Let's talk a little about the conversation we had this morning with President Trump, and at the end of the press conference, the delegation that will go to the Winter Olympics is here, along with Mario Delgado, Secretary of Education; Romel Pacheco, Director General of CONADE; María José Alcalá, President of the Olympic Committee; then Ana Luis Aguilar, head of the delegation's mission; Carlos Pruneda, deputy head of the delegation's mission; Donovan Daniel Carrillo in figure skating; Alan Daniel Corona in cross-country skiing; Regina Martínez in alpine skiing; and Sara Schlepper in alpine skiing. They are the ones who will represent us at the Winter Olympics. So at the end of the press conference, Romel will tell us about the representation, and we will do the formal flag handover of the delegation going there.
Well, I'll tell you a bit about the conversation after the statements President Trump had made. I asked Juan Ramón de la Fuente to reach out to Secretary Rubio; they spoke yesterday, and I also decided to call President Trump. They gave us the call for this morning, and we talked about the joint work that has been done on security matters. There are very important results from the joint collaboration work. For example, fentanyl trafficking from Mexico to the United States has been reduced by 50%. How is that measured? Well, by the seizures they make of fentanyl on the other side of the border. So CBP, a U.S. agency, publishes how much fentanyl they have seized on the other side of the border, and that has been reduced by 50% in one year. And also, fentanyl deaths in the United States have been reduced by around 43%.
And I talked a bit about the work we have done on security in Mexico, the public results on the number of laboratories seized, the number of people detained linked to organized crime, how homicides have decreased by 40%, and the work that has been carried out jointly based on mutual understanding and respect for our sovereignties. And at the end, we said we will continue collaborating on that. He still insisted that if we asked, they could help on other matters. We told him, 'Well, so far we are doing very well, it's not necessary. Besides, there is Mexico's sovereignty and territorial integrity.' And he understood. It was a very cordial conversation, and we agreed that this joint committee would continue working together.
On January 22nd and 23rd, there is a new meeting of this joint commission, this time in the United States, and work will continue jointly with the principles we have always set out, seeking collaboration to reduce, on our part, the trafficking of illegal drugs, and on their part, the reduction of arms trafficking, and to reduce insecurity in Mexico. That was the conversation. We also talked about Venezuela. I told him very clearly that we have a Constitution and that the constitutional principles are very clear. And that was where the conversation ended; he had other things to do. It wasn't a long conversation, about 15 minutes, and we agreed to call each other about other matters. I raised that there are other pending issues, such as trade. He said yes, that he was very clear on it, that we would talk soon, and of course, also the issue of Mexicans and Mexican nationals there. We agreed to keep talking and discussing all the necessary topics in the bilateral relationship. So this was the conversation. I repeat, it was in a very cordial tone. And there is not much more to report on this topic. I don't know if we move on to questions, if you would like. Let's see over here.
Thank you, President. Arturo Paramo, Grupo Imagen. To insist a bit on the tone of the call when the Venezuela topic was addressed, as you told us, President Trump was emphatic that just as there were incursions in Venezuela, he would be planning incursions in Mexico. If it was raised, what was his response and what was the tone? He didn't say it. He asked me what our position was regarding Venezuela. I told him it is the public position, that we have a Constitution, that we are against military interventions. He even said, 'Well, I understand that it is your Constitution.' And essentially that was the conversation about Venezuela. And yesterday too, he didn't insist; rather, it was in the tone of 'if you want us to help you more with our forces in Mexico.' I told him, 'Well, no, I have already told you several times that that is not on the table, but we continue collaborating within the framework of our sovereignties.'
Thank you. Regarding what Mexico has accomplished, as you told us last week in the security report, was there any comment from him recognizing the work being carried out? I understand that yes, he did recognize it. He said he was aware of what was being done, and that in his view more could be done. I said, well, yes, indeed, we can do much more, but we are working on it, and the important thing is to maintain this relationship of respect and collaboration. Okay. Evidently, the topic of a possible visit by you to the United States or by Mexico was not raised. No, it wasn't raised. I repeat, compared to the other calls, this was a shorter call, and we agreed to communicate again. Yesterday, the foreign minister and Juan Ramón de la Fuente also had a call with Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State. Was there any report from the foreign minister to you about the results of that? They came in the evening, more or less within the same framework of the results on security and the other pending issues such as migration, the respect for Mexicans in the United States, and we agreed to keep talking about it.
