Mexico's Drug War

"Why Arresting 'El Chapo' Might Be a Bad Thing."

My apologies for posting this later than I would have liked! Here is an excerpt from my latest piece for Small Wars Journal:

"It sounds crazy, but catching the most notorious and wanted drug trafficker in the world might be a bad thing.

"Joaquin 'El Chapo' Guzmán Loera’s empire spans almost half of Mexico, employs, bribes, and kills thousands of people, and rakes in billions of dollars every year from the insatiable American demand for illegal drugs. He has been ranked for the last three years as one of Forbes magazine’s top 100 most powerful people in the world[1], and the US government is offering a $5 million reward for information leading to his capture.[2]

"Guzmán is also a smart and talented businessman, getting involved in the drug business at a very young age under the tutelage of Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, known as “The Godfather” of Mexican drug trafficking. He was a major player in the original Guadalajara cartel, and was granted his own corridor in Sonora, Mexico when Gallardo divided up his empire in 1987. El Chapo is as “old school” mobster as they come, having built up his transnational criminal organization (TCO), known as the Sinaloa Federation, into one of the richest and most powerful organized crime groups in the Western Hemisphere. So why wouldn’t Mexican and American authorities want him behind bars?"

To read my entire article at SmallWarsJournal.com, please CLICK HERE!

"Mexico nabs ex-Zetas leader 'El Taliban.'"

Here is an excerpt from Dudley Althaus' article in The Houston Chronicle:

"Mexican marines have captured a renegade leader of the Zetas known as El Taliban in the latest blow by the US-backed commando campaign against the violent gang operating south of the Texas border. Ivan Velázquez Caballero, 42, was dragged Wednesday evening from a safe house in a middle class neighborhood in the city of San Luis Potosi. Though accompanied by two bodyguards, Velázquez apparently was seized without a shot being fired... Formerly a senior Zetas lieutenant, Velázquez had broken with the gang's top bosses in recent months, allying himself with remnants of the rival Gulf Cartel and Knights Templar gangs to vie for control of key border cities and smuggling routes... His fall, combined with the Navy's capture this month of two Gulf Cartel leaders, could bolster efforts by Zetas kingpins Miguel Angel Trevíño, known as Z-40, and Heriberto Lazcano to consolidate underworld control along the entire south Texas border... The split between Velázquez and his former Zetas bosses became public in mid-August with the discovery of the bodies of 14 Velázquez gunmen stuffed into a van parked outside San Luis Potosi. Scores also have been killed this month in Nuevo Laredo as the factions battle it out." Link to Full Article

Analysis: The fallout from this arrest can be summed up in three words: What. A. Mess. It's always a good thing when a major TCO kingpin gets arrested - and hopefully extradited - by Mexican authorities, and particularly without a shot being fired in the process. Currently, former CDG kingpin Rafael Cárdenas Vela (nephew of former CDG boss Osiel Cárdenas Guillen) is spilling everything he knows to US authorities during the trial of Juan Roberto Rincon-Rincon, and you'd better believe he'll have something huge to gain from that. I have no doubt Velázquez will be a gold mine of information, probably for both Los Zetas and the CDG.

While that's the good news, the bad news is that his arrest plunges northeast Mexico into even more chaos, if that's even possible. In case you haven't been closely following developments there in the last few months, both Los Zetas and the CDG are undergoing major upheavals. The CDG split into two factions, Los Metros and Los Rojos, over a year ago, and the leaders of both of those factions have recently been arrested. No one really knows who's running the CDG show right now, although some names have been tossed around as likely candidates.

Los Zetas underwent their own split, possibly as far back as April, with one faction falling under Miguel "Z-40" Treviño Morales - who has sort of wrested control of Los Zetas from absent leader Heriberto "El Lazca" Lazcano Lazcano - and the breakaway group falling under Velázquez. Last week, the news was that "El Taliban/Z-50" had forged an alliance with the CDG, Los Zetas' former employer pre-2010, to do battle against Treviño. But the ink was barely dry on that agreement when Velázquez was picked up a couple of days ago. It's not clear if his faction was strong or organized enough to have a set hierarchy, meaning a designated replacement for Velázquez.

Unfortunately, this means there are more questions than answers: Who is in control of the CDG? Have the two factions reunited? What is the status of the Zetas split now that Z-50 is gone? What is the status of the alliance between Z-50's people and the CDG? All of those issues are kind of unknowns right now.

Just to make things more interesting, let's throw the Sinaloa Federation and Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán into the mix. I told Agence France Presse in an interview yesterday that I think Guzmán is probably laughing his head off at this whole mess right now because he's the only one who can potentially stand to gain from it. Many of us analysts/observers had theorized that the Federation could sweep in to prop up the CDG after the arrest of Jorge "El Coss" Costilla Sánchez in order to fight off Los Zetas - and gain a bigger piece of the lucrative Matamoros plaza. But El Chapo might have even bigger fish to fry if he perceives a major weakness in Los Zetas subsequent to El Taliban's arrest. The CDG still needs his help, without a doubt, but Guzmán may be calculating if his organization is capable of eliminating both Los Zetas and the CDG from large swaths of Tamaulipas in one fell swoop. This would be a herculean task, of course, but he can't complain about the good timing.

Sadly, most of us know by know that uncertainty and instability in the drug war inevitably lead to increased levels of violence. With not just one, but two power vacuums going on, plus possibly three major TCOs fighting for control of the same area of NE Mexico, things are going to get even uglier than they already are. The only things that could alleviate that are if Los Zetas and the CDG decide who is in charge VERY quickly, and/or if El Chapo can take control, either with or without the CDG's help, of Tamaulipas in short order. Stay tuned...

Is Chicago Becoming America’s Ciudad Juárez?

“At least seven people…have been killed and 24 others wounded in a string of shootings in the US city of Chicago in the past two days.” This was one very stark headline the morning of August 26, 2012. The attacks occurred in different parts of the city, with several in the south and west parts of the city. Shockingly, the statistics and incident details were reminiscent of grisly headlines emerging daily from a foreign city 1,500 miles away—Ciudad Juárez, arguably the deadliest place in the Western Hemisphere.

Juárez has been the epicenter of violence in Mexico’s drug war since 2007, when leaders of two major drug cartels—the Sinaloa Federation’s Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzmán and the Juárez cartel’s Vicente Carrillo Fuentes—failed to see eye-to-eye on a few things and went to war. The annual murder rate skyrocketed, hitting the plateau of 3,622 people killed in 2010 (according to New Mexico State University researcher Molly Molloy) before dropping precipitously to 1,976 in 2011. The trend seems to be continuing into this year, with only 602 murders through August 14.

Chicago, however, is following a different trend. A 2011 report by the Chicago Police Department shows the murder rate held relatively steady between 2004-2011, with a “low” of 433 in 2011 to a high of 513 in 2008. However, this occurred after over a decade of annual murder totals topping 900 during three years in the 1990s. And it looks like 2012 is taking a turn for the worse again. Between the first of the year and August 23, 351 shooting deaths occurred in the city: 37 of those in July, 47 in June, and 51 in May.

The comparison to homicides in Ciudad Juárez this year is stunning—45 were killed there in July, 49 in June, and 74 in May.

Of course, there are several ways in which Chicago and Ciudad Juárez differ that makes the similar numbers sit on footing that isn’t equal. Chicago has a population of roughly 2.7 million people, which is more than twice that of Ciudad Juárez at 1.3 million residents. The geography, industries, and average income levels are very different.

But the two cities might just have more in common than not. Ciudad Juárez is notorious for its corrupt politicians and police officers, with an entire enforcement arm of the Juárez cartel, known as “La Línea,” being comprised almost completely of dirty local cops. Chicago doesn’t exactly have a squeaky clean record in this department, either. In February 2012, University of Illinois at Chicago professor Dick Simpson, who served as alderman of the 44th Ward in Lakeview from 1971 to 1979, found that Chicago is the most corrupt city in the US through using US Department of Justice statistics. 

It should come as no surprise that Chicago has a gang problem. Just over half of this year’s 297 victims so far had gang affiliations. While most of Ciudad Juárez’s violence has been attributed to the war between big cartels, the truth is more subtle. There are more than 500 gangs operating throughout the city’s 800 colonias, or neighborhoods. And the gangs are all doing the same thing, regardless of country or nationality—fighting for turf and drug profits.

According to the US Department of Justice, Mexican cartels dominate most trafficking of wholesale quantities of cocaine, heroin, and marijuana in the Chicago area. DEA Special Agent in Charge Jack Riley told CBS news last month that Mexican cartels have a significant influence on gang violence in Chicago, with three major cartels operating here and “turning parts of this Midwest city into a Mexican border town.”

Chicago’s increasing murder rate isn’t as simple as it seems—something that can just be labeled “typical gang violence” and addressed with more police patrols and neighborhood watches. The roots of the violence run more deeply than some officials might be willing to acknowledge, and stem from another violent part of the hemisphere that is dangerously starting to look more and more similar to “The Windy City.” Residents can only hope that city officials recognize the potential implications of the Chicago-Mexico connection and address them before the murder rate soars even higher.

"Mexican Navy says captures top drug boss 'El Coss.'"

Here is an excerpt from this Reuters article:

"The Mexican Navy said on Wednesday it had captured one of Mexico's most wanted drug bosses, the head of the Gulf Cartel, in what would mark a major victory in President Felipe
Calderon's crackdown on organized crime. The Navy said it would give more details about the arrest of the man it believed to be Jorge Costilla, alias 'El Coss,' when it parades him in front of the media early on Thursday. A government security official said Costilla, 41, was detained in Tampico in northeastern Mexico, where the cartel is active, without putting up a fight. The U.S. State Department has a reward of up to $5 million for his capture. No other details were immediately available. The arrest of the suspected capo comes barely a week after the Mexican Navy captured senior Gulf Cartel member Mario Cardenas, alias 'Fatso,' also in the state of Tamaulipas where Costilla was caught." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Just as an FYI, the identity of the man the Mexican navy arrested last night was confirmed as that of Costilla Sánchez, so we shouldn't be seeing another case of mistaken drug lord identity.

This arrest is a really big deal. It comes hot on the heels of another major CDG arrest, that of Mario Cárdenas Guillen, brother of former CDG heads Osiel and Antonio (aka "Tony Tormenta"), on Sept. 5. The Mexican government has essentially eliminated the leadership of both the Metros and Rojos factions of the CDG, effectively leaving the organization's jugular exposed to Los Zetas. There's very little chance that northern Tamaulipas can escape a dramatic rise in violence right now.

The question is, who will be responsible for that uptick. The first scenario that comes to mind is a huge push by Los Zetas to take over what's left of the CDG and finally take control of the elusive Matamoros plaza. That city was the birthplace of the CDG and had been their stronghold ever since. By taking Matamoros, not only do Los Zetas take control of the drug profits from that plaza, but score an enormous psychological victory over any CDG holdouts.

However, this situation also presents a huge opportunity to the Sinaloa Federation. Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán has been fighting Los Zetas on many fronts for years. He may be able to prop up what's left of the CDG in Tamaulipas and take the fight to Los Zetas instead. The Federation and the CDG used to be mortal enemies, but they allied a few years ago, forming "The New Federation" along with the old La Familia, to do joint battle against Los Zetas. If it meant survivial for the CDG, I have no doubt that whatever lieutenants get promoted to take the place of Mario and El Coss would be interested in forming a pact again.

The arrest is still very fresh and few details have emerged; Costilla Sánchez was only just recently paraded before the cameras yet in the traditional Mexican perp walk. We'll see how things play out over the next week or two, but regardless of which path the remnants of the CDG take, it's likely to get uglier in northeast Mexico.

Details emerging about Mexican Federal Police Attack on US Embassy Vehicle

This morning around 8:00am local, an armored Toyota SUV belonging to the US Embassy in Mexico City was fired upon by both unidentified gunmen and Mexican federal police officers between the 47km and 50km markers of the Mexico-Cuernavaca Highway. Two US government employees, Jesse Hoods Garner and Stan Dove Boss, were in the Toyota and received non-life threatening injuries. They were taken to a local hospital in Cuernavaca, then taken to another hospital in Mexico City. Four members of the Mexican navy, who were riding in the vehicle with them as escorts, received minor injuries.

What happened during those morning hours has been a nightmare to discern, and the process is ongoing. If any of you have been following my Twitter feed today, you know that it has been one contradictory news story after another, from both US and Mexican sources. As of 4:14pm CST, the US Embassy's only official statement has been to say two US government employees were injured in an attack south of Mexico City.

About 20 minutes ago, I got a look at the only (somewhat comprehensive but still confusing) official statement from the Mexican government via their navy department, SEMAR. In a nutshell, the Embassy employees and Mexican sailors were enroute to an army installation in the El Capulín area of Xalatlaco. About 4km from the main highway, a vehicle pulled up either next to them or behind them (unclear) and the passengers showed them their firearms. The driver of the Embassy vehicle tried to maneuver around them and back onto the highway; at this point, the other vehicle's passengers opened fire on the armored Toyota.

At this point, the navy personnel called the local army base to ask for backup. This is where things get fuzzy. The federal police say they were in the area pursuing a report about a stolen vehicle. Three other cars of gunment had joined the first one, and also started firing on the Embassy SUV. The SEMAR release says that soldiers from the base at El Capulín, along with several federal police, showed up after the gunfight ended, but there was no mention (either in the release or in the press) of how it ended. Some reports said all the cars were stopped at a police checkpoint, which is when the federal police started shooting at the Embassy vehicle. There's no official clarity on where in the timeline the police fired their guns; only that it happened at 8:00am local.

As for the gunmen, reports simply say they got away. The SEMAR release says that the police officers involved in the shooting of the Toyota will be investigated.

A few questions I'd like answered: Is it a mere coincidence that only the two Americans got shot and the navy sailors only received minor injuries? I have no idea where in the vehicle everyone was sitting, who was driving, etc., so that may have played a role in that. Did the federal police think the Toyota was the stolen car they were looking for? If so, is it standard procedure to just start firing away? All the people in the Embassy people were unarmed, so the men in the four chase vehicles were doing all the shooting. Why didn't the federal police shoot at the shooters first?

Anyway, please stay tuned. Just like the shooting of ICE agents Avila and Zapata in February 2011 near San Luís Potosí, it's going to take a few days for all the details to shake out. And sadly, like that incident, no one will be held responsible for the attempted murder of two more US government employees in Mexico.

UPDATE Aug 27: Reports over the weekend indicated that it was definitely 12 members of the Federal Police who opened fire on the US Embassy's Toyota. They said it wasn't an ambush, but rather that they were chasing and shooting at who they thought were kidnappers. All 12 have been officially arrested, which means they can be held up to 40 days. News and updates have barely been trickling out of Mexico, with the FP redirecting all inquiries to Los Pinos (Mexico's version of the White House), and Los Pinos isn't talking to anyone yet. The US State Department has also not issued any updated statements, so we still don't know who the two Americans work directly for.

The good news is that the individuals involved are all accounted for, and it's likely someone (if not all of them) will get punished in some way. But what will that punishment be, will it stick, and will it be enough in the eyes of the US State Department? Will any changes occur either in FP procedure or diplomatic protective measures for US officials working in Mexico? More to come...

UPDATE Aug 28: Both The Washington Post and several Mexican news outlets have suggested this, but The New York Times seems to have confirmed that the two Americans in the Toyota are CIA employees. Here's an excerpt from the Times story:

"The two Americans who were wounded when gunmen fired on an American Embassy vehicle last week were Central Intelligence Agency employees sent as part of a multiagency effort to bolster Mexican efforts to fight drug traffickers, officials said on Tuesday. The two operatives, who were hurt on Friday, were participating in a training program that involved the Mexican Navy... an American was driving the vehicle and that during the attack the captain, who was handling logistics and translating for the men, remained in the back seat... The men were wounded, the Navy said, when the rain of bullets managed to tear through the car’s protective armor. It was unclear if the Americans, who officials said were unarmed, were specifically targeted, if the shooting was a case of mistaken identity or if there was some other reason that the vehicle was ambushed... American officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to release information, said no evidence had emerged so far that the Americans were targeted because of their affiliation." Link to Full Article

Here are some interesting excerpts from the Washington Post story:

"The agency link was first reported in the Mexican media. U.S. public records suggest that the name reportedly used by one of the shooting victims was a CIA cover identity associated with a post office box in Dunn Loring, Va... One of the wounded men was attached to the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, and the other appeared to be in Mexico on temporary assignment, according to U.S. law enforcement officials and diplomats who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the case is under investigation... But an examination of public records suggests that the name used by one of the men may be fictitious, with similarities to others created by the CIA to provide cover for its officers overseas... Some Mexican law enforcement officials have said that the confrontation was caused by confusion — that the federal police were in the area chasing kidnappers who had seized the head of the National Anthropology Museum. A spokeswoman for the museum said it had no reports indicating that anyone from the institute had been kidnapped." Link to Full Article

So at this point, we can reasonably assume that the two Americans in the Toyota were indeed CIA agents or trainers or employees of some sort. We can also reasonably assume that the federal police who shot them were not exactly out in Tres Marías "To Protect and Serve" Friday morning. The last big question that remains unanswered is whether or not the men were intentionally targeted because they were CIA, or American, or just traveling in a highly desirable hard car. Personally, if I want to steal a car for personal use, I'm not going to shoot it 30 times. However, if I want to kill someone IN the car and I know it's armored, I'm going to try to breach the armor by concentrating all my fire in one spot - which is exactly what the shooters did, and exactly how Garner and Boss (cover names, it seems) got shot. I guarantee you, this is not standard FP protocol for dealing with ANY suspect who is unarmed and not actively posing a threat to officers. Stay tuned...

