Mexico

On June 30th, President Bush signed into law the Merida Initiative. The initiative is part of the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008, and provides $465 million dollars for the war against drugs in Mexico and Central America. Mexico will receive $400 million dollars.

The Senate passed the controversial bill on June 27th. The original bill had produced strong reactions in Mexico because it required the fulfillment of conditions that were considered unilateral and against Mexico’s sovereignty. In addition, the administration of President Bush criticized Congress for jeopardizing a necessary initiative that would certainly contribute in the War against Drugs in both Mexico and the United States.

Having reached a deadlock, it seems that the inter-parliamentary session between members of the US and Mexican Congresses in early June contributed to the progress of the bill. After the usual exchange of comments between the US Congress and the Mexican and the American governments, the bill was modified and finally approved by everyone. The Bush administration finally got it passed in both chambers, which represents a victory for the administration; and the Mexican authorities stated that the new initiative does not infringe Mexico’s sovereignty and even represents a new bilateral relationship.

This is not the first time that the US government has contributed with large amount of resources to the fight against drugs in Latin America. Although Plan Colombia—conceived in the late 1990s—did contribute to the war on drugs in that country, it was also correlated with instability in the region and human rights abuses. The situation in Mexico is not as volatile as it was in Colombia, but it is beginning to get there. Hopefully, the initiative will stop this process.

The Merida Initiative would provide $950 million dollars in two years to Mexican law enforcement agencies to support their efforts against resourceful and elusive criminal organizations. The Mexican government needs the aid and the executive branch in the US is willing to provide it. But the US Congress would only grant the funds conditional on the improvement of human rights in Mexico. At these crossroads, the positions of these actors are not precisely original.

First, key members of the US Congress—like Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat from Vermont and member of the Senate’s Committee on Appropriations—believe that Mexican law enforcement agencies are not trustworthy and that tax dollars should not produce further corruption and human rights abuses. This is not the first time the US Congress conditions the use of tax dollars abroad and definitively not the first time the Mexican government is accused of corruption and human rights violations.

Second, high ranking Mexican officials like Interior Secretary Juan Camilo Mourino, as well as members of the political parties, have argued that the conditions established by the US Congress for the provision of the funds are not only unilateral, but also represent interference and even infringe national sovereignty. This is not only an old argument that could have been presented by a 19th century Mexican minister of foreign affairs, but also represents a myopic perspective that does not seem to acknowledge that there is nothing wrong with improving human rights in the country.

Third, the White House, right in between the US Congress and the Mexican government, has argued that conditioning aid to Mexico is counterproductive and that the funds are vital in the War Against Drugs both in the US and Mexico.

These three actors seem to agree on the fact that American support is important and necessary since the demand of drugs and the flow of arms from the US have fueled the conflict in Mexico. They also coincide on the structural inability of Mexican institutions to fight the drug cartels. However, this is not enough to guarantee the approval of the bill and the provision of the funds. Indeed, the US Congress, the White House, and the Mexican government need to find a middle ground that keeps constituents pleased with the efforts of the officials and lawmakers that represent them, while making sure that they engage in true bilateral cooperation to solve a multinational problem like drug trafficking and consumption.

The Mexican armed forces are a pillar of the war against drugs. Indeed, thousands of regular troops are patrolling several municipalities and large cities across Mexico while Special Forces make most of the arrests of high-profile drug lords. In a country plagued by corrupt police forces and heavily armed drug traffickers, the army (which also controls the air force) and the navy have become the country’s last resort in a war that has produced thousands of casualties. Unfortunately, the armed forces themselves are likely to become another victim of this war.

The Mexican army has experienced thousands of desertions in the last few years. According to an investigation of the newspaper Reforma, between 2001 and 2006, the army has lost an average of 30,000 members per year. Although the rate of desertion has decreased to 17,000 in 2007, this is still a very significant number; especially considering where these soldiers go after leaving the armed forces.

The likely cause of desertion in the armed forces is poor working conditions for the meager salaries. According to Benito Jiménez from Reforma, a regular soldier makes between $300 and $400 dollars a month. They could easily make a few more hundred dollars by joining private security companies. More alarming is when soldiers are paid much more for joining drug cartels. This makes the cartels much more deadly, for the trained soldiers are familiar with government procedures. In fact, cartels are now openly recruiting soldiers.

In addition to soldiers leaving for better-paid opportunities, the army is under close scrutiny regarding human rights violations. Although police forces are traditionally associated with violations of human rights in Mexico, the army is no beacon of virtue. Indeed, many military camps served as prisons during the Dirty War of the 1960s and 1970s that produced more than 1,500 disappearances. Even though the country’s human rights records have shown overall improvement, violations continue to occur throughout the territory.

As a result of the Mexican Revolution of 1910, the armed forces were deliberately separated from politics. Their function was limited to the protection of the country from external threats and to relief efforts during national disasters. For decades, the army enjoyed legitimacy unmatched by other Mexican institutions. Lamentably, things have changed. Senior military officers have been tainted by corruption scandals, former member of Special Forces are now bodyguards for drug bosses, and young people aspire to work for drug cartels rather than the army.

So far, nobody knows how this other war within the armed forces will end. If the situation does not improve soon, the army, and the country, will lose the war against drugs.