Thank you. And the second topic, President, this afternoon I understand that the committee you appointed to draft the electoral reform is coming to present the proposal. On Wednesday. Wednesday is the meeting. Yes. And there we will make some decisions that we will inform you about. This afternoon, legislators are also coming to talk with you about... Yes, remember that we normally have a meeting on Mondays to review the legislative agenda. The parliamentary coordinators of Morena come, and other times the coordinators of the allied parties come. And we already talked about the initiatives we are going to send or the pending initiatives. That is what the meeting is about. So the coordinators are coming, Pablo Gómez is also coming. No, we are not going to talk about anything other than the timelines for the electoral reform: when it would have to be presented, if it is for the 27th, when it would have to be approved, if it is for the 30th, when it would have to be approved. What are the most important elements? Thank you. And at what time will this meeting be, President? Because it generally... the health meeting is today around 50. Yes, the people already know. In the evening, it is normally at 7 or 7:30 p.m. Okay. Thank you very much, President. Thank you.
Thank you. Good morning, President. I am Asa García from the international channel Telesur. I would like to ask you some questions about your meeting with your U.S. counterpart. What motivated you to request that call with your counterpart? Well, he had stated three times that he would be interested in having more participation in security in Mexico. So I believe that under these conditions, it is always better to seek dialogue, right? Instead of only through the media or public communication, it is better to talk by phone. And besides, there is a precedent of the joint work being done. That is why we requested the call. When you told him about all the tangible results that have been achieved in the fight against fentanyl, drug trafficking, the reduction in homicides, etc., and the seizure of fentanyl, what was his reaction? Was he receptive? Yes. It was cordial. It was by video, not a voice call. I was accompanied by Foreign Minister Juan Ramón de la Fuente, Roberto Velasco, the Undersecretary for North America, and Omar García Harfuch, the Secretary of Security, in case there was any particular issue to address. But he was receptive.
He generally insists on the participation of U.S. forces. We always say it is not necessary, and that besides, we are very clear in defending our territorial integrity, and that there is collaboration that is working, so it is not necessary. So he was receptive, he listened, gave his opinion, and we agreed to keep working. With all due respect, Madam President, Doctor, was a military action ruled out? Do you consider that... Yes. Yes. That call ruled it out. I ask because yesterday the State Department's statement after the meeting between our foreign minister and his U.S. counterpart, he spoke, introduced a narrative, said he demanded tangible results, and also spoke of narcoterrorism. And the question is, does Mexico accept that conceptual framework and those terms of narcoterrorism and tangible results, or did Mexico make clear that cooperation with the United States does not imply adopting narratives that could be used to justify unilateral actions on Mexican territory?
Let's say it was made very clear in the conversation that there is collaboration, coordination, and that we continue working jointly within that framework. They can always declare something else at some point, and we will seek a new call if that is the case, because what we want is communication, dialogue, and mutual understanding. We have always stated that. We do not agree. Our Constitution and our laws speak of terrorism in a different sense. Organized crime cannot be classified as terrorism. Terrorism has to do directly with actions against the government, and other schemes. So it is not within the framework of our legislation to call it that, and we also do not agree that the United States calling it terrorism implies an intervention in our country. We made it so clear that we changed the Constitution or added a paragraph to the Constitution making it clear that the people of Mexico were against any interventionism. At that moment, when they declared the organized crime organizations as terrorist organizations, and I have always stated it, we do not agree on many issues with President Trump's government, but we want to maintain a good relationship, and so it should be, because we are neighbors, because we are trading partners, and because we must always seek good understanding without violating our principles, which are very clear and which we will always maintain. So that is how it has been so far, and that is how we want it to continue. And we want progress on trade, with the treaty review still coming and the tariff issues we have, as well as on the defense of our nationals there, also because of all the actions that have been taken at this moment and that we have stated we do not agree with. So all those topics remain on the agenda with the U.S. government. Today, we only addressed the topic of the previous statements he had made, making it clear that we continue collaborating and coordinating without the need for an intervention by the U.S. government. That is your message to Mexican society. That is the message, because a few days ago a friend wrote to me saying, 'We have to take to the streets. We cannot leave the president alone defending sovereignty in her speeches and positions.' Would you like the Mexican society to back you up? There have been several mobilizations; we always seek for them to be peaceful, not promoted by us, but promoted by the people. But we have not called for a mobilization. Why? Because in principle we seek dialogue and to know what the position of the U.S. government is at the moment, and so that the American people know that we are doing our part to prevent drugs from arriving. We no longer want drugs to reach the youth of the United States, nor those of Mexico, nor those of anywhere in the world. That is one of our principles, and our vision is that it must be done in an integral way, attending to young people, supporting them with campaigns and education to prevent consumption, and at the same time reducing violence, which is what affects our country the most, and collaborating as equals. That has always been the scheme we have proposed, and so far the understanding has been very clear regarding respect for our sovereignties, collaboration, and cooperation. We share information, and from there, each side carries out its own operations within its own territory.
