Skip to main content

Feature: Failed Drug War Policies in Mexico? Let's Try More of the Same

Submitted by Phillip Smith on (Issue #578)
Drug War Issues

Mexico and its wave of prohibition-related violence were front and center in Washington this week as the Obama administration unveiled its "comprehensive response and commitment" to US-Mexico border security and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Mexico to preach renewed support in the fight against the powerful drug trafficking organizations, but also to enunciate a mea culpa for the US role in the bloody situation.

US Border Patrol
More than 9,000 people -- including more than 600 police and soldiers -- have been killed in prohibition-related violence in Mexico since President Felipe Calderon sent out the Mexican armed forces to subdue the cartels at the beginning of 2007, with the pace of killing accelerating last year and early this year. Now, some 45,000 Mexican army troops are part of the campaign, including more than 8,000 that are currently occupying Ciudad Juarez, across from El Paso, which has seen some of the highest levels of violence anywhere in the country. More than 1,600 were killed there last year, and more than a hundred so far this year.

Calderon intervened in ongoing rivalries between various trafficking organizations, helping to turn what had been turf wars for valuable drug smuggling franchises into a multi-sided battle pitching the cartels against each other and Mexican police and soldiers. The prize is a cross-border smuggling fortune estimated at anywhere between $10 billion and $40 billion and based on Americans' insatiable appetite for the drugs it loves to hate (or hates to love).

On Tuesday, the White House presented its plan to secure the border, including the disbursement of $700 million in previously authorized Plan Merida assistance to Mexico, ramped up enforcement on the US side of the border, and an increased emphasis on demand reduction in the US.

The Plan Merida aid will provide surveillance and information technologies, training for rule of law and justice reform, assistance to Mexican prosecutors in crafting effective witness protection programs, and five helicopters for the Mexican Army and Air Force and a surveillance aircraft for the Mexican Navy. Here in the US, the Department of Homeland Security is bringing its numerous resources to bear, including doubling Border Enforcement Security Task Forces, tripling the number of DHS intelligence analysts working the border, beefing up Immigration and Customs Enforcement staff in Mexico, bringing more surveillance technology to ports of entry, bringing more drug dogs to the border, and targeting flows of guns and money south as well as drugs north.

The DEA is adding 16 new agents on the border to its current 1,170 already there and forming four new Mobile Enforcement Teams to go after Mexican meth traffickers, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is moving 100 agents to the border and continuing its program of tracing guns used in drug cartel violence. Even the FBI is getting in on the act by forming a Southwest Intelligence Group to act as a clearinghouse for all FBI activities involving Mexico.

"The whole package we announced today is not only about enforcement and stopping the flow of drugs into the United States and helping Mexico against these very brutal cartels, but it includes money for more drug courts and reduction in demand," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said in an interview Tuesday. "So, we look forward to working on the demand side as well as the supply side, but I'll tell you, where the Department of Homeland Security is concerned, it's all about border safety and security and making sure that spillover violence does not erupt in our own country."

Secretary of State Clinton sang much the same tune in Mexico this week, but also bluntly accepted US responsibility for the violence, saying that decades of US anti-drug policies have been a failure and that US demand for drugs drove the trade.

"Clearly what we've been doing has not worked," Clinton told reporters on her plane at the start of her two-day trip. "Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade," she added. "Our inability to prevent weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border to arm these criminals causes the deaths of police, of soldiers and civilians."

Clinton's visit came as the chorus calling for change in US prohibitionist drug policies is growing louder. Last month, former presidents of Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico called on the US to radically reassess its drug policies, and increasing concern over the violence in Mexico and its spillover in US border states is only turning up the volume of the calls for legalization.

Law enforcement on the border wants much more help -- Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) has called for 1,000 more agents or even National Guard troops -- but Zapata County (Texas) Sheriff Sigifredo Gonzalez, Jr., head of the Southwestern Border Sheriff's Association, said the administration move was a start. "The plan the president announced is a help," said Gonzalez. "But we still haven't seen the plan that was supposed to be in place last year."

Gonzalez's remote Zapata County has not seen much spillover from the violence across the river, but that's not the case elsewhere, the sheriff said. "As chairman of the association, I hear regularly from my colleagues that what we are seeing is spillover that has been going on for some time -- extortions, kidnapping, robberies. What we're concerned with now is that with the squeeze on in Mexico, there will be even more spillover here."

While security officials and law enforcement were talking more drug war, other observers doubted that the initiative would have much impact on the cartels and could make an intractable problem even worse. But they also saw an opportunity to advance the cause of ending America's reliance on drug prohibition as the primary approach to drug use.

