Mexico

On July 18th, the Mexican Navy intercepted a mini submarine that was transporting more than 5 tons of cocaine. This is a significant operation that highlights the ability of Mexican armed forces to combat drug trafficking by air, land, and sea. Bilateral cooperation between the United States and Mexico contributed to the capture of the submarine. Given the current context, it is important to ask whether foreign assistance in the form provided by the Mérida Initiative or Plan Colombia actually reduce drug trafficking.

Answering such a question is not an easy task. Indeed, there are methodological issues that do not allow to test whether military assistance provided by one country (or countries) to another actually reduce drug trafficking. A large transfer of resources to combat drugs is public information. Drug cartels can observe this transfer. Having observed the transfer, they can modify their activities accordingly. However, this modification is not observable—although intelligence agencies should be able to observe these activities. Cartels can improve their efforts and become even more difficult to catch (they become better drug traffickers); or they can reduce their efforts, thus giving the impression that the aid is working (they play a low profile). This last event is a response to the transfer, not a response to the actual implementation of the funds provided by the transfer.

But high office is run by politicians and not by researchers. Indeed, it is always good to show the photos of a submarine being taken over by Special Forces. We can expect observing more dramatic seizures of drugs under a new bilateral relationship between Mexico and the United States. The question is whether those seizures will be masking other types of illegal operations that make use of even more fantastic ways of transporting drugs across countries.

The June 30 signing by President Bush of House Resolution 2642, the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2008, not only includes the Merida Initative to help Mexico crack down on drug cartels, it also funds wide-ranging American policies of which Latin America forms part of the global war on terror (see the President’s remarks here).  To the dismay of Congress, the Merida Initiative was largely negotiated without their consultation, and passed onto the appropriations bill.  Significantly, its passage represents an important compromise between Congress and the President.  First and foremost, it provides funding for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq without timetables or other restrictive conditions.  Secondly, it expands educational benefits from the GI Bill, as demanded by Democrats, and also includes $2.7 billion for natural disaster relief. It also represents somewhat mended fences between the Executive and Legislative branches.

In perspective, the $465 million to combat drug trafficking in Mexico and Central America pales in comparison to the massive spending in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Nevertheless, it represents an important step forward in bilateral and multilateral relations between the US, Mexico, and Central America.  All parties have signed a free trade agreement, which has now led to a security agreement against illegal drugs.  The passage also represents a balancing act between Mexico and the United States.  Both parties weighed the desire to protect human rights against concerns of sovereignty and efficacy.  Its passage is a great step forward, and ideally will reduce the influence of illegal drugs cartels and, if not more importantly, bring Latin America into America’s foreign policy spotlight.  Perhaps the next step will be immigration reform…

Mexico City’s International Airport is a good representative of the current trends in the fight against drugs in Mexico. Indeed, the airport is a window to the escalating conflict that involves the federal government and its allies—including the US government—as well as drug trafficking organizations that dare to smuggle thousands of cocaine doses through the gates of one of the most important airports in the world.

Any passenger arriving to the new international terminal is likely to see dozens of heavily armed federal agents guarding the hangars of the Attorney General’s Office or the Federal Police. A few years ago it was difficult to see any agents at all. The presence of such a number of agents has been caused by recent seizures of large quantities of drugs at the airport, as well as by the dangerous nature of the organizations that smuggle them into Mexico and the United States. In June 19th and June 20th, the Federal Police seized 58 kilos of cocaine. This is equivalent to more than 116,000 doses of cocaine. This is a small seizure compared to the ton of cocaine intercepted at the airport in February of 2007.

The change in the confiscation rate of drugs at the airport reflects the bloody struggle between the Mexican government and the powerful drug cartels. In addition to the large seizures of narcotics, the federal government has been decommissioning not only dozens of agents whose loyalty has been compromised, but also private security contractors that contributed to the protection of the airport. It has been suggested that these actions resulted in the murder of the head of the federal police in early May.

In an airport that witnesses the movement of more than 25 millions of passengers per year, it is difficult to intercept all the drugs that are smuggled through its gates. Yet, if it is possible to prevent terrorist attacks in larger airports, it is fact possible to deter criminal organizations from smuggling such quantities of narcotics. However, the fight against drugs is not only about capabilities, but also about the political will of the authorities to carry out actions that effectively reduce corruption and decrease trafficking.

With the war on drugs continuing to escalate in Mexico, I feel it’s important to examine the role that the United States plays in fueling the illicit drug trade. Most of us know that the US is the world’s largest consumer of illegal drugs. The education system is geared to advertise the evils of drugs. Yet aside from education, little is done systemically to address the underlying causes.

Most glaringly is the role that American gun stores and arms dealers play in arming Mexican cartels. With it being nearly impossible for private citizens in Mexico purchase firearms, experts estimate that over 90% of the weapons used by drug cartels are bought or supplied from the United States. Out of the 100,000 gun shops in the US, over 12,000 are within 25 miles of the Mexican border. Furthermore, over $10 billion USD is estimated to enter Mexico to provide funding to buy weapons and new recruits.

President Bush’s proposed Plan Merida is a first step in anti-drug cooperation. Yet without renewing the assault weapons ban and cracking down on the black market for guns, including cross-border smuggling, any initiative will do little to diminish the system-wide causes.

In March 1st 2008, Colombian armed forces destroyed a camp of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in Ecuador. Raul Reyes, a FARC’s top commander, died in what is considered the “biggest blow” to the guerrilla group so far. The Colombian armed forces also killed 4 Mexican students and injured another one. The incident and the sole Mexican survivor Lucia Morett’s testimony, have caused tensions between Mexico and Colombia, and galvanized the public in favor and against the Colombian President Álvaro Uribe and his administration. This is indeed unprecedented.

