Mexico's Drug War

"Texas sheriff: Drug war violence spilling over."

Here is an excerpt from this Associated Press story, published in The Houston Chronicle:

"A shooting that injured a sheriff's deputy was the first indisputable case of spillover violence from the Mexican drug wars in Hidalgo County, the local sheriff said Monday. Sheriff Lupe Trevino, who previously said there was no direct spillover violence in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, said the Sunday shootout erupted while one of his deputies investigated a reported kidnapping and drug deal. 'I have to say that with this particular incident, the way the witnesses and the information that we have gotten particularly in the federal system, this is the first recorded spillover violence event that we have experienced — and unfortunately got one of our deputies shot,' Trevino said. One suspect was killed and two were wounded. In all, six people were taken into custody, including the alleged kidnapping victim, and are awaiting charges, the sheriff said... Trevino said the reported kidnapping was a bid to recover marijuana stolen when the Gulf cartel's reputed second-in-command, Samuel Flores Borrego, was killed in September...'Now, there are more cartel members living in Texas, in the Valley, in the United States. I'll guarantee you there's a ton of them,' he said." Link to Full Story

Analysis: That something like this has happened along the Texas-Mexico border should come as a surprise to no one. But this is what I really don't understand. Why isn't this story getting more national attention? I did a search of news stories on this particular incident, and just about everything was local in the RGV or Texas - KRGV, KGBT, The Monitor, The Houston Chronicle, etc. Although I will say, The Boston Herald did print a story on it. But why aren't the "big guys" like CNN, FOX News, and MSNBC splattering this report all over the screen?

This really shouldn't surprise me too much, either. Just last year, the first drug war-related beheading occurred in the US, specifically in Chandler, Arizona. Yep, a beheading on US soil in an apartment complex. When I tell people about that story, they look at me in awe, as if to say, why haven't I heard about this before? Then there are the five men who were electrocuted, tortured, and had their throats slit in a northern Alabama safe house in 2009. Again, only local coverage about that.

But this story in Hidalgo County is different. Most reports about possible spillover violence almost always involve bad guys killing bad guys - like the Gulf cartel members who got into a firefight on a McAllen highway a couple of weeks ago. Perhaps that's why people are disinterested; criminals killing criminals makes the work easier for law enforcement, right? But these were TCO members who shot and severely wounded an American law enforcement officer on US soil. The activities they were engaged in before the confrontation were directly related to the drug war in Mexico. Why is it that only news outlets in Texas are noticing?

The cynic in me tells me that these types of incidents are very bad PR for DHS. Everyone along the border - and particularly in south Texas - knows that cartel members are everywhere down there, but generally keep to themselves. But many border residents also knew it was a matter of time before something like this happened. This is the main reason for the subtitle of my book: The Coming Invasion of Mexico's Drug Wars. The TCOs are getting squeezed tighter and tighter by authorities on both sides of the border. However, they still need to keep the drug profits coming in. That means taking on more risk, i.e. engaging with US law enforcement and engaging in violent behavior in public on US soil.

This is not the first time that TCO members or armed drug smugglers have fired shots at US law enforcement (e.g. USBP Agent Brian Terry), and it certainly won't be the last. My question is, how many of these incidents have to happen before the US government starts rethinking its statement that the border is the safest it's ever been? And what's it going to take to move border security up the totem pole of national concerns? Hopefully, not another injured sheriff's deputy.

"Message Attributes Mexican Politician’s Kidnapping to Zapatistas."

Here is an excerpt from Buggs' article on the Borderland Beat blog:

"A message signed by someone claiming to be a member of the Zapatista National Liberation Army, or EZLN, says that group was responsible for the kidnapping of Mexican former presidential candidate Diego Fernandez de Cevallos, who spent nearly eight months in captivity last year... The signer claims to be a subordinate of “Subcomandante Marcos,” leader of the long-quiescent EZLN guerrilla group, and states that Fernandez de Cevallos, the presidential candidate of the now-governing National Action Party, or PAN, in 1994, was “one of the main enemies of our project” to secure autonomy for indigenous peoples... The message says the government’s strategy for dealing with its opponents has forced the EZLN, which has mainly devoted itself to social and community activism since a brief uprising in January 1994, “to have to resort to constructive violence” and “take appropriate action in secret.” It said the Zapatista movement, which has a leftist, Indian-rights agenda, has its sights set on the “total destruction of the current Mexican political system” and will use the ransom paid for Fernandez de Cevallos’ release to that end... In a public appearance after his release on Dec. 11 of last year, Fernandez de Cevallos provided few details about his captors nor the manner in which they freed him, although he said the government had a “pending” task of bringing them to justice... In his comments after he was set free, Fernandez de Cevallos said both political and financial factors were involved in his kidnapping." Link to Full Article

Analysis: There are so many things wrong and right about this story that I'm having a hard time making heads or tails of it. My first instinct when Cevallos was kidnapped was so assume that one of the DTOs snatched him, and his family would be lucky to see him alive again. Then the news started trickling out that his family was engaging in negotiations with the kidnappers, and those negotiations started to stretch out into months, rather than weeks. This case started to look like something out of Colombia, run by professional narcoterrorist kidnappers, rather than greedy and sloppy cartel members or low-level thugs out to make a buck.

