Just past 2 a.m. on Sunday, March 25, a family was caught in the crossfire of a shootout between gang members and Mexican marines in the border town of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. In what has been described by the marines as a series of ambushes by the criminal group, a total of nine people were brutally killed, and 13 injured. Included in these numbers were a mother, father, and their two young daughters, aged 4 and 6 (Univision).
After months of speculation and uncertainty, the White House released a statement on Saturday, March 10, declaring that President Donald Trump will be attending the Summit of the Americas, or
Out of the 25 countries in the world with the highest rates of violence against women in the world, 14 of them are in Latin America and the Caribbean (UN Women). Of the top 10 countries considered to be the most dangerous for females, 7 are in Latin America (UN Women). These disturbing statistics have led people to question what exactly it is about Latin America that makes it so prone to this form of violence—and what, if anything, can be done to change this pattern.
As 2017 unfolded, the Mexican tourism sector was booming. For the majority of the year, the country was seeing a 20 percent average gain in international passenger arrivals (following a three-year positive trend), and American Airlines Vacations reported a 25 percent rise in demand for Mexican beach destinations (Navarro & Cattan 2017). However, a travel warning issued on August 22 of last year by the United States State Department proved to be destructive.
The North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, has been a controversial piece of legislation since its conception in 1994. This controversy has been reignited since Donald Trump, now the president of the United States, has repeatedly referred to NAFTA as ‘the worst trade deal ever signed’, and a threat to U.S. manufacturing jobs (New York Times). During his election campaign, one of the largest proposals of his platform was to withdraw from the agreement, an idea on which he has flip-flopped quite a bit since his 2017 inauguration.
As we move into the New Year, many around the world are at the edge of their seats, awaiting one of the most highly anticipated elections of the year: the Mexican presidential election on July 1. With Enrique Peña Nieto leaving office after the end of his highly contested 6-year term, this year’s elections will play a large role in determining the future of the Mexican economy and party politics.
Desde los años sesenta las investigaciones demostraron que el estatus socioeconómico (recursos económicos, sociales y culturales) ocupaba el mayor peso explicativo en los resultados de los aprendizajes de los estudiantes (Coleman 1966; Watkins 1997). Este hallazgo impulsó el interés de los estudiosos en profundizar el conocimiento sobre esta estrecha asociación, que se ha mantenido a lo largo de los años, no obstante lo múltiples intentos realizados por revertirla.
Twenty-three years ago, Mexico’s Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) successfully executed its famous uprising under its leader, Subcomandante Marcos, which many thought would be the first sentence on a new page in Mexican history. The revolution in Chiapas, which was intentionally planned to align with the introduction of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), seemed as if it would achieve its goal of realizing rights for indigenous people (Young 2017).
Over the past few years, Mexico’s financial landscape has been undergoing a painful transformation, largely due to the sudden drop in oil prices seen worldwide. Just ten years ago, 35 percent of the government’s revenue was derived from crude oil production. As of last year, though, this had fallen to 20 percent as prices fell and the Mexican state-owned company Pemex reduced its typical 3.4 million barrel per day (bpd) production rate to around 2.2 million bpd.
Last Thursday, officials reported the recovery of the last known victim of Mexico’s magnitude 7.1 earthquake, raising the total death toll to 369 (Wright 2017).