AHC: Mexico in NATO

Corbell Mark IV

Your mission, should you accept it, is to have the nation of Mexico be a member of NATO, preferably during the Cold War.

The more serious the commitment the better.

(Mexico is an ally of the US, has coast on the North Atlantic, is a democracy...)
 

SunilTanna

Mexico is completely safe from any soviet threat by virtue of distance and the the us and other countries being in the way. So has no real need to be in NATO (unless it wants access to advanced weapons for some other reason, but why?)

And I don't see how Mexico would benefit by committing itself to defend norway, turkey or west Germany.

So I think the scenario is pretty unlikely. Especially since the us is already committed to defend Mexico from external threats anyway.

Maybe if the cubans/soviets/Sandinistas/draka, etc. Completely overrun south and central America, while the us is asleep at the wheel, and Mexico thinks it is likely to be next on the menu.
 

Falecius

Mexico is potentially vulnerable to internal "commie" subversion.
It would benefit more from Norway (well, not really, but Britain, for instance) defending it than from it having to defend anything in Europe.
I guess that the endgame would be a somewhat stabler Mexico (it was relatively stable during the Cold War anyway), but I can hardly see major differences from OTL.
 

Falecius

As an aside, being a democracy wasn't really a strict qualification for NATO membership during the Cold War; IIRC, Portugal, Greece and Turkey all were members at times where the "democratic" credentials of their governments were extremely questionable (not that Mexico was THAT much better, although it has had less coups than Turkey and probably less repression than Greece overall).
 

Dilvish

Corbell Mark IV said:
Your mission, should you accept it, is to have the nation of Mexico be a member of NATO, preferably during the Cold War.

The more serious the commitment the better.

(Mexico is an ally of the US, has coast on the North Atlantic, is a democracy...)
Click to expand...

Mexico has coastal territory on the North Atlantic? Hmm, that could be fun. Something that the Americans, British, or Canadians didn't take for themselves. OH! The Canary Islands! Or maybe the Azores.
 

Corbell Mark IV

SunilTanna said:
Mexico is completely safe from any soviet threat by virtue of distance and the the us and other countries being in the way. So has no real need to be in NATO (unless it wants access to advanced weapons for some other reason, but why?)

And I don't see how Mexico would benefit by committing itself to defend norway, turkey or west Germany.

So I think the scenario is pretty unlikely. Especially since the us is already committed to defend Mexico from external threats anyway.
..u.
Click to expand...

Same could be said of Canada.
 

Corbell Mark IV

Dilvish said:
Mexico has coastal territory on the North Atlantic? Hmm, that could be fun. Something that the Americans, British, or Canadians didn't take for themselves. OH! The Canary Islands! Or maybe the Azores.
Click to expand...

The Caribbean Sea is a sea of the Atlantic, and north of the equator, North Atlantic.


Mexico, thus, meets all the requirements for NATO membership!!!:mad:;)
 
Mav12

Mav12

Corbell Mark IV said:
The Caribbean Sea is a sea of the Atlantic, and north of the equator, North Atlantic.


Mexico, thus, meets all the requirements for NATO membership!!!:mad:;)
Click to expand...

Mostly its the Gulf of Mexico not Caribbean, Mexico's East coast is on, but your point still stands (both water bodies are like the Mediterranean of the Americas)
 
Cook

Cook

Banned
Dilvish said:
Mexico has coastal territory on the North Atlantic?
Click to expand...

About as much as Italy (a founding member of NATO), Greece and Turkey (joined in 1952), West Germany (1955), Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (all 1999), the Baltic and Balkan states (2004) and finally Albania and Croatia (2009) have.
 

SunilTanna

Corbell Mark IV said:
Same could be said of Canada.
Click to expand...

Not really.

When Canada joined NATO it had just fought in a major European war - and was a major contributor to the allied effort. It Had also fought in another one just 30 years before. And it was closely linked to Britain.

PlUs NATO only applies to Europe (including Algerian dept of France), north America, north Atlantic, north of the tropic of cancer.

This only only covers a slither of Mexican territory (and doesn't cover brazil at all).
 
Cook

Cook

Banned
SunilTanna said:
Plus NATO only applies to Europe (including Algerian dept of France), north America, north Atlantic, north of the tropic of cancer.
Click to expand...
The boundaries of NATO encompass the territory of the member nations; that’s hardly surprising since they were defined during negotiations prior to the signing of the treaty; include other members and the boundaries would be defined differently. Since Article 5 of the treaty defines the treaty as applying to an attack on the territory of any member state in North America or Europe, Mexico’s membership would not require any redefining of the boundaries, although the entry of Brazil would.

SunilTanna said:
This only only covers a slither of Mexican territory...
Click to expand...

Mexico is entirely in North America; so the definition of the treaty would not have to be reworded to include it.
 

Dilvish

Corbell Mark IV said:
The Caribbean Sea is a sea of the Atlantic, and north of the equator, North Atlantic.


Mexico, thus, meets all the requirements for NATO membership!!!:mad:;)
Click to expand...

Oh, you were saying that Mexico had a North Atlantic coastline in your OP, not that Mexico might need to acquire one.
 

naraht

The treaty itself

The Treaty that formed NATO is at
http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-ECAE8DB0-F591EC88/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

and while the area which would be considered an attack was expanded when Turkey joined, there is still nothing that has changed about Article X which says
The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty.
Click to expand...
(US & Canada were original signers)

In short, Mexico could probably join, but they would have to alter the language in Article X as part of the Accession, I guess. However, I would guess the most likely place where they would considering altering the language would be if Greenland becomes completely independent.
 

Realpolitik

Banned
Maybe Castro gets a bit big for his britches during the Angolan and Central American adventures and tries to cause a revolution there...
 

zoomar

Other than lasting mistrust between Gringos and Mexicans, and Mexico's occasional flirtation with leftist politics there is no reason it couldn't. Turkey and Greece afterall don't border on the North Atlantic and Mexico is as much in North America as they are in western Europe. I think Mexico is not in NATO for the following reasons:

1. Mexico is neither a military threat to the US, nor does it bring anything to the table that assists NATO in defending western Europe.

2. In the event of a "big war" the US would be able to pressure Mexican involvement as either an ally or as a friendly neutral.

3. As opposed to other marginally "North Atlantic" nations, Mexico was not threatened by Soviet expansion in the late 1940's.

4. The Warsaw Pact did not include Cuba, and the Soviets retreated from pushing a strategic advantage that might have forced the widening of NATO in 1962.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top