"Bin Laden-like SEAL Team Raid Could Take Down Mexican Drug Kingpin."

Here is an excerpt from Seth Cline's article in US News:

"The Pentagon may send Navy SEALs into Mexico to take out drug kingpin Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman in a raid mirroring the one that took out Osama bin Laden, Proceso magazine reports. Guzman, who presides over an estimated $1 billion drug empire as head of the Sinaloa cartel, has repeatedly escaped capture since breaking out of prison in 2001. His continued elusion of Mexican authorities has apparently frustrated the Pentagon enough that it has discussed a raid targeting El Chapo with Mexican President Felipe Calderon. Calderon approved of the idea, but because the Mexican Army and Navy balked, Washington will wait to propose the idea to Mexico's next president, Enrique Peña Nieto, according to Proceso's interviews with anonymous Mexican and American military sources. According to the sources, the proposed raid would be performed by two small teams of specially-trained SEALs, armed helicopters, and three missile-equipped drones. One SEAL team would be dropped on the ground and the other remaining in the air, with the drones providing backup support and surveillance. No Mexican military or police would assist in the raid.... Representatives for the U.S. Northern Command and the U.S. Special Operations Command declined to comment for this story." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This isn't a critism of Seth Cline's article, as he's basically providing a concise translation of the original Proceso article (which, if you read Spanish, you can find HERE). It IS, however, a criticism of Proceso and their attempt - yet again - to scandalize the perceived intervention of the US military in Mexico's drug war.

Back in November 2010, Proceso reported on a supposed "super spy center" that the US government stood up in Mexico City:

"With the approval of Felipe Calderón’s Administration, the U.S. Government finally got what it always wanted: To set up a super spy center in Mexico City. It was the escalation of the drug war in the country what opened the door to all U.S. intelligence agencies, including the military, to operate out of the Federal District without having to disguise their agents as diplomats. The establishment of the Office of Bi-national Intelligence (OBI) was authorized by Calderon, after negotiations with Washington, which began under the government of his predecessor, Vicente Fox Quesada. The creation of the super spy center was authorized by the director of the Center for Investigation and National Security (CISEN), Guillermo Valdés Castellanos, without taking into account any objections from the Mexican military."

Unfortunately for Proceso, not only were they wrong, but they really pissed off NORAD and US Northern Command. Two days after the article was published, NORTHCOM published its own explanation on its Facebook page:

"We have seen some mileage from a story out of Mexico alleging a 'Binational Intelligence Office' of US Government officials in Mexico. It is unfortunate that other news agencies are starting to pick up this story, because frankly it simply isn’t true. In violation of standard journalistic practice, 'Proceso' magazine never contacted the Embassy to seek confirmation of any part of this patently false story. The following points below are being communicated to media outlets who call us and we wanted to share them with you, our friends, so you can at least be aware of our perspective on this story.

· There is no “Binational Intelligence Office” in Mexico involving USG agencies. 

 

· There is a Merida Initiative Bilateral Implementation Office (BIO).  It was announced by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mexico’s Secretary of Foreign Relations Patricia Espinosa in March 2009, and it opened August 31 in Mexico City. 

· This office allows for daily exchanges between technical staffers of agencies of both countries with the purpose of fully implementing equipment transfer and training programs under the Merida Initiative. 

· Neither officials from Mexico or the United States working in the Bilateral Implementation Office engage in intelligence or operational activities."

There are a few additional points, but you get the idea. This brings me to the point where I ask you and myself, does this story pass the giggle test? Take a look at the specificity of the operational details that were supposedly leaked by anonymous US and Mexican officials. One guy in the air and one guy on the ground, with a couple of drones and helicopters for backup? You don't need to watch "Act of Valor" to understand that US Navy SEALs do NOT operate this way. Also, tactical details generally aren't developed until a few days - and sometimes hours - before an operation because the target is often on the move, as authorities believe El Chapo generally is.

Moving beyond the operational aspect, I have to ask, Why would the Obama Administration put American lives in harm's way to eliminate a mere criminal? The White House and DHS have made themselves very clear that they consider Mexican TCOs to be criminal organizations that do not pose a national security threat to the United States. While El Chapo is arguably the most wanted man in the Western Hemisphere and runs one of the most powerful criminal organizations in the world, is this the smartest move to reduce drug-related violence in Mexico? If I had a SEAL team and could only take out the leadership of one TCO, I'd hit Heriberto "El Lazca" Lazcano and Miguel "Z-40" Treviño, the top two guys in Los Zetas, not El Chapo. 

Then there's the assumption that the Mexican government asked for this, and either is or will be okay with a covert military incursion into Mexican territory. Has the drug war gotten so bad in the minds of the Calderón administration that they're willing to (at least secretly) admit they've completely lost control and need US military help? Honestly, I don't think they're there, or at least not yet. Of course, if the SEALs were successful in both killing or capturing El Chapo in secret, they could hand him over the Mexican authorities, who could then take credit for the catch. But is there a precedent for this? It would be like killing Osama Bin Laden covertly in Pakistan (like we did), then allowing the Pakistani authorities to take credit for it. Never gonna happen.

Which brings me back to my point - What evidence is there to indicate El Chapo, and the drug war in general, is high enough of a priority to the US government to engage in this kind of activity, given the political, diplomatic, and physical risks? There isn't. And the US government never does anything like this unless there is a clear and defined goal AND benefit to our country. Personally, I believe taking out El Chapo will make things worse in Mexico, not better. It will cause massive destabilization, unless his #2, Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, Garcia can take control quickly enough, and it will also serve as a huge green light for the salivating Los Zetas to move more aggressively to take over Sinaloa Federation territory. It certainly won't reduce the amount of illegal drugs coming into the US, nor significantly reduce violence in Mexico. So why do it? As a favor to Calderón? The election is over, the PAN lost, and the US government hasn't historically been so motivated to do Mexico such enormous favors.

Bottom line, the story is bunk. Hopefully my explanation above will help readers, and possibly other people intending to pass it on, understand why.

Comments

[Gordon L. Dilmore]

Excellent analysis. Considering Proceso's history and reputation, I was surprised when I first saw Seth Kline's US News piece relying so heavily on the Proceso piece.

[julio Figueroa]

As usual Ms. Longmire, a thoughtful, concise and astute analysis. You truly are the best at what you do and can always be counted to provide a top notch report. Thanks for what you do and continued success