The Future of Transport in Mexico: High-Speed Rail as a Driver of National and Cultural Integration (Part 2)

One month after winning the presidential election, Dr. Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo announced a plan to build three passenger rail routes. The proposed project includes corridors running, first, from Felipe Ángeles International Airport (AIFA) to Pachuca; second, connecting Mexico City-San Luis Potosí-Monterrey-Nuevo Laredo; and the last, Mexico City-Querétaro-Guadalajara. These are established cities and economic-industrial corridors with a constant flow of people and goods.

But why build a passenger train at all? Every day, countless private cars, passenger buses, and cargo trucks travel these corridors. What difference would a passenger train actually make?

The underlying idea is straightforward: giving the rest of the population a viable option. For those without a private vehicle, without ties to the commercial sector, and without easy transport links to these destinations, the proposition is simple: buy a ticket, board a train, and visit a part of the country they have almost certainly never seen. Is this purely a tourism play? I believe it goes further. Mexico is, in reality, many Mexicos, and the traditions, cuisine, and culture of the north, center, west, and southeast are not the same.

This vision pursues something deeper: breaking down the cultural isolation that has characterized much of the country, allowing the traditions and customs of different regions to be discovered and valued by one another. A high-speed rail system can be the engine of a national redesign, integrating the center and south, and cementing shared prosperity.

The absence of accessible and affordable transport has allowed these regions to grow as independent silos. The commercial dimension matters, yes, but there is an intercultural connection potential we have never tapped. For someone from the Yucatan Peninsula, the traditions of a northerner can feel entirely "foreign," when they are not. I believe that, given the complicated history that has brought us to today, it may be a historical debt that, in the midst of a technological revolution, we have not managed to consolidate a rail network that would at least allow us to discover the cultural wealth across the length and breadth of Mexico.

We need to break out of this isolation. Our identity as Mexicans, our understanding of development, prosperity, and progress can grow exponentially once we begin building these channels.

To illustrate with some historical context: the idea of trains, beyond aligning with the foundational principles of a national vision, carries an additional component that sharpens the equation. A train is, by its very nature, already a project of interconnection and flow between at least two places.

For redesigning the country, and especially now on the rail question, the opportunity before us has three components I would like to explore.

First, as historical introduction: the former Soviet Union designed what it called the "Modern City," which incorporated certain elements. The first was a social and equity concept: the way their buildings and skyscrapers were constructed was distinctive and radically different from the Western model, reflected in much of Eastern European architecture.

Soviet buildings were wide; unlike Western buildings, which draw attention through height. Soviet structures featured a broad podium at the base, with the tower rising from the center. A reference point that exemplifies this is the Palace of Culture in Warsaw. This architectural approach expressed a conviction that everything built should be grounded in collective support, sustained by many people.

Having established that, they also privileged another component: the automobile. The Soviet Union had more cars than the West; yet something very interesting happened with their cities: they were designed to ensure a continuous flow of vehicles. These were cities in constant motion, which embedded in the collective unconscious the idea of dynamism, advancement, and progress. Today, when we picture cities that never stop, names like New York, Singapore, London, or Amsterdam come to mind. The principle was the same: cities of continuous exchange, with services, order, security, and vitality. Without people, cities are inert.

To sustain this system, the Soviets promoted structures called "pirihot," a Russian concept involving pedestrian underpasses beneath busy avenues. Russian cities never slowed down; they gave the impression of perpetual motion, with pedestrians moving alongside avenues and highways running at 80 km/h. This urban model is visible today in Moscow, Warsaw, and other cities shaped by that regime.

The next attribute was the way they interconnected everything. The Soviet network connected the entire territory by rail to enable efficient movement of goods and military personnel. In fact, the system was deliberately designed to prevent easy cross-regional interconnection, serving as a protective barrier against military invasion.

With that context established, I want to turn to the opportunities a rail project could bring specifically to Mexico. Any project requires a prior step: defining the "why" and the "to what end."