"The 'Los Zetas' Cartel is Divided"

Here is a translated excerpt from the Mexican news magazine Proceso:

"Mexican Federal Security Sources confirm what some narcobanners hung in northern states suggested since early last month: Los Zetas, the extremely violent group of thugs who became a drug cartel, faces a break in the dome. Its two main leaders, [Miguel] El Z-40 [Treviño Morales] and [Heriberto] El Lazca [Lazcano Lazcano] apparently are engaged in a complicated web of betrayals. Experts predict new and more serious bloodshed in the country... [Several narco] messages, [videos on YouTube] and events such as the dismemberment of 49 bodies that were abandoned early on May 13 in Cadereyta, reveal a new division in one of the most powerful and diversified cartels in the country, which could be a prelude to a new spillage of blood... 'El Z-40 has been betrayed and has been moving against El Lazca's people,' say the officials, who add that Lazcano has been moving between Europe and Central America. He was recently spotted in Costa Rica, where he arrived from Germany... El Z-40, who has been located between Piedras Negras, Coahuila, and Aguascalientes, could make an even more violent cartel if he can remain in control. He has distinguished himself as an impulsive operator, say the sources. News of the Zeta division are not new. Since April last year the Texas firm Stratfor intelligence realized versions in this regard." Link to the Full Translation

Analysis: Trying to dissect the potential repercussions of an internal split within the ranks of Los Zetas is a different animal than the same endeavor with the CDG or the Federation. The reason for this is the inherent difference in organization between Los Zetas and the "old school" cartels where fault lines might be more visible.

For example, there have been two relatively recent splits in more traditionally organized TCOs - the Metros and Rojos factions of the CDG, and the split in La Familia Michoacana that resulted in the creation of the Knights Templar. One similarity is that you have two Zetas leaders - Treviño and Lazcano - with whom the various members and cells can choose to align. But Los Zetas are organized very horizontally, sort of in a franchise fashion, whereas the other major TCOs are organized more vertically with a clearer and stricter chain of command.

If the rumors of the split are confirmed - and it certainly seems to be heading in that direction - this will be the most significant shift in the TCO landscape since the La Familia split, or perhaps the defection of the BLO from the Federation. In the last year, we drug war observers believe Los Zetas gained control of more territory in Mexico than the Federation, which is a considerable amount of real estate. Journalist and author Sam Logan theorized not long ago that Los Zetas may have had a long-term strategy in mind to consolidate control over smuggling routes in a roman cross pattern across Mexico. Any major split would completely disrupt any such strategy.

It might be difficult to determine how the split would impact any international arrangements Los Zetas have with cocaine suppliers in South America, route managers and training camp locations in Central America, and arms suppliers in Central America and the US. Kind of like a major corporation that relies heavily on sales and service, Zetas partners may show more loyalty to their local Zetas cell, rather than one or the other head honcho. And individual cells may continue to operate relatively independently, regardless of the personal disputes between Z-40 and El Lazca.

Certainly, some (or many) members may feel more loyalty towards one man or the other, and will follow orders to the death. However, due to the military-style discipline leaders, trainers, and recruiters try to instill in many new members, some Zetas may feel a little lost, like watching the General and the Colonel fighting, and just wait to see who comes out alive to give the new orders.

Also, we have to remember that Los Zetas - probably more than any other TCO - have branched out into a wide variety of other illicit activities, many of which are dependent on local conditions for income. Conflict at the top of the Zetas food chain may not have any major impact on the extortion of businesses or pirated DVD sales in certain parts of Mexico.

But first things first; we need to wait a bit and see if these rumors pan out, meaning we start seeing an increase in violence in parts of Mexico where Los Zetas have total control - meaning a rival TCO can't be held responsible for the killing, like we saw in Tijuana in 2008-2010. So for now, the watching and waiting continues...

"'Flood' of drugs from Mexico linked to Atlanta area abductions."

Here is an excerpt from Mary Lou Pickel's article in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

"A recent increase in drug-related kidnappings in Gwinnett County has put a spotlight on drug violence in Georgia, federal agents say. About nine drug-related kidnappings have occurred in Gwinnett this year. The latest involved a man bound and chained in a basement in Lilburn whom federal agents rescued earlier this month. Mexican drug cartels are moving large amounts of cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana into the country for distribution up the East Coast, said Rodney Benson, the special agent in charge of the Drug Enforcement Administration in Atlanta. Drug-related kidnappings have increased in the past 90 days, he said. David Nahmias, U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Georgia, said Gwinnett is a center of Mexican drug cartel activity in the area because of easy transportation on I-85 and a large Hispanic population where traffickers can try to blend in... Representatives of Mexican drug cartels in Atlanta are 'clashing with each other,' the DEA's Benson said. Drug traffickers are also getting younger, Gwinnett County Assistant District Attorney Keith Miles said... Miles says the up-tick in kidnappings is not a 'blip.' 'It's just a matter of time before innocent people get caught in the crossfire,' he said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This story shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone, as Atlanta is a known trafficking hub for Mexican TCOs. What should come as a surprise is that THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN IN JUY 2008! Yep, this headline and complete story would fit right in with news reports coming out today.

Honestly, I don't have much by way of analysis on this story; it really speaks for itself. I highly recommend following the link to the full article and scrolling down to the bottom so you can read some of the kidnapping cases that occurred in the first half of 2008 in Gwinnett. My point for writing this post is to showcase exactly how little we've progressed in acknowledging that Mexico's drug war is here. This kind of stuff has been happening not just in Georgia, but in Alabama, Baltimore, Denver...you name it. US cities nowhere near the border have been experiencing kidnappings and violent drug-related murders for years, but some in charge are happy to pass those incidents off as "the drug business as usual."

And hey, maybe it is. DHS chooses not to keep track of cartel-on-cartel violence here in the US, which totally misses the point of what border violence spillover really is. The El Paso Sheriff's Office has told me that if they investigate a gang-related murder that is somehow connected to the Mexican drug trade, they don't consider that spillover; just "business as usual." I'm pretty sure that DHS wouldn't classify these Gwinnett kidnappings that way either, which makes me wonder how many TCO-related violent incidents are occurring in the United States where agencies - for purely subjective or political reasons - choose to not advertise the link to Mexico. Then you have other agencies, like the DEA and several south Texas departments, who are happy to let Americans know, "Hey! We've got a problem here!"

I just get so angry when I stumble across old news reports like this that read like today's news. It makes me feel like some people at DHS and in the White House are asleep at the wheel. How is it that no progress has been made in the last four years in our cities where Mexican TCOs are operating? It's all about priorities, and it seems obvious to me that the drug war has been nowhere near the top of the national security priority list since it started in earnest several years ago.

"Mexican army captures 'El Loco,' suspect in murder of 49 in Cadereyta, Nuevo León."

Here is the translated excerpt of Ignacio Alzaga's story on Milenio.com:

"In the town of Guadalupe, Nuevo Leon, elements of the Army captured Daniel 'El Loco' Elizondo, a member of the Gulf cartel and alleged perpetrator of the execution of 49 people found in the town of Cadereyta. The Ministry of National Defense (SEDENA) reported that, 'After the discovery of 49 bodies, military personnel conducted ground surveys and other specific actions to identify, locate and arrest the alleged perpetrators of these crimes with positive results, which will be announced soon, as operations continue,' the agency said in a statement. The National Defense said during the arrest on Thursday in China, Nuevo León, of eight alleged members of the Gulf cartel, they secured four rifles, a handgun, three hand grenades, 881 cartridges of different calibers, 34 magazines for different weapons, a kilogram of cocaine, two vehicles, tactical gear and a radio." Link to Full Article

Here is an excerpt from a post about the story on Blog del Narco:

"Daniel de Jesús Elizondo Ramirez, alias "El Loco", who was the leader of "Los Zetas" in the municipality of Cadareyta, Nuevo León, was arrested in a subdivision in the municipality of Guadalupe for his participation in the event. Edgar Villegas Ruiz, the Department of Defense Director of Operations, said 'El Loco' would have received from Heriberto Lazcano, the leader of the criminal organization 'Los Zetas,' the order to transfer human remains to the main square of Cadereyta, but it was Elizondo who decided to leave them on the road... Another eight [people] were arrested in the town of China. Following that arrest, [authorities] located five mass graves, where there were nine bodies." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Based on the information I've received about this over the past two days, I think I have more questions than answers at this point. One of my TCO sources first told me about the arrest on Friday; media outlets are only reporting on it now, which is disappointing, to say the least. You probably noticed that there's a major disparity between the first story, as reported by Milenio, and the second, as reported by Blog del Narco and echoed by Associated Press reports. The initial information on the ground matched up with the first report - that Elizondo was a member of the Gulf cartel, not Los Zetas. But that didn't add up for my source, and wouldn't for anyone who's been following drug war events.

Anyway, assuming the press finally got their act straight, and we're dealing with captured suspects from Los Zetas, let's take a look at the plan (again, according to what the press is telling us from a suspect's confession). El Lazca, head of Los Zetas, ordered the murder of the 49 people. He wanted the bodies on display in the town's main square, but Elizondo took it upon himself to dump the bodies on the side of the road. They left a sign next to the bodies claiming the Zetas did it. Then days later, they hung narcobanners around town accepting responsibility for other mass killings, but denying blame for this one. Huh? If you're scratching your head, then join the party.

While things may have actually happened this way, there are a couple of things that are bugging me. First, Elizondo defied a direct order by El Lazca. No, Los Zetas are not organized hierarchically like an old-school TCO, and work more like a franchise operation. But still, they're rooted in military discipline. To defy the orders of No.1 and make decisions on your own like that, especially in the midst of one of Mexico's biggest narco body dumps? Very odd.

Then there's the blame game. El Loco says the disparate information coming from the sign and banners was meant to cause confusion. Among who? The police and military? Local residents? Rivals? From my view here in the US, it caused more curiosity than anything else, just trying to figure out who killed all those people when TCOs are usually clambering all over each other to take credit. The investigators would have been confused if they had taken Los Zetas at their word, which isn't necessarily the best investigative tactic when you're trying to get to the bottom of things in Mexico.

I'm not sure if the location of the body dump is significant, especially if what Elizondo said is true. Who knows what was going on inside his head when he picked that spot. It's well east of downtown Monterrey, and enough of a distance away from the primary conflict between Los Zetas and the CDG. The other arrests were made in China, which is another appreciable distance east of Cadereyta, somewhat in the middle of nowhere. Honestly, the body dump in the town square would have made a more dramatic impact, if that's even possible.

But we still come back to the real question everyone wants an answer to: Who were the victims? I still believe they're either migrants or innocent locals. If the killers had left any identifiable parts on them, some may have been associated with the CDG or another rival group, lending more credibility and strength to this intimidation campaign. But if any of those people had been traced back to an absence of criminal record or association, it would be another huge black mark on Los Zetas' record - which they haven't really cared about in the past, to make note. This is actually pretty tidy for the Mexican authorities; they can claim the victims were likely whomever they want them to be for convenience - and in most cases, it's better if the victims are "bad guys."

Bottom line, I don't know if they arrested the right people; we never do. I think it was most likely Los Zetas who did the killing, and if their plan was some sort of deception operation to make their rivals look bad or bring heat upon themselves, it was a fail. And, we'll probably never know who those victims were or where they came from. We can only wait to see if, by some miracle, investigators can provide some solid, reliable answers.

"Head of Northern Command says it is too early to tell if drug war in Mexico is being won."

Here's an excerpt from this article translation from Mexico's La Jornada, and found on America's MexicoBlog:

"The head of U.S. Northern Command said today it is 'too early to estimate whether the drug war in Mexico is being won or lost,' despite 'the brave decision' to put the military in the streets. Gen. Charles Jacoby, head of Northern Command (Northcom), responsible for U.S. military affairs in North America (U.S., Canada and Mexico), appeared today (Tuesday) before the Armed Services Committee of the Senate and was asked to assess the security situation in Mexico... Senator John McCain had asked the general--given that almost 50 thousand Mexican citizens have been killed since 2006, almost 13,000 in 2011, and the U.S. government has issued warnings to travelers regarding areas in northern Mexico--if this 'indicates that we are winning or losing, or it is a stalemate.' Jacoby, pressed to give an assessment of whether the Mexican government's efforts on this area are a success or failure, said "the violence has grown. It was not a huge leap this year, but those numbers are unacceptable, adding that the travel warnings, like the one issued to Nuevo Laredo, are indicative of the safety issue along the border. At the same time, he felt that the strategy of decapitation of the cartels has been 'successful,' given that 22 of the 37 most wanted drug traffickers have been 'removed from the board.' However, he said, "this has not had a significant, positive effect." Link to Full Post

Analysis: I get very bothered anytime there's talk of whether or not the drug war in Mexico is being "won." I understand that Congress has to ask these kinds of questions to determine if Mérida Initiative money is being wasted, or if cross-border collaboration efforts are actually making progress. The problem is that this is not a war where anyone can easily determine who's winning and who's losing.

One mistake that US authorities can make when trying to assess progress in the drug war is to treat it like a conventional conflict. Yes, there are (more or less) two sides: the good guys (Mexican and US governments and law enforcement) and the bad guys (the TCOs). However, many members of Mexican law enforcement and the government play both sides of that coin, which makes things murky. Also, there are several different TCOs and smaller criminal groups who sometimes align with the TCOs (and sometimes not). If this were a more traditional conflict, who would raise the white flag on behalf of the bad guys if they ever wanted to surrender? Plus, they're not state actors, despite the TCOs' ability to manipulate politics at the local level. So who would the good guys say they're at war with? The vague and nebulous "organized crime," or TCOs in general?

If you're able to get past these issues, you then have to figure out how you'd define progress. A reduced level of violence as indicated by a drop in murder figures is a solid and easy start. On the north side of the border, perhaps a significant drop in apprehensions of criminal aliens (armed smugglers, as opposed to unarmed migrants just looking for work) or a significant reduction in the volume of cross-border drug shipments might signal progress. But would these things be enough to signal "victory"? What levels do violence and drug trafficking activity have to drop down to in order to say the drug war is being won, and what happens if the US and Mexican governments disagree on these levels?

I've written in my book and said on many occasions that I think it's a mistake to use win/loss language when talking about Mexico; I believe this is a war that needs to be managed, as true victory can't really be defined. Bringing this war to a manageable level, in my opinion, means reducing violence and drug trafficking to levels where the Mexican people feel safe and secure enough to go about their daily business almost anywhere in the country - much like we do here. We have high crime levels in many parts of the US, but that doesn't prevent people from going to work, taking their kids to school, or eating out at certain restaurants like it does in Mexico. If an American gets robbed or assaulted in a US city, he or she is usually confident that if the police are called, they'll respond right away and follow proper procedures to ID the bad guy and prosecute him if he's caught.

I did criticize the Mérida Initiative in my book (just like the GAO did in its 2010 report) for not having solid benchmarks to determine progress in the drug war. I think this is crucial, and it's very possible to determine whether or not things are getting better in Mexico, as well as north of the border. But winning or losing? It's the wrong language for this conflict, and we need to keep things from getting any worse before we can even start talking about making progress.

"Are American Drug War Bloggers And Tweeters In Danger?"

Here is an excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today's Correspondents Watch:

"Citizens of Nuevo Laredo, Mexico were stunned to see two beheaded and disemboweled corpses hanging from a highway overpass in early September. It wasn’t because they’d never been exposed to this level of brutality by Mexican transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), but rather it was because of the message that was left with the bodies signed by Los Zetas. The note implied the two unidentified males were savagely killed for using social media against them. Later that month, the beheaded body of Elizabeth Macias, an employee of a Mexican news organization, was found in the same location. And on November 10, Mexican police found a fourth body in a wealthy Nuevo Laredo neighborhood with a note that read: “This happened to me for not understanding that I shouldn't report on the social networks.” While US media have reported these incidents and the impact they have had on social media users in Mexico, few have examined how drug war bloggers and tweeters in the United States feel about this new TCO tactic. As it turns out, their level of concern varies."

To read the full article on HSToday.us, please CLICK HERE!

"Paramilitaries may have entered Mexico's drug wars."

Here is an excerpt from Tim Johnson's article for McClatchy Newspapers:

"The gruesome discovery of 32 bodies scattered in houses in the port city of Veracruz this week is the latest sign that Mexico's drug-fueled violence is entering a new phase in which murky paramilitary-style squads are carrying out mass exterminations... It was the latest ghastly event to send shudders through Veracruz. Two weeks ago, gunmen dumped 35 semi-nude, mutilated bodies along a freeway underpass in Veracruz in broad daylight. Authorities said at least some of the victims in both instances were members of Los Zetas, a violent crime group whose reach now stretches beyond Mexico's borders... The Zeta Killers group, which also calls itself New Generation, first came to light in a YouTube video in late July... The manner in which four vehicles maneuvered along the highway, blocked traffic and dumped the bodies led some experts to see a unique style to the recent killing spree... 'These were people who had military training,' said Alberto Islas, a security analyst and chief of Risk Evaluation Ltd... A public security specialist at the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Eric L. Olson, said too little evidence exists to draw conclusions that the killings are anything but violence between rival gangs." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Just the mere speculation that paramilitary groups may exist inside Mexico is exasperating. It makes me wonder what some people define as a paramilitary group, and how much knowledge those people have of paramilitary groups in another drug trafficking capital, Colombia.

