During a recent debate among Republican presidential candidates, a notable point of consensus emerged: the call for American military intervention to combat drug trafficking in Mexico. Several candidates expressed support for cross-border military action, citing concerns about drug cartels and their impact on both nations. These discussions are amplifying tensions on both sides of the border as the idea of unilateral military action gains traction for some political candidates. While there are differing opinions on how to address border-related issues, it’s evident that the current situation significantly affects U.S. national security.
Cartel Activity is Intensifying
Numerous instances within the last few months indicate Mexican drug cartels are out of control. With kidnapping and murders of Americans and the discovery of numerous burnt and headless corpses, Mexican policing is perceived to be nearly ineffectual. Porous borders and more sophisticated technology are allowing cartels to enjoy free rein.
Drones are now commonly used by the cartels. The Mexican army has stated drug cartels are dramatically increasing roadside bombs and improvised explosive devices (IED) usage. Over 42 have been wounded by IEDs so far in 2023, a 200% increase over all of last year.
Mexican Stance
Not surprisingly, Mexican President Obrador rejects calls for the U.S. military to intervene in drug cartel violence in his country. In a recent news conference, the Mexican President stated this action would violate the country’s sovereignty. Obrador said the Mexican government was “not going to permit any foreign government to intervene in our territory, much less that a government’s armed forces intervene”. He added if Republican lawmakers try to “use Mexico for their propagandist, electoral, and political purposes, we will make a call to not vote for that party,” alluding to a potential public information campaign in America.
Can the U.S. do this?
Some analysts suggest that designating the cartel as a foreign terrorist organization could potentially authorize lethal action without the need for congressional approval, although subsequent congressional inquiries would be likely. However, the ramifications of such unilateral action could be profound, including severed diplomatic relations with Mexico, perceived violations of sovereignty, and significant trade implications. Rather than military intervention, there’s a question of whether improving border control and increasing Coast Guard efforts might offer more effective solutions and better allocation of tax dollars.
