POINT-COUNTERPOINT on Mexico

March 31st, 2009 by zen

  1. Informal intra-elite social networks that reflects what’s left of the old camarilla dynamic.
  2. Cross-border organizational networks for U.S.-Mexico security (military, police, intel) cooperation

David Ronfeldt, for new readers here, is a major “edge” thinker in the national security field at RAND and is a co-author (with John Arquilla) of the influential “classic”,  Networks and Netwars: The Future of Terror, Crime, and Militancy , which sits on my shelf about two feet from me as I type this. As it happens, Ronfeldt also specialized in Mexican and Latin American security as an analyst during the Cold War which gives means that his caveats are worth careful consideration. Frankly, we are all better off if Ronfeldt is correct and the “alarmists” are wrong, though I think the grim state of affairs south of the Rio Grande is deterring most Mexico experts  from going out on a limb to make positive predictions.

Page 3 of 3 | Previous page

Posted in 3 gen gangs, 4GW, America, analytic, blogosphere, Failed State, gangs, insurgency, intellectuals, Mexico, national security, network theory, networks, security, state building, state failure, terrorism, threatswatch | 8 comments

Previous post:
Next post:

  1. T. Greer:

    March 31st, 2009 at 5:29 am

    The thought occurs to me that if we are to begin comparing Mexico to failed states and near-failed states, the proper model would not be Afghanistan or Pakistan, but Columbia.
    According to a 2008 GAO report on Plan Columbia, 10% the country’s land is controlled by ELN, FARC, et. al, several thousand armed narco-guerillas still roam across the countryside, and the number of homicides across the country has only dropped to 20,000 per annum.

    With this in mind, would anybody call Columbia a failed state right now? Did people refer to Columbia as a failed state when matters were at their worst, 10 years past? If not, is it fair to call Mexico a failed state now?

  2. Samuel.Logan:

    March 31st, 2009 at 6:43 pm

    I would like to forward the idea of Mexico becoming a "hollow state." Here follows the first fews paragraphs of a piece I recently posted on National Journal’s National Security roundtable entitled: Mexico, Failing State?Those who have studied Mexico’s history know that our southern neighbor will never reach state failure. There is the possibility, however, that Mexico will become a hollow state.The so-called "Hollow State Theory" evolved as analysts in South America watched how corruption and organized crime deteriorated the state of Paraguay from within. After years of this evolution, Paraguay became little more than a shell, one that looked like a relatively well functioning democracy from the outside, but was a machine of corruption, organized crime, terrorist financing, and the hub of South America’s largest black market on the inside. The hope of taking back the Paraguayan state under the leadership of Fernando Lugo is in part why his election was such a cause for celebration.In Mexico, Felipe Calderon’s election will have the effect of accelerating Mexico’s evolution into a hollow state…

  3. zen:

    March 31st, 2009 at 9:33 pm

    Hi T. Greer,
    .
    I think prior to the ramping up of the right-wing paramilitaries through the period of deepest multi-group violence in Colombia where the paramilitaries and the army severely dented FARC and the ELN, until their gradual disarming that left Uribe’s government in a stronger position, Colombia was a failing state. It is still in some danger, in my view, so long as FARC can rely on Venezuela as their "strategic depth".
    .
    Mexico’s situation is both better and worse than Colombia’s in that period. Better, in that Mexico can bring a preponderance of hard power to bear anywhere, at least for a while and that huge sections of mexico have not been formally ceded to narcotraffickers. Worse, in that the narcos are a more decentralized enemy that lack the center of gravity of a FARC and even fewer moral constraints on operations. FARC delusionally wishes to rule Colombia someday and acts "politically"; the narcos want a free hand to sell drugs, not responsibilities of governing Mexico, so chaos suits them well enough. Nor does the Mexican state yet have a groundswell movement of paramilitary allies to "fight fire with fire". Colombians were willing to fight for the state while acting outside of it – is the same true of Mexicans? Time will tell.
    .
    Hi Samuel.Logan
    .
    I agree with you. "Hollow state" seems a very realistic waystation for Mexico and would actually benefit the narcos far more than upending the entire system. I have not followed Paraguay since the end of Stroessner’s philo-nazi dictatorship, but your description would indicate that his successors were less determined to fight for their own supremacy when bribery sweetened their decline in stature.
    .
    Your book looks interesting BTW   I look forard tto reading it when itcomes out this summer