Finally, President, you mentioned that you talked about Venezuela. Did he at any point ask you about your position on the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro, or did you only talk about interventionism? He asked me what my opinion was about what they had done in Venezuela, and I told him very clearly that our Constitution was very clear, that we did not agree with the interventions, and that was it. Thank you very much.
Very well. Let's go over here. President, good morning. Good morning to all. Armando Gama from Canal 11. I want to ask if in this meeting you also talked about drug trafficking coming from... sorry, arms trafficking coming from the United States to our country. It is said that around half a million arms cross the bilateral border. And whether the consequences, the fatal consequences that this illegal trafficking brings, especially for our country, were also put on the table. We did not talk about this topic particularly on this occasion. It is within the understanding that we have agreed that they also have to carry out operations on their side to prevent arms from entering Mexico. They have already carried out some operations, and we always insist on that in our meetings. I repeat, it was not a very long conversation; it was a shorter conversation than the others we have had, and we agreed to keep talking about both security and the other pending topics we have.
On the security topic, we saw that in the photo you shared, Secretary of Security Omar García Harfuch also appears. If I remember correctly, it is the first time he participates in this type of meetings or calls with his U.S. counterpart. Was any report presented regarding advances in the reduction of homicides or other types of achievements in security? I told him the results that have been achieved to date, and he listened very clearly. I told him who was in the meeting. So yes, Omar was part of it, but he did not intervene directly in the conversation. Yes, regarding the review of the topic, there will be new phone calls, new meetings, and basically today, was there any achievement beyond the reference to the topic, was there any progress, the presentation of any achievement or a roadmap to keep advancing on this topic? I repeat, it was a short conversation, and we agreed to keep talking about the other topics, and our teams too.
And regarding the presence of the U.S. ambassador this morning, yes, he was here. He was not present in the conversation; he was here in case of any topic, very kindly, and afterwards we met with him to talk a bit about how the conversation had gone. Was there contact with the ambassador before the call? He has been... he knows about the work being done, and afterwards we talked with him about how the call had gone, very cordially. President, finally, how was this phone call arranged since last Friday, in the middle of this scenario, a bit uncertain internationally, and what was the pulse you noticed in President Donald Trump? Was it cordial, friendly, even joking? I don't know the sense of the person-to-person, leader-to-leader communication. It was friendly. The meetings, the only in-person one we have had, which was when we went to the FIFA event, and the calls we have had, which are more than a dozen, he is very respectful, and we are respectful too. We may not agree, but that does not mean one is not respectful in the way one communicates. So it was respectful, and we agreed to keep talking, which is what matters. And we requested the call because, as he had said three times in a week, the worst thing one can do is say, 'Well, we only communicate through what we say publicly in the morning press conference, in the rallies, in the assemblies.' No, we must always seek dialogue, communication, so that the position and the joint work being done are clear. Thank you very much.
Good morning, President. Rumina Gandare. However, regarding this conversation with Trump, specifically about the historic aid Mexico has given Cuba in hydrocarbons, did you talk about the oil we send to the island? Did he ask you about this topic? We did not talk about the topic of Cuba. That may be a topic we discuss later. Obviously, if Mexico were to become a vehicle for communication between the United States and Cuba, both parties would have to accept it. Obviously, Mexico is in the best conditions, in the best position to be able to do it, but obviously it has to be accepted by the parties. But on this occasion, we did not talk about this topic.
