BajaNomad - ARE THE CARTELS AND THE GOVERNMENT GOING TO JOIN FORCES?

ARE THE CARTELS AND THE GOVERNMENT GOING TO JOIN FORCES?

DENNIS - 2-3-2010 at 03:44 PM

This is a Mexidata article:
----

Monday, February 1, 2010

Are Mexican Officials Negotiating with Narco Kingpins?

By Samuel Logan

Mexican Federal Police arrested four members of the Sinaloa Federation, killing a fifth, in a shootout on 27 January after anonymous informants tipped the police to armed men seen entering and exiting a house in the state of Chihuahua. Such sporadic shootouts and arrests are now commonplace in Mexico, but the arrest of members of the Sinaloa Federation, it seems, remains a rare event.

According to analysts, Mexican authorities have made 53,174 drug-related arrests, with only 941 of those arrests — some 1.7 percent — pertaining to the Sinaloa Federation, believed to still be under the control of one man: Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman.

Mexican security analyst and economist Edgardo Buscaglia took these numbers a step further in a 7 January interview with The Economist, noting that, "the government's strategy is to focus on the weakest groups, so that the organized crime market will consolidate itself around Sinaloa."

He also added an interesting twist: "[The government] is hoping to negotiate a decrease in violence with that one group."

The idea of the Mexican government negotiating with organized crime is certainly not new. From 1929 to 2000, a long succession of Mexican leaders maintained a wink-and-nod arrangement with the country's drug trafficking elite, who were allowed to smuggle contraband into the US as long as they didn't shed blood on Mexican streets.

Mexican President Felipe Calderon's hard-nosed strategy has obviously shattered this historical arrangement, so the idea that his administration would even consider talking to a man like El Chapo seems far-fetched, easily dismissed out of hand.

Yet the arrest statistics support Buscaglia's theory. And with limited resources stretched across a large country, a focus on the Arellano-Felix organization and the Gulf Cartel, both weakened by the successive loss of influential leaders, seems to be a pragmatic strategy.

The Sinaloa Federation represents the strongest drug trafficking syndicate operating today in Mexico. Men under El Chapo's direct control may control as much as 45 percent of the Mexican drug trade, leaving roughly half the narco pie spilt among a number of groups, including Los Zetas, which is arguably the most powerful organized criminal group in Mexico in terms of paramilitary effectiveness.

If Buscaglia is right, then the state of Sinaloa, and the city of Culiacan, would be off limits to the Calderon administration. So far, the Mexican president has focused on Tijuana and Ciudad Juarez, where in the latter he expedited the removal of the military from the streets in January, replacing them with a new cadre of federal police.

The maneuver appears to be a litmus test for a new strategy, one that sees removing the military from the day-to-day patrol duty of hotspots to a more narrow focus on one-off ‘decapitation’ operations, much like the assault that killed Arturo Beltran Leyva.

With a little under three years left in office, Calderon is certainly considering his end game, and it is not one where he will be able to deconstruct all of Mexico's drug trafficking organizations. He will likely succeed at removing two — perhaps the Beltran Leyva organization and the Arellano Felix organization — but within the amount of time he has left, he will not remove Los Zetas and the Sinaloa Federation by force alone. It will require a significant amount of cunning and help, and as long as Calderon stays out of Sinaloa and does not arrest El Chapo's men, many will now have to at least consider that the idea of a truce could be on the table.

——————————

This article was originally published at ISN Security Watch (02/01/09). The International Relations and Security Network (ISN) is a free public service that provides a wide range of high-quality and comprehensive products and resources to encourage the exchange of information among international relations and security professionals worldwide. Reprinted with permission from ISN.

Samuel Logan is an investigative journalist who has reported on security, energy, politics, economics, organized crime, terrorism and black markets in Latin America since 1999. He is a senior writer for ISN Security Watch, and editor of Southern Pulse – Networked Intelligence. He is the author of This is for the Mara Salvatrucha: Inside the MS-13, America's Most Violent Gang, (released by Hyperion in summer 2009). For issues related publications go to http://www.samuellogan.com/publications.html.

JESSE - 2-3-2010 at 03:59 PM

I think the Calderon goverment originally had this plan in mind, and perhaps, its still trying to implement it. In reality, i think its a plan that's impossible to carry out. Calderon controls only a limited amount of law enforcement capabilities. The rest, is in the control of the state and local goverments. While the feds might try to eliminate one cartel in a certain area, leaving the turf in the control of the other competing cartel (in this case, the sinaloa). The task will be daunting if the state and local cops protect the home team.

