Mexico’s President, Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo, announced that she will send a letter to Google to stop the use of the name “Gulf of America” instead of “Gulf of Mexico” on Google Maps. This change comes after a decree by U.S. President Donald Trump, who renamed the body of water as part of a series of geopolitical measures under his America First strategy.
Why did Trump rename it “Gulf of America”?
Trump’s decree is part of the first actions he took upon assuming the presidency of the United States.
The executive order aims to reinforce U.S. identity in strategic regions, including the Gulf of Mexico. According to the president, the change to “Gulf of America” reflects his nation’s preeminence in the Western Hemisphere.
It is worth noting that this decree only applies to U.S. jurisdiction. The names of international waters are regulated by global organizations like the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) and the United Nations. However, Trump’s decree explicitly states the local reach of the measure.
Nevertheless, the controversy remains. Claudia Sheinbaum has pointed out that these international institutions are the only ones with the authority to change the names of international bodies of water. “A single country does not have the authority to rename a gulf shared by several nations,” she emphasized during her morning press conference.
READ ALSO. These are General Motors’ plans in the face of Donald Trump’s possible tariffs
Who owns the Gulf of Mexico? Can its name be changed?
The name of the Gulf of Mexico cannot be arbitrarily changed, as it is regulated under international law. The responsible entities are:
- The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO): Establishes uniform standards for nautical charts and maritime documents.
- The United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names: Discusses and regulates issues related to the standardization of geographical names.
These organizations have intervened in similar disputes, such as the case of the Sea of Japan, also called the East Sea by South Korea, demonstrating that name change processes are complex and take years to resolve.
The Gulf of Mexico, historically known as “Seno Mexicano” or “Gulf of New Spain”, holds significant economic, historical, and geopolitical importance for both nations. According to data from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the gulf provides 40% of the country’s seafood and houses a large portion of its oil refining capacity. Meanwhile, Mexico uses these waters for key economic activities such as fishing and hydrocarbon extraction.
With approximately 829,000 square kilometers as Mexico’s exclusive economic zone and 662,000 square kilometers belonging to the United States, the maritime borders of the gulf are regulated by bilateral treaties that ensure cooperation in resource exploitation and environmental protection.
Claudia Sheinbaum’s response to Google
During her morning press conference, President Claudia Sheinbaum announced that she will send a formal letter to Google through Mexican Foreign Minister Juan Ramón de la Fuente.
The letter will argue that the proposed name change lacks international validity and will ask Google Maps to retain the name “Gulf of Mexico”. Additionally, Sheinbaum ironically suggested that if Trump insists on this change, Mexico might propose calling the region “Mexican America,” a nod to 17th-century historical maps.
Google Maps responded to concerns via a statement posted on X (formerly Twitter), indicating that it updates geographic names based on official government sources. However, it emphasized that any change must be endorsed by official bodies such as the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) of the U.S. Department of the Interior.
What implications would the rebranding of the Gulf of Mexico have?
The proposed change not only affects the political map of the region but also the cultural and historical symbolism represented by the name “Gulf of Mexico.” For Mexico, the term is deeply rooted in its national identity and historical narrative since colonial times.
On the other hand, Trump’s unilateral decision could escalate diplomatic tensions between the two countries and spark broader debates about respect for sovereignty and international law. While the change would have no legal impact outside the United States, it could set a precedent.