Back in the 1980s when Pablo Escobar ruled Colombia, he started seeing a threat being posed to his territory and operations by leftist guerrilla groups - the FARC and the ELN. He formed a personal army, called MAS for Muerte a Secuestradores, or "death to the kidnappers." Soon, other drug lords started doing the same thing. In 1997, three men - brothers Carlos, Fidel, and Vicente Castaño - started an umbrella group to sort of unite these various paramilitaries, under the name Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia ("United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia"). Over the next decade, the AUC racked up more murders than the FARC and ELN combined, and displaced hundreds of thousands of Colombian citizens in an effort to thwart their support to the FARC and ELN.

There is no doubt that many members of the Colombian government secretly supported the AUC's efforts because they had a shared goal - the elimination of FARC and ELN terrorists. But where things got complicated was when the United States designated the AUC a foreign terrorist organization in 2001, despite the fact that the AUC had no political or religious ideology; they existed solely as the private armies for Colombian drug lords. Well, technically they did try to straighten out in the mid 1980s before becoming the AUC and formed a political party called the Union Patriotica. But after several of their members were killed or kidnapped by the guerrillas, they gave up and went back to paramilitary action - that is, defending their employers' turf and operations, and getting into the drug trade themselves. This is actually what led to several cracks in the AUC before they started to disintegrate - and partially disarm - in 2003; the fact that some groups were getting into the drug trade, and some were opposed to that.

Now let's move over to Los Zetas. They were recruited and created by Gulf cartel capo Osiel Cárdenas Guillen in the late 1990s to defend his turf and operations from the Mexican authorities and rival cartels. They soon started racking up an impressive body count, and introduced beheadings and dismemberment as the new drug war norm in 2003-2004 during the battle with the Sinaloa Federation over Nuevo Laredo, and the battle over control of Acapulco. Just like the AUC, Los Zetas come from former military stock (many some members of the AUC were also former Colombian police officers). Also like the AUC, Los Zetas have no ideology to speak of. While they were still working for the Gulf cartel, they existed to fulfill Cárdenas Guillen's wishes. Now, they exist to serve their own.

Moving to the present day, I'm speechless when the Mexican government says no paramilitaries exist in Mexico, and when the media even speculates as to their existence; especially since Los Zetas weren't the only private army working for the TCOs. The Sinaloa Federation has Los Pelones and Los Negros, run by Edgar "La Barbie" Valdez Villarreal before his arrest, and the Beltrán Leyva Organzation has La Linea, made up almost exclusively of former police officers. What does the Mexican government and the media think these groups are?

Here are a couple of definitions of paramilitary groups: "A group of personnel with military structure functioning either as a civil force or in support of military forces," and "A force with military structure conducting armed operations against a ruling or occupying power." I think a strong argument can be made that Los Zetas (in their former iteration under the Gulf), Los Pelones, Los Negros, La Linea, and the latest version of the Mata Zetas are operating with a military structure and conducting armed operations against an occupying power - their rivals that are occupying a desired piece of territory. The Mata Zetas aren't some vigilante group; they're working for the Jalisco Cartel/New Generation, so they're no different than the other private armies.

And who knows how they Mexican government feels about these groups? Los Zetas are a different animal now because they're their own TCO, and fighting the Mexican army and police like everyone else. But the other groups are primarily killing rival TCO members; something that inadvertently helps the Mexican government's cause.

So let's move beyond the silly question of whether or not paramilitaries exist inside Mexico; we need to move more towards the question of what the Mexican government wants to do about their growth and expanding activities.

"Calling Casino Attack In Mexico An ‘Act Of Terror:’ Rhetoric Or Rethinking?"

Here's a excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today's Correspondents Watch:

"One of the worst mass killings in Mexico’s drug war history occurred on August 25 in the violence-plagued city of Monterrey. Around 3:00 PM, a dozen men in four cars pulled up in front of the Casino Royale casino lugging several gas cans with them. In less than three minutes, they doused the small casino with gasoline and set the building on fire, killing 52 people in the ensuing blaze. Some witnesses said the attackers - allegedly members of the brutal Los Zetas transnational criminal organization (TCO) - yelled at casino patrons to get out of the building. Sadly, though, most were unable to do so. Instead of heading for the casino’s exits, most patrons fled deeper into the casino and into bathrooms, where they died of smoke inhalation. Conflicting reports claimed the emergency exits were blocked. However, one report by CNN said several vetted witnesses heard grenades exploding in the casino and saw victims - including pregnant women - intentionally being gunned down by the attackers. One woman who escaped the fire told CNN one of the attackers told the patrons, “we’re going to kill all of you.” In the wake of the tragedy, Mexican President Felipe Calderón wasted no time publicly condemning the attack. But what especially perked the ears of many of the nation’s drug war observers - and likely not just a few members of the US government - was the wording he used. Calderón called the attack an “aberrant act of terror and barbarity.” His National Security spokesman, Alejandro Poiré, bluntly stated that “an act of terrorism has been committed.” But was the Casino Royale attack a true “act of terror”? If the Mexican government believes TCOs are committing acts of terrorism, what does that imply for its drug war strategy - and that of the US government?"

To read the full article at HSToday.us, please CLICK HERE!

Attack on Monterrey casino may up the stakes for Calderon's drug war.

Twitter was on fire last night with various reports of an attack on the Casino Royale in Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, that killed over 50 people and injured many more. Here's a recent report in The Wall Street Journal: 

"In what Mexican officials have called an "act of terror," a half dozen gunmen burst into a casino in Mexico's industrial capital of Monterrey Thursday, sprayed the place with gasoline, and started a fire in the bingo section, killing at least 53 people. Speaking to Monterrey's leading newspaper El Norte, Nuevo León Gov. Rodrigo Medina said that at least 53 people had been killed in the attack... Officials said they expected the death toll to continue to climb in what appeared to be an attack linked to warring drug cartels, although there was no immediate information linking the massacre to drug traffickers. Up to 80 people were in the casino when it was attacked.'Six hooded gunmen came in, shouting obscenities and firing their guns,' said a person at the scene who asked not to be named. 'They drenched the place with gasoline. People were running as the place went up in flames. Those who stayed behind burned to death.'... 'An act of terrorism has been committed," said Alejandro Poiré, the federal government's spokesman for security affairs. "This act of terror will not remain unpunished.' The mention of 'terror' has been a controversial one in Mexico's drug wars, where officials have argued hard against terminology suggesting an insurgency." Link to Full Article

However, this wasn't the only casino attack this week. The Caliente casino in Saltillo, owned by controversial former Tijuana mayor Jorge Hank Rhon, was attacked on Wednesday. A grenade attack near a Reynosa, Tamaulipas casino also occurred on Wednesday, and the Sun City casino in Saltillo) was attacked on August 15th. These other attacks involved mostly gunment (with the exception of the Reynosa incident), and few lives were lost - especially in comparison to the Casino Royale attack.

Analysis: I'm very concerned about the references Calderon and Poire are making to the Casino Royal attack as an "act of terror." I've always written/said that TCOs often behave like terrorists, and engage in terrorist-type activity. However, this doesn't necessarily make them terrorists, and to label them as such would open up a huge diplomatic and political Pandora's Box. Many of my readers and Twitter followers have already commented that the box was opened when he came into office.

The problem with that is that we don't fully understand yet the motivation behind the Casino Royal attack. But because of the string of other casino attacks (and other factors), we can start doing some intelligent speculation. Casinos are frequently owned by TCOs, or allies of TCOs who do extensive money laundering for them. Monterrey, Saltillo, and Reynosa are currently battlegrounds for the war between Los Zetas and the Gulf cartel. These attacks could be rival hits. Or, the owners of the casinos may not be following up on their end of a bargain with one of the two TCOs, and now they're paying the price. I'm more inclined to go with the first explanation; it would be too much of a coincidence that four casino owners would all be screwing their bosses over at the same time. Don't forget; according to the news reports, we don't even know if TCOs were involved, although it's a reasonable assumption.

Taking a look specifically at the Casino Royale attack, spreading gasoline around and starting a fire is a poor way to carry out a true terrorist attack. There are multiple factors here that led to the death of so many people. First, it sounds like it was a small place; only 80 people were in it at the time of the attack, and there are definitely more than 80 people in any Vegas casino in the middle of a Thursday. Second, something was wrong with the emergency exits; either there weren't enough of them, they were poorly lit/indicated, or they weren't opening. Third, many people fled to the bathrooms to escape the attackers, and they subsequently got trapped - and killed - in there by the smoke and flames.

Initial reports claimed this was a robbery attempt, and the attackers were yelling at people to get out of the casino after they started the fire. This is looking less and less like a robbery and more like a simple attempt to burn the place down. Honestly, I don't believe the attackers' intent was to kill everyone inside the casino. This is incredibly important when major political figures are throwing around sound bytes like "act of terror." Were the people in the casino terrorized? Absolutely. Are the Mexican people throughout the country terrorized by the news of what happened yesterday in Monterrey? I have no doubt. But people living in certain parts of Los Angeles and Detroit and Washington, DC (and many other US cities) are terrorized every day by gang violence that rips their children away in drive-by shootings. Does this make gang members terrorists? No.

The bottom line is, unless those men wanted to and planned to kill innocent people in the casino in order to send a message to Calderon's government, the attack wasn't a true act of terrorism.

Yesterday's attack on the Casino Royale was one of the biggest tragedies we've seen in Mexico's drug war. Whenever innocent people are caught in the crossfire of TCO violence, it has a huge impact on the morale of the Mexican people, and the viability of Calderon's strategy. How will the Mexican people choose to view this attack? As a true "act of terror" and an indiscriminate killing? As a severely botched attempt by a TCO to send a message to a rival, or uncooperative casino owner? Or yet another example of a failed drug war strategy?

Sadly, it's unlikely this will be the last tragedy of its kind in Mexico. The question is, how will Calderon's administration play future incidents in the press? By calling the Casino Royale attack an "act of terror," he and Poire may be trying to open an avenue for increased US or international assistance that would help save the face of Mexican sovereignty. He may also be pursuing a political agenda that includes pushing for passage of legislation allowing the government expanded powers to monitor TCO activity.

I'm sure more information will roll in over the next few days and weeks regarding who was responsible for the attack, and why it was committed. However, we're going to see the political fall out from this for many months - perhaps years - to come.

"US officials confirm arrest of Juárez cartel leader connected to US Consulate deaths."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Borunda, Alex Hinojosa and Marty Schladen's article in the El Paso Times:

"Mexican authorities captured the reputed leader of La Linea, a vicious group of thugs that carried out murders and terrorized Juárez for a drug cartel. José Antonio Acosta Hernández, also known as 'El Diego,' one of the highest-ranking bosses of the Juárez drug cartel, was reportedly arrested Friday after a shootout with authorities in a Chihuahua City neighborhood. Acosta was indicted this year in the killings of three people connected to the U.S. Consulate in Juárez... His arrest, according to one expert, may signal the end of the Juárez drug cartel and a downturn in the violence that has gripped Juárez and the state of Chihuahua. Acosta, who was reportedly flown to Mexico City after his capture, is believed to run operations for La Linea in Chihuahua City and Juárez and was arguably the most-wanted man in the state of Chihuahua... In recent weeks, narco-graffiti threatening the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and U.S. Consulate employees appeared on public walls in Juárez and Chihuahua City. The messages telling the "gringos of the DEA" to quit meddling were signed 'Diego'... Many of the public threats from La Linea made frequent references to 'El Diego'... The capture of Acosta may be a new beginning for Juárez residents and a decrease in violence, said University of Texas at El Paso political science professor Tony Payan." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Chalk up another victory for the Calderón administration, as this is a nice one. There's no doubt that Acosta's arrest will have a detrimental impact on La Linea, and perhaps on the VCFO (Juárez cartel) as a whole. The big question is, of course, how much?

Acosta has been indicted in the US for alleged involvement in the attack on the three US Consulate employees, which makes him eligible for extradition. The only thing any narco fears is extradition. Dr Payan mentioned in the article something about Acosta providing good, useful intelligence about his organization and perhaps rivals. That's the key here, both to either preventing Acosta's extradition, reducing his sentence if he is sent to the US for trial (and assuming a conviction, of course), and bringing down the remnants of the VCFO. But will he talk?

No one can really say. Edgar "La Barbie" Valdez Villareal did, and so did Osiel Cárdenas Guillen. If the VCFO really is crumbling, Acosta may believe there's not much left to save - except his own rear end. La Linea has been a force to be reckoned with in Chihuahua for many years, and the VCFO is not a TCO to go quietly into the night - it's been fighting for its life against the Federation for quite some time now, and still maintains a presence in Juárez. However, there is a chance that Acosta could drive some pretty big nails into the VCFO's coffin; we'll see how that develops over the next few weeks and months.

But there's still the other question - how will the assumed demise of La Linea, and perhaps later on the VCFO - affect levels of violence in Juárez? Many people believe that if the VCFO were to concede or be destroyed, the Federation would win control of the Juárez plaza and peace would ensue. Unfortunately, that probably wouldn't be the case.

In past years, the violence in Ciudad Juárez has been a result of the turf battle between the VCFO and the Federation. But something happened in the last couple of years to change to rules - throw them out the window actually...the local drug trade exploded. There are something like 500 colonias, or neighborhoods, in Juárez, and each one has its own gang defending its turf - and dealing drugs. These gangs have joined in the bloodshed, and it's gotten to the point that no one in Juárez really knows who is killing whom. The Federation and the VCFO don't have their top people mixed up in that mess; they hire out lower level thugs to do the grunt work for them in that chaos. The cops are afraid of going in and asking too many questions, let alone thoroughly investigating any murders that occur in Juárez, so it's too simplistic to say that once the VCFO is out, everything will get better. Juárez still has a few hundred gangs to deal with.

That being said, if the Federation ends up being top dog in Juárez as a result of Acosta's arrest (whether that's in a few weeks or months), they have the power to rein in all the disparate factions in the city and establish some order. Whether or not they want to is a good question. With all the killing and chaos, less authority is scrutinizing the movement of drugs across the border into El Paso. However, all those gang members already in the drug business and possibly looking for work...this could result in the largest narco recruiting drive the drug war has ever seen.

At this early point in the game, post-Acosta arrest, it's too soon to tell what impact him being out of the game will have. Of course, it's always interesting to speculate, and imagine positive outcomes. As always, more to come...

"Despite El Chango Arrest, Violence Likely to Grow in Mexico."

Here is an excerpt from Guy Taylor's article in World Politics Review (in which I'm heavily quoted):

"The capture this week of La Familia Michoacana drug cartel boss José de Jesús Méndez, aka El Chango or the Monkey, represents a shiny notch on the belt of Mexican President Felipe Calderón, whose five-year-old presidency has been defined by its war against drug kingpins. But the arrest is unlikely to stem the ongoing violence that has caused frustrations to mount among Mexican voters ahead of the nation's 2012 presidential election. In fact, it's likely to have the opposite effect, says Sylvia Longmire... The government campaign against La Familia over the past several years had already resulted in a split within the cartel's ranks, Longmire added. With El Chango now in custody, she explained, a power vacuum has opened, with the Los Zetas and Sinoloa cartels angling to take over La Familia's territory in the Michoacan and Guerrero states along Mexico's southwestern Pacific coastline." Link to Full Article

Analysis: You can read my take on the arrest in a small nutshell in the rest of the article, but I wanted to go a little more in depth here.

At the time of El Chango's arrest, the original LFM was split in two. This occurred after the cult-like TCO's original leader, Nazario "El Mas Loco" Moreno Gonzalez was killed back in December. Those in LFM remaining loyal to him, led by Servando "La Tuta" Gómez Martínez, renamed themselves the Knights Templar. Oddly enough, they're considered in some places as the breakaway faction. Those under El Chango kept the LFM name, and almost immediately started battling with the Knights Templar over the original LFM's territory and drug routes.

Shortly before El Chango was arrested, he realized that LFM was almost out of money, and running out of options. What's a narco to do? Form an alliance! And that he did, albeit a strange one. Roughly a year to 18 months ago, the original LFM formed an alliance with the Sinaloa Federation and the Gulf cartel to do battle against Los Zetas. So why join them now? Well, because La Tuta and his Knights Templar are the loyalists, El Chango may have been viewed by La Tuta's allies - the Federation and the Gulf cartel - as an enemy. His best bet for survival would have been to seek out help from Los Zetas.

This bears relevance to what might happen to the remnants of LFM in the days and weeks to come. The Mexican government is convinced that LFM is done for, and that may be true - in their previous incarnation. There are, in my opinion, three major possibilities. First, the Knights Templar could make peace with the LFM remnants and reunite. I think this is the least likely option; too much blood has spilled between the two factions in the last six months. Next is the possibility of the Federation absorbing LFM.Their territories butt up against each other, and it probably wouldn't be too difficult for the Federation to muscle in on that. However, that would anger the Knights Templar, and as far as I know, the Federation and the Knights Templar want to stay in each other's good graces to keep fighting Los Zetas.

That leaves us with the most likely option, which is that Los Zetas will absorb what's left of LFM. They were already in talks to form an alliance, and Los Zetas are just inching to work their way westward into LFM and Knights Templar territory. There have already been reports of a Zetas presence in Guanajuato and Nayarit, so expansion is definitely one of their top goals. Unless LFM reunites - which, again, is unlikely - then there will probably be some increased narco activity in and around LFM's territory, which means more violence to come.

Can Mexico’s Anti-Drug War Movement Truly Succeed?

The Mexican people want their country back. That’s the message they plan to send on May 8^th to Mexico’s government, as well as to the narco thugs who have held their country hostage for years, through widespread planned marches and rallies.

