Mexico’s War on Drugs: a Success or Failure?

Mexican drug trafficking organizations have caused more than 60,000 deaths and 26,000 disappearances since 2006. In recent years, the cartels have been expanding their territories into some of Mexico’s most populated cities, such as Mexico City and Guadalajara. In result, there has been an increase in violence, making parts of Mexico extremely dangerous. I have family currently living in Mexico City and several times we have had to cancel our trips because the violence made it unsafe for us to travel. Peña Nieto, the current President of Mexico, and Felipe Calderon, his predecessor, both implemented policies aiming to reduce the violence and drug smuggling run by Mexican drug cartels and improve the lives of those living in Mexico. These policies; however, have failed to make a large impact on the Mexican war on drugs.

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan enacted the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. By prohibiting the use and possession of narcotics, the United States presented the opportunity of a lucrative black market for narcotics. The Mexican drug cartels took advantage of this and the first cartel, the Guadalajara Cartel, was created. Following the increase in demand for the black market drugs, Mexico was not able to control the expansion of the drug cartels due to the Mexican government’s propensity for corrupt authority figures and a lack of resources. The DFS, the National Security Directorate, was aiding the Guadalajara Cartel by providing protection and “ensured drug-laden safe passage over the border by using the Mexican police radio system to intercept U.S. police surveillance messages,” as told by David Gagne. During this period of tension throughout Mexico, the United States turned a blind eye to the violence as well as to the importation of drugs into the country. Once the smuggling of drugs and violence began to affect the United States, President George W. Bush partnered with Felipe Calderon to aid in developing a policy to stop the expansion of the drug trafficking organizations.

To address the problem, there have been several policies put into affect in order to control the collateral damage resulting from the cartels. In 2008, President Felipe Calderon enacted the Merida Initiative, which is a partnership between the United States and Mexico to fight organized crime and the violence associated with it. According to the U.S. Department of State, this policy was also created to “develop reforms to sustain the rule of law and support for human rights, create a 21st century border structure, and build strong and resilient communities”. The U.S. Congress has allocated $2.4 billion to the “Merida Initiative” since 2008. This financial assistance has helped create anti-corruption programs and has provided specialized aircrafts and training for pilots, inspection equipment, canines trained in the detection of narcotics and weapons, a secure telecommunications system between ten U.S. and Mexican border cities, as well as many other resources. Mexico’s current President, Peña Nieto, has enacted the Pact for Mexico in an attempt to improve transparency as well as security and justice for the people. The security reform to this policy will create a national gendarmerie, a military force, which will be controlled by the local governments. The reform will also create standardization across the security apparatus. Although both of these policies have attempted to weaken the drug cartels, the cartels have instead thrived in recent years.

During Felipe Calderon’s presidency, he instituted a “major counter narcotics campaign against Mexican cartels in a concerted effort to disrupt and destroy the critical nodes of drug trafficking in the country”. The United States supported the initiative and has since pledged $2.4 billion in equipment and training. The different programs of the Merida Initiative are known as the Four Pillars. The goals of the Four Pillars are to: “disrupt capacity of organized crime to operate, institutionalize capacity to sustain rule of law, create a 21st century border structure, and build strong and resilient communities”. This policy was enforced throughout the end of George Bush’s Presidency and continued with the Obama administration, until Calderon’s final year in office.

The first pillar hoped to diminish the power and presence of the Mexican drug cartels by capturing and incarcerating their members as well as reducing the amount of drugs being smuggled, money being laundered, and narcotics being produced. The Mexican government hoped to achieve this by allocating funds towards equipment, technology and training to improve the police forces and their ability to productively fight against the cartels. They attempted to establish a secure, cross-border telecommunications system between several U.S. and Mexican border cities. This allowed Mexican border patrols to communicate with American border patrols about information regarding criminal activity. The second pillar hoped to augment border control as well as public security and judicial institutions to preserve the rule of law. These programs aspired to improve internal controls, implement justice sector reform, and further professionalize the military and police forces. The third pillar aimed to reduce the flow of drugs, criminals, weapons, and cash throughout Mexico as well as across their two borders. They have implemented improved infrastructure and technology to strengthen border security and to detect criminal activity. They have delivered over four hundred canines highly trained in detecting narcotics, weapons, and currency to assist border patrol in diminishing the passage of illicit items across the border. The fourth pillar hoped to strengthen Mexican communities against organized crime by encouraging citizens to have confidence in public institutions as well as engaging the youth in their communities to prevent them from getting involved in organized crime. The Merida Initiative Culture of Lawfulness (COL) programs aimed to “instill a sense of individual responsibility to uphold the rule of law in Mexico, with the larger goal of reducing crime and corruption”. These were the four fundamental ideologies that the Merida Initiative followed in order to successfully fight against the cartels and make Mexico safer for its citizens.

Although the Merida Initiative outlined exactly what Mexico wished to accomplish, it failed to be realistic. The majority of the funding provided by the United States was not allocated correctly. According to Ray Walser, a PhD and Senior Policy Analyst, money was used to provide weapons as well as other resources to aid Mexico in their war against drugs. However, a large portion of the money should have been directed towards fighting corruption within the Mexican government. Several of the weapons and technology provided by the United States ended up in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels, either by interception or though corrupt political figures. Mexico should have also worked to improve their communication with the United States, not just concerning border patrol issues but also new policies that could inadvertently affect one another. By having a strong relationship with the United States, the power of the Mexican drug cartels could have been subsided. Instead, the cartels are finding new means of smuggling drugs into bordering countries. Whenever the police force captured and incarcerated a drug lord, the cartels always had a contingency plan and losing one of their leaders rarely hindered their production. Mexico needed to always be a step ahead of the drug trafficking organizations, which was found to be difficult due to the level of corruption within the government and lack of communication with the United States.

