Printable View
May we live in interesting times.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1258dave
Los Zetas: Evolution of a Criminal Organization, By Samuel Logan. ISN Security Watch, 11 Mar 2009.Los Zetas original and Zetas the Brand? Sounds similar to AQ.Quote:
From the original 31 members, the Mexican organized criminal faction Los Zetas has grown into an organization in its own right, operating separate from the Gulf Cartel and just as violent, Sam Logan writes for ISN Security Watch.
http://www.economist.com/displaystor...ry_id=13234157
The link from The Economist (On the trail of the traffickers Mar 5th 2009) is interesting. It is the most detailed information I have seen yet about how Mexico is trying to reform its legal system and its police under fire. I realize that this is partially in response to the furry of comments about Mexico as a "failed stated" (or potential failed state) it is interesting information. I'm glad that The Economist carried it, now where is the rest of the media? :wry:
from the article:
The aim, says Eduardo Medina Mora, Mr Calderón’s attorney-general, is not to end drug-trafficking “because that is unachievable.” Rather, it is “to take back from organised criminal groups the economic power and armament they’ve established in the past 20 years, to take away their capacity to undermine institutions and to contest the state’s monopoly of force.”
Stratfor has been discussing problems in Mexico for quite a while. They were discussing it long before I heard a peep from the media.
http://www.stratfor.com/countries/mexico
Sorry, I only caught the last part of an interview on CNN with a Mexican official, so I didn't catch his name or position.
He went on and on about how more tourists came to Mexico in 2008, than 2007, and so far tourism for 2009 is doing pretty good. That's because the problems are isolated to three northern states, the rest of Mexico is fine (not quite the truth, since there were several attacks in Acapulco). He then went on to say that almost all the killings were thugs killing thugs, which probably was true in the beginning, but obviously any cop, lawyer, judge, politician who attempts to stand up against the Mexican Mafia is assuming a high degree of risk. Not to mention the serious threat of drug money, which is a weapon of corruption that can destroy a government from within.
I remain hopeful at this stage that the thugs can be defeated, but if their officials are in a state of denial, then that causes more concern.
Problems may be isolated to the northern states now, I don't know the situation; but if so it is because a dominate cartel has emerged in southern state turf wars. The cartels need northern export routes, and southern states for maritime and overland import routes. There was a lot of violence over the import routes the last three years.
Congressional testimony: http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/testimony/t...397860176.shtm
Rather bland and full of spin. No sign of threat assessment, but then my armchair is a long way away.
davidbfpo
Some interesting images from Mexico's drug battles..
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/200..._drug_war.html
I guess "somebody" is paying attention.
From Foreign Policy .com:
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/...3/27/was_obama
"The New York Times reports, following the Mexican media, that Hillary Clinton's visit to Mexico is in danger of being upstaged by concerns over Obama's reported pick for ambassador to Mexico, Carlos Pascual. Pascual, who is director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution and former ambassador to Ukraine, has written extensively about failed states and ran the State Department's Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization under the Bush administration:"
NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/wo...1&ref=americas
"The Mexican daily newspaper El Universal, citing unnamed sources, reported Thursday that the United States had submitted Mr. Pascual’s name to the Mexican government.
The paper noted that Mr. Pascual’s specialty was in dealing with conflict-ridden states. He served as the coordinator for reconstruction and stabilization in the State Department, a post that involved working with several agencies to develop strategies for broken countries like Afghanistan.
That could raise hackles among some Mexicans, who take umbrage at recent assertions by American analysts that drug-related violence has so destabilized Mexico that it is danger of becoming a failed state"
Your suppositions that a good career US Ambassador with problem or trouble shooting experience will be or is resented by Mexico is questionable to me.
With an average of over 6,000 KIA, ie, the Mexican drug wars, per year...this dwarfs the cumulative KIA for the entire 7 year long, now, Iraq War.
Mexico needs all the trouble-qualified help it can get.
Drugs in Mexico are no different than opium in Afghanistan. Drugs are drugs and bad for the world at large.
My two cents.
George,
I'm not sure I understand your post.
My 1st impression is that this is a positive step by the US Gov.
I think the situation in Mexico is underreported and I'm trying to post information here.
I can understand how the Ambassdor-designate's past as an expert on failed states might be seen as an affront to Mexicans. In the last couple of years there are ample reports on how Anglo-American diplomacy in Pakistan has been resented. More particularly the USA is a rather powerful neighbour next door. It all depends on how the public aspect of the nomination is presented to Mexicans.
davidbfpo
1258dave:Quote:
Originally Posted by 1258dave
Your clarification helps me better understand you, as I "read" you as joining in the criticism of a career US Ambassador being named to Mexico from the US. My misunderstanding I suppose. I support this career Ambassador's appointment and think he is most suited in background for the Mexican posting...as I am among those who feels Mexico's government has been on the brink of collapse due to the drug lords wars within Mexico, especially along the US border.
The US Ambassador is the servant of whichever administration is in power in the US and has to tow that line, as will now be the case with Obama's appointment to Mexico.
In partial comment to David, the US Ambassadors, Generals, Colonels, whoever, in active service are not and should not be "Free agents."
World citizens have the individual right to judge, condemn, praise, whatever, but they have to elect their own national governing leadership...but as yet no European nation is able to elect our US Presidents. We US citizens elect and live under our US leaders.