  4. david ronfeldt:

    April 1st, 2009 at 4:57 pm

    many thanks for including me.  i’m delighted. 

    the little feedback i’ve received on my posting indicates the following:  yes, camarillas are still important, esp for PRI leaders, but camarilla dynamics are now more about garnering contacts than striving for power.  and yes, there’s increasing awareness among american officials operating along the border that more/better networks are needed with mexicans, but there is also immense inertia and distrust impeding their organization, informally and formally.  so, i too remain pessimistic, but still reluctant to turn alarmist, given my past experiences, as well as my ccontinuing sense that my post’s points remain on a likely track.

    meanwhile, what i’ve most wondered these past few days is the extent to which all the new u.s. border-line (borderline?) security measures (esp the fence) are "causing" much of the upsurge in violence by and competition among the different types of criminal gangs in mexico, and also against the government, perhaps in part because of how those measures re-channel access routes.  surely this proposition has already been noted and discussed somewhere(s), and i just haven’t read enough yet.  if the proposition is valid, it could have quite a mix of implications, positive and negative.

    onward.

  5. zen:

    April 2nd, 2009 at 3:08 am

    Hi David, good to have you here!
    .

    The PRI era camarillas as you described them reminded me of the old, Soviet, nomenklatura "clans" – except that the Mexican camarillas seem to have stayed relatively benign while the Russian nomenklatura fractured into siloviki, mafiyas and oligarch factions and have been anything but positive in their influence.
    .
    Border security, unless it is comprehensive and systemic, might be like squeezing a balloon as you suggest. We’re raising transaction costs but ultimately drug smugglers could put their drug product on a plane or boat to a third country and just raise the price by the marginal difference. Coyotes can head deeper into the desert – the border is long and the ppl manning it are relatively few relative to it’s size. Unless underlying structural issues ( drug laws, temporary labor access) are addressed, tweaking gun control laws, adding "smart" fences etc. just nibbles at the edges.

  6. david ronfeldt:

    April 20th, 2009 at 10:58 pm

    hey zen  — i just spotted your comment here, and maybe it’s too late to reply significantly, but here’s a quick remark or two:
    >
    i’m not as familiar with the mexican terms as you are with the russian ones, but i can add that mexico has its own varieties.  camarillas come in all varieties, benign and malign, open and closed.  they may contain old-school "dinosauros" as well as modernizing "technocratas."  some may have "mafias."  today, the leftist prd party is said to consist of several competing "tribus" (tribes), which are like hardened camarillas. 
    >
    i see the stratfor and fabius maximus blogs have just posted new material on the dark possibilities for mexico.  i’ve tried to keep the brighter possibilities alive and in view through comments at the rethinking security blog, the only one i know that has a lead post on mexico that is not entirely negative.  — onward, david

  7. zen:

    April 21st, 2009 at 3:03 am

    Hi David,
    .
    Adam Elkus at RS has been partnering with Lt. John Sullivan of the (I think I have the correct police agency here but maybe not) of the LA county Sheriffs department on researching Mexican security issues for at least a year or two. They have a new paper coming out very soon – and I think also some articles at GroupIntel and Red Team Journal ( Adam – if you are out there reading this, could you clarify?).
    .
    I think you are correct to keep pushing the brighter possibilities for Mexico in public view. Not so much for USG folks, as I have heard there’s a "speak no evil" line in effect right now in high places on Mexico, but for analysts in and out of tanks or bloggers like myself who might otherwise get locked into a particular frame. It’s hard to keep the entire range of probabilities in mind unless one consciously keeps the entire range of possibilities in mind 🙂
    .
    I’ll frankly admit, I need to learn more about Mexico in terms of granular detail and I’m making assessments here by looking for comparative patterns/dynamics; while what I see I find worrisome but that needs to be balanced with more Mexico specific data.
    .
    So much to read in life, so little time!

  8. A.E.:

    April 21st, 2009 at 10:13 pm

    Zen,

    JPS works at LASD. We’re trying to iron out the paper but it is pretty much about 80% done. We’ve published on Mexico at Small Wars Journal and GroupIntel, but our RTJ paper wasn’t actually about Mexico–it was on Robert Bunker’s "BLACKFOR" red-teaming model and the concept of criminal insurgency.