I have a feeling a lot of people were thrown for a loop when this story about a purported EZLN message claiming responsibility came out. For those of you who aren't familiar with the EZLN - more commonly known as the "Zapatistas" - they're an indigenous rights group in Mexico's southernmost state of Chiapas with a fiery political agenda. They made the news in 1994 with an armed uprising under the leadership of the masked Subcomandante Marcos, but in less than a year they renounced any sort of violent intentions and decided to pursue their political goals peacefully.

Since the mid-1990s, the EZLN has been pretty quiet, and no one has paid them much mind since the drug war violence started in earnest in 2006. So there are two questions we have to ask. First, if the EZLN did actually kidnap Cevallos, why now, and why would they renounce their pledge of non-violence? Second, if the EZLN is being framed, who's doing the framing, and how do they stand to benefit from it?

Going with the first scenario, I'm trying to think why the EZLN would start to make a big stink at this particular moment. Perhaps they're looking for attention in the midst of a time when indigenous rights groups are being drowned out by the drug war. Maybe they felt that kidnapping a high-profile politician like Jefe Diego was the only way their voices would be heard above the fray. Certainly, the $30 million ransom paid for Cevallos' release will fund the EZLN's ambitions for quite some time. However, the EZLN had been respected as a legitimate organization by the Mexican government for several years. The governor of Chiapas is vehemently denying the EZLN had anything to do with his disappearance. Why would they do something like this to screw that up?

Let's go with the second scenario for a moment. Who would stand to benefit in Mexico right now by making the EZLN look bad? The DTOs aren't in any sort of direct competition with the EZLN. Maybe one of the smaller cartels thought it might draw attention and resources away from them and towards the EZLN in Chiapas. Maybe it's a personal/vengeance attack between someone in another group and the EZLN leadership. 

Either way, it's unusual for a claim of responsibility - or ransom negotiations, for that matter - to take so long when a DTO is involved. This is more reminiscent of something the FARC or ELN in Colombia would do, especially considering Cevallos seemed to be in decent physical shape when released, and the Colombian guerrilla/terrorist groups tend to value their hostages more than Mexican kidnappers do. My curiosity is further piqued by Cevallos' statement that his kidnapping was motivated by both political and financial reasons. DTOs don't have any direct political aspirations; they just want to manipulate and control the people in office through extortion and death threats. I don't know that holding Cevallos hostage for 11 months would accomplish a goal for one of the DTOs that something less labor- and time-intensive wouldn't have.

Unfortunately, the only person who can shed any light on this mystery is Cevallos, and he's not making any statements. I imagine this is likely one of the conditions of his release, lest he or one of his family members get kidnapped - or worse. Considering the chances of the Mexican authorities actually finding the people responsible are slim at best, we may never know who was at the bottom of this, or be able to truly assess what it means for the Mexican political and drug war landscape.

UPDATE: 20 kidnap victims in Acapulco may have had ties to La Familia

On Nov. 1, Stratfor published a security memo indicating the 20 male tourists kidnapped in Acapulco a couple of weeks ago had ties to La Familia Michoacana. Here's a brief excerpt from the report:

"A group of 20 tourists from Morelia, Michoacan state, reportedly kidnapped Oct. 1 in the Costa Azul neighborhood of Acapulco, Guerrero state, was sent on orders from La Familia Michoacana (LFM), Reforma reported Oct. 26, citing Mexican federal security sources. According to the report, LFM sent 22 men to Acapulco (two of the men eluded capture) to “heat up” the region as part of its struggle with its rivals from the Cartel de la Sierra, headed by Edgar “La Barbie” Valdez Villarreal. Some of their objectives reportedly included assassinating the mayors of Acapulco and nearby San Marco and attacking area schools. Mexican authorities learned that Valdez Villareal had ordered the kidnapping of the 20 during the interrogation of Isidro “El Quirri” Juarez Solis, allegedly the plaza boss for the Acapulco region for the Cartel de la Sierra, whom they detained several days after the 20 were kidnapped." 

Analysis: The folks at Stratfor don't believe the men are tourists, and for the most part are going with the information they received from the federal police. I can't say that I'm too surprised by the information, but sending 22 guys with no criminal record to assassinate all those high-level people? Even Stratfor claims those goals are very ambitious by Mexican standards, and I believe they're even more ambitious for a smaller - albeit increasingly powerful - DTO like La Familia. Plus, the Reforma source Strafor is using is someone within the federal police. Maybe I'm getting too cynical for my own good, but there's the possibility that for PR purposes, the feds want the public to believe those men were "bad guys" and not innocents being kidnapped and mass-murdered in a major tourist town. Yes, they could have been dirty too, like everyone else, but....I don't know.

Now you have to throw into the mix the fact that on Nov. 3, 18 bodies were found in a mass grave near Acapulco. There hasn't been any confirmation yet that the bodies are 18 of the 20 men who were kidnapped. However, also on Nov. 3, a video was posted on the Internet of two men being interrogated about the kidnapping. An Associated Press story reported they killed "the Michoacanos" in an act of revenge against La Familia, and were ordered to bury those bodies in Tres Palos outside Acapulco. The same story also reports Guerrero state investigators say they corroborated the men worked as mechanics and had no criminal records. Investigators also say they could find no evidence linking the men to any gang and have speculated the group may have been targeted by mistake.