I have UK cousins whose mother is my lst cousin, born in USA. If ever I comment on leadership and elections in UK...if my opinions are not shared, I encounter a storm of protest. I am thinking of my own family example in using my opinion to be contra to those who judge or comment on our US Ambassador for Mexico. But, in all cases, we have world citizens freedom to say what we think...but we can only "vote" in our own national elections, which is as it should be.
are right - and nobody's wrong. Amb Pascual is well qualified. He may well be resented by some or many Mexicans for the reasons noted. What counts, however, is whether he is acceptable to President Calderon. If so, he's in; if not, back to the drawing boards. In the "for what it's worth dept" I think he'll be welcomed with open arms.:wry:
Cheers
JohnT
I always start start getting worried when they talk about the President of Mexico....Calderone was the main dealer in Miami Vice:eek::eek:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cgx558wh7o
I made the prediction back in 2006 that Mexico would be the next small war. I am posting the link from when the thread was started...there is good debate and as usual good music throughout the thread. As for Mexico's future I will make some predictions later on. Notice how hard it was to convince people how much of a threat this is back then...the US can be a slow learner when it comes to good Threat Assessment of VSNA's. Enjoy.
http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ghlight=Mexico
Something doesn't add up about this '2,000 guns a day headed south' figure being touted by the mainstream media. We've seen 10" barreled M4s, M203s,M249s and M60s, in addition to frag HE and 40mm projectiles. That'd make the Mexican military one source, but nowhere near enough to meet demand.
With an estimated 100,000 fighters under arms, the drug cartels would seemingly have easier access to more effective weaponry through Mexico's more-porous southern border.
Furthermore, the cost-value figures that the cartels are reportedly paying for semi-automatic arms are skewed when compared to black market prices for full-auto weaponry (at least as far as what I've read about Latin America).
Does anyone have a copy of the Brookings Institute report that addresses the arms smuggling?
Updated Friday, March 6, 2009 10:18 am TWN, By Arthur I. Cyr, Special to The China Post
Robert Gates links Iran and Mexico
http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/41800
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the Cabinet holdover from the Bush years, is in the news regarding two major issues, and in each case is challenged to demonstrate that he remains in charge of the enormous Pentagon.
In one case, he has disagreed sharply with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding Iran's nuclear weapons capacity. In the other, he appears to disagree with himself, at least in institutional terms, regarding Mexico's enormous expanding drug traffic.
The problems represented by developments in both nations have very strong implications for Asia and indeed the comprehensive international system of nations. Iran is steadily growing in influence in the Middle East and Persian Gulf, one byproduct of the United States invasion and occupation of Iraq not anticipated by the Bush administration. The problem of Islamic radicalism, and the development in turn of associated terrorist groups, is however global in scope, reflected recently in the violence in Mumbai India. The largest Muslim population in the world is found in Indonesia.
Drug trafficking likewise is a global problem. Illicit manufacturers as well as traders are to be found in literally every country on the globe. Southeast Asia traditionally has been a major source of supply.
As a Devil's Advocate, I wonder how much cross-over there is between these two problems.
I've read article three times now, and still do not see how Robert Gates linked Iran and Mexico together as suggested in the article's title.Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG
Well...Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG
Iran does have one of the better counter-narcotics programs in the world, and several thousand Iranian security personnel have died fighting drug traffickers. DTO's that operate through Iran have in the past likely been utilized by foreign intelligence services. Similarly, it's possible that Mexican DTO's could be as well.
Ollie North's buddy Arif Ali Durrani, who previously was pinched for selling missile parts to Iran from the US, was busted in 2005 exporting jet parts to Iran out the back of his restaurant in Tijuana.
Classic convenient use of statistics to push an agenda
Quote:
The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.
While 90 percent of the guns traced to the U.S. actually originated in the United States, the percent traced to the U.S. is only about 17 percent of the total number of guns reaching Mexico.
EXCLUSIVE: You've heard this shocking "fact" before -- on TV and radio, in newspapers, on the Internet and from the highest politicians in the land: 90 percent of the weapons used to commit crimes in Mexico come from the United States.
-- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it to reporters on a flight to Mexico City.
-- CBS newsman Bob Schieffer referred to it while interviewing President Obama.
-- California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said at a Senate hearing: "It is unacceptable to have 90 percent of the guns that are picked up in Mexico and used to shoot judges, police officers and mayors ... come from the United States."
-- William Hoover, assistant director for field operations at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, testified in the House of Representatives that "there is more than enough evidence to indicate that over 90 percent of the firearms that have either been recovered in, or interdicted in transport to Mexico, originated from various sources within the United States."
There's just one problem with the 90 percent "statistic" and it's a big one:
It's just not true.
You beat me to it, Tom.
Lucky I did a search, first.
Bottom line is, that illegal military arms are cheaper and easier to import into Mexico than legally purchased civilian arms from the US.
The whole "90 percent" argument is a Big Lie. Now, if you're telling me that you can stop the Mexican Army from handing it's guns over to the Drug Cartels faster than the US sells them to them by enforcing stricter gun control laws on civilians in the US, I'd say that someone is smoking crack.
Or they're a former General Officer trying to kiss up to the current administration for a J-O-B.