Iran Setting Up Shop South of the Border
It is often said in matters of love and real estate that timing is everything. Now, strange though the application may seem, the same cliche can be said about Iran’s steady march north through Latin America right up to the U.S. southern border.
While America’s political and diplomatic glitterati are riveted on Mexico’s civil drug war — and Mexico is appropriately busy managing its biggest existential peril since Pancho Villa — the Islamic Republic of Iran is about to slip into the country before anyone really notices.
Late last month, the mullahs sent emissaries to Mexico City to pitch vastly expanded trade ties of the sort that, at least in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Nicaragua, have given national security establishment types the hives.
According to a February 27 press release put out by Mexico’s department of foreign relations, Secretary Maria Lourdes Aranda Bezaury met with Tehran’s deputy foreign minister for the Americas, Ali Reza Salari. The Mexicans fielded an Iranian proposal to expand ties in the “political, economic, and cultural arenas,” the release stated.
There was one short AP wire story on February 26 about the meeting that got no play in the United States, then complete silence.
Granted, the bilateral problem of rampaging Mexican drug gangsters justifies every bit of the attention it’s getting, including the visit by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a presidential visit by Barack Obama, one by Department of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano, and at least two congressional delegations.
But since relations with Iran about its nukes also are sky high on Obama’s foreign policy agenda, I thought the Iranian overture to Mexico City was worth at least a few reportorial phone calls. It turns out once again, as with my coverage of Iran’s move into Nicaragua, that I remain the only U.S. reporter to inquire. Here’s what I learned:
First, I wanted to take Mexico’s pulse on the Iranian overture, especially in light of how Mexico’s closest, most interdependent ally, the U.S., and every president since the 1979 Islamic revolution and hostage crisis, has viewed Iran. I wondered what Mexico might say now that the Bush administration has gone home and Obama is in, the first president since 1979 — Democrat or Republican — bearing olive tree branches for Iran.
Tehran has kept a minuscule diplomatic presence in Mexico City since the days of the shah. (Iran’s website for its diplomatic mission in Mexico City lists a Hotmail account to reach personnel and two of the three phone numbers are no longer in service.)
Back then, though, the two countries, being big oil producers, were wedded by the mutual interest of petroleum economics and friendly relations with the U.S. But Mexico’s relationship with Iran since 1979 has degraded to a mere presence in each other’s countries, with a scant $50 million in annual trade, partly because of Mexican deference to its northern neighbor’s feelings and partly because Tehran hated Mexico’s friendliness toward the shah.
Even with Obama in, I reasoned, Mexico couldn’t be totally insensitive to U.S. historic feelings about Iran. There were U.S.-led international economic sanctions against Iran for breaking global nuclear disclosure agreements. There was the U.S. designation of Iran as a state sponsor of terror. Of late, Iran has been caught red-handed sowing Quds Force attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq. Undisputed evidence has revealed Iranian involvement in terror attacks, kidnappings, assassinations worldwide, and terrorist group support from Argentina and the tri-border region of South America to Lebanon and Saudi Arabia.
I called and emailed Mexico’s ambassador to the U.S., Arturo Sarukhan, who has always kindly returned my past interview requests. After a week of messages from me asking about Iran, though, the ambassador couldn’t find the time.
I also emailed Mexico’s ambassador to Iran, Carlos Tirado, multiple times, asking to take Mexico’s temperature on the Iranian proposal. No response. Finally, a Mexican diplomat who requested anonymity called back, probably just to shut me up.
The diplomat said Mexico welcomed Tehran’s proposal with open arms and considered it no different from any other. The diplomat explained that this was the new way of the world since the Obama administration has shown open-mindedness about Iran.






Makes perfect sense from the Iranian perspective. As Russia and China have recently shown, the Democrats are living up their militantly pacifist reputation.
And with Sec. of State Clinton blaming the violence raging through Mexico on the US itself, the timing’s just right for Iran to help out against The Great Satan, whether Mexico wants it or not:
http://trackacrat.com/category/hillary-clinton/
It may be interesting to see the clash between Islam and narco-traffikers. My money is on the traffikers.
I have lived in central Mexico for about six years now… Im not convinced that Mexico-Iran ties are something to be truly worried about…. at least for now. What Iran does in Venezuela and Nicaragua, two countries who have little to lose by ticking the US off, will be more of a bellweather…
Im certain Mexico’s interest with any ties with Iran are purely economic. With Obama in office, they are definitely freer to test the waters in that respect. But I cannot imagine Iran having any real influence here. Islam is no real temptation and, despite the blowhards, neither is any serious anti-Americanism.
