Jorge Castaneda, a former Foreign Minister of Mexico in 2000-2003 and a wise friend, wrote an analysis recently in which he credits President Obama for leaping into Mexico's drug war at the outset of his administration. According to his analysis, however, President Obama "now faces perils that are barely touched upon in Washington, except in cables originating in Mexico".
If this statement is true the imperative question is: Why?
In furthering his argument Castaneda points to the execution by the Mexican government -- late last year -- of Arturo Beltran Leyva, one of the Sinaloa Cartel's three top capos and to U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual's statement condemning SEDENA's (the national defense secretariat) "refusal to move quickly".
According to Castaneda, Pascual's analysis "reflects a risk-aversion philosophy that cost the institution a major counter-narcotics victory". Furthermore Pascual's declaration similarly describes the complete lack of cooperation between Mexican intelligence officials and the military. In exploring this information the U.S. State Department and Department of Justice must ask themselves three questions:
1. Does Ambassador Pascual's information reflect the internal struggles within the Mexican political system -- which all current intelligence points to a whopping YES.
2. Why has the Mexican President not found the trump card necessary to negotiate with the Drug Syndicates and thereby legitimize his "War on Drugs", as did Colombian President Alvaro Uribe during his administration?
3. Why has the United States not entreated the Mexican government for accurate accountability?
As many in the State Department and most at the Department Of Justice know, the U.S. and Mexican officials fear that whatever information they share with the Mexican army will be handed to the cartels. Because of the rampant corruption and duplicitous relationship between some high ranking Mexican government officials and drug lords it remains impossible to:
a) Secure our borders
b) Stop child trafficking from Mexico into the U.S.
c) Halt the drug and weapons trade
In a report published by the Washington Post drawn from WikiLeaks cables on December 27, 2010, Mexico defense secretary, General Guillermo Galvan, told Dennis Blair, the former director of national intelligence, that the Mexican army intended to capture the number one drug lord and head of the Sinaloa Cartel, Joaquin Guzman Loera a.k.a. 'El Chapo Guzman' (nicknamed because of his pint size stature), except that "'El Chapo' commands the support of a large network of informers and has security circles of up to 300 men that make launching an arrest operation arduous."
It would be interesting to learn what exactly the Department of State is doing to assist and empower Ambassador's Pascual's appointment and how his October 26, 2009 report released by WikiLeaks will be exercised by U.S. intelligence operatives.
The logical conclusion Castaneda asserts is that Mexican President Felipe Calderón, "cannot be both president and drug czar, and is justifiably unwilling and reasonably unable to carry out the essential day-to-day interagency coordination in Mexico. This current void needs to be occupied by someone else", he says. And if I may add with direct financial and military assistance from the U.S. in the same way they invested in Colombia. "Increasingly", Castaneda adds "it is being filled by the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, staffed by first-rate diplomats who may be biting off more than they can chew".
The Mexican government is one of the two regimes most likely to fall in the world according to the CIA. The other is Pakistan and we already have our own troops there trying to help.
Mexico won't accept our troops helping them and the levels of corruption in their own military are too high for them to be depended upon.
Any money or supplies we send would only be throwing good money after bad. They need to decide for themselves who is going to run their government and so far it does not look like Calderon is going to be in office sans election much longer.
If their government loses the revolution, it should and will be the fault of their own pride and machismo.