And after these conversations, what do you feel is the most urgent on the bilateral agenda? You already mentioned that there are pending topics regarding trade. But what do you feel is the most urgent? Well, the two most important topics are, one, the review of the trade treaty is coming, and it is very important to lay the foundations, just like the topic of the tariffs we still have regarding automobiles, steel, and aluminum, the so-called 232s, which we still want to keep advancing, and the topic of the treaty review itself, hoping the best conditions are met, and of course, the topic of our nationals there, which is also very important. Are you satisfied with what was talked about today and with the tone of your conversation today with Donald Trump, and do you feel this conversation will alleviate some of the pressures that have been coming from Washington toward Mexico? I believe it is very important to have personal communication, dialogue. So far it has helped us a lot, so he knows clearly. He knows that there are things we do not agree on, just as we know there are things he does not agree with us on. That does not mean we are not neighbors, that we are not trading partners, that there are not 40 million Mexicans living there, that there are not more than a million Americans living in Mexico, and that we have to have a good relationship. So seeking dialogue is always important; it is something that I believe has helped us and will continue to help us. So why avoid a dialogue that allows things to be said directly, clearly, without problems, and respectfully? So it has helped us; so far there have been more than 15 calls, I believe, plus one visit. So we have to continue like this, we have to keep seeking dialogue, understanding, and where we do not agree, talk about it too, so that there are no misunderstandings and, on the contrary, solutions are sought. So it has worked for us; it worked today, and we are going to continue like this, seeking the best possible dialogue with the U.S. government for the good of Mexico, of the women and men of Mexico here on the other side of the border, and for the good of North America and the continent. We believe that Mexico has always had an important position in foreign policy, in some periods better than others, but as President López Obrador used to say, the best foreign policy is domestic policy, and we agree with that. But we know we play an important role. So dialogue with the U.S. government is indispensable, and we will continue doing it directly with President Trump, as many times as necessary. Thank you very much. When could the next call be? We didn't agree... sometimes we agree that we will call this week and the opportunity doesn't come. Remember that he has his anniversary very soon of when he took office, where he has to give his message. So, but if it is this week, this week. If it is next week, next week. Always seeking the best dialogue. Thank you very much. Who else is over here? Let's see, let's see over here.
Good morning, President. Jonathan Losada on the Máxima FM network. Continuing a bit with the tone of the call, Mexico was treated as a strategic partner. Did you feel it was also a kind of pressure? Probably, I ask, because Mexico today lives a cohesion, an economic strength, a political strength that is not necessarily the result of following Washington's or the World Bank's schemes. How did you feel this communication, President? Well, we didn't go that far, but I must say he has always been respectful. We appreciate the treatment. And we too, I repeat, may not agree, but that does not mean one is not respectful in the calls, always seeking the best dialogue. So I thought, for example, that we were only going to talk about security and the results, and he said, 'Well, any other topic?' And I said, 'Well, yes, we have the pending trade topic, right?' And he said, 'True, we have that topic, and we have to seek another call to keep advancing on it.' So it was very, I repeat, very friendly.
President, you talked about collaboration within the framework of respect for sovereignties. I want to ask you what limits Mexico made clear in this bilateral relationship, so that cooperation is not confused with giving in to pressure or mediation. It has been made very clear since the moment President Trump took office, and at the end, to the four principles that are in the understanding, they know how important sovereignty and territorial integrity are to us. So there may be information they give us, intelligence that is worked on jointly, but in Mexico we operate, no one else operates. Even the agents they have from their agencies in Mexico know the limitations very well, and they are marked by law. So there are four axes we have set out: respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, shared and differentiated responsibility. This is very important because we share responsibility for security on both sides of the border, but each of us has our own responsibility. There is a responsibility they have for consumption, there is a responsibility they have for operations in their own territory, for the arms that come from the United States to Mexico, and we also want to support to prevent drugs from arriving on the other side of the border. It is even a matter, as I have said, of a humanitarian nature. We do not want anyone to die from an overdose of any drug. So there are shared and differentiated responsibilities, each within the framework of our sovereignty, respect, and mutual trust. We have to respect each other and we have to have trust. They have to have trust in us and we in them, based on the understanding we have and cooperation without subordination. It is very clear, and they have respected us within that framework.
