The name of the Gulf of Mexico may end up in the UN: “It is a place name from the 17th century that Trump wants to change capriciously”

One of Donald Trump’s first decisions as president of the United States has been rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of Americaa measure that he announced this Monday in his inauguration speech and that made Hillary Clinton, present in the room and who seemed to not believe what she was hearing, laugh.

But Trump’s bid is serious because the name change is already beginning to be effective in the US. In fact, that same Monday it was used by the Florida meteorological service, which in its daily report warned of the arrival of “a low pressure across the Gulf of America, interacting with Arctic air”.

It will be necessary to see, however, if this new name ends up being imposed in the US and, above all, if it settles beyond its borders because changing the name of any stream is not the same as changing the name of an ocean basin of 1.5 million km² that bathes the coasts of three countries: the United States, Mexico and Cuba.

“The formation of place names is a process that derives from traditional use and that has been formalized over time, along with the creation of modern states. Currently, each country has a series of commissions or protocols that establish how normalization is carried out and internally they can approve name changesas has happened in Spain, for example, with place names that had to do with fascism,” explains Carlos Manuel, vice president of the College of Geographers.

“In an internal context, within a country, it is much easier to change a toponym, problems arise when they refer to places or geographical features that affect several countriesas is the case of the Gulf of Mexico,” he adds, underlining that “Mexico has already said that it will not accept the new name.”

Although it is not the first toponymic dispute between the US and Mexico, they already disagree regarding the name of the river that serves as the natural border between both countries. (Rio Grande to the north and Río Bravo to the south)this new conflict seems, without a doubt, more serious because it even affects international navigation.

The geographer assures that this case will most likely trigger a dispute that could reach the United Nations: “When there is a lack of agreement between two countries, a conflict is generated that can last a long time. It is difficult to say who has the power to establish the correct name, but Mexico can file a claim at the UNwhich has a group specialized in issues of standardization of geographical names and that seeks consensus to establish a common language for the entire world.

It is not the first toponymic conflict

However, Manuel insists that these toponymic conflicts can fester over time without the intervention of the United Nations being able to remedy it: “We have a very clear example in the sea that is between the Korean peninsula and Japan. For the Japanese it is the “Sea of ​​Japan and for Koreans it is the East Sea.” And there are many more, such as the Falkland Islands, which the British control administratively and call the Falklands. In fact, in 2023 there was a formal London protest because the EU used the name in Spanish during a summit with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.

Of course, the Trump administration can now try to pressure Mexico and other reluctant countries to accept the new name: “Everything will depend on the effort that the US government wants to put into it, but if it takes it very seriously could censor outside publications They don’t recognize the new name. “It is something that the Argentine dictatorship already did with international editions of cartography that did not recognize the Malvinas as Argentine territory.”

In any case, the vice president of Spanish geographers believes that it is most likely that The US uses the name Gulf of Americaat least as long as the Trump government lasts, while the rest of the world continues to call it the Gulf of Mexico: “We are talking about a place name that dates back to the 17th century and that the US now intends to change in a capricious and unilateral way, without there being any “no consensus or any new element that justifies this modification”.

And he emphasizes that it is not the same situation that was experienced in 2015, when Barack Obama changed the name of the highest mountain in North America, Denali (6,190 m), previously known as McKinley and located in Alaska. “That was a claim by the Alaska Geographical Board, with a lot of popular support in that State, to which Obama gave official status. Normally, when there is an internal agreement for a name change, and this does not affect third parties, The rest of the countries usually accept the decision made for the country in question,” says Manuel Valdés. Of course, the name Denali could also have its days numbered because Trump has already said that he will recover the McKinley name.