Peña Nieto has attempted to pick up the pieces following Calderon’s presidency. He has done so by implementing the “Pact for Mexico,” which went into effect in December 2012. The Pact for Mexico is an agreement approved by Mexico’s three main political parties, and consists of 95 initiatives. The platform of the Pact for Mexico policy was to “take the counter narcotics function out of the hands of the military- which he [Nieto] argues has not only been ineffective but counterproductive- and return it to a law enforcement structure that is ‘clean,’ transparent, and trusted”. The policy has three central points; the strengthening of the Mexican state; political and economic democratization; and the application and expansion of social rights, as explained in Andres Sada’s article “Explainer: What is the Pacto por Mexico”. All of the 95 initiatives fall under five categories: democratic governance, transparency and accountability, rights and liberties, security and justice, and economic growth and competitiveness. The Mexican government also vowed to develop a new paramilitary unit solely dedicated to reestablishing security across the country. This paramilitary unit will be made up of 40,000 military personnel, all deriving from either the navy or army. The military force will be divided into 14 locations throughout Mexico, all of which are major drug trafficking areas. These groups will also be responsible for investigating organized crime with an emphasis on monitoring rural jurisdiction where the state has minimal presence.

Peña Nieto’s policy has been criticized for being too similar to his predecessor’s (Felipe Calderon). Both policies aim to target “cartel kingpins” at the border, while kidnapping and extortion have been on the rise. Just last year there was the disappearance and massacre of 43 college students. These students were abducted by police, on order of a local mayor and were handed over to the Guerreros Unidos gang. The gang then killed them and burned their bodies before disposing their remains in a river, as reported by Mariano Castillo. According to an interview with Foreign Affairs, Nieto’s goal is to reduce the level of violence by “emphasizing prevention, coordination, and the reconstruction of the social fabric”. Although Mexico has seen a reduction in homicide, the drug trafficking organizations have begun to lash out in different illegal acts, such as kidnapping and extortion. The horrific event in Guerrero is only one example of the prominence of corruption within the Mexican government. In order for Mexico’s goal to diminish the presence of the drug cartels to be achieved, one of Nieto’s priorities needs to be eliminating the existence of corruption within the Mexican government. The cartels also make up Mexico’s largest industry, behind oil. Mexico needs to work with the U.S. and establish an agreement to take stricter measures to decrease both the demand and supply of narcotics.

As both Calderon’s Merida Initiative and Nieto’s Pact for Mexico are very similar, they both struggle to be successful for the same reasons. Peña Nieto’s policy did not differentiate much from Calderon’s policy and neither had very much success. Both have aided in the capturing of some of the most notorious drug lords; however, the cartels continue to thrive. In order for Mexico to stop the cartels from expanding and becoming even more powerful and influential, the government needs to focus on eliminating corruption within the government. TO achieve this, the Mexican government would need to improve the education, training, and pay of the police officers as well as military personnel. This would hopefully prevent them from being bribed by the members of the drug trafficking organizations. Another strategy could be to target the supply of resources for the production of illicit drugs. If you cut off the supply, the cartels would not be able to produce the narcotics. The guns smuggled into Mexico from the United States provide the cartels with an advantage over the equipment used by the police and military in Mexico. In order to prevent this, Mexico should require strict patrolling of the border, as a large amount of resources, such as weapons and money, come from the United States. The telecommunications reform in the Pact for Mexico would be beneficial in communicating with the United States government in order to narrow down what the patrolmen are looking for at border checks. If the supply were to be cut off, the drug trafficking organizations would no longer be able to fund their production, which would weaken their infrastructure. Overall, the policies implemented in Mexico had good intentions but were unable to successfully make a difference on the Mexican war on drugs. With improvements in anti-corruption regulations within the Mexican government and patrolling and communication at the border, Mexico would have a greater chance of reducing the power of the drug trafficking organizations.

Works Cited

Bolton, Gene. “Evaluating Political Compromise: A “Pact for Mexico”.” Council on Hemispheric Affairs. COHA, 19 Dec. 2012. Web. 12 May 2015.

Castillo, Mariano. “Remains Could Be 43 Missing Mexican Students — CNN.com.” CNN. CNN Cable News Network, 11 Nov. 2014. Web. 7 May 2015.

Chalk, Peter. “Mexico’s New Strategy to Combat Drug Cartels: Evaluating the National Gendarmerie | Combating Terrorism Center at West Point.” Combating Terrorism Center at West Point. West Point, 23 May 2013. Web. 9 May 2015.

Gagne, David. “Merida Initiative.” U.S. Department of State. U.S. Department of State, 6 Apr. 2015. Web. 9 May 2015.

“Merida Initiative.” U.S. Department of State. U.S. Department of State, n.d. Web. 20 May 2015.

“Pact for Progress.” Foreign Affairs. Foreign Affairs, 06 Dec. 2013. Web. 11 May 2015.

Sada, Andres. “Explainer: What Is the Pacto Por México?” Explainer: What Is the Pacto Por México? Americas Society/Council of the Americas, 11 Mar. 2013. Web. 11 May 2015.

Stewart, Scott. “Understanding Pena Nieto’s Approach to the Cartels.” Stratfor. Stratfor Global Intelligence, 16 May 2013. Web. 15 May 2015.

“United States Diplomatic Mission To Mexico City, Mexico.” Merida Initiative. United States Diplomatic Mission to Mexico, n.d. Web. 10 May 2015.

Walser, Ray. “U.S. Strategy Against Mexican Drug Cartels: Flawed and Uncertain.” The Heritage Foundation. N.p., 26 Apr. 2010. Web. 10 May 2015.