And finally, President, after these statements last week by President Trump, many Mexicans on social media, in everyday common dialogue, in social interaction, did notice tension, we noticed tension, and today we see, well, a call and clarity regarding the day. Is there any message you could send to the Mexican people regarding the relationship that is now marked with the United States and with President Trump? The Mexican people must know first that their president will never negotiate sovereignty or territorial integrity. Never. Second, that we seek coordination without subordination, as equals. And third, that this is permanent, right? We have been in this relationship with President Trump for almost a year, and there have been its moments. So it is not a matter of 'today it's done,' but communication, coordination, and the defense of the Mexican people here and there are permanent. Everything is permanent, and if it is necessary to call for a mobilization, something, we will do it, but we always seek dialogue that allows us to advance, and I have confidence that the framework of the treaty review will be good. It will be good. I have confidence that this year it will be resolved. There will be tensions on certain topics, but it will be good. I have that confidence because there is a lot of economic integration between the two economies, and the truth is that this is something that has been happening for 40 years; it is very difficult for that to break. So we obviously seek other markets, we seek relations with all countries in the world, we have development plans, and here next week we will present what I told you about how we are going to strengthen public investment, mixed investment, and private investment in the country this year, in 2026. And within that framework, the treaty issue has to be handled well because it is good for the three countries, and particularly for the United States and Mexico. So there are always moments of tension, but one must seek dialogue in those moments of tension; the best moment for dialogue. Thank you, President. Thank you. Well, let's see over here, sorry, military. Military mobilization of what? No, at the moment it is not on the table.
Good morning, President. Vicente Serrano, host of Sin Censura TV. A few days ago, Gustavo Petro, President of Colombia, said that President Trump had been lied to in the United States, creating an image that leads him to be the front man, as was mentioned, of Nicolás Maduro. In that sense, he later said, 'We talked and I clarified many things, and I believe these conversations serve precisely for that.' In your assessment, President, to what degree has the media campaign against your government abroad and these so-called denunciations of the sellouts, as they have already been mentioned here, had an impact? I remember when I mentioned it to you, and I believe the strategy began to become clear, that interview with Lily Téz on Fox News and what came after. To what degree do you believe this international campaign is impacting, to the point that President Donald Trump made these statements last week? President, I don't know if it is the campaign; what is very difficult is to know why President Trump made these statements. What is certain is that the opposition in Mexico has been seeking, and has stated during all these months, a bad image of the Mexican government in the United States. All this idea that here we protect organized crime or the narco-president, narco-candidate, comes from their campaign. If it has influence, well, I don't know how much influence it may have, but they do seek it. And what do they want? What would they like? U.S. intervention in Mexico. That is the truth, because since they do not have popular support in our country, because they no longer have popular support, they believe they have to seek it from outside to affect us. Well, there is no difference with 19th-century conservatism. They seek that outsiders come to govern us. That is their position. Now, what do we have to do? Well, keep explaining to the people, keep delivering results, honesty at the forefront, our nation project, and a good relationship with the United States, and also keep informing the American people about what we are doing here, because it is important. From here, it is not about going out and campaigning there, but that what we are doing is known. And in general, there is a good opinion of the Mexican government in the United States, despite this campaign they run, and it must be denounced too. We must say that they want to go there to denigrate the Mexican government. Who is going to seek outside the country the support they do not have here? Well, only the one who does not love Mexico. Only the one who does not love Mexico. So they are watching, I mean, they would have liked this call not to have gone well, but they are not going to get their wish because we will always seek a good relationship within the framework of our principles, because it is good for the Mexican people and good for the nation. And we are going to do what the people mandated us to do: what is best for the Mexican people and what is best for the nation, maintaining our principles, but seeking good dialogue. So they are there now, 'Oh, the conversation went well again,' right? Because they would have liked to say, 'Oh, President Sheinbaum fought with President Trump.' No, well, no, we are not going to fight. The Calimán strategy is still being applied, right? The Calimán strategy. Yes. Cool head. What is it? Serenity and patience.
