The Transnational Mexican Drug Trade

The Transnational Mexican Drug Trade

            For decades, the Medellin and Cali drug cartels dominated the international illicit drug trade. Starting in the 1980’s, the Guadalajara cartel, led by Mexico based Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, took control of the Mexican drug trade. Felix Gallardo became the point man for the Colombian drug trade through Mexico and essentially controlled all trade routes in Mexico underneath the umbrella of the Medellin cartel. In the late 80’s, Gallardo began to feel that running all of Mexico’s drug trade through him created the danger of the entire system falling apart if he and his lieutenants were to be killed or captured. This led him to break up his Guadalajara cartel into multiple smaller cartels, which would later evolve into the current state of power struggle. With the demise of the Colombian cartels in the 90’s, a power vacuum opened up which the Mexican drug trade happily filled. Currently, over 90% of all illicit drugs being brought into the United States come from Mexican drug cartels (Cook). This includes a large supply of cocaine, marijuana, methamphetamines, and heroin.

            The United Nations has recently defined transnational crime as a structured group with three or more people committing serious crimes to obtain financial benefit where the crime committed affects multiple countries. In this definition, the Mexican drug cartels easily fit into the category. Just among the few largest cartels, mainly Los Zetas, the Gulf Cartel, and the Sinaloa Cartel, there is an estimated profit of between $13.6 and $48.4 billion annually, not to mention billions of dollars that are laundered in Mexico (Ibid). It is clearly a for profit institution involving thousands of people, based in Mexico for the predominant purpose of drug sales in the United States, thus involving multiple nations.

            In Shelley’s article, he mentions that one of the most important characteristics that must be prevalent in a country in order for transnational crime to be sustained is corruption of the government. He states that in a corrupt system, the government protects and legitimizes criminals in return for bribes and power. Mexico is currently one of the most corrupt nations in the world, with thousands of its police officers either actively working for the cartels, or at the very least turning a blind eye. Multiple times, the Mexican government has simply disbanded entire police forces because of the overwhelming amount of corruption. For example, in 2006, the Mexican Federal Investigative Agency (AFI), one of the police forces used to combat narcotics trafficking, was inspecting over 1500 of its members for corruption, of which over 450 of them had actually been charged (Freeman). It is suspected that these agents were working as enforcers for the Sinaloa cartel. Even more indicative is the Los Zetas cartel, which originally worked as an enforcer gang for the Gulf cartel before splitting off to form its own faction, whose original thirty-one members all came from the elite Mexican forces.

            However, there has not been concrete evidence of widespread corruption in the United States, which Shelley says is a necessity for the perpetuity of transnational crime. I believe that perhaps widespread corruption in the United States is not necessary for the continuation of the particular crime in question, however, because the cartels are not actually the ones distributing the narcotics on the street level. This is mostly carried out through partnerships with gangs and organized crime in the United States, notably Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) and the Latin Kings (US Department of Justice).

            Another important factor Shelley mentions is the lack of a strong civil society, which is evident within Mexico. In fact, many academics feel that Mexico is in strong danger of becoming a failed state (Grayson). This assertion is corroborated by the US military, who issued an analysis of Mexico in 2009 wherein they stated that if the Mexican drug war were to continue for another 25 years, the state would likely collapse (Blair). One can see further evidence of this assertion in the strong correlation between the amount police officers are paid in a region, and the amount of drug-related crime there is within that region. For example, the Tijuana region is notorious for being an epicenter of the drug trade and home to the Tijuana cartel. The municipal police in Tijuana are known to often act as enforcers for the cartel, likely because they have the lowest salaries of any of Mexico’s police forces.

            As mentioned before, the deleterious effects of the transnational drug trade may be strong enough to seriously undermine Mexico as a state and the relatively young democracy that is in place there. As Shelley mentions, it can cause an increase in tax rates as less and less of the economy remains licit and thus taxable, which may in turn lead to an increase in corruption and organized crime. In this way, Shelley’s third condition, which is self-perpetuity, is fulfilled.

            However, this problem, as a transnational problem, is not that of Mexico alone. Many, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have claimed that the enormous desire for drugs within the United States is a major factor in the continuation of the transnational drug trade (Robinson). Indeed, many believe that reducing the actual desire for drugs within the United States as opposed to attempting to militarily destroy the drug cartels could be as much as seven times as cost effective (Miller).

            I personally echo this belief. Antagonizing Mexican Drug Cartels as we have been doing in the past decade and a half, with the aid of the last three American administrations, has only led to a huge increase in violence and massive destabilization of the country as a whole, as well as an influx of illicit narcotics being brought into the United States. I believe that if we truly wish to combat the violence and chaos brought about by the drug trade, we must address the issues which created the problem we have today: first the US demand for drugs, second a lack of civil society in Mexico, and finally the immense amount of corruption in the Mexican security forces.

Cook, Colleen W., ed. (October 16, 2007). "Mexico's Drug Cartels" (PDF). CRS Report for Congress. Congressional Research Service. p. 7. Retrieved 13 Nov. 2012.

Ibid; U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center, National Drug Threat Assessment 2006, January 2006.

RS interview with Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) officials, November 8, 2006; "Alerta PGR sobre Aumento de Violencia y Narco," Criterios, August 3, 2006; and, Laurie Freeman, State of Siege: Drug-Related Violence and Corruption in Mexico, Washington Office on Latin America, June 2006.

CRS interview with FBI officials, January 10, 2007and U.S. Department of Justice National Drug Intelligence Center, National Drug Threat Assessment 2006, January 2006.

Grayson, George W. (2010). Mexico: Narco-Violence and a Failed State?. Transaction Publishers. pp. 4.

Blair, David (2009-01-16). "Mexico in danger of collapse". London: Telegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 13 Nov 2012.

Robinson, Eugene. "Drugs and Guns -- a Deadly Trade Between Mexico and the U.S." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 27 Mar. 2009. Web. 13 Nov. 2012. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032603115.html>.

Miller, Stephanie (April 7, 2009). "A Regional Strategy for Drug Wars in the Americas". Center for American Progress. Retrieved 13 Nov. 2012.