This raises fundamental questions. “If they're going to designate traffickers as narco-terrorists, will they also include the Americans who are part of these networks? Because we're not just talking about well-known drug cartels, but trafficking Networks, money laundering, and other structures, many of which are involved in the United States, are somewhat nebulous and impenetrable when it comes to drugs.
According to Zavala, the narrative allows figures such as President Trump to use the concept of narcotics as a tool of intimidation, threat, and extortion towards the Mexican government. “Rather than describing the realities, narcotics are based on political phantoms based on perceptions that are used to force Mexico to align with Washington's interests,” he says.
An executive order to intervene militarily in Mexico
Intervening militarily in Mexican territory with selective infiltration aimed at damaging the cartels is something that has been on the US radar screen for some time. But analysts argue it would be a shot in the foot for the Trump administration.
“By using the concept of narcotics, the US government empowers itself to intervene militarily in Mexico. This is something very complicated, because intervening in that way would seriously damage bipolar relations, which are very delicate. It is almost infallible. [the idea of military aggression]”Zavala explains.” I believe that apart from Bravo, the Mexican government has generally been aligned because in the end our security policy has always been subordinated and violated; Even subjugated by the United States. ,
This Wednesday, the President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, said that the Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Juan Ramón de la Fuente, had a telephone conversation with the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. She did not provide details of the conversation, but said it was “a very cordial conversation” and that they discussed “migration and security issues”. Rubio has said that he would prefer that any action, any decision made from Washington, have the consent of the Mexican government.
“Cartels do not exist”
Osvaldo Zavala (Ciudad Juárez, 1975) has specialized in Mexican fiction, and is an alternative vision of the narco phenomenon in Mexico. He believes that the cartel's image of power is exaggerated and sponsored by the state. author of Imaginary US–Mexico Drug Wars: State Power, Organized Crime, and the Political History of Narconarratives (1975–2012)explains Wired that the war against drug trafficking is typically built on imaginary, contradictory, and often absurd concepts, which gradually create an imaginary that presents drug trafficking in an alarmist manner.
“The US government has managed with great skill to create a long list of concepts, monsters and criminal actors that dominate the public debate not only in the United States, but also in Mexico. Thus, when Americans want “The center of the discussion revolves around fentanyl and, above all, the Sinaloa cartel,” explains Zavala.
Zavala argues that the narratives used by the US government are ways of simplifying a complex problem, giving a common sense to a debate that would otherwise be much more complex. “If we take into account that a large part of drug consumption occurs in the United States, there are organizations within that country that facilitate trafficking, launder funds and, in many cases “The discussion becomes much more complicated for the Mexican panorama. And even militarily in Mexico,” he says.
“As citizens we must be very careful of the narratives emanating from Washington,” he warns. “They need to learn to analyze critically and to distance themselves from what we are being told. This process is neither easy nor quick, because unfortunately, not only the Mexican government repeats these narratives , but the media also imitate them, and sometimes institutions and other actors push them. Corridos About Fentanyl, about 'chapitos' and about the cartels' alleged criminal empires. It is very difficult to avoid all this. ,
A war that has left more than 100,000 people missing
More than 100,000 people have been missing in Mexico since 1964, when the count began. The National Registry of Disappeared and Unaccounted for Persons has exceeded this figure for months now, evidence of the dire situation in the country. Most of these people were registered as missing since 2006, when the administration of Felipe Calderón, which took the army to the streets to combat the violence of organized crime, began.
“Many of the most serious effects of anti-drug policy are the ones we have been suffering in Mexico for decades. More than half a million murders, followed by more than 100,000 forced disappearances, since militarization began with President Calderon. We know that this There is violence, above all, against poor, racialized, brown young people who live in the most deprived areas of the country,” says Zavala, who is surprised when people say Trump is worried. “As if we weren't already living, for years now, a really serious wave of violence in the country.”
According to the researcher, military violence is often expressed as a form of social control in the form of management of violence. “You are not going to see militarization in areas like Condesa or Roma, but in the margins of Mexico City, in the worst areas. The violence is happening in the peripheries, in the poorest neighborhoods, where there is not even enough media or human rights institutions. Monitoring,” Zavala says.
What should surprise us, Zavala says, is the very high rates of violence we are experiencing, as a backdrop to something that is already happening, not something that is not yet there. “I think we still don't fully understand that there is a clear class dimension to this violence. This is not generalized violence, but systematic and directed against the most vulnerable sectors of society,” he says.
Solution: Demilitarize the country
The decision taken by Calderón 16 years ago to entrust the army with responsibility for public security in many areas of the country has shown us its deadly consequences. Enrique Peña Nieto and Andrés Manuel López Obrador both pledged, during their respective election campaigns, to return peace, security and civility. However, once in power, both presented proposals to consolidate, through legislation and even constitutional reforms, the military security model. The situation does not change with the administration of Claudia Sheinbaum.
Thus, recent presidents of Mexico have maintained a “peace and security” policy based on a military strategy, justifying it on the perceived operational inability of police corporations to confront organized crime.
“I agree with the viewpoint that drugs need to be reduced, addictions treated, all that. But in my opinion, much of the violence in Mexico is not necessarily linked to drug trafficking, but to the experience of militarization itself. And I think there's solid empirical data to support this idea. We know that in Mexico there is a 'and a' and a 'after' demilitarization,” Zavala explains. “Prior to the military deployment, our suicide rates were declining across the country, and there is a direct correlation between the military occupation, the presence of the armed forces, and the increase in homicides and enforced disappearances.”