The national sentiment of  Hasta la madre! [“We won’t take it anymore!”] has been slowly and steadily building, but was catalyzed by the death of a well-known Mexican poet’s son. Javier Sicilia, a journalist-turned-activist, lost his son to the drug war in late March 2011, and as a result has galvanized a movement of Mexicans, both domestically and in the United States, to protest the conduct of the drug war.

Sicilia says one of the goals of this mobilization is to return dignity to the names of the dead who “in the eyes of the State have been counted as collateral damage or statistics.” He also calls for a rebuilding of Mexico’s social fabric, and a re-founding of the country through a social pact formed between the Mexican people.

But can such a movement, with decidedly lofty goals and ideals, truly succeed in Mexico’s current environment?

There are several factors working in the protestors’ favor. Historically, this is the first time that so many Mexicans have come together to publicly call for an end to President Felipe Calderón’s drug war and associated violence. There are currently 38 marches and rallies taking place on May 8^th across Mexico, and some are also planned in the United States.

The El Paso Times reported that Mexican journalist and asylum seeker Emilio Gutierrez, along with a group of supporters, is encouraging people in the El Paso area to join a rally in Mesilla, Texas in support of the national marches in Mexico.

The Mexican people have already warmed up for this day, too. Media reports said that on April 7^th, up to 35,000 people in 21 Mexican states and 26 cities took to the streets to protest corruption, push for changes in the government’s fight organized crime, and lament the deaths of thousands of innocents across Mexico. These people were inspired by an open letter penned by Sicilia shortly after the death of his son.

I’ve had the chance to speak with people who are passionately answering Sicilia’s call. Some are looking at May 8^th as just a beginning, a precursor to a process that will likely take years to bear fruit. Others have used the terms “revolution” and “civil resistance,” invoking recent events in Egypt and historical figures like Gandhi and Martin Luther King to draw parallels with this phenomenon.

Unfortunately, as well-intentioned as these protestors may be, it sounds like they’re forgetting about the number one cause of the drug war that is ruining millions of Mexican lives—American drug users.

Sicilia outlined several goals for this movement in a long open letter, but they’re all domestically oriented. Many of them are vague and idealistic, like the forming of a “social pact” and “rebuilding Mexico’s social fabric.” Others are practical, like eliminating corruption from the ranks of politicians, soldiers, and police. Some are outright unrealistic, like completely legalizing all drug trafficking in Mexico.

The anti-drug war movement seems to be using Sicilia’s letter as a manifesto of sorts, but it still comes across as unfocused. Are they protesting against the Mexican government, the cartels themselves, or US drug policies? Perhaps it’s all of the above, but they don’t appear to have a solid road map for how to achieve their ultimate goal—the end of the drug war.

Most importantly, they’re leaving out the biggest problem—the insatiable American demand for drugs. Millions of drug users in the United States couldn’t care less that their habit results in the loss of thousands of Mexican lives every year. The U.S. media is providing better-than-expected coverage of these marches. But even if millions of Americans learned about the rallies and their goals, most probably wouldn’t flinch, let alone change their daily routines.

The comparisons to Egypt and Gandhi and Martin Luther King also aren’t quite accurate. The protests and civil resistance in those cases were for political reasons dealing with purely domestic issues. If the anti-drug war movement only had to deal with the Mexican government, then they’d really be on to something. But no matter how many people take to the streets in Mexico—or even in the United States—to demand an end to the bloodshed and corruption, no change in Mexican strategy or policy or social outlook is going to affect the American desire for illegal drugs.

There is no question that the Mexican people are displaying an incredible amount of courage, fortitude, and determination by taking steps to get their country back. There are many changes that the anti-drug war movement is demanding that are necessary to have a positive impact on the drug war. Regardless of the U.S. role in the drug war, the Mexican people would no doubt benefit from less corruption, elected officials who weren’t working hand-in-hand with narco thugs, and diminishing national fear as a result of communities working together.

Those changes will take time, patience, and hard work. But the anti-drug war movement can’t succeed by confining its goals to Mexico alone. Without a component to galvanize the American people or the U.S. government to dramatically reduce drug demand or revamp U.S. drug policies, it’s unlikely the drug war and bloodshed will end through Mexican protest alone.

 

"Los Zetas Employ Terror Tactics Near US Border."

Here is an excerpt from my latest article for Homeland Security Today magazine's Correspondents' Watch:

"Just when people thought the drug war in Mexico couldn’t get any more horrendous, mass graves have begun to be uncovered near the border. Several found in the northern Mexican state of Tamaulipas were filled with more than 300 rotting corpses. And with more mass graves being unearthed, the numbers of the dead are piling up. And they aren’t likely to be the last mass graves that will be found. Mass graves in Mexico aren’t a new phenomenon, though. They’ve been found in other areas of the country, but usually with fewer cadavers. While most of the previously discovered mass graves were almost always filled with members of transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) - rivals, traffickers who lost loads, dealers who owed money, etc. - what makes the newer graves different is that they’re filled with the bodies of innocent Mexicans and citizens of other Latin American nations." 

To read the full article on the HSToday website, please CLICK HERE!

My interview on 4/12 with Al Jazeera (English)

I didn't get a chance to let my readers know about this last-minute interview with Al Jazeera (English) almost two weeks ago. I was on my way out the door to an event in St Louis when they called, so it was pure luck that I was going to be in the city near the studio at the right time that night...and that I left the house with nice clothes and some makeup on! Anyway, we talked at length about the drug war in light of the then-recent discovery of the mass grave in northern Tamaulipas. Enjoy!

 

"Mexican drug war denies reality."

Here is an excerpt from Denise Dresser's article in The Australian:

"MEXICAN President Felipe Calderon finally has what he wanted: the resignation of US ambassador Carlos Pascual. Calderon shot the messenger for delivering bad news via confidential cables released by WikiLeaks. Pascual's harsh assessments of the "war on drugs" that Calderon unleashed four years ago infuriated the President... Essentially, Pascual was forced to leave for describing a reality that Calderon does not want to face, and that his government would prefer to ignore. In other words, he lost his job for doing it properly. But the stubborn truth revealed by the US diplomat emerges every day, despite drug kingpins bring arrested, the number of weapons discovered or the amount of cocaine seized. Mexico is not winning the "war" against drug trafficking and organised crime: Pascual's forced resignation cannot hide the 34,000 dead, the growing number of Mexicans addicted to drugs, the surge in kidnappings and executions, and widespread impunity... Therein lie the contradictions, evasiveness and lack of transparency regarding the terms on which Calderon's war is being conducted. Everyone on his team demands that the US devote more attention and resources to Calderon's effort, but publicly denies doing so when evidence of heightened US presence in Mexico becomes public. In recent weeks, the Calderon administration has twisted itself into knots trying to explain how and why it authorised US drone planes to fly over Mexican territory for intelligence-gathering purposes. And yet, while Calderon insists that the US assume its bilateral responsibilities, he also demands the US ambassador's head for revealing his own tactical and strategic mistakes in the war he insists on prosecuting. Calderon's contradictory stance is rooted in the reflexive habits of a Mexican political class trained to gain points by kicking the US. Calderon, too, has sought refuge behind the folds of the Mexican flag and in diatribes about sovereignty under siege." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Every now and then, I read an article on the drug war and think, man, this writer really gets it. This is definitely one of those times. Dresser does an amazing job of spelling out the Mexican government's pride and intransigence when it comes to the drug war. Calderón keeps pushing the same strategy he's been using since coming into office in December 2006, but it seems obvious to everyone but him that it's not working - and actually is making things worse.

I particularly like Dresser's explanation of how Calderón wants our help, yet somehow denies it at the same time in the name of Mexican sovereignty. There's an expression in Cuba: Como el perro del hortelano, que ni come ni deja comer, translated to essentially mean like a dog who neither eats, nor allows anyone else to eat. The Mexican government obviously isn't making much progress in the drug war, yet isn't willing to publicly allow the US or anyone else to help them make any progress.

Like they say, the denial Calderón is in isn't a river in Egypt, but a sad state of affairs that has locked the drug war in a state of paralysis. Actually, that may not be entirely accurate, because while Mexico isn't moving forward, it's definitely capable of moving backwards, as has been evidenced by the hundreds of innocent Mexicans being slaughtered by Los Zetas in Tamaulipas. I don't know how bad things need to get before Calderón - and certain people in our own government - wake up and acknowledge the realities of Mexico's drug war and the failing strategies currently being applied.

UPDATED: "The Myth that No Place in Mexico is Safe"

[I originally published this article on MexiData.info in December 2009. Earlier today, I received an email from an expat reader who lives near Cabo San Lucas, and he urgently asked me to update and repost this article. His wife works in tourism promotion for Baja California Sur, and he feels terrible that Mexico is losing so many potential tourists due to misconceptions about the security situation in Mexico. So in light of his request, I've decided to update my article and re-post it here on my blog.]

Thanks to the bloody drug battles being waged on a daily basis in so many Mexican cities and towns, the country has acquired a terrible reputation as a travel destination in the last few years. While some areas in Mexico definitely need to be avoided by tourists, there are several areas where this reputation is completely undeserved.

But before we get into the discussion of specific areas in Mexico and their relative safety, it’s important to understand why certain areas are so dangerous, and the factors that need to be taken into account when contemplating travel to Mexico.

As most people know, Mexico is in the middle of a drug war. The unprecedented bloodshed is a result of turf battles between drug cartels, as well as rivalries within cartels. The turf in question is usually one of two places: a highly valued drug trafficking corridor into the United States, also known as a plaza, and cities or towns where drugs are brought into Mexico from outside the country.

Control of these key locations is crucial for the success of a cartel’s business operation. In order to maintain control of these locations, cartels are willing to conduct assassinations of public officials, commit mass murders and dismemberment, and kidnap and torture those who wrong them.

Some of the most notorious plazas at the moment include Ciudad Juárez in Chihuahua state, Acapulco in Guerrero state, Monterrey in Nuevo León state, and Reynosa and Matamoros in Tamaulipas state.

The U.S. State Department has made clear in recurring travel alerts that non-essential travel by American citizens to certain areas should be deferred. More specifically: “Recent violent attacks and persistent security concerns have prompted the U.S. Embassy to urge U.S. citizens to defer unnecessary travel to Michoacán and Tamaulipas, to parts of Chihuahua, Sinaloa, Durango, and Coahuila, and to advise U.S. citizens residing or traveling in those areas to exercise extreme caution.”

Unfortunately, when Americans and other foreigners hear about all these travel warnings — and are unfamiliar with the nuances of the security situation in Mexico — they sometimes tend to get the impression that all of Mexico is a war zone. This is certainly not the case, as there are numerous places in Mexico that have been untouched by the drug war.

Mexico is well known as an affordable travel destination and for its all-inclusive beach resorts. Fortunately, the majority of these tourist locales remain safe for American and other foreign travelers. In fact, Baja California Sur — the home of the famous Cabo San Lucas and the other Los Cabos — is one of the safest places in Mexico, as it isn’t considered a strategic location for any of the drug cartels. Part of the safety factor is that many of the resorts in the Cabos are all-inclusive, meaning that guests never have the leave the resort grounds for food or entertainment.

Other popular tourist destinations include Puerto Vallarta, Cancun, and Cozumel. These places have occasionally appeared in the news as sites of drug-related violent incidents. However, it’s very important to note that these violent incidents occurred several miles away from tourist areas and resorts, and in no way affected the safety of tourists staying at those resorts. News reports don’t usually provide that helpful context. Other places like Playa del Carmen and the rest of the Riviera Maya are just as safe as Los Cabos. 

In addition to the more well-known tourist destinations, there are dozens of other places in Mexico that cater to visitors who enjoy beaches, Mayan and Aztec ruins, and eco-tours. While too numerous to name individually, most of these sites remain beautiful — and safe — places to enjoy.

The most important thing any potential business visitor or tourist to Mexico can do is arm him or herself with good information about specific destinations. The U.S. State Department travel site for Mexico (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_970.html) is a great place to start. Also make sure to read the most up-to-date travel alerts and travel warnings (http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_4755.html) for all the specifics on areas to avoid. One should never hesitate to contact a U.S. Consulate in Mexico if questions about the safety of a particular location arise.

Members of the military should be extremely diligent when planning any travel to Mexico, as certain locations have been officially declared off-limits by the Department of Defense, and others require command approval prior to travel.

Above all, travelers to Mexico and any other unfamiliar foreign travel destination need to exercise common sense. Try to blend in. Don’t wear things that scream “I’m American!” or “I’m an easy target!” Don’t wear flashy jewelry. Try to learn a few useful words in Spanish. While you’re not likely to be targeted in Mexico by the mere fact that you’re a tourist, you can still become the victim of common crime by not exercising common sense.

The violence in Mexico is not likely to escape our minds — or our headlines — any time soon. But that doesn’t mean that Mexico is no longer a viable option for rest and relaxation at an affordable price. It sounds almost corny, but it can’t be said enough that you need to know before you go. Arm yourself with good information about your destination, and enjoy the great things that Mexico still has to offer.

"The Perilous Intersection of Mexico’s Drug War & Pemex."

Here is an excerpt from this article, which I co-wrote with Jeremy Martin of the Institute of the Americas for the Journal of Energy Security:

"The stillness of early Sunday morning December 19, 2010 was shattered by a thunderous explosion. Residents across San Martin Texmelucan, a small town about 60 miles from Mexico City, were awakened to the latest, and one of the most deadly incidents, involving possible fuel theft at Pemex, Mexico’s national oil company. Many were more than just jolted awake: Over 100 homes were damaged or completely destroyed; 30 people perished and more than 50 were injured. It was a national calamity for a nation and state oil firm that sorely did not need it.

"Explosions, shootouts, deaths and violence have been increasingly seared into the collective minds of citizens in Mexico and the United States as the drug war persists. The battles between the government and competing cartels have been well-documented and the topic has coursed through the agenda of a series of high-level bilateral meetings between the two nations, most recently during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s trip to Mexico.

"But what has also percolated just below the surface is an alarming intersection between the drug violence and Mexico’s energy sector. For Mexico and Pemex, the increased intensity of the drug war and its damage is but the latest in a string of challenges, and a twist that has seemingly linked two previously unconnected drags on the nation. "

To read the full article, please CLICK HERE.

"Homeland Security Implications Of Los Zetas Attack On ICE Agents."

Here's a brief excerpt from my latest article in the News Analysis section of Homeland Security Today's website:

"On February 15, 2011, the landscape of Mexico’s drug war shifted in such a way that it couldn’t help but grab our attention. Two American law enforcement officers—agents with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE—were shot, and one killed, by members of a major Mexican drug trafficking organization. While they weren’t necessarily attacked because they were US federal agents, they were definitely left for dead in spite of it. Much to our national chagrin, this event has dramatic implications for our role in the drug war, and for our national security as a whole."

To read the full article, please CLICK HERE.

Two ICE agents shot while driving between Mexico City and Monterrey

Here is the official statement from ICE, issued on Feb. 15:

"Earlier this afternoon, two U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) special agents assigned to the ICE Attaché office in Mexico City were shot in the line of duty while driving between Mexico City and Monterrey, Mexico, by unknown assailants. ICE is working with the U.S. State Department, Mexican authorities and other U.S. law enforcement partners to investigate the shooting. Our thoughts and prayers are with our colleagues."

News reports on their websites and Twitter had little to add. One agent was reportedly critically wounded, and the other seriously wounded. One of the two agents was also said to be from Brownsville.

I got several questions from readers on my Facebook Fan Page asking what ICE agents are doing in Mexico. Here's some info from the State Department on the Attaché Office's mission there:

"The major goals of the ICE Attaché Mexico City MLS are sharing with the Mexican law enforcement and prosecutorial communities methods utilized by money launderers, supporting money laundering investigations that originate in the U.S. with Mexican nexus, and providing reciprocal support to the Mexican Government in their financial investigations. Additionally, it is a goal of the ICE Attaché Mexico City to assist Mexican law enforcement in developing more comprehensive investigative and preventive strategies by conducting increasingly complex joint investigations. To address the threat of money laundering activities between the U.S. and Mexico, the ICE Attaché Mexico City established the Money Laundering Section (MLS), comprised of ICE Attaché personnel. The ICE Attaché Mexico City has successfully conducted high profile money laundering investigations resulting in the dismantling of large criminal organizations, which utilized sophisticated methods to hide the source of their illicit funds.

"To further enhance the MLS, the ICE Mexico Money Laundering Vetted Unit (MLVU) was created in 2002. The MLVU is comprised of 34 vetted Mexican law enforcement officials and five prosecutors, who are assigned to the Agencia Federal de Investigaciones (AFI). The officers of the MLVU work in conjunction with ICE Attaché personnel to assist in conducting money laundering and other financial crime investigations, assist in obtaining provisional arrest and search warrants, and developing leads.

"The ICE Attaché Mexico City also conducts significant investigations of “Politically Exposed Persons” (PEP) and Money Remitters (Casas de Cambios). PEP cases are focused on public corruption in Mexico and the use of the U.S. financial institutions to hide the illicit proceeds of cime. The Money Remitter cases involve investigations of businesses and individuals that frequently use money exchange mechanisms to serve as alternatives to the official banking system. Casas de Cambio provide currency conversion, exchanges and money movement services for a fee. Since these businesses are numerous and more lightly regulated than banks, these exchange houses are often utilized by large-scale criminal organizations, including terrorists, to launder large amounts of currency throughout the world. The ICE Attaché Mexico City is addressing these threats by developing proactive strategies and providing investigative leads to the ICE domestic offices."

Analysis: I normally don't do "breaking news" type posts on my blog, but this event is pretty significant because it's not every day that US law enforcement agents get shot in Mexico. There are too many unanswered questions right now for me to do anything other than speculate, and I have more questions than answers right now.

