The United States is threatening to downgrade Mexico's air safety rating once again, not for security reasons—as it did four years ago—but for supposedly not complying with the bilateral air transport agreement. The trigger: Mexico's 2023 decision to forcibly relocate all dedicated cargo operations from AICM to AIFA, a unilateral move that—according to Washington—increased costs, disrupted routes, and harmed the logistical competitiveness of U.S. airlines.

What began as a technical dispute has deeper commercial implications. A downgrade to "Category 2" would stall the expansion of Mexican airlines into the U.S. market and disrupt supply chains that rely on speed, binational coordination, and seamless access to the continent's main cargo hubs.

The impact would be immediate for more than a dozen Mexican companies with air cargo routes between the two countries. According to SiiLA, they account for 1% of industrial tenants and 2% of the gross leasable area in the packaging, transportation, and logistics sectors. Among them are Estafeta, Grupo Logistics, and Redpack. Meanwhile, passenger carriers such as Aeroméxico, Volaris, and Viva Aerobús could be blocked from adding new routes or charter flights.

Though air cargo represents just 0.1% of total national freight volume, it moves over a million tons per year—goods that are most sensitive to time and value per kilo—and is critical to sectors like advanced manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, and global e-commerce.

That's why this isn't just a legal dispute. It's a strategic one.

In an era where cargo routes are no longer redrawn by decree but by operational diplomacy, logistical consensus has become a structural condition for development. It's not just about moving goods; it's about pushing them with shared legitimacy, so they arrive on time.

So what can Mexico do? First, negotiate. The bilateral agreement allows for consultations to avoid sanctions, and the Mexican government can still adjust course without abandoning its policies: it only needs to guarantee operational equivalence, publish clear rules, and restore the reciprocity required by the treaty.

Second, correct it on the ground. If the shift to AIFA is irreversible, Mexico must prove it's not creating a logistical disadvantage: international operators need comparable or better access, infrastructure, and costs than what AICM offered.

Third, institutionalize the lesson. Mexico needs a framework that anticipates the commercial impact of logistical decisions—one with technical assessments, industry consultation, and precise execution criteria. Not to ask for permission, but to ensure its decisions build trust.

For now, the sanction is likely, legally grounded, and part of a broader strategy of commercial pressure.

In 2021, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) downgraded Mexico to Category 2 for technical reasons. It took over two years to recover. Today's threat comes not from the FAA, but from the Department of Transportation. The precedent exists, and the risk is real. Which is why understanding what's at stake isn't a diplomatic exercise—it's a logistical one. Because when consensus breaks down, routes aren't canceled: they become more expensive, more difficult, or they simply shift elsewhere.

To anticipate those shifts—and their impact on the industrial market—visit SiiLA REsource or contact us at contacto@siila.com.mx.