and Iraq when they felt under threat after the

September 11 attacks.

Conclusion

The September 11 attacks were a catastrophic series of events that shook the U.S.

Nevertheless, their consequences surpassed frontiers and they also had a deeply negative

impact in the progress that the U.S- Mexico relations was experiencing in the last years.

During the beginning of the Fox Bush administrations, the scenario appeared to be in

favorable terms to address issues in immigration, trade, education and drug trafficking

and during official State visits, some progress was being made. Nevertheless, the 9/11

events occasioned that the U.S. focused its attention to its national security, and the

progress that had been made with Mexico did not matter anymore.

All in all, talks on immigration reforms and stronger economic ties were gone. In the

aftermath of 9/11, Mexico and its illegal immigrants represented a threat to the U.Ss

25 Anzures, The US-Mexico War on Drug Trafficking and Realism, 6-7.

national security and measures were taken to get rid of them, as well as increasing control

along the border.

The economic partnership remained but Mexico have been unable to become a strong

partner of the U.S as it could had been if the 9/11 attacks never happened. No wonder why

the U.S Mexico relations are described as complex.