The biggest question is, of course, were the two agents specifically targeted, or were they just an opportunity? The two missionaries who were shot at - and the wife killed - north of San Fernando a couple of weeks ago were shot at by DTO thugs because they wanted the Davises' truck. The agents were driving a black Chevy Suburban with US diplomatic plates; these are pretty high up on the DTO "most wanted" list for SUVs. I'm hoping that's the case, because if these agents were targeted by DTOs in Kiki Camarena style, then we have a big problem.

There's a first time for everything, but I don't think DTOs have made the VERY courageous leap yet to start picking off US law enforcement working in-country. Second, I don't think they'd start with two ICE agents if they really wanted to send a message. Third, they would have had to know that those agents would be on that road in that vehicle at that time. While US diplomatic facilities in Mexico have been infiltrated by DTOs before, the chances of someone working their way inside enough to get that info isn't likely. However, it is possible that, if the agents were meeting with Mexican counterparts, DTOs could have gotten the agents' itinerary through those counterparts. Still, an unlikely scenario.

I am concerned by some updated information from the LA Times that the agents were caught up in a road blockade set up by narcos about a third of the way to Monterrey. If this is true, then the narcos definitely would have taken notice of the diplomatic plates. For them to pursue and fire at two individuals riding in a consular vehicle is profoundly disturbing...again, it that is, in fact, what happened.

The next major question becomes, what is the US government's response going to be? For all intents and purposes, I think it's going to be minimal and inadequate. Of course they'll do everything they can to investigate, but they'll probably never find out who the shooters were, less who they were working for (if anyone). The Mexican authorities may do a bit more than they did in the David Hartley case because it was two US law enforcement agents who were shot and not "civilians," but they have their own problems...like staying alive.

My heart goes out to the families of these two agents, especially the family of the agent who died from his wounds. I pray the other will fully recover from his injuries. I'll try to keep my readers updated as best I can on this situation.

UPDATE 2/16 at 0815: I'm starting to see several media reports that the SUV the agents were in was boxed in and run off the road by armed members of Los Zetas, just outside their stronghold of San Luis Potosí. I don't know yet if they were shot while still in the vehicle, or were forced out and then shot. I also don't know how they got away, or if the Zetas just left them there afterwards. One of the two agents - presumably Jaime Zapata, the agent who later died - was medevac'd by helicopter to Mexico City, so someone was able to call for help.

Here's an image of the SUV they were driving:

Some observers have asked the very good question, why were these agents driving from the DF to Monterrey instead of flying? For those of you not familiar with Mexico's geography, Monterrey is a good 11-hour drive north of Mexico City, and involves the use of two highways - Mexico's route 57 and route 85. Route 57 has been the site of roadblocks and narco attacks before.

I originally said I didn't believe these agents were intentionally targeted, but were more of an opportunistic find for their attackers. As information about the attack trickles in, I may be changing my assessment. We know Los Zetas are probably the most violent and the most brazen of all the DTOs operating in Mexico right now, so I'd pick them to be the first to try killing US law enforcement agents on purpose. There are still too many plausible scenarios to choose from right now, so more wait-and-see is in order.

UPDATE 2/15 at 1001: I'm taking a closer look at the Chevy Suburban the ICE agents were driving, and I'd bet a lot of money that's an armored vehicle. It looks pretty clean on the outside from the photos published on the El Paso Times site, and the driver's side window is up (many armored vehicles are made so the front windows can be rolled down up to seven inches). So how do you shoot two US agents who are riding in a "hard car"? The photos only show the driver's side, but there aren't any glaring scratches on the outside that would indicate random firing at the SUV.

This might indicate the agents were shot while sitting inside the Suburban. What would have convinced them to either roll down the window or open the door? I don't know what level of protection their SUV had because the level of armoring is tailored. If the checkpoint looked official enough, the attackers may have been asked by convincingly disguised Zetas to show identification. However, this conflicts with media reports that they were boxed in, then run off the road. If that's true, how did the actual shooting occur, and why were they left alive (at the time) by the Zetas? If they were intentionally targeted because they were ICE agents, then both would have been either kidnapped or executed on the spot, in my opinion. Perhaps the attackers shot first and asked questions later, then panicked when they saw who their catch of the day was.

It's highly likely the Zetas just wanted the SUV; after all, nothing screams NARCO in Mexico more than a black armored SUV. But if they wanted the car that badly, why didn't the attackers drive it away after shooting the agents? Perhaps they saw the plates at that point and didn't want to mess with a stolen hard car belonging to the US government. Or, they just wanted to get out of an ugly situation quickly and left the bleeding agents and their prized SUV behind. The more answers I get, the more questions I have...

"Slain U.S. missionary was fleeing cartel gunmen with husband."

Here is an excerpt from Jared Taylor's article in The Monitor:

"A police officer watched the blue Chevrolet pickup truck speed against traffic toward the checkpoint at the Pharr-Reynosa International Bridge shortly after noon Wednesday. Inside was Sam Davis and his wife, Nancy, who was still alive after suffering a gunshot to her head about 70 miles south of the Rio Grande, police said. Police and U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers called an ambulance, which rushed the 59-year-old missionary to McAllen Medical Center. She died at 1:54 p.m. Wednesday. The rural Monte Alto couple worked as missionaries in Mexico for more than three decades... The couple was returning from a mission near San Fernando, about 70 miles south of Reynosa, police said.On the outskirts of the city of about 30,000 residents, the missionaries encountered a drug cartel checkpoint and refused to stop, authorities said. Several men in a black pickup truck tailed the couple past the impromptu checkpoint and opened fire. Sources said at least five gunshots struck the back of the missionaries’ pickup truck, leaving it 'riddled with bullets.' The missionaries may have been fortunate to escape the region and avoid kidnapping." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is one of the more tragic stories I've heard related to Mexico in a while, and that's saying something, considering everything that's going on right now. These folks had been working in Mexico for 30 years, just to have this horrible nightmare happen to them. The incident highlights a few drug war issues.

First is the DTO "unofficial" checkpoint. I get a LOT of emails from people planning to travel to Mexico, and asking me if certain parts of the country are safe. I try to answer as best I can, but I'm not familiar with every town and every road and highway. Even if I were, the locations where DTOs set up these checkpoints change pretty often. I don't know how familiar the Davises were with the narco situation in Tamaulipas, but it was obviously a bad - and sadly, fatal - decision to blow through the checkpoint. This is why having situational awareness of your destination in Mexico isn't enough; you have to find out what's happening on the route you plan to use to get there. I can't stress enough that if you plan to travel to Mexico - particularly to a non-resort or rural area within 100 miles of a narco hot spot, you should contact the closest US Consulate in Mexico to ask them what the security situation is. I can try to help you and offer advice, but only to an extent.

Second, I'm more than a little concerned that the gunmen just started indiscriminately spraying the Davises' truck with bullets without knowing who was inside. But you know what? I have a feeling that even if they knew there were two American missionaries in their fifties sitting in that truck, they wouldn't have cared. Because they blew through the checkpoint, I'm sure the gunmen assumed it was members of a rival cartel or someone else who deserved to get shot for not stopping. Most Mexicans know better than to blow through a checkpoint, official or not, so the Davises' behavior likely came off as more than a little suspicious.

So what does this imply for Americans doing God's work - or any other work or pleasurable activity, for that matter - in Mexico? Well, don't automatically assume that you're out of harm's way because (a) you're American, and (b) you're doing something kind and charitable for the people of Mexico. DTOs don't give a rat's behind about who you are or what you're doing in their country. If you get in their way and don't follow their rules, you're a viable target, case closed. 

I tell anyone who plans to do any sort of driving in Mexico to ALWAYS stop at checkpoints, and always have some cash on hand to pay the inevitable bribe. Often, that's not enough. You have to read up (plenty of others' experiences on the 'net...do a Google search) on how to specifically offer the bribe to get going on your way and avoid getting arrested if it's a police checkpoint...and eventually having to pay a bigger bribe to avoid going to jail. DTOs will normally not mess with an American after collecting said bribe. I'm a big fan of the author's work (Hi Jared!), but I have to disagree with his statement that the Davises' were lucky to escape being kidnapped. Yes, we're seeing more Mexican politicians, businessmen, and migrants being kidnapped for ransom - especially by Los Zetas. However, we have yet to see any innocent Americans taken by the DTOs, probably because of the political/diplomatic firestorm that would ensue. Can you imagine the response if Los Zetas posted some sort of proof of life on YouTube for two American missionaries in their late fifties? But maybe I'm being naïve to assume our government would aggressively step in; they might take the same non-negotiation stance with organized crime that they do with terrorists.

Regardless, this is a tragic ending to a horrific story that all Americans with interests in Mexico would be wise to read about. I will remind readers again that there are still plenty of places in Mexico that are safe to visit for vacations and business trips. However, road trips in Tamaulipas, Nuevo León, Chihuahua, Durango, Michoacán, and a few other places are ill-advised. Remember, the State Department is your friend when it comes to reading up before you go...use them.

*UPDATE* I just finished reading this report from CNN, and it looks like the Davises didn't blow a DTO checkpoint after all. It seems that while they were driving, narcos in three trucks tried to box them in so they could get the Davises to pull over and then steal their truck. One of the three trucks wasn't successful in getting in front of the Davises' truck, so someone driving parallel to them fired a couple of shots at them; one of which caught Nancy in the back of the head, and at least one more that lodged itself in the truck. 

When I read earlier reports of the truck being sprayed by dozens of bullets, it didn't make sense that narcos would shoot up a truck they wanted to steal. This account - straight from Nancy's husband, I believe - makes more sense and is infinitely more plausible. My analysis still stands; questionable checkpoints are still out there, and carjackings like this one are occurring with more frequency.

"Hidalgo SSP: Car bomb in Tula revenge attack by Los Zetas."

Here is a translated excerpt from this article in Milenio:

"The Public Security Secretary Hidalgo, Damián Canales Mena, confirmed the car bomb explosion which killed the commander of investigations assigned to Tula, Victor Peña, was a reaction of the criminal group known as "Los Zetas" in response to the deaths of two gunmen that took place weeks ago. Commander Victor Peña went to a spot on Interstate Tula-El Carmen to verify a citizen complaint about an abandoned car, minutes later exploded injuring three other officers... Similarly, the responsibility of the state Public Safety detective revealed that Peña had received death threats because of their investigations to disrupt criminal cells operating in the region of Tula." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This isn't the first instance we've seen in which DTOs have used car bombs to inflict damage against police. Two were set off in August last year in the Tamaulipas capital city of Ciudad Victoria. One was in front of a police station, and the other was in front of the Televisa new station. The first car bomb to be used since Calderón took office in 2006 exploded in Ciudad Juárez in July of last year. That one also caused little damage to anything other than the car itself.

Many people are concerned that these car bombs represent a scary escalation of drug war violence. I'll refer back to something Scott Stewart of Stratfor said in his analysis shortly after the Juárez explosion: "There's a difference between a car bomb and a bomb in a car." So far, the vehicles that have been used have contained relatively rudimentary explosive devices. They've also all been parked cars, and not even driven into a building or public area by remote control. It seems like a very elaborate way to target just one or a few people - namely police officers, government officials, or journalists - and not always very effective. 

So with my analysis, I'm going to go the route of saying I believe the use of exploding cars is just a new way DTOs are trying to intimidate government forces. While they're not using true car bombs in the same way groups like the FARC or al-Qa'ida would, they still have a psychological impact because the image of a car exploding brings terrorist attacks to mind. Tossing grenades on the doorstep of a police or TV station has a similar effect; it may take out one or two people, or just cause damage to the building. However, stuff blowing up tends to scare the pants off people, and that's the real intended effect, in my opinion.

No, I don't like the fact that DTOs are exploring the option of using exploding cars as a psychological or physical weapon. However, I believe they're still a ways off from crossing that ever-more-gray line of going from heinous criminal activity to true terrorism. We'd have to see a car bomb with serious explosive impact going off in a crowded area with no other target other than innocent bystanders before we can start going down that road.

A quick overview of who's fighting whom, and where

I was recently reading a story in the L.A. Times by Daniel Hernandez about the 31 deaths and 15 decapitations in Acapulco in the last week, and how three different cartels were battling for control of the city. I honestly thought it was only two, so you can imagine my surprise when I saw some of the unfamiliar details Hernandez quoted from a story in Mexico's Proceso magazine. I quickly familiarized myself with what was going on (and I've since found clearer sources than the Proceso story), and thought I'd take the opportunity to provide my readers with a very brief overview of which cartels are fighting each other and where.

Let's start with the most complex situation (in my opinion) right now, and that's Acapulco. Over the last couple of years, the Beltrán Leyva Organization (BLO) under the local command of Edgar "La Barbie" Valdez Villareal had been fighting with La Familia Michoacana (LFM) for control of drug deliveries into and trafficking out of the resort city. That got completely messed up with La Barbie's arrest and the death of Arturo Beltrán Leyva. Hector Beltrán Leyva, who took over the BLO after Arturo's death, wanted to distance himself from La Barbie (who was breaking off anyway), so he renamed his faction of the old BLO to the Cartel Pacífico del Sur (CPS), or South Pacific Cartel - also known as "El H" or "La Empresa." In April of last year, graffiti started showing up all over the state of Guerrero with the initials "CPS," and La Barbie's breakaway faction was bearing the brunt of many CPS-initiated murders of hitmen in the area.

Now, the 15 headless corpses that were recently found in Acapulco reportedly had a note attached implying that the Sinaloa Federation's Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán Loera ordered the killings. So here's where it gets ugly. According to Stratfor's Scott Stewart, the CPS has aligned itself with Los Zetas (and old friend of the BLO) against the Federation and LFM. I always thought Acapulco was a BLO/LFM problem, and to an extent I was right; the old BLO is just under the new name of CPS, and La Barbie's faction seems to no longer be a player. But now it looks like El Chapo may be stoking the fire in Guerrero, and that doesn't bode well for residents or tourists in the city.

Moving to Tijuana, things are actually relatively quiet there - for now. Although the AFO emerged victorious after breakaway faction leader Teodoro "El Teo" Garcia Simental was arrested, AFO leader Fernando "El Ingeniero" Sanchez Arellano seems to have entered into an agreement of sorts with the Federation (El Teo's employer after he defected) to move drugs through Tijuana. This explains the relative calm in the city, but we'll see how long that lasts.

Of course, the hottest spot in Mexico has been Ciudad Juárez for a few years now, but the way cartel dynamics are changing there, it may not last the next couple of years. The Federation and the Vicente Carrillo Fuentes Organization (VCFO) have been fighting for control of this most lucrative corridor, although the VCFO has been backed into a corner there recently, and most of the drugs being moved through Juárez belong to the Federation. Some of the local politicians say the majority of the violence stems from gangs fighting for control of the local drug trade, but I don't buy into that.

Moving east into Tamaulipas, the shrinking Gulf cartel (or CDG, for Cartel del Golfo) are fighting with their former enforcers, Los Zetas, for control of routes along the east Texas border and transshipment cities like Monterrey. The border cities of Nuevo Laredo, Reynosa and Matamoros have been hit particularly hard by fights between these two DTOs, and the wealthy enclave of Monterrey is still reeling from the bloody transformation of their city.

There are other hot spots scattered throughout Mexico where the DTOs are fighting each other, so the violence is not just limited to these areas. You'll hear bad news out of places like Michoacán, Morelia, San Luís Potosí, Durango, and others. This is just meant to give you a general idea of who is fighting where and over what.

"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.

"Mexican Cartel Threatens to Kill Civilians in Guatemala."

Here is an excerpt from this article in the Latin American Herald Tribune:

"People purporting to speak for Mexico’s Los Zetas drug cartel have threatened to attack civilians in the northern Guatemalan province of Alta Verapaz if Guatemala’s government continues the state of siege it imposed on the region. Reporters for radio stations in Alta Verapaz said Tuesday they have received text messages warning of possible assaults on shopping malls or other public places unless Guatemalan security forces cease counternarcotics operations in the region... President Alvaro Colom’s administration imposed the 30-day state of siege Dec. 19 with the announced aim of expelling Los Zetas from the northern province. The cartel is using Alta Verapaz as a transit corridor and staging area for South American cocaine coming up through Central America, according to authorities... Eighteen suspected Zetas have been taken into custody since the state of siege was declared." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This is yet another example that supports my argument that Mexican DTOs are increasingly turning to terrorist tactics, and that considering them to be mere organized crime groups is to underestimate their capabilities - and their motives.

Los Zetas have a pretty good thing going in northern Guatemala. If you think corruption and police incompetence is rampant in Mexico, you should see the situation in its neighbor to the south. Los Zetas have been able to train, smuggle, and operate in general without any impediments there, so it's obviously in their best interest to maintain control over government forces and the people in Alta Verapaz.

For sure, the 30-day state of siege the Guatemalan government has implemented there isn't ideal, but it can't be more than a minor annoyance for Los Zetas. Even Guatemalan President Colom has come out and said he doesn't have enough soldiers and police to deploy to the area to really get the job done, although every day his government is singing about the successes they're having there. I'm always concerned about any sort of "state of siege" in a Latin American country. It essentially means martial law, and pretty much always leads to a rash of human rights abuses.

Moving on to the more disturbing details, what would Los Zetas have to gain by threatening innocent civilians with death, and spreading fear among the populace? The same thing that terrorists have to gain by doing the same thing in other parts of the world: pressure on the government to bend to the Zetas' will. Guatemalans don't want to die, and certainly not at the hands of some brutal Mexican DTO. If the Guatemalan government can't demonstrate to the people that it can take care of business in Alta Verapaz cleanly and quickly, then things are going to get ugly, and fast. 

