Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mexican Narcoterrorism - an memo by Gen McCaffrey

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mexican Narcoterrorism - an memo by Gen McCaffrey

    Hot off the press from the Small Wars Journal. I find his view that the violence in Mexico is as severe as that of Afghanistan to be an interesting perspective.
    General Barry McCaffrey: Mexico Trip Report

    General Barry McCaffrey (USA, Ret.) an Adjunct Professor at West Point, visited Mexico 5-7 December 2008 as part of an International Forum of Intelligence and Security Specialists.

    In his report, General McCaffrey notes that drug-related violence in Mexico is as severe as terror-related violence in Afghanistan and calls on the new Administration to urgently focus on the growing security threat to the US southern border.
    Full PDF: http://www.mccaffreyassociates.com/p...ember_2008.pdf

    I'll quote parts of the PDF file I found to be particularly interesting:
    • The proposed U.S. Government spending in support of the Government of Mexico is a drop in the bucket compared to what we have spent in Iraq and Afghanistan (these foreign wars have consumed $700 billion dollars and resulted in 36,000 US military killed and wounded). Yet the stakes in Mexico are enormous. We cannot afford to have a narco state as a neighbor.
    • A failure by the Mexican political system to curtail lawlessness and violence could result of a surge of millions of refugees crossing the US border to escape the domestic misery of violence, failed economic policy, poverty, hunger, joblessness, and the mindless cruelty and injustice of a criminal state.
    E. Mexico is not confronting dangerous criminality--- it is fighting for survival against narco-terrorism.
    Thoughts on the memo? Is Mexico facing an existential threat from narco-terrorists, and what should we be doing to assist them? I have to admit that I'm shocked of my almost complete ignorance of the situation right south of our border -- and spilling over it.
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

  • #2
    Mexico's Narco-Insurgency
    Hal Brands | 22 Dec 2008

    When Barack Obama takes office on Jan. 20, his foreign policy will almost certainly be consumed by the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet Obama would do well to pay equal attention to a third ongoing insurgency, one that is currently more violent than the war in Iraq and possibly more threatening to American interests. This insurgency is raging not half a world away in the Middle East, but just across America's southern frontier in Mexico.

    Since 2006, Mexico has descended into a multifaceted narco-insurgency. Well-armed and well-funded cartels are viciously fighting the government and one another over control of the drug-running corridors into the United States. As today's discovery of nine decapitated bodies -- including seven Mexican soldiers -- indicates, they do battle with astonishing savagery, often beheading, immolating, strangling, and torturing their enemies, and advertising their expertise in such tactics in slickly produced videos posted to YouTube.

    The violence has escalated this year, claiming nearly 5,000 lives since January, causing a palpable sense of insecurity throughout Mexico, and leaving the Mexican government's control of large stretches of territory nominal to non-existent. Once renowned for its political stability, Mexico now seems en route to becoming a failed state.

    The dangers of this insurgency hardly end at Mexico's northern border. The upheaval threatens to produce a spike in illegal immigration to the U.S. -- according to one study, the number of undocumented migrants heading north quintupled from 2006 to 2007. It could also imperil the $364 billion in annual commerce that crosses the border and more than $84 billion in U.S. direct investment in Mexico. Economic activity in the northern part of that country is already severely depressed.

    More troubling still, the destabilization of Mexico would pose a host of security challenges for the U.S., depriving it of the essentially pacific southern border that it has enjoyed since the close of the Mexican revolution 90 years ago and raising the specter of lawlessness and chaos very close to home. This is hardly a far-fetched scenario, as cartel operatives have recently been implicated in murders in Dallas, Phoenix, and other southwestern cities. The violence in Mexico will likely only get worse in the coming months, and as it does it will increasingly spill over into the U.S.

    What is to be done? In its last months in power, the Bush administration has unveiled a program known as the Merida Initiative, or Plan Merida. The initiative -- a three-year, $1.4 billion counter-drug assistance package aimed mainly at Mexico -- is meant to strengthen the enforcement, interdiction, and internal security capabilities of the Mexican military and police. The U.S. will offer training in counter-narcotics techniques and provide equipment like helicopters, X-ray scanners, and surveillance planes, thereby allowing the Mexican government to take the offensive in the fight against the cartels.

    Plan Merida represents a good start insofar as it recognizes the immense U.S. stake in Mexico's security and stability. In terms of grappling effectively with the drug trade and its attendant violence, though, it is only a start.

    It contains few if any provisions for dealing with the deeper, more embedded issues that make the drug trade so intractable: official corruption, poverty and social alienation, and the remarkable weakness of the Mexican judicial system and other critical institutions. Plan Merida also has little to say about America's own homegrown contributions to the Mexican drug trade: the demand for illegal narcotics that keeps the cartels in business, and the flow of guns, purchased legally in the United States and then smuggled south to the cartels, that fuels the violence in Mexico. As long as these issues go unresolved, Plan Merida will be a mere palliative for the narcotics trade and its devastating consequences.

    To be effective, the security and interdiction components of Plan Merida must be integrated into a broader framework that not only strengthens the forces of order in Mexico but also combats the underlying problems that drive the drug trade. This means developing anti-poverty initiatives and giving at-risk populations access to opportunities other than crime and illicit commerce; helping the Mexican government fight official corruption and strengthen feeble institutions like the judiciary; and reversing the current trend of declining appropriations for prevention, treatment, and other demand-reduction programs in the United States. It also means getting serious about restricting the flow of arms into Mexico by tightening the lax laws that currently allow cartel middle-men to purchase assault rifles and other heavy weapons from U.S. suppliers with no questions asked. Finally, it means integrating all of these elements into a coherent, interagency and international effort.

    Devising and implementing such a program will not be politically easy or financially inexpensive. Yet it need not be impossible, either. Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), the chairman of the Western Hemisphere subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, has spoken eloquently about the shortcomings of Plan Merida, and Obama himself has signaled a desire for a more comprehensive approach to issues like drug trafficking and economic development in Latin America.

    If these officials can seize the opportunity presented by the current crisis to refashion U.S. counter-narcotics policy in bold and imaginative ways, they may begin to make progress in dealing with the entrenched problems that have long fueled the drug trade and drug-related violence in Mexico. If not, Plan Merida will go down as another failed offensive in the war on drugs.
    Source: http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/article.aspx?id=3072
    "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

    Comment


    • #3
      An article from the SWJ from August 2008:
      State of Siege
      Mexico’s Criminal Insurgency
      by John P. Sullivan and Adam Elkus, Small Wars Journal

      State of Siege: Mexico’s Criminal Insurgency (Full PDF Article)

      Mexico is under siege, and the barbarians are dangerously close to breaching the castle walls. Responding to President Felipe Calderon’s latest drug crackdown, an army of drug cartels has launched a vicious criminal insurgency against the Mexican state. So far, the conflict has killed over 1,400 Mexicans, 500 of them law enforcement officers. No longer fearing retaliation, cartel gunmen assault soldier and high-ranking federale alike. The criminal threat is not only a threat to public order but to the state. A top-ranking Mexican intelligence official has noted in interview that criminal gangs pose a national security threat to the integrity of the state. Cartels are even trying to take over the Mexican Congress by funding political campaigns, CISEN director Guillero Valdes alleged. Should Mexico’s gangs cement their hold further, Mexico could possibly become a criminal-state largely controlled by narco-gangs. This is not just a threat to Mexico, however.

      As the intensity of the violence grows, so does the possibility that Tijuana and Juarez’s high-intensity street warfare will migrate north. Recent cartel warfare in Arizona indicates that America has become a battleground for drug cartels clashing over territory, putting American citizens and law enforcement at risk. But the northward migration of cartel warfare is not the worst consequence of Mexico’s criminal insurgency. A lawless Mexico will be a perfect staging ground for terrorists seeking to operate in North America. American policymakers must act to protect our southern flank.
      http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/200...xicos-crimina/
      "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

      Comment


      • #4
        Mexico

        I spent a week in Oaxaca during the spring of 1996.

        Their army trained junior officers by running operations in the mountains surrounding Oaxaca- (chocolate, coffee, reefer, opium).

        Demonstrations for repressive actions and sympathy to Chiapas were common too. A strong left was working next to a burgeoning narco-network. Not complementary in their actions but the net corrosiveness and tension was pervasive then.

        I guess a lot worse now.

