"Mexico's Drug Wars - Will President Calderon Succeed?"

Sydney M. Williams

Thought of the Day

“Mexico’s Drug Wars – Will President Calderón Succeed?”

June 9, 2011

Acapulco, on Mexico’s west coast, is considered one of North America’s most beautiful resort towns, attracting the “rich and famous” from all over the world. It is a city of just over 600,000 people noted for the daring young people who dive into its bay from its magnificent cliffs, yet during a single week in March more than thirty people were killed in Acapulco.

In an article in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, readers were warned that, with drug related crime continuing to rise, tourists are “turning their backs on Mexico.” This is significant, as 22.4 million visitors spent $12 billion in 2010. However, drug trafficking is estimated to be a $50 billion business for Mexico. The costs to Mexico are incalculable. Residents of very poor towns like Badiraguato, which is considered the birthplace and heart of the drug trade, depend on the cartels for employment, so live under a code of silence. Costs for Mexican businesses that need additional security have increased by five to ten percent, according to some estimates that to me seem low. During the four years ending 2010 about 35,000 deaths have been attributed to the drug war, including a number of children. Mexico has almost 200,000 soldiers, including federal police, assigned to eliminating the cartels. So the question becomes, can Mexico eliminate its drug trade without inflicting too much damage on its own economy.

The effect on the United States is multifold, the most important of which include trade and immigration. It also includes arms. An operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) called “Fast and Furious” was designed to stop U.S. weapons from ending up in the hands of drug cartels. The concept was based on the idea that the cartels employ a series of “straw” buyers, individuals who buy in small quantities. Fast and Furious would then follow those buyers to their target, high-level traffickers. Somehow they lost them. (The Wall Street Journal has a front page article this morning on the subject.) Attorney General Eric Holder (who has responsibility for the ATF) has told Congress: “Under no circumstances should guns be allowed to be distributed in an uncontrolled manner.” Nevertheless, that is what appears to have been happening. Fast and Furious is proving to be neither fast nor furious.

The pressures facing President Felipe Calderón are enormous. Upon assuming the presidency in 2006, he declared that ridding Mexico of drug cartels would be his priority. Previous administrations had left them alone. Ignoring the problem was no longer a viable alternative.

When criminals run rampant, as they have in emerging countries – Russia and Colombia come to mind – and as they did during Prohibition in the U.S., they have a profound negative effect on the economy. In the U.S., the repeal of the Volstead Act in 1933 negated the need for bootlegging. In Colombia in 2002, newly elected President Álvaro Uribe vowed to rid his country of their drug cartels that had been operating for over forty years. Between 2003 and 2008, homicides related to drug trafficking were down 30%, kidnappings declined 80% and terrorist attacks went from 1,257 in 2003 to 347 in 2008. Progress continues; so today Colombia is considered a model for Latin America.

A peaceful and prosperous Mexico is important to the U.S. As a neighbor, they have been our second most important source of imported oil this year. They are our third largest export market. And, as we all know, they are the primary source of our illegal immigration.

Ridding the country of its drug cartels is not easy. Indicative of the difficulty has been the rise in the number of killings, from 2,837 in 2007 to 15,273 in 2010. U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual has argued that the rise in violence may be a direct result of President Calderón’s military measures. To me, that sounds like a statement of the obvious. Desperate people, especially desperados, resort to desperate measures. (Through May of this year, while still very high, killings attributed to the drug cartels have declined on a pro rata basis to 4,741.) Regardless, to give in to the cartels is to doom the country to poverty and make far worse the relationship with the U.S.

There have been additional setbacks. In February, one U.S. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) agent was killed while supporting Mexican agents in their crackdown on the cartels. In early May, several hundred demonstrators took to the streets in the city Oaxaca, to voice their opposition to what they referred to as President Calderón’s “war against organized crime.” That march coincided with a National March for Peace for Justice and Dignity. Their argument is that the armed forces are receiving massive amounts of money while millions lack jobs and access to basic services. They also claim that Señor Calderón is subservient to the United States.

But these demonstrations are often initiated by the cartels. President Calderón is on the right strike. The question is can he stay the course. Eradicating the cartels is dangerous: it takes courage; it takes money and it takes time. The brutality of drug leaders knows no bounds, as the killings in Acapulco show. Children have been killed because of actions of their parents. Necessary spending on the military has diverted funds from investments in social programs and in state owned companies like PEMEX, which has lost 25% of its reserves since 2004. The company badly needs investment. Five years have passed since President Calderón made his vow. The cartels are powerful and enormously rich. People living in the remote regions of Northwest Mexico know no life other than one of fear and poverty. Success in this endeavor will benefit all the people of Mexico. Additionally, its success will accrue to the U.S. in terms of immigration relief and in terms of trade.