Worst case scenario might possibly be a terror cell coming across the US-Mexico border (something that has been worried about for sometime). However, Mexico has a real vested interest in the US NOT seriously shutting down the border. Any terrorist attack would do just that.
Rather than a clash between Islam and Mexican narco-trafficers, you might see an alliance. If Iran wanted to infiltrate people, weapons and explosives into the U.S. what better partner than the Mexican drug gangs who can seemimgly get anything, in any quantity, into any part of America? In addition to infiltration, the drug gangs have wide-reaching, sophisticated, para-military operational capabilities here too. MS-13 would be an outstanding operational partner for any terror mission inside our borders.
Mexico’s drug cartels are all about drugs and money and associated crimes like prostitution and kidnapping. The Iranians have a political agenda up to and including the manufacture and/or possession of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. I’d be much more worried about Iran getting too chummy with Mexico and, as the author states, the Mexican governments reluctance to even discuss the issue for me raises large red flags. Do you seriously think the corrupt and basically incompetent Mexican government can cope with a determined Iranian effort to infiltrate both Mexico and the U.S.? Compared to the professional killers of Iran the Mexican drug cartels are nothing more then thuggish amateurs. Instead of sending more troops to Afghanistan maybe we should be sending a few thousand more heavily armed troops, with artillery and air support, down to the Southern border.
terrorists use international terror not to liberate a country, or change an ideology but to expand geo political projection. that is why they do it. that is what is happening in the western hemisphere. expansion is the source of power, as well as their Achilles heel if they fail. that is what their interests are. their prime directive is to expand.
how that is a mystery as stated here and the interview is utterly baffling to me. non allied country’s are trying to hitch a ride with Russia and China to expand their influence. for Iran, they will expand their external influence or they will die internally. why is that complicated?
people have their eyes so fixated on boogie men motives like Islamic fascism and Zionism that they fail to see the most basic of historical historical motives. the worlds first history book described absolutely nothing different than what is happening today. pick up a copy of the Peloponnese wars, read it, add modern weaponry and a larger field of war and you will have no more questions about why Russia, Iran, and China are rapidly deploying all means of influence in Latin America. they are filling the void of gringo incompetence, short sightedness and stupidity about the most basic tenets of internationalism. give it the big duh.
and on top of that Calderon just asked the U.S for billions more in aid to help battle drug lords, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=a0KyEWkn3kqI&refer=latin_america But then again we now live in a world where 10 to 35 Billion dollars isn’t as much as it used to be. But if you ask me for that kind of money we might as well tell mexico to just get the hell out of the way and let us in to handle it!
I agree the gringo helped the situation with NAFTA, and GATT. All those jobs going south to the turd world brings the US closer to being the same. Not to mention China, and 50 cent an hour jobs.
Yep, those gringos keep showing incompetence with not securing the border, and billions going south non-taxed.
Moon god worshipers will use this incompetence to extend a hand of peace to the gringos. I do not know what to think about those Zionist. They just stay at home, and try to protect their children and wives from rockets from the religion of peace.
I’m going to go clean my weapon now.
Meanwhile, Hezbolla, according to the DEA and as reported by the Washington Times, is operationg on the U.S. Mexico Border using Mexican assets to smuggle…
I love it how they’re talking “Regional Issues” with Iran…
leatherneck, you are a dinosaur. you sound like one of the kid anti globalization protesters, with an added racial insecurity issue. yeah man, slants, greasers and the border, those are the real problems. get a grip.
gcblues,
Are you sure it is me? Read your post at #6 again, and get back to me.
BTW, I know a lot of Americans that lost their jobs to NAFTA, and GATT. I am a Nationalist, and do not like to see our laws broken, and our tax money used for the third world’s poor healthcare, jail costs, and anchor babies. Let Mexico and others be billed. Of course, pointing that out makes me a racist to lefturds.
You’re part of the problem.
leatherneck: you been in a cave or something? haven’t you been watching the great giveaway?
Anchor babies are all descendants of John Smith, and those that came afterwards. so yeah it does make you sound like a racist/righturd.
what i don’t understand is the anger towards the AIG people who got money they earned??? that is a tenet of capitalism, you work and you get paid. why aren’t people pissed off at the ones who made it possible to happen with tax monies, like Chris Dodd and Geithner, and that Obama fellow?
money talks and lots of money shouts in Mexico, so as long as the Iranians are willing to throw money around there will be someone to listen. the problem will be that it will mostly be some lower level burrocrat who will take the money.