President, your opinion about this letter published by dozens of legislators also rejecting these expressions toward Mexico, at a time when, as part of the strategy that at least I see in U.S. media, includes Republican legislators who have a very confrontational language toward your person, not toward the government, toward your person, María Elvira Salazar, this Cuban legislator, I believe his surname is Jiménez, but your opinion about this bloc that comes out to say this definitely will not lead us to a good place. What do you say to them? What message do you send? Look, I don't even know how this communication came about. It wasn't lobbied by you? No, we didn't lobby for it. It came from the United States, and because we... it's not that we are Republicans or Democrats; we want to get along with everyone, and I repeat, defend what we have always defended, but have a good relationship. So I don't know very well how this communication came about; obviously we always appreciate it, but we seek that what we are doing here is known, and how well Mexico is doing, and that together we must guarantee a good relationship for the good of both countries.
You have been insistent in this morning's press conference, President, about talking about Mexicans in the United States, which is a pending topic and important to you. A few days ago you met with consuls and ambassadors here in this hall. In the panorama they presented to you, was there anything that worried you especially, beyond what some reporters and journalists bring you about the situation? Why the urgency? What do you see? What worries you, President? Well, I believe we all see it, right? We do not agree with this way of treating migration, and we will always defend Mexican women and men. The U.S. economy relies heavily on migration, but particularly on the work of Mexican women and men. Many have lived there for 10, 20 years and have helped the economy there and the economy here, and what we want is for that to be recognized. So obviously, the persecutory treatment does not help the United States either. So all of that is a topic that is important to keep discussing with them because we will always defend Mexicans there. The consuls presented to us, depending on the place, there are places where there are more of these types of actions. But I was glad because many of the new consuls there are very active in defending Mexican women and men there. I believe we are advancing so that everyone feels protected by our consulates. What message do you send to our nationals, President? How to find a space for calm when they see murders, deaths at the hands of ICE agents, when the hunt continues and becomes more violent? What does your president say to those of us who are with them, and that we are going to do everything in our power to protect them? Thank you very much, President. Good day. Good day. Well, let's go with one or two more questions over here.
Thank you. Good morning, President. Mara Rivera from Enfoque. Well, you already told us what you raised with President Donald Trump regarding Mexico's position on Venezuela or any intervention, and that it is public and has been reiterated. But literally, what did President Donald Trump respond to this position? Well, that he understood what Mexico's Constitution is, that obviously it does not coincide, right? But he understood it, I mean, we didn't continue that conversation further. Now, regarding the figures Mexico has reported, a 40% reduction in homicides, even in fentanyl seizures, what do you expect or what does Donald Trump's government want after hearing yesterday's statements by Marco Rubio in the sense that it has not been very tangible and not solid cooperation? What would you expect from Mexico, what does the United States want from Mexico? More than what the United States wants from Mexico, I believe that obviously what they do not want is for drugs to enter the United States from anywhere. It is evident from our point of view, as we have said, they also have to work on the issue of addiction among young people and other Americans. But obviously that is what they want, and it is not a matter of one day to the next. What is certain is that fentanyl, imagine, a 50% reduction in fentanyl trafficking from Mexico to the United States, and obviously other drugs too, and we are going to keep working on it. And what interests us, because ultimately, why do we work on security in Mexico? For the protection of Mexican women and men. If we collaborate with the United States, supporting them, but our main objective is security and peace in our country and justice. That is the objective. That is why we talk about generators of violence; we don't even talk about drug trafficking, because obviously it is a topic, but what interests us here is reducing insecurity, so that there are no crimes related to violence. Why? So that Mexicans can live in peace. That is our objective, and within that framework we also collaborate with the United States. So far, we have reduced homicides by 40%. It is a very significant number, and I am convinced it will continue to decrease. And we are going after extortion, which is a topic that affects Mexican families a lot, from many places, from the lowest level of a merchant to the highest levels, and we are going to address that topic, just like the topic of disappearances, which we are also addressing, along with the states, robberies with violence, and everything related to insecurity. Now, from our perspective, it is not only police, not only the National Guard, not only the prosecutor's office, although reducing impunity is very important, but also addressing the causes, which is integral: it is education, culture, sports for young people, well-being, economic development with justice. It has to do with a different development model, and it is yielding results, and we will yield more results. Because besides, we are in this daily, and there is a good team and the support of the Mexican people always. Without the support of the Mexican people, we could not keep advancing.