First, although relations between Mexico and Colombia have always been close, the conflict has produced tension between them. On the one hand, the Mexican government is obliged to protect the rights of the Mexicans involved. This places more international pressure on the Colombian government to adjust its policies against guerrilla forces and improve its human rights records. On the other hand, these tensions have been fueled by statements given by the Colombian President about the relationship between the Mexican students and the FARC–they were called terrorists and criminals; and by the Colombian government’s refusal to compensate the relatives of the Mexican students. In addition, both countries have dispatched members of their police forces to investigate the circumstances surrounding the deaths and FARC operations in Mexico. In a continent where sovereignty and self-determination are pillars of foreign policy, the results of police investigations are likely to provoke more tensions.

Second, the activities of the Mexicans killed and injured in the attack have caused protests against the Colombian government and declarations in favor of its guerrilla tactics. Conservative groups in Mexico have publicly backed President Uribe and his tactics, and even presented a formal request to the General Attorney’s Office (Procuraduría General de la República) for an investigation of the possible links between Mexican students and Colombian guerrilla fighters and drug-traffickers. According to these associations, there might be a link between the FARC and violent groups in Mexico–which has been plagued by kidnappings and has experienced guerrilla-style attacks in the last few years.

Conversely, relatives of the killed students, supported by their classmates from the National University (usually associated with the Left in Mexico), have argued that Lucia Morett and her companions were only doing research in Ecuador when they were attacked while staying in the FARC camp. According to this version of the story, the Mexican students were in the wrong place at wrong time. Moreover, they accused Uribe and his administration for the murder of their relatives and friends. In late March, protestors demonstrated in front of the Colombian embassy in Mexico City and marched towards the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs. On March 30th, the Ministry produced a declaration confirming its commitment to protect the international rights of Mexicans. The declaration also condemned the Colombian incursion into Ecuador and requested compensation from Colombian authorities. In late April, some relatives of the students killed in the attack announced that they will visit Colombia and meet with members of the Colombian Congress.

Mexican and Colombian authorities are currently investigating the presence of the students in the FARC camp attacked in Ecuador on March 1st. While the incident has affected relations between Colombia and Mexico, it is important to note that the tensions between the administration of President Uribe and Mexican society are greater than the problems between the Colombian and Mexican governments. Indeed, governments can cooperate and negotiate, yet both are subject to domestic constituencies that demand, on the Colombian side, an end to the war at all costs; and on the Mexican side, the protection of Mexican nationals abroad–which echoes demands for the protection of Mexican immigrants to the United States–and the protection of Mexicans from kidnappings and drug-related violence within Mexico.

At the center of this conflict are human rights concerns. Both Mexico and Colombia need to learn how to carry out their national security policies without endangering the rights of innocent citizens and their visitors. By improving their human rights standards, they would also improve regional security while combating transnational guerilla activities and drug trafficking.

The leaders of Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. concluded a two-day summit focusing on issues such as trade, the environment, and border security. Presidents Bush and Calderon discussed a joint plan to combat drug trafficking on both sides of the border. The leaders also met with business executives from across the continent and agreed to block the import of unsafe products into North America. The summit, in Montebello, Quebec, drew crowds of protesters, which has become a regular feature of President Bush’s foreign excursions, especially where trade is at issue.

(Reuters photo of U.S. President George W. Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and Mexican President Felipe Calderon)

The 9th Cuba-Mexico Inter-Parliamentary Conference concluded recently in Havana, providing an opportunity to strengthen bilateral relations. According to press reports, the meetings were attended by senators and deputies from all parties represented in the Mexican Congress and a deputy delegation from the Cuban Peoples’ Power National Assembly. Delegates hoped to review positions prior to international events such as the upcoming Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly meetings, while also covering issues like health, education, culture, and cooperation in natural disasters and environmental protection.

See: Cuba-Mexico Lawmakers in Havana (Prensa Latina)

Le Figaro published an interview with President Felipe Calderon, in which he discusses relations with the U.S., Cuba, and Venezuela.  On Cuba, he said, “It is inconceivable that the Cubans would opt for a market economy if the outside world continues to block opportunities for trade and investment.” 

Calderon also addresses climate change, saying that although developed countries have the greatest responsibility, developing states should also act.

See:  Calderon: “Mexico must have an active foreign policy” (Le Figaro)

Mexican President Felipe Calderon kicked off a five-nation tour of Europe this week, hoping to promote trade relations, increase investment in Mexico, and boost European tourism to Mexico.  Calderon began his trip in Rome, where he met with Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Calderon was scheduled to meet with 400 Italian business executives in Milan on Tuesday before attending the G8 Summit in Germany on Wednesday, representing Mexico in the “Group of Five” or G5 — the five countries selected by the G8 as “emerging powers.” He will also visit France, Belgium, and Denmark on his European tour.

According to the Latin Business Chronicle, Mexico is the top Latin American destination for European Union exports and the second largest EU trade partner in the region. Calderon commented in Italy that it was important for Mexico to diversify its relations in the EU.

(Photo: Calderon with Prime Minister Romano Prodi in Italy)

Economic ministers from Mexico and India agreed today on a plan to bolster bilateral trade relations.  Indo-Mexican trade has increased by 600 percent in the last 6 years, totaling about $530 million through March in this fiscal year alone.   The countries announced in New Delhi today that they would set up a group of senior government officials to work out details of an investment promotion and protection agreement.

Mexico’s Economic Minister, Eduardo Sojo Garza-Aldape, and India’s Commerce Minister, Kamal Nath, will co-chair the group negotiating the details of the agreement. 

Sources: India, Mexico Seek to Boost Trade (AP, Forbes), India Looks for a Window in NAFTA through Mexico (The Hindu), and India, Mexico sign investment protection agreement (Economic Times, India)