Ciudad Juarez for example, is what many say the epicenter of the goverments policy for leaving one cartel in charge. The result? the most violent city in the world. And the local cartel is still operating and defending its turf.

Now try to wipe out all the other cartels, and you will see how impossible this plan was (is).

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-3-2010 at 04:09 PM

If Mexico does what is suggested in this news report then Mexico as a nation is doomed and will forever more be overrun by killers. Now that they have some of the cartels on the run they need to keep up the pressure and get even more aggressive. Killers need to be caught and incarcerated for the rest of their lives or legally be put to death or killed in the shootouts. These killers have killed and killed and killed and it is inconceivable they can be rehabilitated. Their consciences no longer have the “No, No Factor" in it and have conditioned themselves to kill without any thought of remorse. You don’t change that mentality because they actually like to kill people.

[Edited on 2-3-2010 by ELINVESTIG8R]

Bajahowodd - 2-3-2010 at 05:31 PM

Unless the government becomes the last cartel standing.

Donjulio - 2-3-2010 at 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ELINVESTIG8R
If Mexico does what is suggested in this news report then Mexico as a nation is doomed and will forever more be overrun by killers. Now that they have some of the cartels on the run they need to keep up the pressure and get even more aggressive. Killers need to be caught and incarcerated for the rest of their lives or legally be put to death or killed in the shootouts. These killers have killed and killed and killed and it is inconceivable they can be rehabilitated. Their consciences no longer have the “No, No Factor" in it and have conditioned themselves to kill without any thought of remorse. You don’t change that mentality because they actually like to kill people.

[Edited on 2-3-2010 by ELINVESTIG8R]

We are all pitching in and getting you some tranquilizers. Two or three and a little tequila should mellow you right out.

Another one for the Taser Hall of Fame!

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 05:46 AM

Here DonJulio let me help you now after you helped me with the tranquilizers and tequila. I always like to repay kindness done to me. :lol:

I hope this was a help to get you business guys out of your anesthetized state of mind!

toneart - 2-4-2010 at 10:25 AM

You may remember that I was the first one to suggest this as a solution to curtail the violence. Of course it is a radical idea and would be morally wrong but it is a possible solution. My ideas are radical and usually go over like lead turds here on the BajaNomad, but they often come to be. War on anything doesn't work. It just supports unfriendly industries and makes nasty billionaires richer. The rest of you who buy the status quo are stuck in your own prison. Escape! Think out of the box.

Shame on me? Well...right back at you.

DENNIS - 2-4-2010 at 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by toneart
You may remember that I was the first one to suggest this as a solution to curtail the violence.

Jeeeezo, Tony.....Do you really believe there is any positive value at all in having a government policy that gives tacit approval to drug dealing? Mexico would have as much world respect as Afghanistan and the poppy growers.
The only way they could pull it off would be to legalize, without condition, all drugs in Mexico.
I further believe a policy such as this could start a war.

BajaGringo - 2-4-2010 at 10:38 AM

A war with who?

And would it be any worse than now???

[Edited on 2-4-2010 by BajaGringo]

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 10:43 AM

Tony, I can tell you and I definitely think outside of the box because we are friends here in Baja Nomad. And we all know I am your favorite Conservative Republican Turd....! :lol:

Now where did I put my taser!

DENNIS - 2-4-2010 at 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
A war with who?

Who? Are you kidding?

toneart - 2-4-2010 at 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by toneart
You may remember that I was the first one to suggest this as a solution to curtail the violence.

Dennis,
No! i don't think there is any positive value other than a deal to curtail the violence. To me that is the most important thing, and to let innocent citizens return to some kind of normal life without fear.

Your idea is a better one, which I have also been touting for years. That implies working within the rule of law to legislate. Mexico is more comfortable and experienced in underhanded dealing though. It is all about power and money.

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 10:55 AM

I personally would like to see the USA roll full force into Mexico (With Mexico's approval of course) with all the troops and equipment we take out of Iraq so we can help the Mexican Government out with killing these murderous drug cartel killing machines, searching City-by-City, House-to-House, Building-by-Building, Rancho-by-Rancho and underneath every rock. Is this thinking too far out of the box? What do you think?

DENNIS - 2-4-2010 at 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by toneart
No! i don't think there is any positive value other than a deal to curtail the violence.