        I know this- back then you traveled the highway between Oaxaca and Huatulco on the Pacific coast at your own risk. It was often cut by bandits, cars stolen, people robbed and often killed.

        Different world south of the Rio Grande. Make no mistake there.
        "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
        "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by S-2 View Post
          I spent a week in Oaxaca during the spring of 1996.

          I guess a lot worse now.

          I know this- back then you traveled the highway between Oaxaca and Huatulco on the Pacific coast at your own risk. It was often cut by bandits, cars stolen, people robbed and often killed.

          Different world south of the Rio Grande. Make no mistake there.

          I have been to Tijuana a few times in 03-04 when I lived in San Diego to er...see the sights. Leave the car on the American side, a taxi ride anywhere costs $2. The taxis will take you to the party zones where the American college kids hang out. Outside of that travel at your own risk. A couple buddies of mine were stopped by the cops, patted down (one looks like a hippy) and were relieved of some bribe money. They were lucky it was the cops. Definitely not a place to bring the kids.

          Comment


          • #6
            Does anybody think that the US ought to provide assistance to Mexico to combat narcoterrorism, and if so, in what form and at what level?
            "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
              Does anybody think that the US ought to provide assistance to Mexico to combat narcoterrorism, and if so, in what form and at what level?
              I'm not a big supporter of the war on drugs. Demand will never cease, so if people want to get high/kill themselves they will find a way. Also calling it "narcoterrorism" is not a quite accurate term. These guys are not out to further any political goals, they only want money. They don't always kill civilians either.

              I don't know what throwing more money at the problem is going to do; if we don't cut demand or legalize drugs there will always be a violent competition over who will be the suppliers. At the core of it we have to remember ultimately these guys, these cartels, are businessmen, so I don't that they would harbor or encourage terrorists who could be bad for their business.

              This article just came out: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28589917/ If these cartels spill over into the US, the military will 'surge' them.

              To date, there has been no significant violent spillover from the drug war in Mexico, but U.S. authorities have spent a tense year watching and waiting.
              These guys aren't stupid though; Americans are their customers not their rivals. I think it will stabilize before too long.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
                Does anybody think that the US ought to provide assistance to Mexico to combat narcoterrorism, and if so, in what form and at what level?
                Two things come to mind when I consider your question:

                1. Is Columbia a valid case study for the problem in Mexico and is that the type and scale of assistance we should provide?

                2. How much unilateralism can we safely peddle in lieu of a joint solution to a regional problem?

                Regards,

                William
                Pharoh was pimp but now he is dead. What are you going to do today?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Swift Sword View Post
                  Two things come to mind when I consider your question:

                  1. Is Columbia a valid case study for the problem in Mexico and is that the type and scale of assistance we should provide?

                  2. How much unilateralism can we safely peddle in lieu of a joint solution to a regional problem?

                  Regards,

                  William
                  I don't think Colombia is a valid case study because it has an insurgency that is funded by drugs. Drug money funds their other goals. In Mexico, the cartels do not control any territory and aren't trying to overthrow the government. Drug money for the Mexican cartels is the end goal.

                  The US isn't going to do anything unilaterally in Mexico... I don't think it's anywhere near the realm of possibility. Any anti-cartel efforts would have to be undertaken in joint cooperation with the Mexican federal government.
                  "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Any operations with the Mexican government is doomed to failure due to corruption and moles ... it's the same situation as with the South Vietnamese Army.

                    Mexico's instability is the biggest threat to our national security according to a recent FBI report and thus it's time to send the US Army down there and replace the US Border Patrol and create a special Border Guard within the US Army, we can avoid Posse Comatius by having the troops detain any border crosser's (illegals or drug smugglers) until Customs inspectors can make the actual arrest and process them.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      We need to give them everything we can.

                      Mexico's in grave danger of becoming a narco-state like Columbia. The maras, most notably MS-13, are very powerful, controlling most of the rail lines from Guatamala all the way to N. Mexico. Mara Salvatrucha controls TFM which runs from Chaipas through Veracruz and provides protection for drug shipments for the cartels. It's drugs and human trafficking going north, weapons going south.

                      90% of S. American cocaine is coming into the US from Mexico. It's a major supplier of heroin. It has one of the highest kidnapping rates in the world. There are FARC cells active in Mexico providing military training to the maras and the cartels. I know this.

                      Whatever happens in Mexico effects the US.

                      And don't think the cartel's or maras don't control territory. There are 4 major cartels controlling parts of the US border. And Mexico does have active leftist guerrilla movements, the EZLN and the EPR, the latter which openly advocates revolution.

                      There are many fine brave honest cops and soldiers in Mexico, trying to make their country better. Yeah, there's corruption. It's called plata o plomo: silver or lead. You take the money or you take the bullet. Its a hard offer to resist but many have had the courage to do so.
                      Last edited by Red Seven; 14 Jan 09,, 19:50.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Red Seven View Post
                        We need to give them everything we can.

                        Mexico's in grave danger of becoming a narco-state like Columbia. The maras, most notably MS-13, are very powerful, controlling most of the rail lines from Guatamala all the way to N. Mexico. Mara Salvatrucha controls TFM which runs from Chaipas through Veracruz and provides protection for drug shipments for the cartels. It's drugs and human trafficking going north, weapons going south.

                        90% of S. American cocaine is coming into the US from Mexico. It's a major supplier of heroin. It has one of the highest kidnapping rates in the world. There are FARC cells active in Mexico providing military training to the maras and the cartels. I know this.

                        Whatever happens in Mexico effects the US.

                        And don't think the cartel's or maras don't control territory. There are 4 major cartels controlling parts of the US border. And Mexico does have active leftist guerrilla movements, the EZLN and the EPR, the latter which openly advocates revolution.

                        There are many fine brave honest cops and soldiers in Mexico, trying to make their country better. Yeah, there's corruption. It's called plata o plomo: silver or lead. You take the money or you take the bullet. Its a hard offer to resist but many have had the courage to do so.
                        Dosent MS-13 also control significant amounts of El Salvador outside of the major cities? IMO they are more of a private army then a street gang like alot of our LEOs make them out to be, if you ask me we are not taking this huge powder keg in Latin America seriously enough.

                        I honestly don't think Bush and Obama are aware that if they implode then the current problems on the border will look like a kindergarten class outing in comparison.
                        Last edited by ChrisF202; 15 Jan 09,, 01:12.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          MS 13, MS 18 and other maras are everywhere through Central America...It's organized crime with tens of thousands of members. They finance ops through protection rackets and controlling the smuggling conduits, charging "taxes" on the cartels, the human traffickers and the gun runners.

                          Then you've got the various revolutionary factions, like Columbian FARC which is now active everywhere, providing military training...and most of these guerrilla groups have their hands in drug protection and drug money. FARC and others still do "contract" work protecting drug labs, etc.

                          Add to this Cuban, Venezuelan, Nicaraguan mercenaries, political agitators; Hamas and Hezbollah activly fund-raising in S. America; Chinese triads; Russian arms merchants; and operating with great discretion behind this web of chaos and the USA's focus on Iraq and A-stan, you have the People's Republic of China buying up natural resources, making deals with socialists like Chavez and Ortega. And China does not do business anywhere without operators from the Ministry of State Security tip-toeing around in the shadows.

                          Its a great big freakin Bandito holiday south of Texas. Mexico is trying to deal with it. But it needs the kind of help we were giving Columbia in the 90's. It needs more than that. The US military is stretched pretty thin right now. Most of our SOF assets are being used in the GWOT. But IMO Mexico's stability is crucial to the US.
                          Last edited by Red Seven; 15 Jan 09,, 20:55.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            We should create a European style paramilitary gendarmerie/constabulary force to patrol the Mexican border complete with military status as the 6th branch of service with a special exemption to allow them to perform law enforcement duties like the Coast Guard. Like the Coast Guard it would be run by DHS in peace and DOD in war.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Good idea. I'm guessing eventually something's going to happen on that flank that compels us to take more action.

                              Our military involvement in drug interdiction in the 90's in Columbia and the Carib was pretty effective. It gave Columbia some needed resources--not to mention the confidence--to ramp up the fight--and led to the fall of Pablo, the Ochoas and Rodriguez Gacha.

                              (It also led to the redirection of drug shipments by land routes up through Central America.)

                              The damned heartbreak in all this--discounting the horrible addictions at the terminus--is that so many thousands of courageous people have died trying to rid their respective countries of the narcos, in Columbia, Mexico, etc.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X