So which is it? La Familia operatives sent to assassinate several high-level and extremely difficult targets who were targeted for kidnapping and death by a rival cartel? Or tourists who were victims of mistaken identity? Both stories are plausible, and while I have several tons of respect for the analysts at Stratfor, I don't know that the federal police and subsequent Reforma story completely passes the smell test. Even the YouTube video of the interrogation could be DTO propaganda taking advantage of the situation. If those men were targeted accidentally, no one will ever really know because dead bodies in a mass grave aren't too chatty. We'll see what else comes out of the investigation over the next few weeks.

"The case of the 20 missing Mexican tourists doesn't add up."

Here is an excerpt from Ken Ellingwood's article in the L.A. Times:

"It's one of the more puzzling episodes in a drug war heaped with unsolved cases: 20 Mexican men travel to Acapulco together and are kidnapped en masse as soon as they arrive. wo weeks later, there has been no trace of the men. Investigators have yet to announce any good leads, even though two others from the group were not taken. Against the backdrop of Mexico's extraordinary drug violence, it's tempting to write off the Sept. 30 disappearance as another grim skirmish between rival traffickers... But in the Acapulco case, the pieces don't add up neatly. Relatives back in the western state of Michoacan insist they were no drug henchmen, but ordinary guys: mechanics, students, deliverymen, an accountant, a physician. Loved ones said the friends and co-workers saved up for months for an annual, guys-only weekend in the seaside resort... Authorities have made comments casting doubt that the men were mere tourists, but have not specified a motive for the disappearances...  A state police commander first raised an eyebrow, saying it was unusual for a group of men to go on vacation without family members. And Zeferino Torreblanca Galindo, governor of the state of Guerrero, where Acapulco is located, was also quick to express skepticism. 'We assume it has to do with organized crime,' Torreblanca said a day after the news broke. 'I don't think anyone comes to deliberately carry out an attack on 20 tourists.' When the families complained that officials appeared to be blaming the victims, the authorities backed off, announcing that checks showed that none of the missing men had criminal records. When the men's vehicles were recovered, investigators found signs of a road trip — suitcases, beer, cookies — but no weapons or contraband. But last week, Mexico's tourism minister, Gloria Guevara, reignited tensions when she said the missing men 'didn't fit the usual profile' of a tourist. 'A tourist usually travels with family, has a hotel reservation, arrives directly at his hotel and fits certain profiles,' she told a congressional committee when a question about the case came up. Guevara stopped short of tying the men to criminal activities, but the implication seemed clear. Families of the men fired back, accusing Guevara of a 'lack of responsibility' and offering papers showing the group had reserved rooms for the three-day stay in a hotel they did not publicly identify." Link to Full Article

Analysis: To make this quick and dirty, know first off that the Mexican government can't afford to say that tourists - whether Mexican or foreign doesn't really matter - are being kidnapped in a high-profile resort area like Acapulco. I think those statements by government officials saying the men didn't fit a certain "tourist profile" are complete garbage. A tourist profile? Really? Can you honestly say that an American family consisting of a married couple and two or three kids heading to a major theme park for a week manages their vacation in the same way as four fraternity brothers from a big college heading to the Florida panhandle for Spring Break?

Speculation aside on these men's traveling habits, let's take a look at the facts. First, all the men had clean records. You can't go on the family's claims because they always say their family members aren't involved in drug dealing, but the records speak for themselves. Also, although nine of the victims were mechanics, the others had varied jobs in different places. This was also described as an annual trip, meaning it's not the first time these guys got into a few cars together and headed to Acapulco for a break. 

So what did happen to them? Was it another case of mistaken identity, as the current theory goes for the Hartley/Falcon Lake case? Los Zetas are currently fighting with La Familia Michoacana for control of Acapulco. Was this another case of amateur "Zetitas" carrying out an unsanctioned attack against a group of men they mistakenly thought posed a threat?

The worst-case scenario, of course, would be that the men were easy targets and kidnapped for ransom, or like the 72 migrants, offered the opportunity to work for Los Zetas in lieu of execution. All we know is that there have been no ransom demands, and there have been no heads or bodies showing up with notes attached. When DTOs want to send a message, they don't take too much time to put the bodies on public display, so it's likely the bodies of those 20 men have been summarily disposed of already. I don't believe they were picked off solely because they were tourists, but even if this was a DTO mistake, the Mexican government has to publicly push the assumption that the men were somehow dirty.

And this is where the real problem comes in. We're seeing more and more innocent bystanders being kidnapped for ransom, or shot and killed in cross-fire between narcos, or extorted at their places of business. The easiest (and most common) explanation for the death of a Mexican citizen by narco is that they were involved in the drug trade. That easy explanation can't be made in every case anymore, which means the Mexican government has to get up off its rear end and actually start investigating cases. I don't have the exact percentage handy, but the percentage of murder and kidnapping cases actually investigated with any level of professionalism and thoroughness is in the single digits. Even in the Hartley case, which was called off after two weeks, Mexican authorities acknowledged they spent way longer looking for his body than they would have for a Mexican citizen.

Will we ever know what happened to those men, or why it happened? Probably not. We can assume with some confidence that Los Zetas were likely involved (although La Familia is always a possibility, since the men were from Michoacán). Unfortunately, we can also assume that the Mexican government will continue to make it sound (whether intentional or not) that the 20 victims somehow had it coming to them. Whether they did or not, the authorities need to realize that thorough investigations for murder and kidnapping should be the rule and not the exception.

"Violence in Mexico has reached unprecedented levels, experts agree."

Back in early May, I provided an interview to Nadia Sanders, a reporter for CNN México for a story she was working on. I didn't hear from her afterwards, so I didn't realize until I did a Google search for Spanish sites only that my quotes were used in a story on May 17. Sorry this is late (and in Spanish), but I thought some readers might be interested in checking it out. The link to the full story is at the end, and English-only speakers can always use the Google Translate feature:

"Expertos en seguridad y estudios sobre México coinciden en que los niveles actuales de violencia en México no tienen precedentes. Tras la desaparición de uno de los políticos más renombrados de México, el ex candidato presidencial del oficialista Partido Acción Nacional, Diego Fernández de Cevallos, los especialistas coinciden en que la violencia en México ha alcanzado a una clase que antes era "inmune" a la inseguridad. Andrew Selee, director del Instituto México del Woodrow Wilson International Center, comentó a CNNMéxico que este "secuestro” refleja a nivel nacional las amenazas que a diario enfrentan los líderes sociales y periodistas en algunas partes de México.

“Es muy pronto para decir si esto representa un incremento en la violencia dentro de la política o la ‘colombianización’ de México”, afirmó; “sin embargo, sí pone énfasis en un nivel de violencia que comienza a afectar a otros sectores de la sociedad, que alguna vez fueron inmunes a ésta”.

En la opinión de Sylvia Longmire, experta en asuntos de seguridad interna y analista de temas de seguridad en América Latina, es muy pronto para considerar que “el secuestro” del ex senador sea un signo de ‘colombianización’. Recordó el secuestro del cubano-estadounidense Félix Batista, negociador en secuestros, que fue raptado en el norte del país y no hubo solicitud de rescate ni comunicación por parte de sus captores. “En Colombia, el secuestro es un negocio simple y llano que llevan a cabo los miembros de las FARC (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia) y el ELN (Ejército de Liberación Nacional) quienes toman rehenes para obtener dinero o ganar la liberación de presos políticos como un intercambio, explicó Longmire a CNNMéxico.

“(En México) cada vez es más frecuente el secuestro de personas involucradas con el tráfico de drogas (o miembros de su familia) y son capturadas porque perdieron un cargamento o deben dinero”, expone. “No creo que Fernández de Cevallos haya sido capturado para pedir dinero”, expresa. “Hizo algún tipo de trato con algún cártel y percibieron que no estaba cumpliendo con su parte del trato, o estaba siendo presionado por un ellos para hacer algo y él se opuso. Cualquiera de estas dos posibilidades llevarían a una acción de este tipo por parte de un cártel", afirma." Link to full Spanish-language article

"Officials: 3 men kidnapped, murdered in Juárez were US citizens."

Here is an excerpt from Aileen Flores' article in the El Paso Times:

"Chihuahua state police confirmed Tuesday that three of the four bodies found in the back of a pickup in east Juárez on Monday were those of U.S. citizens abducted during a wedding last week... All are from La Mesa, [New Mexico], in Doña Ana County... The Moraleses were kidnapped by gunmen who burst into the wedding ceremony Friday evening at El Señor de la Misericordia Catholic church... On Monday, Mexican police found four bodies with signs of torture in the covered bed of a Toyota Tacoma with Texas license plates... Their father said the wedding took place in Juárez because that is where the bride was raised. He said she is also a U.S. citizen... During the ceremony, a group of armed men arrived, ordered everyone to get down to the ground and kidnapped the victims. Rafael Morales said Mexican and U.S. authorities are assisting the family in the investigation... Chihuahua state police officials said the family did not file a kidnap report with the state police. They said an investigation into the slayings continues. No arrests have been made." Link to Full Article

Analysis: The groom's father has told authorities and the media that he has no idea why his son and the others were kidnapped and killed, but the immediate answer is that they seriously ticked off someone in a major DTO - likely either the VCFO or the Federation, since that's who's fighting in Juárez these days. Initial information indicated there was never a ransom request or contact made by the kidnappers; now we know why. This was a targeted hit against those four people, and although we may never know the exact reason they were targeted, it's most likely there was some sort of DTO link there. 

I have no information at all that indicates DTO enforcers are just randomly kidnapping and killing people for no reason. As I've mentioned before, that type of action would represent a MAJOR shift in DTO tactics - especially if US citizens were being targeted just because they were citizens. Several dozen US citizens have either been killed in Mexico or become victims of cross-border kidnappings. But US citizenship doesn't mean you're clean and invulnerable, or that you didn't have DTO ties before you swore the oath. I hate to be so cynical, but unless I read something solid to the contrary, I'm going to assume that these US citizens in particular were either actively involved in the drug trade, were witnesses to something they shouldn't have seen, or were working as informants for a US agency. All three of these situations are likely to put someone - regardless of citizenship - six feet under in a Mexican dirt pile.

"Travelers to Tijuana warned."

Here is a translated summary of this article in El Debate by the M3 Report:

"Relatives of murder and kidnapping victims in Tijuana have started a campaign to alert travelers crossing the border to Tijuana about the need for awareness regarding the increase and impunity of those crimes in Tijuana. The leader of a citizens’ group stated that 1,700 such cases have occurred in the last seven years, but he also acknowledged that not all cases have been reported and that the official tally is much below reality. The mother of a U.S. citizen presently being held for ransom has applied for permission to demonstrate about this danger on the U.S. side of the border crossing. Groups of people beating pots and pans and carrying placards have been demonstrating in front of local government’s offices in Tijuana." Link to the M3 Report and the Full Spanish-language Article

Analysis: There is no question that kidnapping is and has been a huge problem in Tijuana, often referred to as the kidnap capital of Latin America. However, I wonder exactly what audience these demonstrators targeted. The local government offices are typical because most people feel their government isn't doing enough to resolve kidnap cases. But based on cross-border kidnapping statistics, I'm wondering about the nature of the cross-border travelers they tried to warn.

If the average Mexican kidnap victim were innocent American "gringos," then indeed we would have a huge outcry on our side of the border as well. The media has reported more than enough on the dangers of traveling to certain parts of Mexico, as has the US State Department in their travel alerts and warden messages. But the average kidnap victim in Mexico is not the "gringo" tourist or the innocent bystander.

FBI statistics, police reports, and personal anecdotes tell us that the LARGE majority of kidnap victims in Tijuana - and elsewhere in Mexico - are somehow involved in the drug trade. They could be dealers who have lied to their DTO bosses, transporters who have lost loads, or women whose boyfriends or husbands have seriously pissed off someone in the DTO chain of command. It's true that illegal immigrants are sometimes kidnapped and tortured while their relatives in the US are extorted for money. And occasionally, prominent Mexican-American businessmen who reside in the US and work in Mexico are picked up because they have money in the bank. But in this case, we have to go with the most common case, which is criminals being kidnapped by...criminals.

I believe that most Mexicans know this is the case, despite the fact that some vehemently deny their sons or husbands - now kidnap victims - could ever be involved in that business. So why try to warn people coming into Tijuana from San Diego and parts beyond? It's true that some people visiting Tijuana fit that victim bill because of their nefarious associations, but this kind of demonstration is going to hurt tourism by "gringos" to a Mexican state that is working REALLY hard to turn its image around and encourage more investment in a down economy.

I think this demonstration did better in bringing attention to the kidnapping problem in Mexico and the effect corruption has had on effective resolution of kidnap cases. Many DTOs and smaller, inexperienced criminal groups are getting into the K&R game, often with gruesome results. The situation has obviously hit a breaking point with Tijuana residents, and this is the method they felt would best get their message across. I think many Americans are getting that message that Tijuana is a dangerous place, but lets hope that local Mexican governments are feeling that frustration enough to get moving towards reducing the kidnapping rates.

"Is Phoenix really the 'kidnapping capital'?"

Here is an excerpt from E.J. Montini's article in The Arizona Republic:

"Phoenix police Sgt. Tommy Thompson took a telephone call not long ago from a Florida couple who were driving their motorhome through Arizona and wanted to know if they should avoid Phoenix. The folks from the Sunshine State had heard on TV that Phoenix was the "kidnapping capital" of the nation and the second-worst city for kidnapping in the entire world. They wondered if they should bypass Arizona since they couldn't afford a big ransom. That was in February. The TV folks had learned that the Phoenix Police Department had a special unit to deal with what has become a near constant stream of ransom kidnappings linked to drug-smuggling and human-smuggling gangs out of Mexico. The department let a news crew monitor their operation. In the subsequent ABC report, Phoenix is described as 'the kidnapping capital of America, with more incidents than any other city in the world outside of Mexico City.' The label stuck.... Phoenix is upfront about the roughly 370 kidnappings each year linked to criminal smuggling gangs. Other cities may not keep track of the problem in the same way or may simply avoid speaking about it publicly." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I love this article because it's a great example of (a) how the media plays a big part in shaping our perception of the drug war, and (b) how difficult it is to grasp the problem because NO ONE knows the exact number of anything involved in this war. It's impossible to know exactly how many people are being kidnapped on the US side of the border, anywhere in Mexico, and anywhere in the world, for that matter. Why? Because the victims' families are terrified; they're being threatened with harm to their loved ones (or worse) if they go to the police. Estimates vary from country to country on what percentage of kidnappings actually gets reported to the authorities, but most that I've seen hover around 10% in developing countries. The percentage is probably higher in the US because the public is generally trusting of law enforcement. However, the majority of cross-border kidnapping victims in the US are either dirty themselves, or an immediate family member of someone involved in the drug business. This greatly reduces the chances of the kidnapping being reported to US authorities.

As happy as I am that Phoenix is being so up front about their kidnapping problem (click here for a great story in Newsweek on that), I'm curious as to why they've chosen to go that route. I agree with the author that it's bad for tourism, and I'd hate to be the person at the Phoenix PD who has to answer questions from people regarding the safety of the city. Perhaps they feel that by just putting it out there, it sends a message to kidnappers that Phoenix is ready and willing to take them on. Maybe it also (wittingly or not) sends a political message to DC and the rest of the country that screams, "helloooooo, we have a problem down here!" Regardless, I'm glad the Phoenix PD is taking the bull by the horns, and as long as you're Joe Tourist and the family, I think checking out the sights there will be just fine.

Who are the "Mata Zetas"?

A few days ago, I started seeing Spanish-language media reports about a group of Mexican hitmen killing...other hitmen. Here are a couple of translated excerpts from these reports:

"Inside an abandoned truck in a residential neighborhood in Cancun, Quintana Roo State, were found the bodies of three men, handcuffed and with plastic bags on their heads. Together with the remains was a note with the message: 'We are the new group Mata Zetas and we are against kidnapping and extortion, and we will fight them in all states for a cleaner Mexico.'" Link to El Universal Article

"A video on YouTube confirms the existence of a group of hitmen dedicated to the capture and killing of members of organized crime groups. The group calls itself 'Mata Zetas' and previously denounced a series of crimes by leaders and members of Los Zetas." Link to Terra.com.mx Article

Analysis: Normally I'm the one providing you, the reader, with some answers and explanations, but the phenomenon of 'Mata Zetas' and other vigilante groups in Mexico is still pretty new to me. I recently sent out an email to colleagues asking if they had information about an anti-Kidnapping vigilante group in Coahuila being reported by the Saltillo Vanguardia, but that group seems to be an unknown as well. Unfortunately, I have more questions than answers about the "Mata Zetas," namely, who created them, who leads them, and who funds them? I'm personally not a huge fan of vigilantism (although I am a huge fan of Jack Bauer), especially when the corpses start piling up. It's very possible, and even likely, that the "Mata Zetas" don't have the best interests of a "cleaner Mexico" at heart, and are just a front for one of Los Zetas' competitors - likely La Familia Michoacana or the Sinaloa Federation.

A theory that's a little more out there, yet concerning nonetheless, is that the "Mata Zetas" are being honest about their intentions, and could possibly be unofficially sanctioned by the Mexican government. I don't consider myself to be a conspiracy theorist, but I'm thinking of this possibility because we've seen something similar occur in Colombia - although the parties involved are a little different. In the 1980s, Pablo Escobar created his own private army of enforcers because he was getting tired of his crew members getting killed and operationg being disrupted by the Marxist FARC guerrillas. These paramilitaries eventually grew and morphed into the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), which was designated as a terrorist organization by the US in 2001. Anyway, the AUC was made up of a LOT of former Colombian army soldiers, and dozens of Colombian congressment are jailed and awaiting trial for providing support to the AUC. Many Colombians don't blame them; the AUC had the same mission as the Colombian army and the government - to get rid of FARC and National Liberation Army (ELN) terrorists. Could the "Mata Zetas" be or become to the DTOs like the AUC was in Colombia to the FARC and ELN? I'm curious to see where their notes - and deeds - pop up next.

"The Sicario: A Juárez hit man speaks."

Here is an excerpt from Charles Bowden's article in Harper's Magazine:

"I am ready for the story of all the dead men who last saw his face. As I drank coffee and tried to frame questions in my mind, a crime reporter in Juárez was cut down beside his eight-year-old daughter as they sat in his car letting it warm up. This morning as I drove down here, a Toyota passed me with a bumper sticker that read, with a heart symbol, i love love. This morning I tried to remember how I got to this rendezvous. I was in a distant city and a man told me of the killer and how he had hidden him. He said at first he feared him, but he was so useful. He would clean everything and cook all the time and get on his hands and knees and polish his shoes. I took him on as a favor, he explained. I said, 'I want him. I want to put him on paper.' And so I came. The man I wait for insists, 'You don’t know me. No one can forgive me for what I did.' He has pride in his hard work. The good killers make a very tight pattern through the driver’s door. They do not spray rounds everywhere in the vehicle, no, they make a tight pattern right through the door and into the driver’s chest. The reporter who died received just such a pattern, ten rounds from a 9mm and not a single bullet came near his eight-year-old daughter. I wait. I admire craftsmanship... I have spent years getting to this moment. The killers, well, I have been around them before. Once I partied with two hundred armed killers in a Mexican hotel for five days. But they were not interested in talking about their murders. He is." Link to Extended Excerpt on Anderson Cooper 360

Analysis: THIS is what an interview with an assassin should look like. It is a gripping ten-page account of the interview between the author - a veteran and award-winning journalist - and the subject, a world-weary and repentant sicario who has been staying out of the business for the last two years. The article is gripping, intense, and incredibly vivid in its detail and emotion. It's unfortunate that you can only read an excerpt of it online, but it's completely worth the drive to your local bookstore to pick up a copy of May 2009 edition of Harper's in order to read it (and thanks to James Creechan and Lindsay Beyerstein for recommending this!).

There are a few things about the article that I want to point out, which will hopefully encourage those of you with a profound interest in this topic to go out and buy the mag. First, the writing is really good. Yes, it's very dramatic and reads like a novel in some places. But isn't that what keeps you interested? Bowden, unlike some writers, doesn't use that tactic to detract from shaky "facts" or a mediocre story. The subject and the interview are very grave, which merits a degree of drama, in my opinion. I think it adds context and perspective, especially for those who don't follow border violence issues and don't realize just how bad things are in some places in Mexico.

Several important aspects of the drug smuggling business are revealed here, and it's not in a question-and-answer format that makes you wonder whether or not the answers were planted or the subject was set up to answer in a certain way. For example, the subject explains at great length that he never really knew who he was working for. He got orders, carried them out, and got paid in cash, booze, drugs, and women. He had rules to follow, and as long as he followed them, he stayed alive.

He explains that towards the end of his "career," after things started getting really bad in 2006, he was kidnapped twice. He talked about how his captors and torturers were amateurs in their methods - something I've noticed going on in the Tijuana area for about a year or so. This is part of what's contributing to the more grisly slayings and collateral damage - the fact that some newer hitmen are inexperienced, not as likely to follow the rules, and bloodthirsty. There's a part of the article where the subject talks about the difference between men that kill as a job and men that kill because they like killing. He felt that the men who enjoyed killing for its own sake were sick and needed to be killed themselves because they were a liability...an interesting viewpoint.

One of the more disturbing parts is his discussion of the corruption among Mexican law enforcement and the collusion between police and the DTOs. I knew corruption was widespread in many, if not most, areas of Mexico, but I had no idea it was this pervasive. The mere thought of Mexican cops taking part in kidnappings and torture - regardless of whether or not the victims are dirty themselves and owe money to a drug lord - is tough to swallow. However, it makes the problem of corruption so real, and helps the reader see what in incredible obstacle corruption poses to the Calderon administration.

So if you haven't figured it out yet, I think this is an incredibly good read, and well worth the time, effort, and $6.95 to get it at the news stand. It's an insight into a world who some think they know, yet we've only begun to scratch the surface; we may never get to the day-to-day truth that lies deep beneath for so many in Mexico.

"A Tale of Two Laredos."

Here is an excerpt from Todd Bensman's article on GlobalPost.com:

"All is quiet now on Coahuila Street. But traces of the violence that destroyed the lives of two American brothers with businesses here linger. A blackened structure is all that's left of Alan Gamboa's once-profitable radio communications business, after it was drenched in diesel and burned to the ground the night of Dec. 5. His brother, Ricardo Gamboa, is still missing — and feared dead — after being kidnapped by cartel gangsters on Coahuila Street the previous morning. Violence and kidnappings have become almost commonplace in Mexico, as the country's civil drug war rages. Often, the murder and kidnap victims are American residents of border cities like Laredo, who are involved in the drug trade. But the violence that upended the Gamboa brothers' lives is different. By all accounts, they were not drug dealers. Their only transgression, it seems, was to rent a house to the U.S. State Department and Drug Enforcement Administration, which set up an anti-cartel intelligence operation with Mexican federal police in the rented space. The brothers' tragic story offers a rare glimpse into a part of Mexico's drug war that gets little notice. The narrative of the conflict as a fight to the death between drug cartels and the Mexican government often excludes another player: the U.S. government. And as the Gamboa tale demonstrates, the American government's actions in Mexico can also lead to casualties." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is a very interesting article regarding the innocent civilians that end up involved in Mexico's drug war, and a view point that isn't often explored. Human intelligence sources and the general assistance of locals are required in any counterdrug operation. Sometimes those sources of intelligence or assistance are what the intelligence community calls "witting," or completely knowledgeable about their role and potential consequences of their involvement. Sometimes they are "unwitting," which means they don't know the full identities of the people they are working with or their intentions.

In this case, it appears Americans who reside in Texas but work in Mexico provided assistance to the US Government unwittingly, and are now being punished by cartel enforcers because they see them and their families as collaborators. So the debate becomes, should the US State Department have been more forthcoming about their intended uses for the Gamboa house, or should the Gamboas have been less naive and more inquisitive about their new renters? I think a strong argument can be made for both sides.

As for the State Department, as long as they followed US and Mexican laws regarding the rental transaction, I'm willing to bet they had no legal requirement to tell the Gamboa brothers (who are estranged) anything about their planned use of the house. For example, if you own a house and rent it out to a nice couple with steady income and great credit, you can't demand that they tell you if they plan to use it to make pornographic movies, even though that might change your desire to rent your home out to them. Also, the information surrounding the planned use of the home may have been classified or, at the least, operationally sensitive, and the State Department may not have been allowed to share that information with the Gamboas. I do find it interesting that the Gamboas didn't dig a little deeper during the transaction - although it appears that Ricardo knew little to nothing about the rental since his brother Alan managed it. I would be HIGHLY suspicious if all those armored vehicles showed up at my front door with a bunch of G-Men offering eight months rent in advance.

As for the Gamboa brothers, their situation is tragic, and made more so by their apparent naivete. Nuevo Laredo is one of the more violent border cities in Mexico, and not much happens there that the Gulf cartel and their enforcers - Los Zetas - don't know about. I find it hard to believe the Gamboas thought their actions in any capacity would go unchecked. However, I'll give the Gamboa brothers the benefit of the doubt by believing they really didn't think the rental circumstances were unusual. I don't know if they truly believed they could stay neutral - or at least untouched - in the drug war in a place like Nuevo Laredo, but they were probably trying hard to do so. As it is with all Mexican kidnapping cases, I'm not optimistic about Ricardo's chances with his abductors, but I hope he's returned safely to his family.

This case is a good example of the difficulties both the Mexican and US Governments have in obtaining reliable, willing, and uncorrupted human sources on both sides of the border, but particularly in Mexico. I would imagine that any potential unwitting, clean sources like the Gamboas would have no interest whatsoever in assisting either government for fear of cartel retribution. Thus, government agencies are resigned to conducting operations in a more clandestine fashion. While not informing landlords or car salesmen or restaurant owners or others of their roles in assisting the US or Mexican Governments may well be legal and operationally necessary, it places these individuals and their families in danger because of the appearance of collusion. While some may say this is the cost of doing business in such a dangerous place against such a formidable foe, I'm sure the Gamboas and others trying to stay out of the drug war feel that's a price they shouldn't have to pay.

"The Enemy Within: Cartel-related violence has moved well beyond American border towns."

Here is an excerpt from Eve Conant and Arian Campos-Flores' article in Newsweek:

"Surprising as it may seem, Phoenix has become America's kidnapping capital. Last year 368 abductions were reported, compared with 117 in 2000. Police say the real number is likely much higher, since many go unreported. Though in the past most of the nabbings stemmed from domestic-violence incidents, now the majority are linked to drug-trafficking and human-smuggling operations that pervade the Arizona corridor. It's still unclear to what extent the snatchings are being directly ordered by Mexican cartels, but authorities say they're undoubtedly a byproduct of the drug-fueled mayhem south of the border. "The tactics are moving north," says assistant police chief Andy Anderson. "We don't have the violence they have in Mexico yet—the killing of police officers and the beheadings—but in terms of kidnappings and home invasions, it has come." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is one of the better articles I've read lately on the anecdotal/case evidence aspect of border violence spillover (for more on this topic, click HERE). It mostly covers kidnappings in Phoenix with a great amount of detail and first-hand accounts, which makes for good reading and high impact on the reader. It also talks about the presence of DTO members or associates in other parts of the country nowhere close to the southwest border, like Alabama and North Carolina. It's disconcerting to read about kidnap victims being gagged and tortured in safehouses thousands of miles away from where we would expect that to be happening.

There are two main points I'd like to make about this excellent article. First, it makes clear to the reader that the majority of victims involved are involved in the drug trade. I particularly like the quote from a law enforcement officer who explains that many times, kidnap victims are rescued by the police, then go straight from the place they were being held to jail to await trial for the crimes they committed. Second, this article reinforces one of the points I make in my IN FOCUS segment on spillover- specifically, the point that some agencies view spillover as DTO-related criminal activity occurring within the US. This article clearly shows that the law enforcement individuals interviewed believe spillover is happening, despite any statistical evidence or "official" statements to the contrary.

IN FOCUS: Border violence "spillover"

This is a topic that causes frustration because the term "spillover" is used by so many people and agencies with little consistency or agreement. On almost any given day, you can see several government or law enforcement officials on television saying spillover hasn't happened yet, spillover is happening now, or spillover has been happening for years. So which is it?

Well, the problem lies in the fact that there is no single, standardized definition for border violence spillover. Some agencies are looking for spikes in crime levels on the US side that parallel spikes in crime on the Mexican side. Other agencies are basing their assessments of spillover on case information or anecdotal evidence of Mexican DTO-related crimes occurring in US cities, such as targeted killings or kidnappings. Some officials won't call it spillover unless innocent US citizens (i.e. unrelated to the drug trade) on US territory become DTO targets.

First, let's examine the crime statistics angle. One can assume that crime statistics originating from US law enforcement agencies are reliable because agencies on the US side of the border don't suffer from the same corruption issues as Mexican agencies. However, US crime statistics generally don't differentiate between drug-related and non-drug related crimes. It is entirely possible that murders for a US border city could drop from one year to the next, yet the proportion of drug-related murders can rise in the same year. Also, statistics alone don't account for sociological factors occurring in border cities that may skew the meaning of those statistics, such as changes in immigration patterns or economic declines. Finally, crime statistics for cities on the Mexican side of the border are notoriously inaccurate for various reasons, including corruption, lack of reporting, and investigative ineptitude. Mexican crime statistics also do not differentiate between drug-related and non-drug-related crimes.

Next, let's consider case information or anecdotal evidence. We know from publicly available information that the FBI is investigating an increasing number of cross-border kidnapping cases. We also know that hundreds of people in the southwest border states - mostly affiliated with the DTOs in come way - have been kidnapped for ransom or retribution. According to the US Department of Justice, several US-based gangs are affiliated with Mexican DTOs, either distributing drugs for them or contracting themselves out for hits inside the United States. Depending on which source you believe, anywhere from 90-97% of weapons illegally entering Mexico originate in the United States, with most of them coming from the four southwest border states. So does all this criminal activity that seems obviously related to the Mexican drug trade add up to spillover?

Finally, let's take a look at the US-citizens-as-targets issue. There is almost universal agreement among agencies that in almost all cases of border violence, US citizens NOT associated with the Mexican drug trade in any way, shape, or form are NOT being targeted for violence by DTOs or US-based gangs affilated with DTOs. Occasionally, innocent US citizens do get caught in the cross-fire, but usually it's a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Does this mean that spillover is NOT happening?

Ultimately the issue of border violence spillover is a subjective one, and I believe it can't be proven one way or another. I think a strong argument can be made for either position. However the next time you see or hear someone authoritatively trying to say spillover is happening or isn't happening, ask them what their sources are or what proof they have...I'd sure love to see it.