This business of asking Spain to apologize to Mexico at this point—I just don’t understand it.
—Luis Mateo Díez (Cervantes Prize)
In recent times we have witnessed the demand made first by Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), and later by Claudia Sheinbaum, that the Spanish state apologize for the “atrocities” committed during the conquest and colonization. Meanwhile, some sharp minds wonder when these leaders themselves will apologize to the families of the 130,000 intentional homicides and more than 50,000 forced disappearances during the past seven years of the Obrador’s government.
The immediate response is that the two things are not the same: what happened more than five hundred years ago was the result of a violent colonization, and such an apology is necessary to dignify a relationship marked by historical “chiaroscuros”—as the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, recently said in an interview. But would it not also be necessary to apologize for having allowed, and continuing to tolerate, this internal colonization by criminal organizations in regions practically devoid of the State?
True: Christopher Columbus, sent by the Catholic Monarchs, arrived on the island of Guanahani in the Bahamian archipelago on October 12, 1492, believing he had reached India. Later, on April 21, 1519, Hernán Cortés did likewise: he disembarked at San Juan de Ulúa, entered the territory, and on the way to Great Tenochtitlan forged strategic alliances in order to violently dismantle the Mexica Empire.
Not so different is what the barons of organized crime have done—men who have moved from being subjects of political power to becoming its protagonists, with all the prerogatives that implies in terms of territorial control, institutions, and federal, state, and municipal budgets.
This apology has never come, and perhaps never will, because in some sense it would have to come from those who practice narcopolitics—and, mind you, some of them are the very ones demanding an apology from the Spanish state.
So, what is the point of requesting such an apology? Populist narratives always need an enemy, whether to reaffirm their nationalism in a globalized world or to find scapegoats for their own inability to generate well-being for their peoples. Be it the Spanish state or former presidents Ernesto Zedillo or Felipe Calderón—one representing neoliberalism and the other responsible for the so-called “war on drugs.”
Six years have passed since AMLO sent a letter to Pope Francis and another to the Spanish king, Felipe VI, demanding an apology for the atrocities committed against Indigenous peoples. Pope Francis had no problem issuing that apology in a protocolary manner, while the Spanish Crown considered the request excessive and has maintained prudent silence all these years.
And suddenly, the interest in securing an apology from the Spanish state has resurfaced, and diplomats from two like-minded governments are working so that, within this discreet framework, the objective may be achieved—seeking that triumphant photograph of King Felipe VI and President Claudia Sheinbaum.
It must be acknowledged that this request, more than an attempt to redress historical “atrocities,” has a political and economic agenda behind it, as one could read between the lines of the speech by Spanish foreign minister José Manuel Albares Bueno.
A political interest because, as noted, there is an affinity between the occupants of La Moncloa and of the National Palace—that is, between the PSOE and Morena. But above all, an economic interest because Mexico is experiencing a lack of economic growth which, according to Banco de México’s forecasts for 2026, is likely to worsen, whereas Spain has one of the most stable economies in the European Union—an attractive factor for stabilizing diplomatic relations between the two nations, even though the rule of law is, for many investors, in question because of the popular election of judges, magistrates, and ministers. And we shall see how this becomes the touchstone in the tripartite negotiations for the USMCA review, which could further aggravate the situation of a government that spends more than it earns—a situation that, by pure logic, should be reversed, but has instead been resolved through debt.
Thus, diplomatic discretion must prevail to safeguard economic interests, and for that, the signals and gestures of political leaders—who must avoid any missteps—are critically important.
I offer two contrasting examples. The first is a front-page photo from El País showing Mexico’s ambassador to Spain, Quirino Ordaz Coppel, and Spanish foreign minister José Manuel Albares Bueno greeting each other warmly as a prelude to the opening of the exhibition Half the World: Women in Indigenous Mexico, which showcases 435 archaeological pieces across four venues in the Spanish capital. In his remarks, the minister acknowledged that the conquest and colonization included “moments of pain and injustice toward Indigenous peoples.”
The second is President Sheinbaum’s dismissive response when asked, during one of her morning press conferences, about Queen Letizia’s intention to visit Mexico: “We’ll see!”
Some will say it was an irrelevant slip. However, others will believe that this very distinctive style of Obradorista diplomacy—from the apology to the verbal stumble—is what complicates the delicate work of those weaving the fine threads of Mexico–Spain bilateral relations.
Furthermore, all of this coincides, unfortunately, with the rupture of relations with Peru. The South American country’s Congress has declared Sheinbaum persona non grata for, among other things, interfering in Peruvian affairs, while from the high parliamentary tribune she is accused of being in thrall to organized crime.
Ultimately, Mexico’s relations with the world—and, in particular, with certain Latin American countries—are going through a difficult moment when political leaders are questioning the collusion between politics and organized crime. That is where an apology to the families of the murdered and disappeared becomes necessary to fulfill AMLO’s own maxim: “the best foreign policy is domestic policy.”
Autor
Professor at the Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa. D. in Political Science and Sociology from Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Member of the National System of Researchers of Mexico.
