DEA in Mexico: The Risks of Interference
Published in La Jornada
(Mexico) on 28 October 2011
by Editorial (link to original)
(Mexico) on 28 October 2011
by Editorial (link to original)
Translated from
by Arie Braizblot.
Edited by Heidi Kaufmann.
Statements issued last Wednesday by Secretary of Foreign Affairs Patricia Espinosa and the president’s spokesperson, Alejandra Sota, acknowledged the participation of agents from the U.S.'s Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in the fight against narcotics trafficking in Mexican territory. Ms. Sota argued yesterday in statements to this newspaper that the deployment of American counter-narcotics officers in Mexico — which increased during the government of Vicente Fox and grew in intensity during this administration — is in strict compliance with applicable Mexican law and national sovereignty.
In recent months, the increasing political, military, intelligence and police interference of Washington in our country has been documented in different ways: through the leaked cables of WikiLeaks, La Jornada reports, publications by the American newspaper The New York Times and reports about the actions of active CIA agents and retired American military officials in Mexico. Nevertheless, that which the members of Calderon’s cabinet pretend to defend is something that by principle should not take place. These actions accentuate the perception of a grave weakness in our national authorities and of a government whose handling of public safety contradicts the principles of national independence and sovereignty.
The Calderon administration’s spokeswoman did it no favors when she affirmed that the cooperation between the PAN leadership and Washington has been very important because it allowed sharing of information that led to the arrest of notorious organized crime leaders. The spokeswoman did a disservice because these successes originated from rare circumstances — the operation of foreign agents in our national territory — and because
such a claim ignores that in that very cooperation, Washington supplied arms to criminal organizations in Mexico through operations like Fast and Furious and Wide Receiver, while also arming government contractors. What’s more, the official strategy — the aim of which was to develop the intelligence work and information of Americans staffed in our country — may have played a decisive role in the increase in violence, but it has not done much to diminish the production of illicit drugs. This is confirmed by a recent report by The Washington Post about the growth of narcotics in Mexican territory over the past five years.
Supposing that the operation of DEA agents in Mexico was in strict compliance with Mexican law and national sovereignty, their presence represents a risk factor for the country and its population in a historical light: The unavoidable reference is the dark murder, in February of 1985, of Enrique Kiki Camarena, an undercover DEA agent, whose body was found a month later on the Mareño ranch, located in Michoacán. This murder seriously disrupted the bilateral relationship and exposed Mexico to diplomatic blackmail, to violations of its sovereignty — like the kidnapping and illegal transport of various Mexicans to their neighboring country to be judged in American tribunals — and later, to a campaign of open hostility and political pressures that, among other things, was expressed in Washington’s humiliating anti-drug certification process.
With these elements of justice, it seems indefensible that the government would attempt to explain the presence of American agents as beneficial, desirable and even necessary for our country. In any case, if the Mexican government has become aware of its inability to combat drug cartels based on the current security strategy, it would be necessary to modify this strategy, not look for help from agencies in Washington — the CIA, DEA or FBI — with a sordid history of actions outside American borders and an ancient habit of destabilization, intrigue and the production of interventionist alibis.
In recent months, the increasing political, military, intelligence and police interference of Washington in our country has been documented in different ways: through the leaked cables of WikiLeaks, La Jornada reports, publications by the American newspaper The New York Times and reports about the actions of active CIA agents and retired American military officials in Mexico. Nevertheless, that which the members of Calderon’s cabinet pretend to defend is something that by principle should not take place. These actions accentuate the perception of a grave weakness in our national authorities and of a government whose handling of public safety contradicts the principles of national independence and sovereignty.
The Calderon administration’s spokeswoman did it no favors when she affirmed that the cooperation between the PAN leadership and Washington has been very important because it allowed sharing of information that led to the arrest of notorious organized crime leaders. The spokeswoman did a disservice because these successes originated from rare circumstances — the operation of foreign agents in our national territory — and because
such a claim ignores that in that very cooperation, Washington supplied arms to criminal organizations in Mexico through operations like Fast and Furious and Wide Receiver, while also arming government contractors. What’s more, the official strategy — the aim of which was to develop the intelligence work and information of Americans staffed in our country — may have played a decisive role in the increase in violence, but it has not done much to diminish the production of illicit drugs. This is confirmed by a recent report by The Washington Post about the growth of narcotics in Mexican territory over the past five years.
Supposing that the operation of DEA agents in Mexico was in strict compliance with Mexican law and national sovereignty, their presence represents a risk factor for the country and its population in a historical light: The unavoidable reference is the dark murder, in February of 1985, of Enrique Kiki Camarena, an undercover DEA agent, whose body was found a month later on the Mareño ranch, located in Michoacán. This murder seriously disrupted the bilateral relationship and exposed Mexico to diplomatic blackmail, to violations of its sovereignty — like the kidnapping and illegal transport of various Mexicans to their neighboring country to be judged in American tribunals — and later, to a campaign of open hostility and political pressures that, among other things, was expressed in Washington’s humiliating anti-drug certification process.
With these elements of justice, it seems indefensible that the government would attempt to explain the presence of American agents as beneficial, desirable and even necessary for our country. In any case, if the Mexican government has become aware of its inability to combat drug cartels based on the current security strategy, it would be necessary to modify this strategy, not look for help from agencies in Washington — the CIA, DEA or FBI — with a sordid history of actions outside American borders and an ancient habit of destabilization, intrigue and the production of interventionist alibis.
Next article![]( "We Don't Want to Be Like Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan")