Based on what you told us at the beginning, it seems he insisted on this help he offers Mexico to be able to enter the country. Now, did you concretely raise the possibility of drones, helicopters, or in what way did he reiterate this proposal to help Mexico? Well, he has said it many times, it is not the first time. He says that if we need greater participation from them in Mexico, that they want to help us, and we always say, well, no, better we continue collaborating as before, and it is yielding results, and yes, it is yielding results, and obviously we want more results. Yes, we want more results.
President, you also told us that the topic of Cuba was not addressed, he did not ask you to stop giving humanitarian aid, far from it. Would it not be convenient or could it not be possible that the Mexican government, before addressing this topic, in a future call or interview, who knows, Mexico will provide the information that is still pending: what percentage is humanitarian aid, what percentage is sold, how are the contracts? This information that has been left a bit pending and that has also caused noise in the relationship between both countries. Yes, it is an aid that has been given for a long time, it is not new. That is very important because President López Obrador gave it, but before that, Peña Nieto gave it. In the two PAN terms it was not as much, but they did support it. So it is a historical relationship with the island. So, of course, we have always said, if we can help a dialogue between both nations, we will always be there, but both nations have to agree. So that position is there, and we will keep talking about it with both the United States and Cuba, and about how much... but regarding sovereignty, always, because what has been put in question, or what they want to put in question, is how much the contract with the island is, at what price, and what percentage is exactly humanitarian aid, which is what has been published and which sows certain doubt. It worries me a lot regarding the opposition, and the information is there, but for the Mexican people it seems to worry them a lot, right? Because there is enough petroleum, there is gasoline, there is diesel, there is all the necessary fuel, the price did not increase. They said it was going to increase and it did not. We have an agreement with the gas station owners. So of course the information can be given, there is no problem. The important thing, first, is that it is known that it is an aid that has been given for a long time, and second, that Cuba and the United States know that we are here for any topic where they wish Mexico to participate. If they do not wish it, well no, but we are always there to support.
Two more topics, President. One has to do with the INE and its statement to separate the midterm elections from the judicial election and the midterm elections. Is this viable or... It has to be analyzed. Now, for example, last year the elections were held jointly in Veracruz and in... where else was the election? Coahuila, no, Coahuila is this year, Durango, Durango and Veracruz. And the polling stations were different. Well, that is not right because how are you going to go to one polling station and then, hey, now go to the other polling station to vote for the judiciary? Ideally it has to be the same polling station, right? Because otherwise, a person who stood in line for one polling station does not necessarily have to stand in line for the second one. Issues like that have to be resolved with the INE. If in 2027 it is going to be joint, as the Constitution currently states, the Constitution would have to be changed so that the second part of the judiciary and its election were in another year. The Constitution would have to be changed. If the Constitution is not changed, then voting has to be made easier, because it cannot be that they are two different polling stations, right? Well, that is still... we do not have a proposal on that yet. What ease is there that all elections are at a time when there is no longer an allocation of resources for the following year, but maybe it is too much in a single election. Now the Supreme Court would no longer be elected, the... I always forget what it is called, the judicial discipline tribunal. Only state judges would be elected, right? Okay. The Electoral Tribunal would no longer exist.
President, regarding the oil hedges that the government buys annually... ah, we wouldn't talk about the Electoral Tribunal, I think, because I think the change is coming. Yes, part of it, half, yes. Regarding the oil hedges, I would like to ask you, according to predictions, it has been said that there will be more supply than demand in the market, which could lower prices. Now, I would like to ask you, in the volume that the Mexican government has secured through the oil hedges, at what price should a barrel of oil fall for these 2025-2026 hedges to be activated immediately? We request a card from the Finance Ministry. That is how the hedges are. No, I do not have the data at the moment, but we request a card from the Finance Ministry so they can inform you. Both the amount and how it works, the amount, how it works, etc. Yes, but yes, the hedges were acquired, so to speak, in case of a significant drop in oil prices. Well, thank you, President. I believe we will leave it here. Let's have the delegation come in. Go ahead. We present ourselves again.