In Mexico's case, I see three things. The first concerns defining the ideological concepts, initially laid down by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and centered on justice and austerity, along with the counterposition of ending historical abuse.

His policy has always been to change and install something new rather than maintain aging structures. In that sense, there is indeed a replacement carrying significant change for the country. The so-called "republican austerity" and concepts of justice now integrate into President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo's vision of "shared prosperity," a vision reflected in her foundational idea of the Prospective Territorial and Industrial Atlas I have discussed previously, which laid the groundwork for economic zones within the country capable of growing through their own human and economic virtues and resources.

Once we have an ideological vision, the next step is anchoring it to reality. The Soviets had their characteristic buildings, highways, trains, and housing complexes, and the reality was that everyone had housing; homelessness was virtually nonexistent. That is no small thing in a society, and it reveals some genuine successes that regime achieved in sustaining itself for so long.

In Mexico's case, the anchoring of this vision of justice and equity began with the Tren Maya, the Interoceanic Train, and the other social programs. But it goes beyond all of this. Now, with the rail lines proposed by the president-elect, we are talking about ways of anchoring and generating a new sense of nationhood through a "Connected Republic." That is why I believe those rail lines should not be medium-speed, meaning 120 or 150 km/h, but above 300 km/h. It must be a meaningful marker of a before and after, surpassing the rail lines the United States operates between Washington and New York (Acela), fast enough to be an experience in itself and a symbol of prosperity.

The idea I want to leave on the table here, beyond questions of ownership, routes, or number of lines, is the symbolism those trains represent. While the commercial dimension matters and will speak to their profitability, their value goes beyond numbers: it refers to what they will add to Mexico's concept of identity and how they will connect the diverse cultures that exist here.

Perhaps not all of the proposed lines can be built at true high speed. Even so, it is worth remembering that China has more than 42,000 kilometers of high-speed rail network, while Mexico has barely 1,500 km of the low-speed Tren Maya, to which the approximately 3,000 km of new lines would be added.

This brings us to the point that if Mexico reconnects and creates this network, it is not only about cargo transportation, though that would be significant. The connection between north, center, and southeast has been very limited and is vital for development. By reducing the distance between them, a pending integration becomes possible, one that is also a social integration, since north, center, and southeast are distinct regions.

The symbolism of high-speed trains transcends physical mobility. Just as rail systems in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and China became emblems of progress and cohesion, Mexico has the opportunity to position its rail network as an engine of social and cultural integration. These trains will not only connect regions; they will also help strengthen the emotional and cultural ties among Mexicans, enabling greater national unity.

Just as the buildings of the "Modern City" reflected a social vision of collectivity, a modern rail network in Mexico could be an emblem of integration and equity, aligned with the principles of social justice promoted by the Fourth Transformation. Each station could become a hub of social, economic, and cultural activity, revitalizing lagging areas and serving as connection points between previously isolated regions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What passenger rail corridors did Claudia Sheinbaum propose?

She announced three routes: from Felipe Ángeles International Airport (AIFA) to Pachuca, from Mexico City to Nuevo Laredo via San Luis Potosí and Monterrey, and from Mexico City to Guadalajara via Querétaro.

Why does the author argue for speeds above 300 km/h rather than medium-speed rail?

The author believes the trains must function as a symbolic national milestone, surpassing the US Acela corridor between Washington and New York, and becoming an experience of prosperity in their own right rather than a utilitarian transport upgrade.

How does Soviet urban planning connect to Mexico's rail vision?

The Soviet 'Modern City' demonstrated how infrastructure, from wide-base collective buildings to continuous-flow road systems and integrated rail networks, can embed social values in daily life. The author uses this as a framework for how Mexico's rail network could anchor its own vision of shared prosperity and equity.

How does Mexico's rail coverage compare to China's?

China operates more than 42,000 km of high-speed rail. Mexico currently has roughly 1,500 km of low-speed Tren Maya track, with the proposed new lines adding approximately 3,000 km more.