Only white folks can be racist. Don’t you lefturds know anything?
leatherneck, you will always have problems with other people. it will never be your fault.
sounds like you and your “friends” deserved to lose “their” jobs. as if a person or a country has a right to a job. you cannot compete with the world so whinnnnnnnnnnne like a girl. in the USA, “nationalists” like you were known by another name. “no nothings”. you “no nothings”, rightards and leftards, both on the right and the left, try to use the state to dial in the culture and economy you piously and loudly think is correct. the result, both sides have eroded personal freedoms and rights rendering the USA as just another failed central planning state. land of the free? no mas. more like land of the bozos.
thanks nationalists. good job. pass a few more laws, expel a few million more, build some walls, pass some tariffs, join a union, buy american junk, ….. yeah that’s it. man i missed it leatherneck, your a freaking genius.
The big push will be to convert Mexican citizens to the “Religion of Peace.” Once there is a huge mosque in Mexico City and a couple of hundred Islamic schools teaching what they teach best, that to die for Allah is the best of all possible things, then Barack Hussein will finally admit being a Moslem all along. Thats all we will need to keep us busy for a long time, home grown Iranian type Moslems next door with the rights to come over the border any time they want to do so.
Hey gcblues,terorrists and the drug cartel are both our enemy. Does that tell you something?
I am amazed at the low response to this article. It seems small and insignificant right now, but it’s something we need to keep an eye on. This isn’t a left or right issue – it’s a national security issue. I see it as a sort of “back door invasion.”
No, they aren’t invading yet, but once the Islamic extremists have Mexico in their pocket, we might start seeing stories like the one above generating a lot more concern from the American citizenry.
I don’t know about turning Mexicans into Hispanic versions of Islam – Catholicism is pretty strong in that country. However, if the terrorists decide to infiltrate Mexico, who is going to stop them, when we see the corrupt Mexican government turning a blind eye to the violence in the current drug wars? They’re getting big payoffs to stay out of the cartel’s way. I’m figuring Iran has more money to pay for bribes and favors than the cartels.
Wake up America! It’s happening!
#15. You may be right about Obama. I have no evidence, but the Muslim principle of ‘al taqiyya’ allows deception on the level you suggest. For those who don’t know about taqiyya, try google.
All this is a public acknowledgement that Iran and the Islamic extremists are working with the narco-terrorists and others who are undermining Mexico. Mexico is the terrorist free ride into the US to destroy us. It just makes sense for Iran to ally themselves with these groups and facilitate the trafficking of people, drugs, and weapons.
http://franklinslocke.blogspot.com/
Well, why not manufacture an incident or a rivalry between the Iranians and the biggest cartel? With the current bunch running the CIA, I could see the pessimism in this approach.
..the Iranians have studied chess
Why is it that Muslims claim Moses was a prophet and the 10 Commandments given to Moses by OUR HEAVENLY FATHER on Mount Sinai clearly gives OUR HEAVENLY FATHER’s Commandment not to kill while they believe in killing those who will not convert, and killing for other various reasons under Shari’a Law? Do Not Kill; there are no ifs, ands, or buts. OUR HEAVENLY FATHER, who created all in Heaven and on Earth, made that Commandment expressly clear. Any prophets to come along later have supported all those Commandments given by OUR HEAVENLY FATHER. OUR HEAVENLY FATHER is greater than absolutely everyone and absolutely everything. Do Not Kill; there are no ifs, ands, or buts. We apparently are not to kill others; that is not our purpose. Supposedly Mohammed said something different. So either Mohammed agreed with those Commandments and didn‘t actually say what he supposedly said, or Mohammed wasn’t a prophet. And if Mohammed agreed that those Commandments came from OUR HEAVENLY FATHER, then Mohammed didn’t try to argue with them or change them to fit his own agenda. Maybe that ‘Book Burning’ in the 7th century A.D. (C.E.) wasn’t just to ‘standardize’ but to ‘cover-up’ the Truth. I’m not trying to argue religion here; or trying to argue doctrine. It just does not make any sense. If Christians and Jews killed people as Muslims kill people, then most of the world would kill each other off. Do Not Kill; there are no ifs, ands, or buts. May OUR HEAVENLY FATHER’s Will Be Done.