I don't know, Tony. Surrender by any other name is still surrender. There has to be a better way and, of course, there is. Seperate the product from the consumer.

BajaGringo - 2-4-2010 at 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DENNIS

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
A war with who?

Who? Are you kidding?

I said that tongue in cheek to make the point that there already is a narco war. I don't see it getting worse by legalizing drugs...

Dave - 2-4-2010 at 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
A war with who?

Basically thumbing your nose at U.S. drug policy wouldn't sit well.

While I doubt it would be a shooting war it would be economic suicide for Mexico.

And probably the U.S. as well. :rolleyes:

Bajahowodd - 2-4-2010 at 12:27 PM

The US and Mexico have almost $300 billion in combined trade annually, trailing only Canada and China, and well ahead of Japan. So economic suicide is correct.

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 01:10 PM

Larry it was said somewhat tongue-in-cheek and was not the ranting of some “Crazy Guy.” I just forgot to add the laughing bobble head. Ohh, wait a minute, I just may be crazy. :lol:

BajaGringo - 2-4-2010 at 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
The US and Mexico have almost $300 billion in combined trade annually, trailing only Canada and China, and well ahead of Japan. So economic suicide is correct.

Counting the drug traffic?

Dave - 2-4-2010 at 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
Counting the drug traffic?

Saw some program the other night where someone estimated 20% U.S. and 60% Mexico. While I doubt the validity of these figures no doubt it is substantial.

I doubt the U.S. would stand for Mexico legalizing and Mexico knows this. The first thing that the U.S. could do is simply prohibit all tourist travel to Mexico.

Legalization just ain't gonna happen.

DENNIS - 2-4-2010 at 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
Legalization just ain't gonna happen.

I mentioned legalization a while back, but it wasn't a suggestion by any means. I only meant that it would have to happen in Mexico before the government, the new silent partner of the cartels, could completely turn their back on the operation, which would happen if the idea in the article were to take place.
That agreement couldn't be a private matter. The whole world would know in a second. I don't see it happening.

BajaGringo - 2-4-2010 at 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
Legalization just ain't gonna happen.

Unless Al Franken makes it to the White House...

What/ No Laughing Emoticon?

Bajahowodd - 2-4-2010 at 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
The US and Mexico have almost $300 billion in combined trade annually, trailing only Canada and China, and well ahead of Japan. So economic suicide is correct.

Counting the drug traffic?

Of course not!

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo

Quote:

Originally posted by Dave
Legalization just ain't gonna happen.

Unless Al Franken makes it to the White House...

BajaGringo - 2-4-2010 at 02:22 PM

Although I hear Franken wants to see Bill Maher in the oval office...

wessongroup - 2-4-2010 at 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by toneart
You may remember that I was the first one to suggest this as a solution to curtail the violence. Of course it is a radical idea and would be morally wrong but it is a possible solution. My ideas are radical and usually go over like lead turds here on the BajaNomad, but they often come to be. War on anything doesn't work. It just supports unfriendly industries and makes nasty billionaires richer. The rest of you who buy the status quo are stuck in your own prison. Escape! Think out of the box.

Shame on me? Well...right back at you.

Think your on point, Toneart .. else why is the CIA and military using "drones" to TAKE OUT the LEADERS of the opposition.. so effective, that the other side is stepping up the stakes a bit.. it would appear from the past few weeks..

Busting a bunch of folks in the distribution end is not the way to go, unless you want to just fill up the jails, while the "main man" is untouched..

Busting a dRiver with a load of pot under a pile of fish.. not going to get er done..

You have to take out the leadership.. seems pretty logical and effective to me.. but, then I'm not in charge, and the folks at the top, well let's just say they seem to get their way...

And the irony would seemed to be lost... given the individual is busted bring pot into a State where it is legal.. currently, along with 13 other States..

[Edited on 2-4-2010 by wessongroup]

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
Although I hear Franken wants to see Bill Maher in the oval office...

Holy Jesus, Mary and the Holy Ghost No!!!

Bajahowodd - 2-4-2010 at 02:39 PM

What's the matter, David? You have a bias against intelligent, humorous men?

ELINVESTIG8R - 2-4-2010 at 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
What's the matter, David? You have a bias against intelligent, humorous men?

Nope! We just do not need these guys in the oval office! "PERIOD END OF REPORT" And don't expect me to expound on that statement either! :lol: