The long-anticipated move from the U.S. political arena has finally arrived. The U.S. Federal Register has designated six Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, and, ipso facto, the State and Treasury Departments have made it official.

The designated groups include the Sinaloa Cartel, Jalisco New Generation Cartel, Northeast Cartel, Gulf Cartel, as well as the Abuelo and Unidos cartels. Combined, these criminal organizations operate across all 32 Mexican states, with most maintaining international connections.

This designation is no minor development—it carries significant implications for U.S.-Mexico relations. That is why President Claudia Sheinbaum’s response is particularly relevant. She has maintained a position grounded in “sovereignty and non-intervention,” emphasizing a discourse of “collaboration and cooperation” between both nations.

While institutional contacts and security agreements between the two governments exist, U.S. actions extend beyond diplomatic negotiations. American military aircraft, drones, and naval vessels frequently operate across land, air, and sea—sometimes within the framework of bilateral agreements, but often on Washington’s own initiative.

This approach aligns with the broader U.S. strategy of exerting military and economic pressure on other nations, leaving political leaders with limited room to maneuver. As President Sheinbaum has pointed out, she must respond not only to the principles of her political project but also to the entrenched forces of narcopolitics, which have developed over decades. This reality has been well-documented by sociologist Luis Astorga and numerous journalistic investigations.

And these forces are present even within her own political movement. It is not enough for Sheinbaum to declare alignment with the U.S. in combating what are now classified as “terrorist organizations.” Action must follow, in accordance with the law. Mexico’s Federal Penal Code, specifically Article 139, defines and penalizes acts of terrorism, offering a clear description of the ongoing violence:

“A prison sentence of 15 to 40 years and a fine of 400 to 1,200 days’ wages shall be imposed, in addition to penalties for any related crimes, on anyone who, using toxic substances, chemical or biological weapons, radioactive or nuclear material, firearms, explosives, arson, flooding, or any other violent means, intentionally acts against public or private property, or against the physical, emotional, or personal integrity of individuals, in a manner that instills fear, terror, or alarm in the population or any sector thereof, with the intent of undermining national security, pressuring authorities, or coercing individuals into making specific decisions…”

This legal provision has remained largely unenforced for years—years in which organized crime has evolved from a small-scale operation run by ranchers in the Golden Triangle (Sinaloa, Chihuahua, and Durango) into powerful, internationally connected syndicates.

That is the current reality. Sheinbaum understands that narcopolitics, as even Trump has described it in multiple speeches, is deeply entrenched. This calls for a shift from emotional rhetoric to a measured, rational discourse that benefits both nations.

Acting abruptly would be disastrous, disrupting political, economic, and even social stability. A gradual strategy is necessary to dismantle these criminal structures, which claim hundreds of thousands of lives each year in both the U.S. and Mexico.

Reports in various media outlets suggest that the governor of Sinaloa may soon fall, allegedly due to his involvement in the capture and extradition of cartel leader Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada. His removal could trigger further violence, as evidenced by the ongoing seven-month war between factions of the Sinaloa Cartel, which has already resulted in thousands of deaths and forced disappearances. There is also speculation that Sinaloa, Durango, and Tamaulipas could be classified as narco-states. Such a designation would be unprecedented and could lead to a specialized public policy response unlike any seen before in countries facing similar structural challenges.

Furthermore, in the name of “collaboration and cooperation,” efforts are being directed at both the violent actors and their financial operators.

If handled strategically, this could present an opportunity—albeit one fraught with risks—for a government still tied to the ideology and interests of former President López Obrador, who many Mexicans believe continues to pull the strings behind Sheinbaum’s administration.

The pressing question is whether Sheinbaum will choose—or be able—to break free from this political oversight. Or whether, in the end, the Trump administration will bypass her entirely, launching unilateral military incursions, either overt or covert, as permitted under the classification now formalized by the U.S. Federal Register, State Department, and Treasury Department.

The clock is ticking. Decisions must be made soon.

_{*Machine translation proofread by Ricardo Aceves.}