It doesn't help that we're talking about Los Zetas here. Sure, they're not the original group that deserted from GAFES and has all the high-speed low-drag special forces skills they learned on active duty. But much of that training has been passed on to current members, and they're still one of the better-armed, better-trained, and better-funded DTOs in Mexico. They're also easily one of the most violent - neck and neck with La Familia for that title, in my opinion - and rarely hesitate to demonstrate their violent talents.

Honestly, I admire the Guatemalan government for stepping up and doing what they feel they need to do to protect their people, despite knowing they'll get criticized for and likely have some human rights problems down the road - because you know the 30 days is going to get extended at least once. But I fear that the Guatemalan soldiers and police in Alta Verapaz are showing up with knives to a gunfight, and I'm not looking forward to seeing the likely grisly results of their confrontations with Los Zetas over the next few weeks.

My comments on cartel leadership changes in KRGV interview...

I was interviewed yesterday for a piece by KRGV News in the Rio Grande Valley on changes in cartel leadership stemming from arrests and deaths. Check out the video here:

http://www.krgv.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=170682%40krgv.web.entriq.net

Just as a note, I did NOT say I knew for sure that Tony Tormenta had been replaced. I said that it was up to Jorge "El Coss" Costilla Sánchez to decide if he wanted to run the Gulf cartel by himself or replace Tormenta by promoting a lieutenant from within. 

Three DTO-related incidents on US soil in six weeks

Here is an excerpt from "One killed in suspected execution style shooting" on Action 4 News/ValleyCentral.com:

"Mission Police are reporting one of two victims dead, after a suspected execution style shooting Tuesday night... The shooting reportedly happened last night near the Cimarron Country Club, at the intersection of Glasscock and Rio Grande Drive. Police say several gunshots were fired... A number of vehicles were seen at the location of the shooting with Mexican license plates. Four suspects are reportedly in police custody, while police continue to look for two more suspects." Link to Full Story

Here is an excerpt from  "Police probe whether beheading was 'hit' from drug cartel" by Mike Sakal in the East Valley Tribune:

"Chandler police are investigating the possibility that the stabbing death and decapitation of a 38-year-old Phoenix resident believed to be an illegal immigrant from Mexico earlier this month was a “hit” by a Mexican drug cartel against a member who betrayed them. Alejandro Cota-Monroy, whose decapitated body was found inside an apartment at 300 West Fairview St. the morning of Oct. 10 amid a bloody and gruesome scene, may have ripped off a Mexican cartel of illegal drugs, according to Chandler police Detective Dave Ramer... Initial media reports indicated that the man’s death could be connected to a Mexican religious ritual, the Saint of Death, because candles and a Ouija border were reportedly found at the scene. But Ramer said the slaying had “nothing to do” with the religion, although drug dealers and drug cartel members are known to participate in it because they believe if they do, it will protect them from law enforcement." Link to Full Article

Here is an excerpt from "Two Zetas executed in Brownsville, Texas" in The Brownsville Herald:

"Authorities have linked Thursday’s double homicide on FM 511 in the northwest outskirts of Brownsville. Texas, to Mexican drug cartels and are investigating the killings as spillover violence from the Tamaulipas war between the Gulf Cartel and Los Zetas. The bodies of Omar Castillo Flores “El Omarcillo”, 25, and Jose Guadalupe Lopez Perez, 38, were found inside a gray Dodge Ram pickup that was riddled with bullets, police spokesman Eddie Garcia said Friday. He said the truck had a Mexican license plate on the back bumper, and he identified both men as residents of Mexico... Brownsville Police Chief Carlos Garcia confirmed the information provided by Mexican law enforcement officials who stated that Omar Castillo and Jose Lopez were members of the Zetas criminal organisation and that Omar Castillo was the younger brother of former Gulf Cartel member Alberto "Beto Fabe" Castillo Flores." Link to Full Article

Analysis: While these three incidents happened in two different states, three different cities, and six weeks apart, they signal a disturbing possibility: Mexican DTOs might be more willing to take risks and engage in violent activity against their selected targets in the US.

Not that violent activity by DTOs on US soil is anything new. In August 2008, four suspects were paid between $400,000 and $450,000 to torture five victims with electric shock and slit their throats in an Alabama apartment. The murders have been tied to a Mexican DTO that transports cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. In February 2009, gang members threw an inactive grenade into a strip club in Pharr, Texas. In August 2009, 16 members of the "Los Palillos" gang were indicted for the torture and murder of nine people in San Diego on behalf of a Mexican DTO.

In all fairness, there's no concrete proof (yet) that either the McAllen country club shooting or the Chandler beheading are definitely connected to Mexican DTOs, but I'd be willing to bet money that they are. The real question becomes, are we seeing a trend, or are these three incidents just becoming more noticeable?

We know a couple of things. First, hitmen working for DTOs are starting out younger and younger, which means they lack the experience and expertise of their predecessors. That means hits these days tend to be messier and more public. We also know that some DTOs in some places are getting more desperate to hang on to their territory and their share of drug profits. This means they may be willing to take more risks when it comes to engaging in violent activity on this side of the border.

It's so hard to say because criminals tend to not report crimes committed against them. It could be just a sheer coincidence that these incidents happened within a few weeks of each other, or that the police found out about them; the killers could have just been careless in all three cases. However, I'm a firm believer that once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, and three times is a conspiracy. I prefer not to be an alarmist, but I'm concerned that these incidents were so blatant, and may have been designed to send a message. I'm not raising the red flag just yet, but I know I'll be keeping an eye out for other incidents like this in the next few weeks.

"Authorities Say Cartel Leader’s Death Won’t Curb Violence."

Here is an excerpt from this story on KRGV.com:

"Over the weekend, more than 50 people were killed in several gunbattles in Matamoros. Among the dead, according to Mexican officials, the head of the Gulf Cartel Antonio Ezequiel Cardenas Guillen. Guillen, also known as "Tony Tormenta," was killed along with four of his gunmen. Just one day after his death, rival drug gangs hung signs on bridges and other public places gloating about his death. Authorities said with Cardenas now out of the way, rival Zetas will be even stronger and keep the violence coming, as rival drug gangs battle for power." Link to Full Article

Analysis: As I'm sure most of you have heard or read one way or another, on Nov, 5m Mexican authorities killed Antonio Ezequiel "Tony Tormenta" Cárdenas Guillen, one of the two heads of the Gulf cartel (CDG). Of course what everyone wants to know is, what will this mean for the DTO dynamic in northeastern Mexico, and how will it affect violence levels?

Well, I don't think things are going to get better, but they're not going to necessarily get worse. What happens depends mainly on how quickly Ezequiel can be replaced, if he's going to be replaced at all. What most media outlets are not telling you is that "Tony Tormenta" was not the only guy in charge of the CDG. He shared leadership with Jorge "El Coss" Costilla Sanchez, who is still around and actually has a pretty big price tag on his head - placed there by the US government. As you may know, Ezequiel was the brother of the notorious former CDG leader Osiel Cárdenas Guillen, who was arrested by Mexican authorities in 2003 and extradited to the US in 2007. 

Stratfor has something very interesting to say about Tony and El Coss: "Costilla Sanchez was said to be the operational leader of the cartel, with Tony Tormenta enjoying his position [as the Tamaulipas plaza boss] only due to his relationship to his brother, Osiel. In many ways, Tony Tormenta’s death could prove beneficial to Gulf cartel operations." I haven't read anything about Ezequiel being replaced by a lieutenant being promoted from within the CDG, so it's possible that Costilla Sanchez will try to maintain control of the CDG on his own.

If you hadn't heard, Los Zetas have been fighting with the CDG for control of the Texas-Mexico border region for the better part of a year and a half. Los Zetas will likely see Ezequiel's death as an opportunity to wrest control of some plazas - particularly Reynosa and Matamoros, from the CDG. However, I agree with Stratfor's assessment that the CDG will likely be prepared for this. I said in my interview with John Vause on CNN International a few days ago that I think this will be just a hiccup for the CDG. Yes, they've been weakened by Los Zetas and Mexican government actions over the last couple of years, but they still have plenty of fight left in them. We'll probably see more violence in northeastern Mexico over the next month or two as Los Zetas test the waters, but I think things will eventually go back to how they were in Tamaulipas before Ezequiel's death...at least until someone picks off Costilla Sanchez, that is. Then you'll be seeing another post from me on the CDG's fate.

Read more: Mexico Security Memo: Nov. 8, 2010 | STRATFOR 

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.

What really happened to the Hartleys on Falcon Lake?

Analysis: I know I normally start off my posts with excerpts from news stories, but there are too many small pieces of this story in separate articles. I'll try my best to encapsulate everything here. 

You probably already know the basic story, but in case you don't... David and Tiffany Hartley went for a ride on their jet skis last month on Falcon Lake, which straddles the Texas-Mexico border. There are some beautiful church ruins (#12 on the map) that are partially submerged on the Mexican side that they were trying to check out. While they were near that area, Tiffany says they were approached by men in three boats who started shooting. They began to flee towards the US side of the lake, but then David got shot and fell off his jet ski. Tiffany tried to pull him up onto her ski, but she says they started shooting at her. So, she had to leave him and beat feet to avoid getting shot herself.

Tiffany has provided a few different versions of the story, which has caused authorities on both sides of the border to be a little suspicious. David's body hasn't been found yet, and it will probably never be found. I've also read accounts that say David was shot from the front, which doesn't jive with him getting shot while heading away from the "pirates" towards the US side of the lake. The same account said the Hartleys had just returned from a luxury cruise and bought a house filled with new furniture shortly after attending a seminar for people having financial trouble.

The latest analysis by Stratfor says the shooting was a case of mistaken identity. David apparently had worked in Reynosa, and their car had Tamaulipas plates. This led Los Zetas to believe the Hartleys may be rival DTO Gulf cartel scouts. Stratfor also surmises that the killing was unauthorized, and the accidental work of young amateurs who have probably been killed by their cartel bosses already. The head Mexican investigator has already been killed, with his severed head delivered to Mexican authorities, and the search for David's body has been suspended indefinitely.

So what really happened? I have to tell you, this story doesn't pass the smell test for me. There's too much that doesn't make sense, and Tiffany has told too many different versions of what happened. I keep going back to the motive of the alleged shooters. Robbery (which is what pirates do)? No way...two jet skiers wouldn't exactly have a lot of cash on them, and I haven't read anywhere that the pirates took David's jet ski - or even tried to take Tiffany's. Retribution? I was told by a reporter friend of mine who got an off-the-record tip that the Hartleys may have been involved in some drug activity, but that hasn't been fleshed out enough. For fun? I still think it's too dangerous for cartels to start randomly shooting at innocent Americans just to do it because they know the response will likely be strong and swift. 

I think the Stratfor explanation makes sense. I know that many DTOs are hard up for shooters, so sometimes they have to hire younger punks with itchy trigger fingers. I just didn't expect that Los Zetas - probably the strongest DTO next to the Sinaloa Federation - would be so hard up that they'd have to go that route. Then again, they did just execute 72 South American migrants who refused to work for them. The more-then-slightly cynical explanation that "the wife did it" also makes sense, especially if the Hartley's were hard up for money and she was looking for a life insurance payout. However, we know Los Zetas were definitely involved in the incident - whatever really happened - and it's unlikely Tiffany had entered into some sort of arrangement with them. 

The Mexican authorities do not want to get back in this game for fear of losing more investigators, and they've already spent way more time looking for David than they would have looking for a Mexican citizen. I highly doubt David's body will ever be found - I agree with Stratfor that Los Zetas had to eliminate it - and we'll never have an account of events outside of Tiffany's side of the story. One can only hope that US citizens actually start heeding the advice given in State Department travel warnings and stay away from places like Falcon Lake known to be highly active drug smuggling areas.

"Suspected drug traffickers fire on U.S. Coast Guard off Nicaragua."

Here is an excerpt from Nick Valencia's article on CNN.com:

"A U.S. Coast Guard cutter was fired upon by suspected drug traffickers during a pursuit off the coast of Nicaragua, a Coast Guard spokesman told CNN. A U.S. Coast Guard cutter was fired upon by suspected drug traffickers during a pursuit off the coast of Nicaragua, a Coast Guard spokesman told CNN. The incident took place in the early morning of September 14, but information about the attack was not released until CNN inquired Friday about the incident... No shots hit the Coast Guard boat and there was no damage, O'Neil added. The shooting happened after a boarding team from the Cutter Escanaba (pictured) pursued a go-fast vessel suspected of smuggling drugs in international waters. The suspects managed to escape after entering Nicaraguan waters, said O'Neil. The Coast Guard is still reviewing the event, he said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Is anyone else disturbed by the fact that drug smugglers are firing upon US Coast Guard personnel and vessels? I don't know how far away the two groups were from each other, but it's a good thing the shooter missed. I don't want to find out how a headline about a dead Coastie who was a victim of narco gunfire would play in the media, or with the general public.

Mind you, this isn't the first time that smugglers have fired on a US law enforcement agency. There have been numerous reports of gunshots exchanged between people on the Mexican side of the border and Border Patrol agents and police on the US side. This shouldn't be any different than those incidents, but somehow it feels more threatening. What would the national response have been if a Coastie had been shot, or worse, killed? In January 2008, a USBP agent was killed after being hit by a truck driven by smugglers. In July 2009, another agent was killed by  several gunshots to the head by an unidentified group of border crossers near a San Diego border fence. I don't remember there being a national outcry or major changes in policy after either of these incidents.

I guess I'm just curious what sort of incident it's going to take before people take notice of how brazen and aggressive smugglers have become, and the impact their activities are having on US homeland security personnel. I'm also curious if the Coast Guard was ever going to publicize this incident and use it as an example of the threats we're facing from drug smugglers. Maybe this happened all the time in the Caribbean when the Coasties were interdicting Colombian smugglers in go-fasts, and I'm making a big deal out of something that is (or was) relatively commonplace. After all, cops and Coasties and the military expect to be fired upon by the bad guys now and again. Still, my gut tells me that DTOs are moving away from the usual behavior of scuttle the vessel, dump the load, and just run as fast as you can to something considerably more dangerous. I hope I'm wrong.

"Tijuana’s top cop cites results amid claims of brutality."

Here is an excerpt from Sandra Dibble's article in the San Diego Union-Tribune:

To his many admirers, Tijuana’s public safety chief has been a key player in the city’s emergence from its darkest days of kidnappings, drug violence and widespread police corruption. Supporters say Julian Leyzaola’s efforts have helped create a renewed sense of public security, and they hope it will pave the way for a much-needed economic recovery by drawing new investment and encouraging many Americans who were driven away by fears of crime to return. Amid the choruses of praise, accusations have emerged from suspects who said Leyzaola tortured them to extract false confessions. Human rights groups have taken up their cause and are calling for the chief’s removal, saying such actions overshadow any accomplishments... Leyzaola’s hands-on style has won him supporters on both sides of the border, and U.S. agencies paid homage to his efforts last week at a ceremony in Tijuana... For many Tijuana residents, the drop in high-profile violence such as decapitations, hangings and public shootouts among rival gangs is cause for celebration, no matter what the reason. Recent months have seen the opening of new restaurants and the rebirth of a night life in the city... Crime statistics show a mixed picture, said Juan Manuel Hernandez, president of the Tijuana business group Coparmex. Car thefts, burglaries and kidnappings went down while homicides and robberies rose between 2008 and July of this year, according to a Coparmex study. A state government report that compares crime in the first eight months of 2009 with the same period this year shows an overall drop of 12 percent for common offenses in the city, but notes an increase in violent crime... Yet the fact that Tijuana’s rate of violence remains far lower than that of Mexican cities on the Texas border, such as Ciudad Juarez, may have more to do with the dynamics of drug groups than the efforts of law enforcement." Link to Full Article

Analysis: So this story brings us to an Abu Ghraib-style debate over appropriate law enforcement tactics in Mexico. It's true that for the past eight months or so, things have been remarkably quiet in Tijuana; or just so loud in Ciudad Juárez that Tijuana is being drowned out. Of course, that begs the question if the newfound calm is a result of law enforcement efforts or the shifting dynamics of DTOs, as David Shirk from the University of San Diego suggests. There's no reason it can't be a bit of both.

If you remember, Teodoro "El Teo" Garcia Simental was captured earlier this year (in January, I believe) and his right hand man, Raydel "El Muletas" López Uriarte, and brother Carlos were also arrested. I thought for sure that things were going to heat up after that, as the head of the AFO - Fernando Sanchez Arellano - made a play to get his territory back from the Sinaloa Federation's proxy group. Oddly enough, Tijuana has stayed mostly out of the news since those arrests, which is a good thing all around.

Or is it? Is Leyzaola being too heavy handed and extracting false confessions under duress? Or are criminals just trying to make him look bad? Either is possible, and it's hard to believe a drug trafficker who is likely going to jail for a while. And maybe that's part of the problem. If Leyzaola and his people are engaging in abusive tactics, they're probably banking on the fact no one is really going to believe the narco who's beat up and tortured his fair share of people.

Does that make it right? It depends on whom you ask. We get pretty bent out of shape here in the US when our troops or police officers get too heavy-handed with people, no matter how evil they are. In Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America, the attitude towards civil rights - and their suspension during times of domestic turmoil - is often different than it is here. Considering what the Mexican people have been through in the last decade, I'm going to presume that they would find Leyzaola's behavior - if those accusations are accurate - perfectly acceptable and appropriate. At least someone is getting things done in Tijuana, and roughing up some people may be the price that has to be paid for peace.

I'm sure there's some reader out there who's a member of the ACLU or something and screaming at the screen right now. Just remember, Mexico isn't the United States, and the mayor and residents of Tijuana have likely reached that point of "desperate times call for desperate measures." God knows how many thousands of people are having their civil rights violated every day by brutal thugs who don't give a crap if you don't feel safe enough to vote, go food shopping, or take your kids to school.

I do feel this is another great topic for debate. What do YOU think? Is it time for Mexican law enforcement to take things up a notch in order to get the narcos to pay attention? Is the violation of suspected drug traffickers' civil rights too steep a price to pay, no matter what the results?

What if Mexicans could arm themselves?

I know it's rare that I post pure commentary without a news story attached. But one of my readers posted a comment several days ago in response to another story, and what he said has been percolating in my brain for a little bit. I'd like to explore both sides of this idea, and then open it up to my readers for (hopefully) civil and thoughtful comments.

Some of you may already know that the majority of Mexican citizens cannot purchase firearms. Technically they're allowed to own them, because Mexico's constitution has wording very similar to our Second Amendment. However, there are only a handful of gun shops in the entire country, and the sheer volume of paperwork, checks, and personal recommendations required is huge. Even if you could obtain permission to buy a gun, the highest caliber pistol you could get is pretty low, with the higher calibers reserved strictly for law enforcement and the military.

These restrictions obviously haven't had much of an impact on gun violence in Mexico. DTOs obtain all the firepower they need from guns purchased in the US and smuggled south, and weapons and grenades "imported" from former eastern bloc countries, Central America, and Asia. DTOs also know they're operating in an environment of a population powerless to do anything, because even the police who are armed and sworn to protect them are in cahoots with the DTOs.

But what if the Mexican people were no longer powerless, and could legally arm themselves? Would this make a difference in the drug war?

Analysis: Let's take a look at the "pro" side first. I think there's a possibility that DTOs might change their strategy a bit if they knew the Mexican people - who have had it "up to here" with drug violence - all of a sudden had a means with which to defend themselves. Vigilante groups are starting to pop up in places as a result. More and more people refuse to go out at night or eat at certain restaurants because of the fear of becoming collateral damage in a gun fight between rival cartel members. Maybe the ability to carry a gun for self-defense would instill some confidence in some Mexicans to venture out again, and would give some narcos pause before kidnapping someone for ransom or entering an establishment and spraying it down with bullets.

Legal gun sales in Mexico would also likely have a positive impact on the southbound weapons trafficking problem. Of course, that just makes thing better for us, and doesn't completely solve the problem of certain weapons that Mexico probably wouldn't legally sell to its citizens. But probably much fewer handguns and standard rifles would be making their way across the border.

Looking for an example of Mexico's gun situation in the US is difficult, but can be found right in our nation's capital. Until very recently, it was illegal for residents in Washington, DC to own handguns. Ironically enough, some parts of DC are among the most violent in the country. The ban obviously didn't have much of an impact on criminal activity, and I'm curious to see how criminals there will start behaving now that they know the owner of the house they're thinking of burglarizing might be able to legally protect his home with a gun.

Finally, Mexico's economy is hurting even more than ours. Providing Mexicans with the opportunity to open hundreds of gun shops across the country, combined with the likely high number of people who'd be interested in buying guns for self-defense, might provide the Mexican economy with a much-needed injection of cash.

Now let's look at the "cons." The first and easiest argument to make is that gun violence in Mexico is bad enough as it is. Does anyone want to add to that by throwing armed citizens into the mix? Also, the majority of gun battles occur between narcos and cops, narcos and the military, or narcos and other narcos. All of them are armed already, so legalizing gun sales may not impact that.

Given the high level of corruption in Mexico at all levels, regulating gun sales and investigating violations would be challenging at best. The government would also need to implement a more robust registration system, and rewrite laws and regulations regarding requirements for gun ownership. This isn't complicate per se, but things move at a snail's pace already in Mexico's judicial and legislative system.

As I said earlier, vigilantism is already on the rise. Providing regular citizens with an easy path to gun ownership might push people who are currently on the fence towards joining or starting such a group willing to take the law into their own hands. This further subverts Mexican legal institutions, and could throw the country into even further chaos.

So what are your thoughts? Would removing most restrictions from private gun ownership in Mexico make a difference in the drug war?

"What's behind Mexican migrant killings still unclear."

Here is an excerpt from Tim Johnson's article in McClatchy Newspapers:

"President Felipe Calderon on Friday accused the gunmen who killed 72 illegal migrants in northern Mexico this week of "incalculable savagery" as his government attempted to depict the   major drug gang implicated in the slaughter as weakened and desperate. The discovery of the grisly massacre Tuesday night at a ranch near San Fernando, about 45 miles southwest of Brownsville, Texas, put the spotlight on Los Zetas, a crime syndicate based along the Gulf Coast of Mexico that has international tentacles. The massacre — and its murky motives — continued to shake Mexico on Friday... Calderon himself also confirmed that two state criminal investigators who'd been assigned to probe the slayings had vanished... Alejandro Poire of the National Security Council said the gunmen had captured the migrants and given them a choice: Work for Los Zetas as gunslingers and peons, or face death. When the 58 male and 14 female migrants resisted, they were killed... However, an Austin, Texas-based strategic intelligence research group, Stratfor, said in a report Friday that Los Zetas, sometimes called simply the 'Z's,' indeed are hurting... Another analyst of Mexico's security situation, Edgardo Buscaglia, cast doubt on official accounts of the massacre and criticized Calderon's handling of it... 'The president, unfortunately, looks at all of this as a media war,' Buscaglia said. The portrayal of Los Zetas as weakened 'is a marketing story' to deal with the international black eye Mexico has suffered with the massacre,' he said." Link to Full Article

Analysis: So unfortunately, it looks like there's still a lot of doubt surrounding this incident, despite the extensive media coverage over the last few days. Was it really Los Zetas who committed this heinous act? If so, are they weakened or stronger than ever? And did they kill the migrants because they needed the manpower, or simply because they couldn't pay ransom?

The reason that the Mexican government believes it was Los Zetas is because the one man who survived the mass killing told authorities that the shooters identified themselves as such. I know of several instances where Los Zetas have had no problems taking credit for things or advertising themselves, so that's not out of the ordinary. However, this also sets them up to be framed, as it were, by rivals. The area where the massacre occurred has been Gulf cartel territory for some time, but Borderland Beat reported in mid-June that gunmen belonging to Los Zetas had attacked other cities and towns under the control of the Gulf cartel in the previous two weeks, including Mier, Reynosa, Tampico and Valle Hermoso. It's likely the killers were Zetas, but keep in mind the possibility that men from the Gulf cartel could be setting up their former partners. And who better to take the bait than non-Mexican migrants who aren't as familiar with the workings of the different Mexican DTOs? I know it's a stretch, and such a plan would have been useless if that one migrant hadn't gotten away from them.

As for Los Zetas losing strength, that's also possible. They had gotten strong enough that the Sinaloa Federation, La Familia, and the Gulf cartel felt the need to (temporarily, of course) join forces in order to put Los Zetas out of business. Considering how much bad blood there is between the Federation and the CDG, that alliance speaks volumes to the capabilities Los Zetas had achieved. So does this mean that the alliance was doing its job, and the massacre was an act of desperation? I'm not so sure. Remember, Los Zetas share a special bond and have a whole truckload of special forces training. This is what makes them some of the best and most efficient killers in Mexico. Heck, they were recruiting the Guatemalan Kaibiles to help them. Why all of a sudden would they want to forcibly recruit a group of 72 non-Mexican migrants into their organization (as slaves or otherwise) who aren't trained or vetted? They probably have a line of former cops and soldiers a mile long wanting to work for them and make the money they do. They'd also be better off just subcontracting to a Mexican gang.

We know that the methods of killing have become increasingly brutal over the years because, in a way, they have to. Just like TV or video games, we become insensitive to certain things over time, so DTOs have to get creative or just do something over-the-top to get a rival's--or the government's--attention. This could be a "simple" case of an opportunity for some Zetas to extort a large group of unfortunate immigrants from other countries. Maybe they felt less sympathy for them because they weren't their countrymen. Who knows? When the migrants couldn't pay up, the killers might have seen that as a chance to teach them a lesson, earn some street cred, and send a message at the same time.

These are just a few of the possibilities that have crossed my mind, and the truth is often far stranger than anything I can come up with on my own. Considering that investigators of the killings are now starting to disappear, we may never get to the bottom of the story.

"Los Zetas drug cartel seizes 2 U.S. ranches in Texas."

Here is an excerpt from Kimberly Dvorak's article on Examiner.com:

"In what could be deemed an act of war against the sovereign borders of the United States, Mexican drug cartels have seized control of at least two American ranches inside the U.S. territory near Laredo, Texas. Two sources inside the Laredo Police Department confirmed the incident is unfolding and they would continue to coordinate with U.S. Border Patrol today. “We consider this an act of war,” said one police officer on the ground near the scene. There is a news blackout of this incident at this time and the sources inside Laredo PD spoke on the condition of anonymity. Word broke late last night that Laredo police have requested help from the federal government regarding the incursion by the Los Zetas. It appears that the ranch owners have escaped without incident but their ranches remain in the hands of the blood thirsty cartels. Laredo Border Patrol is conducting aerial surveillance over the ranches to determine the best way to regain control of the U.S. ranches, according to the Laredo Police department. The approximate location of the U.S. ranches are10 miles northwest of I-35 off Mines Road and Minerales Annex Road. Just off 1472 (Mines road) near Santa Isabel Creek north of the city of Laredo, Texas." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Normally I wouldn't dignify a story like this with a post, but it's making enough rounds across the Internet that I feel compelled to dispel the rumors and set Ms. Dvorak straight. First of all, the story is completely untrue. I've confirmed that through the Webb County Sheriff and US Northern Command. A US government spokesperson has also dismissed the story as false. It's unfortunate that Ms. Dvorak insists on sticking to her story, which is based on anonymous and circular information.

Since I used to be the South America Policy Examiner for Examiner.com (I've since stopped because it pays pennies for the work you have to do to make any worthwhile money), I know that your earnings are based on the number of hits your article page gets, and how long the reader stays on the page. I guarantee you Ms. Dvorak is seeing a spike in hits today, and I'm not crazy about the fact I'm contributing to that - and the further spread of her bad article - by linking to it above. But fair is fair, and I won't make an exception just because the story is "hogwash," to quote the Sheriff in Laredo.

Let's go beyond the fact the story has been discounted by several local and national law enforcement and government authorities for a minute. Why would Los Zetas try to seize two ranches in Laredo? They already have homes and properties and cars in various cities in the southwest border states, and with all the money they have to burn, they can just buy any ranch they want. Why expose themselves to US law enforcement with such reckless behavior? The story says the ranch owners escaped without incident; that in and of itself is odd. It throws the possibility of the seizure as DTO retribution against the owners out the window. It also implies that the ranch owners either had some kind of warning about the intrusion or were let go by the intruders. Neither of those theories fit with Los Zetas modus operandi; they're extremely stealthy, and generally don't let witnesses just wander off.

Either way, the important takeaway is that Los Zetas have NOT taken over two ranches in Laredo, and always remember to ask critical questions when you read a story like this that seems too sensational to be true. One of these days it might be, but chances are there's less to it.

"Shots apparently fired from Juárez pelt City Hall, enter office."

Here is an excerpt from Daniel Borunda's article in the El Paso Times:

"Several gunshots apparently fired from Juárez hit El Paso City Hall on Tuesday afternoon. No one was hurt, but nerves were rattled at City Hall in what is thought to be the first cross-border   gunfire during a drug war that has engulfed Juárez since 2008. El Paso police spokesman Darrel Petry said investigators do not think City Hall was intentionally targeted but rather was struck by stray shots. 'It does appear the rounds may have come from an incident in Juárez,' Petry said. City Hall sits on a hill about a half-mile north of the Rio Grande... Petry said an inspection by police and city staff found that City Hall was hit by seven gunshots, which appeared to be losing velocity when they struck. Six of the rounds hit stucco walls on the north and south sides of the building. Two bullets were recovered -- the one that went through the window and one that bounced off an exterior wall. The size of the bullets was not disclosed... El Paso police said the time the gunshots hit City Hall coincides with a shooting in west Juárez on Bernardo Norzagaray boulevard, which runs parallel to the Rio Grande... Investigators found 40 bullet casings from an AK-47 and other firearms." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I definitely agree with Petry's assessment that City Hall was not intentionally targeted, but had the misfortune to be in the line of fire of an incident in Juárez. I'm not a ballistics expert, but I remember enough from my active duty Air Force days and my firearms experience to know the range of a small-caliber handgun versus that of a rifle. I'd say it's likely those rounds came from a rifle due to the sheer distance, but it doesn't really matter; those folks in City Hall were really freaked out, and rightfully so.

So what do we make of this incident? Unfortunately, not much can be made of it. You have to chalk it up to "that's what happens" when you're a city in such geographical proximity to a place like Ciudad Juárez. And there isn't anything that can practically be done about it. Retrofitting a building with a face made of up mostly glass windows with either concrete or bullet-proof glass is impractical at best. Fortunately, it's not like these stray bullet incidents are happening every day. We know they've happened before in similar sister-city situations in Texas, but again, they didn't involve intentional targeting of US buildings. On top of all that, the targeting of a building like El Paso's City hall would be a radical departure from the usual tactics of DTOs, and it wouldn't accomplish anything as far as DTO business goals go. 

I do find it amusing that Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott wrote President Barack Obama on Wednesday to say Tuesday's "cross-border gunfire" was more proof that the state "is under constant assault from illegal activity threatening a porous border." He also used the incident as evidence that the 1,200 National Guard troops Obama plans to send to the border won't be nearly enough. I agree with him completely on that in general, but even if 5,000 Guard troops were on duty when that incident occurred, they couldn't have done anything to stop it. 

El Paso City Manager Joyce Wilson also shrugged off suggestions that more security could prevent stray bullets from flying across the border. I have to agree with Wilson on this one. Technically, City Hall was not intentionally "under assault" like Abbott claims. While I hate the fact that something like this can happen and yes, put Americans in harm's way, we have to understand that this situation - meaning stray gunfire across the border - is not something the US government or law enforcement can control. Yes, it is excruciating for many (myself included) to acknowledge that, and worse to feel so helpless about it. But until Mexican authorities can get a handle on these types of incidents in their border cities that are mere yards from ours, we have to just hope and pray that something like this doesn't happen again.

"Mexican Candidate for Governor Is Assassinated."

Here is an excerpt from Marc Lacey's article in the New York Times:

"A popular candidate for governor of Tamaulipas State who had made increased security his prime campaign pledge was killed along with at least four others Monday morning when gunmen opened fire on his motorcade as he headed to a campaign event, the authorities said. The   killing of the candidate, Rodolfo Torre Cantú, 46, drove election-related violence in Mexico to a peak unseen since 1994... Mr. Torre’s death followed the killing of a mayoral candidate and that of an activist during a get-out-the-vote effort. Explosives have been thrown at two separate campaign offices. Immediate suspicion in the Torre case fell on drug cartels since Tamaulipas, a northeastern state bordering Texas on the gulf coast, has been the site of fierce fighting in recent months between rival trafficking organizations, the Zetas and their former allies, the Gulf Cartel." Link to Full Article

Analysis: The important take-away from this story is not the person who was actually assassinated, but the fact that DTOs are using this as a tactic to benefit their business operations. Killings in Ciudad Juárez hit a record daily high last week, and some people are asking what's causing the uptick in violence. Upcoming gubernatorial and municipal elections aren't the whole story, but they're a big part of it. Violence in certain parts of Mexico is often cyclical or even seasonal, but DTOs do have a message to send at this particular time of the year.

And that message is two-fold: one for the candidates and one for the people. Organized crime in the US has always held a certain amount of influence over some politicians, but Mexican DTOs take it to an extreme. It's no secret that DTOs want certain people in office because they need an ally - whether forced or voluntary - who will allow their trafficking activities to continue in that state or municipality unfettered. Torre Cantú was probably not willing to play the DTOs' game, and he summarily paid the price for his intransigence. Either that, or because his opponent was and was less likely to win, assassinating Torre Cantú would clear the way for his opponent to be easily voted into office. Such political manipulation goes beyond the traditional definitions of organized crime, and governments on both sides of the border would be wise to regard it as such.

The second message - and perhaps the more dangerous and insidious one - is the message sent to the Mexican people. Rising drug violence, especially when it involves a lot of collateral damage, is highly discouraging to the electoral process. Not only do people stay away from the polls on election day, but they lose all faith in the candidates' ability to protect them or do anything to curb the violence where they live. It erodes the fundamental nature of democracy when a populace loses all faith in the system. Not that Americans are all that fond of our own politicians, and voter turnout during major elections usually hovers around 40-50 percent. But still, we don't fear for our lives when we go to the polls, and I think most Americans still believe their representatives have at least some concern for their constituents.

Keep this in mind when you see news stories of Mexican candidates for office being assassinated over the next week. It's not just a case of drug-related violence as usual. This is a basic erosion of democratic norms by powerful organized crime groups, and the ultimate effect on Mexico's government and society will be dire indeed.

"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

UPDATE: US Consulate in Nuevo Laredo was not specifically targeted

I still have information coming in from various sources on Friday night's incident of an explosive device of some sort being thrown over the Consulate wall and going off. What I do have so far from a trusted source is that the device was a grenade, and it was thrown as a result of a fight between other elements outside the Consulate. This means the US Consulate in Nuevo Laredo was NOT the target of a grenade attack.

