Migration diplomacy in Mexico–United States relations: Decision-making under asymmetric structures
Natalia Saltalamacchia discusses the key points from her new Review of International Studies article - Migration diplomacy in Mexico–United States relations: Decision-making under asymmetric structures
Want to know more? You can read the full article at DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210526101831
BISA members receive access to RIS (and to our other journal European Journal of International Security) as a benefit of membership. To gain access, log in to your BISA account and scroll down to the 'Membership benefits' section. If you're not yet a member join today.
Abstract
Research on migration diplomacy has shown that control over cross-border mobility can function as a power resource, enabling transit states to extract concessions from destination countries. However, transit states do not systematically activate this potential leverage, nor do they uniformly engage in rent-seeking behaviour. This article asks why transit countries occupying similarly advantageous geopolitical positions adopt divergent approaches to the use of migration power. Focusing on Mexico–United States relations during Donald Trump’s first presidency, it shows that Mexico initially refrained from instrumentalising migration control and later relied on defensive rather than extractive uses of its leverage. To explain this variation, the article develops an analytical framework that conceptualises transit states’ choices regarding the activation of migration power as strategic decision-making grounded in cost–benefit calculations under specific structural constraints. It shows that these evaluations are context-dependent and shaped by how actors perceive their scope of action. The framework examines how political, reputational, and implementation costs shape states’ willingness to deploy migration leverage and how different aims – punitive, extractive, defensive, and deterrent – structure its use in practice. By shifting attention from rent-seeking behaviour to strategic restraint and defensive action, the article broadens the explanatory scope of the migration diplomacy literature.
Photo by Luis Ramirez on Unsplash
