They see, in terms of security, stigmas and lack of coordination between Mexico and the US.

The recent disagreement between the Mexican government and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) over "Project Portero" is more a matter of political and ideological strategy than a technical debate on security and reflects the differences in narrative between the two countries, experts said.

However, they added that they see no risk of a breakdown in the bilateral security relationship.

Alberto Guerrero Baena, a researcher at the National Guard Observatory of Causa en Común, stated that "security cannot be ideologized. It requires a balanced, data-driven technical perspective. Today, there remains a stigma against the DEA, inherited from López Obrador's administration, but the country needs cooperation to confront organized crime."

The specialist stated that the transnational challenges posed by organized crime require us to consider solid bilateral agreements that transcend political rhetoric.

In this regard, he proposed the creation of a Binational Intelligence Center, with joint personnel from both countries, to allow for the exchange of information and the coordination of joint operations under a shared governing body.

Guerrero Baena questioned the political use of the sovereignty argument and noted that the rhetoric that "the people of Mexico would not allow it" lacks foundation if citizens are not genuinely consulted.

"We are no longer in a moment of alluding to an issue of sovereignty or wrapping ourselves in a flag like Juan Escutia. I believe that today we are facing a situation in which there must be bilateral agreements, especially in matters of security, taking into account the type of organized crime that has been expanding. These are binational groups. Just as in Mexico we have groups that expand their territory of work to other latitudes, obviously there are also criminal networks in the United States," he indicated.

For his part, UNAM academic Carlos Rodríguez Ulloa explained that the episode highlights three distinct agendas: the US agenda, focused on sending political messages to its constituents and federal agencies; the Mexican agenda, which seeks to control domestic discourse under the principle of sovereignty; and the diplomatic agenda, evidenced by the immediate reaction of the US Embassy in Mexico after President Claudia Sheinbaum's clarification.

However, he noted that, despite the discursive tensions, the principle that each country operates within its own territory will be maintained, since unilateral US intervention in Mexico would be "very costly" and unnecessary.

"The Mexican government has done virtually everything the US government has requested. I don't see any need for unilateral action. Furthermore, there is full confidence in interlocutors like Omar García Harfuch and in institutions like the Armed Forces, which professionally conduct these agreements," he emphasized.

Cooperation

Regarding urgent issues on the bilateral agenda regarding security, the experts consulted mentioned that, in addition to drugs, weapons, and money laundering, the agreement should include complementary strategic topics such as: joint customs management to curb illicit trafficking and improve border security; exchange of operational and strategic intelligence; joint investigations and coordinated operations against transnational networks; cooperation on immigration control and combating human trafficking, among others.

"A technological agreement could be the key to this entire collaboration," Rodríguez Ulloa stated.