"This is not a major departure from what was budgeted under the Bush administration," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. "The most important assistance the US can provide is intelligence-related assets, as in Colombia in the 1980s and 1990s -- CIA or NSA-type information that helps the Mexicans target the most violent and powerful of the traffickers. Providing financial assistance to help pay local police more is also helpful, but beefing up the border is largely symbolic and is responding to both legitimate concerns as well as media and political hysteria around this. This is not a departure, not a major new initiative."

"The biggest problem in all this is that Calderon's policies have thrown gasoline on the fire," said Sanho Tree, drug policy analyst for the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, DC. "It was utterly foolish of Calderon to get in the middle of a cartel turf war. Those people are all about making money, and the violence isn't going to decline until the cartels reach a modus vivendi among themselves. There are rumors they are trying to do that; they want the killing to stop so they can get back to business."

Neither should we take much comfort in Mexico's ability to occasionally kill or capture a leading cartel figure, said Tree. "It's like killing Al Qaeda's number three man," he laughed grimly. "All it means is someone below him is going to move up, or there will be a struggle to see who replaces him."

For Tree, the situation in Mexico is taking on the ominous aspect of Colombia in the 1990s, where the breakdown of public security led to vigilantism and death squad activity, the predecessors of the Colombian paramilitaries. "When people became to realize the state was powerless to stop prohibition-related violence, it opened the door for other criminal activities, including kidnapping, and what makes this really dangerous is that now the ability of the state to protect individuals comes into question."

But Tree also noted that the situation in Mexico is forcing American media and policymakers to at least address calls for drug legalization. "This is doing what Colombia and Afghanistan couldn't do, which is to bring the violence of prohibition right to our door step and rub our faces in it," said Tree. "Calderon got in between some hornets' nests with a fly swatter, and now people in both countries have to make a choice. Mexicans supported this at first, but when they realized this isn't ending but is instead getting worse, they asked why he picked this fight."

"I'm worried about the militarization of the border and the assumption that that will fix this," said Larry Birns, director of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs in Washington, DC. "On the other hand, it seems to be causing a growing crescendo of people wanting to talk about drug legalization. It's as if a critical mass has been arrived at. The recent statement by the three Latin American presidents was a voltaic shock to get the discussion going, and with the violence in Mexico, one has to acknowledge that a preponderance of the evidence shows the present model for drug control is not working. Even though there is a huge, formidable self-interested drug prohibition lobby, the logic of legalization is becoming so compelling it becomes all but impossible not to address it."

That political space to discuss legalization is changing things, Birns said. "Organizations like my own, which were timorous about taking on this issue now feel much more at ease with the clear recognition that everything else has failed. The possibility of legalization has to be seriously reviewed, inspected, and debated now."

Nadelmann suggested the current crisis could and should open debate about effective demand reduction strategies. "If we want to help Mexico by reducing demand, and want to give the notion more than lip service, then we have to remove the ideological inhibitions that limit our ability to effectively reduce demand," he said. "A small number of drug users consume a significant portion of all drugs. The traditional answer is to get more serious about drug treatment and rehab, but it could also mean providing addicts with legal sources of the drugs they are consuming. We know it works with heroin; the same approach deserves to be tried with cocaine and meth."

"The other thing we can do," Nadelmann argued, "is to move in the direction of legalizing marijuana. We know have 40% of Americans in favor of it, and it's approaching 50% out West. This is the first time a furor over drug-related violence has been so powerfully linked with marijuana prohibition. That mere fact that so many law enforcement people are saying it lends it credibility. This is putting the notion of marijuana legalization as a partial solution to prohibition-related violence on the edge of the mainstream political discussion in the US. With the Ammiano bill in California, Barney Frank's bill waiting to be introduced, Sen. Webb pushing for his commission, the conversation is really bubbling up now."

And so it goes. As the prohibition-related violence in Mexico continues and as the US appears to be heading down the reflexive path of fighting drug war failure with more drug war, the prohibitionist consensus grows ever more brittle. It's a shame that so many Mexicans have to die to get us to shift the direction of our dialogue on drugs.

Permission to Reprint: This content is licensed under a modified Creative Commons Attribution license. Content of a purely educational nature in Drug War Chronicle appear courtesy of DRCNet Foundation, unless otherwise noted.


Anonymous (not verified)

Just remember Queen Hillary is married to Mr. "I didn't inhale", and neither did she, either.

