US imminent intervention in Mexico

3194

What does a US military intervention in Mexico imply?

The resolution calls for the military use of force against those persons, organizations, or foreign nations that are responsible for trafficking fentanyl and its derivatives.

A resolution of the United States Congress proposes the military use of force against several Mexican cartels for “being responsible for trafficking fentanyl and fentanyl-related substances “ in the neighboring country. 

The document with the proposal for ‘Authorization for the Use of Military Force to Combat, Attack, Resist, Locate, Eliminate and Limit Influence” or by its acronym in English ”AUMF CARTEL Influence Resolution”, would allow President Joe Biden the use of “necessary” force with those who have violated the Controlled Substances Act of the United States. 

“The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those foreign nations, foreign organizations, or foreign persons affiliated with foreign organizations” that have attempted to introduce and traffic fentanyl or associated substances, the document read.

The joint resolution includes among its priority objectives the main organized crime organizations in Mexico, such as:

  • The Sinaloa Cartel.
  • The Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG)
  • The Gulf Cartel.
  •  Los Zetas cartel.
Mexican cartels have identified themselves as the main traffickers of fentanyl Photo: Cuartoscuro
  • Northeast Cartel.
  • Juarez cartel.
  • Tijuana cartel.
  • Beltrán-Levya cartel.
  • The Michoacan Family, also known as The Knights Templar.

Among the motivations that led to this decision is that fentanyl and its derivatives ” kill approximately 80,000 Americans each year and is the leading cause of death among American men between the ages of 18 and 45.” 

Organized crime generates instability on the border with Mexico Photo: Cuartoscuro

In addition to identifying the CJNG and the Sinaloa Cartel, they are not only the main suppliers of the drug , they also create instability on the border with Mexico due to the constant armed conflicts that occur between them. https://77fa7b4bccec7ca48af9dd78c91a4444.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-40/html/container.html?n=0

On the other hand, they also considered that in 2019, the National Guard had to let go of Ovidio Guzmán, son of “Chapo” Guzmán, after being arrested in Sinaloa for the wave of violence that the cartel unleashed in the famous “Culiacanazo”  .

“Mexican cartels have repeatedly fired on law enforcement and the national guard stationed along the US-Mexico border,” the document detailed. 

A long list of suggestions of unilateral US government intervention in the face of the failure of Mexican authorities to stem the flow of narcotics across the border has accumulated over the past few years. President Donald Trump and his advisers considered the possibility of intervening in Mexican territory to exterminate the Mexican cartels with a forceful blow, an idea that was rejected by the US military leadership for implying the violation of the sovereignty of an allied country. General Glen D. VanHerck, commander of the Northern Command, stated on March 16, 2021, that he estimated that the cartels controlled around a third of Mexican territory. In recent times,

Although it sounds like a solid and impressive plan, US military intervention would not be a solution to the crisis of violence that Mexico is going through, but would very likely aggravate it. US soldiers are especially incompetent in conducting counter-insurgency and anti-terrorism operations, with Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan being their biggest failures. Additionally, it is delusional to think that the North Americans will be able to achieve with an expeditionary force what the Mexican government has not achieved by deploying 600,000 elements in the last 15 years, approximately 50% being soldiers/sailors and the rest state and municipal police.

If the Mexican government tried to resist using its armed forces, the American troops would go into combat with an overwhelming advantage. An air campaign like the one executed in the 1991 Gulf War that combines aircraft and missiles could decimate all Mexican battalions, regiments, and magazines in less than 48 hours.

Mexico lacks countermeasures for US air superiority. The 401 Squadron of the Mexican Air Force has only a handful of F-5 aircraft in museum condition and the Artillery Weapon does not have a single piece of anti-aircraft artillery.

The only hope of survival for the Mexican troops is to disperse and use irregular tactics (guerrilla, sabotage, etc.). However, no army can fight without supplies. Without a logistical resupply structure, units will slowly surrender to the Americans or ally with the cartels.

Even if the entire Mexican defense budget is poured overnight into building capabilities to resist an invasion, buying new equipment and building capabilities takes decades. Assuming that new combat aircraft and S-400 anti-aircraft missiles are purchased by 2030, the doctrine would still have to be written on how to use them and train soldiers to occupy them.

The remaining problem is the drug prohibition policy. If drugs were legal, their production, transportation, and sale would be the same as any other product. Being illegal, violence becomes a legitimate control strategy in said market.

The war against drug trafficking is a war against geography (many of these substances grow naturally in semi-desert and tropical climates) and against pleasure (the most fundamental criterion with which human beings make decisions, pleasure/pain). And the Americans themselves know that every war against pleasure begins with a loss. Alcohol prohibition failed miserably in the US because where there is demand, there will always be someone willing to supply it.

Let’s abandon collective suicide, the decriminalization of drugs would take that market out of criminal hands to put it in the hands of businessmen. The ban is untenable.

Source. eleconomista.com.mx

Mexico Daily Post