Connect with us

Politics

Will Trump send troops to Mexico? His pick for ambassador worries officials there

Published

on

Will Trump send troops to Mexico? His pick for ambassador worries officials there

One of the more surprising foreign policy ideas the Trump team has proposed on the eve of its ascension to power is military intervention in Mexico to go after drug cartels and possibly stop migrants headed to the United States.

The idea seemed so wild and provocative — siccing U.S. troops on a peaceful neighbor — that Mexican officials figured it was nothing more than Trump bluster aimed at revving up his base.

But now President-elect Donald Trump’s choice of Ronald D. Johnson to serve as ambassador to Mexico has them wondering if he is serious.

Johnson is both a former U.S. military officer — a Green Beret — and a former CIA official. And in his previous post as U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, Johnson was an enthusiastic enforcer of Trump’s policies in support of its president, Nayib Bukele, an authoritarian widely accused of human rights abuses in a massive crackdown on gangs and in silencing dissent.

Trump has already threatened Mexico with 25% tariffs on many of its exports to the U.S. — including tomatoes, avocados, tequila and car parts — if the government of President Claudia Sheinbaum does not “do more” to stop the entry of migrants and fentanyl into the U.S. over its southern border with Mexico.

Advertisement

Many economists say such an action would not only blow up prices for U.S. consumers but also probably send the Mexican economy into a free fall, which in turn could spur more migration to the United States.

“Mexico can expect enormous pressure,” Maureen Meyer, programs vice president at the Washington Office on Latin America, said in an interview. The focus will be almost exclusively on immigration and law enforcement, she predicted, while “issues of concern to the human rights community — reproductive rights, climate, democracy — will all take a step back.”

She and others said that will probably be true across Latin America as a Trump government fortifies common cause with right-wing governments and parties in Argentina, Brazil and elsewhere, but will have the most impact in Mexico because of its 2,000-mile border with the United States and its close economic and cultural ties.

Johnson, not to be confused with the Republican Wisconsin senator of the same name, has resided in Florida since stepping down as ambassador to El Salvador at the end of the first Trump administration. He is an Alabama native, married with four grown children and five grandchildren, and spent time in Iraq and Afghanistan as part of his CIA duties. He also worked on counter-insurgency operations during El Salvador’s civil war in the 1980s, when the U.S. supported the right-wing government against leftist guerrillas.

“Ron will work closely with our great Secretary of State Nominee, [Florida Sen.] Marco Rubio, to promote our Nation’s security and prosperity through strong America First Foreign Policies,” Trump said on Truth Social in announcing the nomination this month.

Advertisement

“Together, we will put an end to migrant crime, stop the illegal flow of Fentanyl and other dangerous drugs into our Country and MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN!” Trump wrote. This week, Trump added a plan to designate Mexican drug cartels as terrorists, a step that might be used as authorization for deploying U.S. troops.

In his campaign platform, Trump said he would order the Pentagon to use “special forces, cyber warfare, and other covert and overt actions to inflict maximum damage on cartel leadership, infrastructure, and operations.”

But it remains unclear how many of these steps Trump could take unilaterally. Terrorist designations usually require action by other agencies, such as the State Department, and some members of Congress who advocate a tougher approach to Mexican drug trafficking are nevertheless reluctant to send U.S. troops into the fray without approval by the Mexican government.

In Mexico, news of Johnson’s nomination was greeted warily, with many seeing a clear signal of the Trump administration’s intended, narrow focus.

Johnson’s “resume is the message,” Jorge Castañeda, a former foreign minister in Mexico, said in an essay for the Nexos news website. “Johnson has no experience in economic, commercial or financial matters. He is not coming to Mexico for that.”

Advertisement

Where Johnson does have ample experience is in counter-insurgency.

Johnson probably “will demand a change in the security strategy in Mexico,” said Mexican commentator León Krauze. “Trump likes spectacle, and has long considered the possibility of delivering to his electorate images of unilateral incursions into Mexican territory to arrest major drug lords, Hollywood-style.”

Many in Mexico are weary of U.S. intervention in security matters and blame the U.S. in part for backing former President Felipe Calderon’s military assault on drug cartels beginning in 2006, which sparked devastating levels of violence that persist to this day. Still others, just as exhausted by high murder and kidnapping rates, and having lost confidence in Mexican law enforcement often bought off by criminals, have started to lean toward welcoming U.S. troops.

Security cooperation between the U.S. and Mexico diminished greatly during the presidency of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who accused U.S. forces of “abusive meddling” in 2020 when the former Mexican defense secretary, Salvador Cienfuegos, was arrested at Los Angeles International Airport on suspicion of drug trafficking.

López Obrador forced the Trump administration to return Cienfuegos to Mexico, where he was awarded a major military decoration. The damage strained U.S.-Mexico relations and hampered work in Mexico by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.

Advertisement

Sheinbaum, who took office Oct. 1, is similarly likely to be reticent in cooperating with Trump.

After his initial threats about military attack and tariffs, she telephoned him at his resort in Mar-a-Lago and then posted on X that Mexico would cooperate with the U.S. on relevant topics, but that the country would not bend to the will of the U.S. as it had in drug war that began in 2006.

“We are going to collaborate .. but without subordinating ourselves,” she wrote. “We will always defend Mexico as a free, sovereign and independent country.”

Eschewing the military-heavy approach of some of her predecessors could set Sheinbaum on a collision course with Trump and Johnson.

Sheinbaum “is not a Bukele type,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat who specializes in Latin America and has been highly critical of the Salvadoran leader. “She wants good relations with Mexico … but is not looking to kiss Trump’s ring.”

Advertisement

Another major question is how Johnson would treat human rights issues in Mexico.

In El Salvador, where he was ambassador from 2019 to 2021, Johnson refrained from criticizing Bukele as the government rounded up tens of thousands of people in an effort to reduce gang crime. Some had gang affiliations, but many did not. According to human rights organizations, most were denied due process, innocents including children were detained, and hundreds were tortured in jail and died. Homicide rates declined substantially, although there is dispute over by how much.

Johnson also failed to sound the alarm over Bukele’s attempts to stack the country’s Congress and the Supreme Court with loyalists in what critics have described as a power grab that eroded El Salvador’s hard-fought democracy.

Bukele frequently spoke of his warm friendship with Johnson. The two were photographed yachting together in the Pacific off El Salvador’s coast. In June, long after Johnson had left his posting as ambassador, he joined Donald Trump Jr., Tucker Carlson and Rep. Matt Gaetz to attend Bukele’s inauguration to a questionably legal second term.

It is highly unlikely Johnson will have a similar relationship with Sheinbaum, Mexico’s first female president, a climate scientist by training, and representative of a leftist political party.

Advertisement

Wilkinson reported from Washington and Linthicum from Mexico City. A special correspondent in San Salvador also contributed.

Politics

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

Published

on

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

new video loaded: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

On the fifth day of the war in Iran, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the U.S. military operation was intensifying and that more warplanes were arriving in the region.

By Christina Kelso

March 4, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

Published

on

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A U.S. submarine sank a prized Iranian warship by torpedo, the first such sinking of an enemy ship since World War II, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said Wednesday morning.

Hegseth joined Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine at the Pentagon to provide an update to reporters on “Operation Epic Fury” in Iran.

“An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters,” Hegseth said. “Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo. Quiet death. The first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War Two. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department. We are fighting to win.”

Caine said that an Iranian vessel was “effectively neutralized” in a Navy “fast attack” using a single Mark 48 torpedo. He added that the U.S. Navy achieved “immediate effect, sending the warship to the bottom of the sea.”

Advertisement

WATCH HEGSETH’S ANNOUNCEMENT:

Hegseth said that the U.S. Navy sank the Iranian warship, the Soleimani. The flagship was named for Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian military officer who served in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who the U.S. killed in a January 2020 drone strike during President Donald Trump’s first term.

“The Iranian Navy rests at the bottom of the Persian Gulf. Combat ineffective, decimated, destroyed, defeated. Pick your adjective,” Hegseth said. “In fact, last night we sunk their prize ship, the Soleimani. Looks like POTUS got him twice. Their navy, not a factor. Pick your adjective. It is no more.”

This map shows U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iranian naval forces as of March 1. (Fox News)

Hegseth also told reporters at the briefing that the U.S. and Israel will soon achieve “complete control” over Iranian airspace after Iran’s missile capabilities were drastically diminished in the four days of fighting.

Advertisement

US ‘WINNING DECISIVELY’ AGAINST IRAN, WILL ACHIEVE ‘COMPLETE CONTROL’ OF AIRSPACE WITHIN DAYS, HEGSETH SAYS

“More bombers and more fighters are arriving just today and now, with complete control of the skies, we will be using 500 pound, one thousand pound and 2,000 pound laser-guided precision gravity bombs, of which we have a nearly unlimited stockpile,” he said.