The Laredo Morning Times published an article on this story this morning, but it didn't contain much new information on the attack itself. What it did mention is that the FBI, the ATF, and Mexico's PGR (Attorney General's Office) are all opening an investigation on the incident. Maybe they'll find out who threw the grenade and what the exact circumstances were regarding the fight that led to it being unintentionally thrown into the compound; and maybe they'll never find out. If I hear anything more that's substantial, I'll post it here.

"AP Exclusive: Sinaloa cartel takes Ciudad Juarez."

Here is an excerpt from Alicia Caldwell and Mark Stevenson's Associated Press article, as published in The Houston Chronicle:

"After a two-year battle that has killed more than 5,000 people, Mexico's most powerful kingpin now controls the coveted trafficking routes through Ciudad Juarez. That conclusion by U.S. intelligence adds to evidence that Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman's Sinaloa cartel is winning Mexico's drug war. The assessment was made based on information from confidential informants with direct ties to Mexican drug gangs and other intelligence, said a U.S. federal agent who sometimes works undercover, insisting on anonymity because of his role in ongoing drug investigations. The agent told The Associated Press those sources have led U.S. authorities to believe that the Sinaloa cartel has edged out the rival Juarez gang for control over trafficking routes through Ciudad Juarez, ground zero in the drug war. Other officials corroborated pieces of the assessment. Andrea Simmons, an FBI spokeswoman in El Paso, confirmed that the majority of drug loads arriving from Juarez now belong to Guzman. And Mexican Federal Police Chief Facundo Rosas told the AP that while authorities are still working to confirm the U.S. assessment, 'These are valid theories.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: I'm hesitant to get too excited about this news article because this would be the biggest thing to happen in the drug war (in my opinion) since the death of Amado Carrillo Fuentes. I sent emails out to my federal, state, and local law enforcement contacts to see if I could get some boots-on-the-ground confirmation that this is actually happening. I'll post any relevant updates after I get more info.

For now, suffice it to say that complete Sinaloa Federation control over the Juárez plaza is going to bring some peace and quiet to that city that its citizens haven't known for quite some time. Cuidad Juárez is arguably the busiest and the best drug smuggling corridor from Mexico into the US, which is why it's been the epicenter of the murder and mayhem along the border for so many years. If the battles between El Chapo's people and the VCFO's people are really winding down - at least for now, anyway - then that means that some sort of stability can be established there. And for the newbies, stability = peace. 

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, it looks like the situation is advancing closer to the megacartel theory that writers like Sam Logan and John P. Sullivan have written about. One huge cartel dominating most trafficking activity means less violence and more peace and quiet for most of Mexico. But it then becomes the six- (or is it seven- ?) headed hydra that the Mexican government is REALLY ill-equipped to do away with. That is, of course assuming the Mexican government would even want to do away with such a megacartel that pours millions of narcodollars into a strapped economy.

More to come, folks...

US State Department issues travel warning for parts of Mexico.

Here are some of the more salient excerpts from yesterday's travel warning:

"The Department of State has issued this Travel Warning to inform U.S. citizens traveling to and living in Mexico of concerns about the security situation in Mexico, and that it has authorized   the departure of the dependents of U.S. government personnel from U.S. consulates in the Northern Mexican border cities of Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey and Matamoros until April 12.  Family members of US Government personnel assigned to other areas of Mexico outside the Mexican border states are not affected by this departure measure. This Travel Warning supercedes that of February 22, 2010, and announces the authorized departure of some dependents and updates security incidents.

"Recent violent attacks have prompted the U.S. Embassy to urge U.S. citizens to delay unnecessary travel to parts of Durango, Coahuila and Chihuahua states(see details below) and advise U.S. citizens residing or traveling in those areas to exercise extreme caution.  Drug cartels and associated criminal elements have retaliated violently against individuals who speak out against them or whom they otherwise view as a threat to their organizations. These attacks include the abduction and murder of two resident U.S. citizens in Chihuahua.

"The situation in the state of Chihuahua, specifically Ciudad Juarez, is of special concern.   The U.S. Consulate General recommends that American citizens defer non-essential travel to the Guadalupe Bravo area southeast of Ciudad Juarez and to the northwest quarter of the state of  Chihuahua including the city of Nuevo Casas Grandes and surrounding communities.  From the United States, these areas are often reached through the Columbus, NM, and Fabens and Fort Hancock, TX, ports of entry.  In both areas, American citizens have been victims of drug-related violence."

To read the full travel alert on the US State Department website, please CLICK HERE.

Analysis: First off, I need to remind readers that the State Department has different levels of alerts and warnings for US citizens abroad, based on the level of severity. To review information regarding these different levels, please CLICK HERE. Travel warnings are the most severe of the three, and the State Department issues these after much thought and with care, as they know the warning will usually annoy the country in question's government and often scare the bejesus out of US citizens planning that cruise to Cancun or vacation to Cabo San Lucas.

Second, readers need to know that this situation is serious, and any potential travelers need to make note of the locations specifically mentioned in the travel warning. They're mentioned for very good reasons, i.e. lots of people - including US citizens - are dying there. That being said, there are plenty of places in Mexico that are still safe to visit. But you have to do your homework. The State Department has really good information in the travel section of their website, and you can always call the Embassy in Mexico City or the Consulate in the city closest to where you'll be visiting to get more detailed information.

Above all, be smart, stay informed, and don't take your safety for granted.

"Three people linked to US consulate in Mexico killed."

Here is an excerpt from this news story on BBC News online:

"Three people connected to the US consulate in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez have been killed, the White House has said. They include a consulate employee and her husband, both American, and the Mexican husband of another employee... The three victims were killed in drive-by shootings on Saturday afternoon, a US official told the BBC on condition of anonymity, citing privacy considerations. The White House statement did not provide any details of the incident in Ciudad Juarez... Meanwhile, the State Department has authorised government employees at six US consulates in northern Mexico to send their family members out of the area over concerns about rising drug-related violence. The six consulates are in the border cities of Tijuana, Nogales, Ciudad Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey and Matamoros. The department said in a statement Sunday that recent violent attacks have led the US Embassy in Mexico City to advise American citizens to delay unnecessary travel to parts of the Mexican states of Durango, Coahuila and Chihuahua." Link to Full Article

Analysis: Unfortunately, I don't have much to offer by way of analysis yet because this story is just breaking this morning. I felt it was important to get the raw information out there first. I'm working to find more details on who the victims are and who the shooting suspects are, but information is very scant right now, even in the Spanish-language Mexican dailies. If any of my readers out there have more solid details, please email me at spooky926@gmail.com or post the info in the comments section.

I should say right now that I have no indication at the present time that these people were specifically targeted by Mexican DTOs strictly because (a) they were American, and/or (b) they were associated with the US consulate in Cuidad Juárez. That may change, but such targeting would represent a massive shift in DTO modus operandi, and it's too soon to draw such dramatic conclusions from an incident on which we have so little information right now. More to come...

"Is Tranquility or Turmoil Next for Tijuana?"

Here is an excerpt from my latest article in Homeland Security Today's "From the Field" section:

"The security situation in Mexico is in a constant state of flux, and nothing exemplifies that more than recent events in Tijuana and the surrounding area. President Felipe Calderón and his federal police forces got a much-needed morale boost on January 12 with the capture of the elusive Teodoro “El Teo” Garcia Simental. Garcia was the head of a drug operation that split off from the Arellano Felix Organization (AFO) in April 2008, and he was receiving support from the rival Sinaloa Federation.

"After Garcia’s capture, the general opinion among drug war observers was that not too much would change in violence levels or the movement of product across the border. This was due to the fact that Garcia ran a tight ship with a clear chain of command. True to form, boss. The biggest concern at the time was that López might escalate the level of violence to establish his position as the new boss—one worthy of assuming Garcia’s position.

"Fortunately, López never got that chance. In a huge raid on February 8, Mexican federal police arrested López, along with Manuel “El Chiquilin” Garcia Simental (Teodoro’s brother) and several Tijuana police officers. These three major arrests in the span of a month have effectively dismantled the AFO’s main rival and the Sinaloa Federation’s proxy in northern Baja California.

"So the question becomes, is this good news or bad news for Tijuana and the other drug corridors along the California-Mexico border?"

To read the full article at HSToday.us, please CLICK HERE.

"Mexican mayor fears massacre of 16 was random."

Here is an excerpt from Alicia A. Caldwell's Associated Press article in The Washington Post:

"The mayor of a violent Mexican border city said Monday he fears a shooting that killed 16 people in a working class neighborhood may have been random because many of the victims   were 'good kids' with no apparent ties to drug gangs. The dead included at least eight teenagers, the youngest a 13-year-old girl. Mayor Jose Reyes Ferriz said police were pursuing all lines of investigation. But he said none of the victims of the attack Saturday night had criminal records, and the teenagers were 'good kids, students, athletes... 'There is no logical explanation, a concrete reason for this event. This is something that worries us, gratuitous or random criminal acts,' Reyes told MVS Radio. 'It goes way beyond what had been happening and puts Ciudad Juarez in even greater danger.'" Link to Full Article

Analysis: Until the results of the investigation start coming out, it's almost impossible to say whether or not these kids were or weren't involved with organized crime. This truly is a sad, no-win situation either way. If the kids weren't involved in the drug trade, then someone decided it would be a good idea to just randomly shoot and kill a bunch of people in Juárez. That would be a significant development because it's a clear sign that DTO tactics are degenerating further, and delving into terrorist tactics.

If any of the kids were involved in the drug trade, then it becomes a sad reflection of the state of things in Juárez - the age of perpetrators and victims becoming lower and lower, and opportunities for Mexico's youth in such places declining. The allure of the DTO lifestyle to many teenagers in Mexico can't be denied, and is just one of the many aspects of the drug war the Mexican government has to figure out how to combat. 

In this case - if any of those kids were involved with organized crime - sending in the Mexican army isn't going to cut it. This is a profound sociological issue that can only be dealt with at a cultural - i.e. a familial - level.

"San Diego's crime rate fell again in ’09, stats show."

Here is an excerpt from Kristina Davis' article in the San Diego Union-Tribune:

"Crime continued to plunge in San Diego last year, following a national trend of large U.S. cities that are growing safer despite a sour economy, according to statistics released by the Mayor’s   Office yesterday... Overall crime in the city fell by nearly 18 percent in 2009. Homicides were down 25.5 percent, with 41 last year, compared with 55 in 2008. The last time there were fewer was in 1972, when the population was less than half the size it is today, Mayor Jerry Sanders said. Rape, which had been one of the only violent crimes to rise over the past few years, saw a decrease last year of 15.4 percent... Property crimes, including burglary, theft and auto theft, dropped 20.1 percent. Police officials attributed part of the overall crime reduction to a renewed focus on curfew violations and gang crime. Collaboration with federal authorities and increased supervision of parolees and probationers have also led to a reduction in stolen cars going across the U.S.-Mexico border... The San Diego Police Officers Association cautioned that the report released yesterday does not provide a full picture of crime trends in the city. Traditionally, only major categories of crimes, such as homicide, robbery, rape, auto theft and burglary, are reported to the FBI each year for statistical purposes." Link to Full Article

Analysis: This article and my subsequent analysis go back to the concept and apparent dichotomy of border violence spillover. If you follow this blog regularly, you've read my numerous posts on how the existence of spillover is highly debated, and its very existence depends on whom you ask. We know that crimes related to the drug trade in Mexico happen on our side of the border all the time. Yet, crime rates are falling in San Diego, and El Paso - right across the border from Cuidad Juárez, the most violent city in Mexico - is something like the second safest city in the United States.

So how does that work, exactly?

You can read my prior analysis on this topic HERE, in which I go into some detail about crime statistics and spillover. I don't want to rehash everything again (mostly because I'm doubling my efforts), but the main point I want to make here is that statistics don't always paint the most accurate picture. I think it's awesome that crime rates in San Diego are going down, and that's a testament to the great work that law enforcement agencies are doing there.

However, what statistics don't tell you is who is committing those crimes. More specifically, let's use homicide as an example. I don't know what the exact statistic is for 2009 in San Diego, but let's just say that there were 120 homicides in 2008, and there were only 80 in 2009. Sounds good, right? Well, what if in 2008, 15 percent of those homicides were related to the drug trade in Mexico, and in 2009, that chunk of the pie rose to 55 percent? True, you have a decrease in homicide overall, but you may still have a much bigger problem.

I don't know what percentage of major category crimes are being committed in relation to Mexico's drug trade, let alone minor category crimes - which are not tracked for statistical purposes by the FBI. And maybe a lot of people - politicians, police, etc. - don't necessarily care about the proportions, as long as crime is going down. I will say that if our government has any hope of defining spillover in a standard fashion and truly prevent it from happening more than it already has, then more scrutiny needs to be paid to crime statistics in border cities.

Mexico's federal police arrest Teodoro "El Teo" Garcia Simental

Here is an excerpt from Sandra Dibble's article in the San Diego Union Tribune, titled "Mexico arrests leader of gang":

"His brutality was widely broadcast, as victims were found tortured, beheaded, dissolved in lye, hung from bridges, often with messages attached. Yet Eduardo Teodoro García Simental for   many months maintained a low profile and evaded capture. Yesterday, his luck ran out. The gang leader known as El Teo, who also was linked to numerous kidnappings and extortions in the Tijuana region, was captured in the quiet seaside city of La Paz, capital of Baja California Sur. What his arrest will mean to the violence that has gripped the Tijuana region has yet to play out.

"Authorities had been on García’s trail for five months, but the operation to detain him early yesterday was over quickly as Federal Police, soldiers and marines closed in on the two-story residence in an upscale neighborhood of the city about 900 miles south of Tijuana. Hours later, García was in Mexico City, in handcuffs as he was forced to pose for photographs with masked and heavily armed federal agents. A one-time member of the Arellano Félix drug cartel, García is being blamed for 300 murders, including the deaths of numerous police officers." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I was bombarded yesterday with emails of the news of El Teo's arrest, and I was thrilled to hear about it. I was also frustrated because I'm in the middle of a cross-country move, and didn't get a chance to post my analysis until just now. Regardless, this is a really big deal, and there are a lot of ramifications that come with it.

If you have been following events in Mexico's drug war even casually in the last year, you know that violence levels in Tijuana sharply spiked in the spring of 2008. That's because El Teo split off from the AFO in April, got the backing of the Sinaloa Federation, and started his own little war against what was left of the AFO in northern Baja. Life in and around Tijuana has been pretty brutal ever since, and it's mostly because of El Teo.

You'd think that now because he's behind bars, things will get better, and everyone in the Calderón administration will be jumping for joy for some time. Unfortunately, that probably won't be the case. Like any capo worth his salt, El Teo had a right-hand man, and his name is Raydel "El Muletas" López Uriarte. López is probably the guy who will take the reins in El Teo's stead. He'll have a lot of responsibility to deal with in very short order, and the easiest way for a new capo to prove he means business - especially to someone as brutal as the head of the Federation, Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzmán Loera - is to start killing people.

Bottom line, it's really a good thing that the federales picked up El Teo; it's good news for the people of Tijuana and the rest of northern Baja, and good for the morale of the Mexican army, federal police, and government. However, the bloodshed is far from over, and the Mexican authorities are going to need to figure out how López is going to proceed.

 

"Slaying of hero's family brings chills to Mexico."

Here is an excerpt of Elisabeth Malkin's article from the New York Times, reprinted in the Houston Chronicle:

"It had been an elaborate farewell to one of Mexico's fallen heroes. Ensign Melquisedet Angulo, a special forces sailor killed last week during the government's most successful raid on a top drug   lord in years, received a stirring public tribute in which the secretary of the navy presented his mother with the flag that covered her son's casket. Then, the next day, only hours after the grieving family had finished burying him in his hometown, gunmen burst into the family's house and sprayed the rooms with gunfire, killing his mother and three other relatives, officials said Tuesday. It was a chilling epilogue to the navy-led operation that killed the drug lord, Arturo Beltran Leyva, and six of his gunmen. And it appeared to be intended as a clear warning to the military forces on the front line of President Felipe Calderon's war against Mexico's drug cartels: not only you, but your family is a target as well." Link to Full Article

Analysis: I think we all knew that reprisals were coming after Arturo Beltrán Leyva was killed, but I don't think anyone imagined something like this would happen. I thought nothing the DTOs could do would ever surprise me, but I'm floored with this one. Going after a soldier's family? As an acquaintance of mine put it today, not even the Mafia went after family members.

For some time now, I've been saying that the Mexican government - as well as our own government - needs to start treating DTOs as something more than just common criminals. I wrote an article in Henley Putnam University's Journal of Strategic Security some time ago about this very topic; you can read it here if you like. While you may not be able to call them terrorists in the purest sense (no ideology other than a profit motive), they're behaving like a hybrid of organized crime, terrorists, and insurgents. How can you effectively battle an Nth Generation organization like that when you're treating them - and fighting them - like gang members?

Some of my readers have taken issue with this view, saying I sometimes give DTOs too much credit. And it's true that many people believe DTO leaders and members are just greedy thugs who like to use they're enormous arsenal with impunity. That may be true in some cases, but ordinary street punks don't infiltrate the government and police as well as the BLO does, or organize prison escapes as elaborately as Los Zetas do, or mastermind the piecemeal destruction of rival organizations as well as the Sinaloa Federation leadership does.

So - not that any government is coming to me for advice - my take on this latest development is that both the Mexican and US governments need to wake up, stop putzing (not my preferred word, but I'm a lady and this is a public forum) around, and treat the DTOs like the opponent that they are.