Fri, 03/27/2009 - 2:05pm Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

These clintons are a joke so is anyone else that doesn't understand we must legalize all drugs. If you are considering a rehab for any reason, first ask them if they think drugs should be legalized. If they say no , you know they are not drug savvy and are into it just for the money and are eather ignornt about drugs and or don't give a crap except losing their place at the trough. Better yet, call up the drug rehabs that charges thousands of dollars and most of the time it is a waste of time to go there for treatment and ask them if they support drug reform. I try to give these ignorant assholes an education every time. Watch out for the big sell , they are worse than used car salesmen!

Fri, 03/27/2009 - 2:34pm Permalink
felkakarp (not verified)

Blaming the Clintons won't help (unless you think the last 8 years were heaven on earth) Taking action will.

Please take a moment to join me in signing the petition. It takes just 30 seconds, but can truly make a difference. We are trying to reach 1000 signatures - please sign here:

Once you have signed, you can help even more by asking your friends and family to sign as well.

Thank you! Alan

Fri, 03/27/2009 - 6:53pm Permalink
aahpat (not verified)

synopsis of the situation. The only thing missing is what reform organizations are going to do to bring this to a boil in terms of the public debate within the U.S.

If we had thousands of people out in the streets of D.C. demanding that congress take up legalization the congress would be forced to confront their failed authoritarianism.





When will the reform movement get leadership willing to take it to the streets?

Fri, 03/27/2009 - 7:06pm Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

The System hs established the rules. So if down and dirty is their game, lets play ball. They're not gonna get it until WE start to turn the tables on them.

I'm not suggesting mob action, but this economic civil war HAS TO STOP before it turns into a full fleged civil war...

Fri, 03/27/2009 - 10:32pm Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

As a mexican civilian im tired of this sick war, tired of this violence
i think its time to make a change on the laws
no more deaths please
legalize it !

Sat, 03/28/2009 - 4:02am Permalink
aahpat (not verified)

One daily action that reformers can take is to search Google News each day for current news stories on the topics of 'drug war', 'mexican border', 'marijuana', 'medical marijuana' and any other topic that strikes you on any particular day. Then find newspapers with forum threads. Go to those thread and argue the issues with people.

Also, write letters to the editor at the papers with stories, opinion columns or editorials about policy.

Make a point to make a reference, (preferably negative), to state legislators and/or members of congress and/or president Obama and/or the two dominance political parties in the letters to the editor and on the forums. Make the politicians feel the pressure.

A letter a day will make the drug war go away.

Take this fight to the cyber streets of America.





You can also download voter registration forms and change your registration from Democrat to Independent, Green or Libertarian. The three groups that respect and reflect the social justice values of drug policy reform.

Sat, 03/28/2009 - 9:06am Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

Just last week President Obama literally scoffed at a legitimate question posed to him about this very subject. I feel betrayed, and yet, not surprised. So much for change.

Mon, 03/30/2009 - 5:09pm Permalink
aahpat (not verified)


President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State Hillary R. Clinton have all sworn to "insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare" which are guarantees articulated in the United States Constitutions. But their co-sponsorship in 2005 of S-103, "The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005" has achieved just the opposite. It has grown dangerous Mexican drug cartels across America and provided them with the financial to corrupt the Mexican military to the point of being able to recruit dangerous military professionals and purchase state of the art U.S. military munitions that our government has sent to Mexico to fight the war on drugs. S-103, "The Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005" today directly threatens America's "domestic tranquility" by weakening our "common defense" with policies that significantly damage the "general welfare" of all Americans.

Wed, 04/01/2009 - 8:56am Permalink
Anonymous (not verified)

No more whiners so what if a few million people end up in prison raped and taught how too really be a bad person and loose their futures, Who really cares . What difference does it make if the Drug War gets a couple of thousand people a year Murdered Does not matter if they were just sleeping in their own beds at home and the police came in the wrong house or not . Why not corrupt the under paid law enforcement with money problems that just one deal can fix! This is so well thought out that if you don`t see the evil you haven`t thought it through . There`s a reason there's no leader ship To get the ball rolling If you know there is a way they can get to you or kill you . Most people that have figured out how wrong this is have either got some one
in Jail or are a chronic Pain Patient and The DEA already could discredit them in the media in about 2 seconds. More guns on our borders . More guns for the Mexican Army . Have you ever heard a pain patient scream all night long because of not enough medication. the amount of money and the control that this war give some one ? I wish I knew who. nodoubt they must think they are right drug companies can make so much more than any drug dealer that it has actually turned around and bit some of them now because they thought they could control it . hope they all end up in the new prisons they built. Make love not WAR READ THIS

Sun, 04/05/2009 - 7:33pm Permalink

Add new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.