Mexico

It seems that some municipalities are governed by criminal organizations. According to the Attorney General’s Office, drug cartels control 80 municipalities. However, Mexico has more than 2,500 municipalities and controlling 80 of them is far from controlling the entire country. In spite of this, a qualitative interpretation of these events would suggest that things are just not right in Mexico, especially since cartels are said to behave as a form of a government that collects taxes and provides some public goods. The cartels also profit from the sexual exploitation of persons, according to the report.

It is not surprising to learn that drug cartels present a clear and present danger to Mexican democratic institutions. This was recently declared by Guillermo Valdés, head of Mexican intelligence. Unfortunately, the current fight against drugs has not improved the situation. During the last year, the country has experienced a dramatic increase in the number of drug-related casualties. In addition, the federal government has overexposed the military to a force it was not prepared to fight. This explains the need to minimize the involvement of the armed forces and increase the budget to recruit more regular police forces.

The question is whether the new impulse in the fight against drugs in Mexico will start having an impact before the situation becomes unmanageable and drug cartels control more municipalities in the country.

Members of the Senate have declared that the Mexican Center for Research and National Security (CISEN) has been spying on them. According to some Senators, the executive branch, through the CISEN, has been gathering information about them without authorization. The Senators’ outrage comes from three sources. First, information about them was collected without permission. Second, it was discovered that the Center did not collect the information itself, but hired a private company to do so. Third, the director of the company in charge of collecting the information happens to be closely linked to the ruling National Action Party. With this evidence in hand, it is not surprising or completely unreasonable that the Senate has asked for the dismissal of Guillermo Valdés Castellanos, director of the CISEN.

Of course, the appointment and dismissal of high ranking public officials is a prerogative of the President and not of the Senate. This was clearly stated by the Ministry of the Interior in a response to the agreement reached at the Senate. In the press release, the Ministry of the Interior denies any accusations of espionage and makes a reference to the outstanding record of Valdés Castellanos as head of the CISEN. In spite of this clear demonstration of support, it seems that members of the Senate will continue to keep this event as an issue in Mexican politics.

Manlio Fabio Beltrones, Senator from Sonora, has formally placed an accusation of espionage at the Attorney General’s Office. This is quite a turn of events for Beltrones, a former high ranking official linked to the political police that was part of the PRI-led administration that ruled Mexico for more than 70 years. Beltrones, a fomer governor of Sonora, was accused by American intelligence of having ties to drug traffickers in the late 1990s. Today, Beltrones is the PRI leader at the Senate.

So for this month’s scandal, the intelligence services hired a consulting company to collect information about members of Congress. The consulting company came up with a fictitious form that Senators had to fill out for the purposes of publishing an academic book. Naïve and not-so-naïve members of Congress fell for the trick. Once they found out they were subject to an unauthorized collection of information—espionage for short, according to them—they have asked for the resignation of the head of intelligence services.

If Valdés Castellanos becomes a political liability, Calderón is likely to remove him regardless of his past record as head of intelligence. Unlike Valdés Castellanos, who can be removed quickly, Beltrones and other Senators can only be removed—or in fact prevented from reaching office—by their electorates. This usually takes up to 6 years. For better or worse, that is how fixed terms work.