The war has killed more than 1,000 people in Iran and dozens in Lebanon, while U.S. officials said six American troops were killed in a fatal drone strike in Kuwait.

Thousands of travelers have been left stranded across the Middle East.

This map shows security and travel updates for Americans regarding countries in the Middle East region. (Fox News)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Caine told reporters that the U.S. military is helping thousands of Americans stranded in the Middle East after the U.S. State Department urged citizens to leave more than a dozen countries.

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Related Article

Israel says fighter jet took down Iranian warplane, the first shootdown of its kind
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Published

on

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) is preparing for President Trump to declare a national emergency in order to seize control of this year’s midterm elections from the states, including by bracing his Senate colleagues for a vote in which they would be forced to either co-sign on the power grab or resist it.

In the wake of reporting last week that conservative activists with connections to the White House were circulating such an order, Padilla sent a letter to his Senate colleagues Friday stating that any such order would be “wildly illegal and unconstitutional,” and would no doubt face “extremely strict scrutiny” in the courts.

“Nevertheless, if the President does escalate his unprecedented assault on our democracy by declaring an election-related emergency, I will swiftly introduce a privileged resolution [and] force a vote in the Senate to terminate the fake emergency,” wrote Padilla, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.

Padilla wrote that such an order — which could possibly “include banning mail-in voting, eliminating major voting registration methods, voter purges, and/or new document barriers for registering to vote and voting” — would clearly go beyond Trump’s authority.

Advertisement

“Put simply, no President has the power under the Constitution or any law to take over elections, and no declaration or order can create one out of thin air,” Padilla wrote.

The same day Padilla sent his letter, Trump was asked whether he was considering declaring a national emergency around the midterms. “Who told you that?” he asked — before saying he was not considering such an order.

The White House referred The Times to that exchange when asked Tuesday for comment on Padilla’s letter.

If Trump did declare such an emergency, a “privileged resolution,” as Padilla proposed, would require the full Senate to vote on the record on whether or not to terminate it — forcing any Senate allies of the president to own the policy politically, along with him.

Experts say there is no evidence that U.S. elections are significantly affected or swung by widespread fraud or foreign interference, despite robust efforts by Trump and his allies for years to find it.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, Trump has been emphatic that such fraud is occurring, particularly in blue states such as California that allow for mail-in ballots and do not have strict voter ID laws. He and others in his administration have asserted, again without evidence, that large numbers of noncitizen residents are casting votes and that others are “harvesting” ballots out of the mail and filling them out in bulk.

Soon after taking office, Trump issued an executive order purporting to require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship before registering and barring the counting of mail-in ballots received after election day, but it was largely blocked by the courts.

Trump’s loyalist Justice Department sued red and blue states across the country for their full voter rolls, but those efforts also have largely been blocked, including in California. The FBI also raided an elections office in Georgia that has been the focus of Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

Trump is also pushing for the passage of the SAVE Act, a voter ID bill passed by the House, but it has stalled in the Senate.

In recent weeks, Trump has expressed frustration that his demands around voting security have not translated into changes in blue state policies ahead of the upcoming midterm elections, where his shrinking approval could translate into major gains for Democrats.

Advertisement

Last month, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, “I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!”

Then, last week, the Washington Post reported that a draft executive order being circulated by activists with ties to Trump suggests that unproven claims of Chinese interference in the 2020 election could be used as a pretext to declare an elections emergency granting Trump sweeping authority to unilaterally institute the changes he wants to see in state-run elections.

Election experts said the Constitution is clear that states control and run elections, not with the executive branch.

Democrats have widely denounced any federal takeover of elections by Trump. And some Republicans have expressed similar concerns, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who chairs the Senate rules committee.

In the Wall Street Journal last year, McConnell warned against Trump or any Republican president asserting sweeping authority to control elections, in part because Democrats would then be empowered to claim similar authority if and when they retake power.

Advertisement

McConnell’s office referred The Times to that Journal opinion piece when asked about the circulating emergency order and Padilla’s resolution.

Padilla’s office said his resolution would be introduced in response to an emergency declaration by Trump, but hoped it wouldn’t be necessary.

“Instead of trying to evade accountability at the ballot box,” Padilla wrote, “the President should focus on the needs of Americans struggling to pay for groceries, health care, housing and other everyday needs and put these illegal and unconstitutional election orders in the trash can where they belong.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending