The Drug war in Mexico: Serious National Security Threat

The drug war that is raging south of the border has U.S. officials growing more and more concerned about the security of the United States, not least of all because the violence from the conflict is showing more and more signs of spilling over the border into the United States.

This issue has historically been considered a national security threat by past administrations and is in fact considered such by the current Obama administration. However, some argue that the war against drugs is better characterized as public safety and public health issue rather than as national security issue since the drug trade has mainly resulted in increased local crime and violence, and largely concerns local area gangs.[1]

The Obama administration, while stating that the issue is a one of national security, has previously made it a point that U.S. efforts to assist Mexico—such as the Mérida Initiative put forth by the Bush administration to provide monetary aid and create training and information-sharing programs—continue to be focused on keeping the violence from spilling across the border more than it already has.[2]

However, recent events support the argument that the narcotics associated violence is a serious threat to U.S. national security and regional security. As has been reported, the violence has been brutal and corruption so rampant that some U.S. officials—such as former U.S. drug czar Gen. Barry McCaffrey—claim the possibility exists that Mexico could become a failed state or even collapse into a narco-state.[3][4] This outcome is obviously much more conducive to violence spilling over the borders.

Mexico becoming a failed or “narco” state could be a dire result since it would likely produce corrupt violent regimes whose policies and interests run very contrary to U.S. foreign policy and current U.S. efforts to stem the tide of drugs into the country, all the while sharing a border with the U.S. It is reported that these cartels are able to field as many as 10,000-plus gunmen in regions where police do not earn enough to resist being corrupted, or they live with the constant danger of being killed.[5] Even the mayor of Juarez and his family had to flee to the U.S. city of El Paso, and they have still been threatened by the cartel who claim he and his family are not even safe in the U.S. anymore.[6]

Mexico is a large trade partner for the United States, and this partnership could be severely disrupted if Mexico fails to contain the drug cartels. Furthermore, should Mexico fail to restore control, millions of refugees could join their other economically motivated countrymen in trying to cross the U.S. border both legally and illegally.[7] This flow of people will not only contain those looking for refuge or better opportunities, these breaches in border security mean that those with malicious intent such as terrorists or spies can gain access to the country through this route.

Many administration officials have taken the stance that this is not just a Mexican matter.US Attorney-General Eric Holder and the Justice Departmenthave branded Mexican drug traffickers as the biggest organized crime threat to the US.[8] "They are a national security threat. They bear the hallmarks of organized crime, married to savvy business practices that allow for successful international commerce," said Holder.[9] Crimes connected to these cartels are spreading across the Southwest, where many of murders and kidnappings are believed to be linked to the drug trade.[10] Furthermore, complaints are filtering into the police about extortion threats allegedly coming from notorious Mexican cartels.[11]

In addition, if cartels improve their relationships with local American gangs in order to facilitate drug trafficking, it would lead to an increase in cartel activity and cartel influence within the United States. This increase in cooperation with American groups would only compound the threat and may lead to further security breaches at the border.[12] ABC news reported that Mexico's Sinaloa cartel has apparently had 70 distribution points in 26 US states, which are not only operating in big cities like New York and Los Angeles, but in places like Stow in north-eastern Ohio, a town of just 35,000 people.[13]

Admiral Michael Mullen, who is the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has stated that America does bear some responsibility for the situation in Mexico since “the demand signal (for the drugs) comes out of the United States, the money's flowing from the United States, there is a flow of illegal weapons in and out of that country, and (therefore) there is a focus on doing all we can to help eliminate that.”[14]

These facts may suggest that the Mérida Initiative has been insufficient in stemming the violence, which is why policy makers are now discussing the possibility of increasing monetary aid and considering the potential military assistance beyond existing training and information-sharing programs.

The Obama administration now sees the drug-related violence sweeping through Mexico as a growing threat to U.S. national security and has launched a broad review of steps the military and intelligence community could take to help combat what U.S. some officials describe as a "narcoinsurgency.”[15] U.S. and Mexican officials say the Pentagon’s Northern Command, DHS, and other agencies are discussing what aviation, surveillance, and intelligence assets could be used — both inside Mexico and along the border — to help counter the drug cartels.[16]

Officials applaud what President Felipe Calderón is doing taking about issue, and point out that “there is a war going on down there and they (Mexico) are going to need help in combating that war.”[17] It is presumed that it is only a matter of time before it reaches U.S. soil.

However there are inherent problems with an increased effort to aid Mexico with its narcoinsurgency. One problem is that with increased intelligence collaboration there is the possibility that the information shared by U.S. agencies to their Mexican counterparts may be passed on to the cartels if those people are on the payroll of the cartels.

And though Mexico is intertwined with the U.S. economically, many Mexicans would see greater American military involvement in the conflict as a breach of sovereignty,[18] and with the Pentagon focused on the Middle East and al Qaeda and its affiliates, it is unclear what if any enthusiasm will exist in the U.S. for a greater U.S. role, even if Mexico agreed to one.

Nevertheless, U.S. officials still use the term insurgency to describe how Mexican cartels are challenging the government,[19] Similar language was used by Secretary of State Hilary Clinton a few months ago and is also akin to that used in the November 2008 U.S. military assessment that lumped Mexico together with Pakistan as running the risk of “rapid and sudden collapse” in a worst-case scenario.[20]

This will be a long-term struggle. The problem of rooting out the domestic corruption that supports the cartels in Mexico is too large to be solved anytime soon. Mexico has begun the long struggle to develop an independent judiciary and a powerful and incorruptible police force to cope with the well-financed, powerful cartels. Much of the region is desert and rugged mountain terrain, making it difficult to even monitor the cartels’ activities, much less counter them.

However, supporting the Mexican government may lessen the need and size of defensive counter measures here in the United States. Proactive operations often prove more financially reasonable then setting up a massive defensive control system at the border and within the United States in order to keep drugs out and guns in.