Search

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Drug War to Transnational Combat in Arizona


The Obama administration is on the same page as the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission in viewing the Arizona-Sonora border as the frontline in fighting illegal drugs. But the war on drugs has evolved into what the Obama administration calls the combat against transnational organized crime.

No longer will you find the federal government pronouncing about drug war’s role in protecting U.S. national security.

Having dropped the drug war terminology and substituted concerns about transnational organized crime, the Obama administration, the Obama administration seems, at first glance, to have made a welcome shift in framing counternarcotics from military to law enforcement terms -- from war to crime, from national security to public safety.

Officially, there is no longer a “war on drugs.” But as White House’s Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime stays true to the militaristic spirit of the four-decades-long drug war. Interlaced throughout the strategy statement and the declarations of administration officials is the same military and conflict terminology such as “combat” and “transnational threats,” the same alarmist assessments that drug trafficking constitutes a threat to national security, and the same involvement of the U.S. military and national intelligence apparatus.

Except for the actual use of the term “war on drugs,” the jargon of domestic counternarcotics operations has, if anything, become more pervaded by military jargon, including the now common use by the Border Patrol of such military terms as “deconfliction,” “situational awareness,” “operational control,” “surges,” “forward operating bases,” “common operating picture,” and “defense-in-depth.”

The Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats represents one of the first institutional manifestations of the Obama administration’s reconfiguration of the drug war as a combat against transnational threats.
DHS describes ACTT as a “multiagency operation” involving more than 50 law enforcement agencies that aims to “deny, degrade, disrupt, and ultimately dismantle criminal organizations and their ability to operate” and to “engage communities to reduce their tolerance of illegal activity.”  

What makes ACTT distinctive, according to DHS, is that it undertakes “intelligence-driven operations” against transnational threats that are directed by a Unified Command comprising the leaders of the participating agencies.

ACTT has a clear drug war focus. In June 2011 the White House’s Office on National Drug Control Policy released its biannual National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, which poses drug control policy as an integral part of U.S. national security strategy.

Although officially a DHS initiative, ONDCP also claims a role in deploying four counterdrug alliances along the southwestern border, beginning with the one targeting what DHS and ONDCP call the Arizona-Sonora drug corridor and following with three others, each with their own United Command, that will target the drug corridors into Southern California, New Mexico/West Texas, and Southeast Texas.

According to the counternarcotics strategy, ACTT is a counternarcotics “framework” in which “agencies should develop and maintain frameworks that address the coordination, integration, deconfliction, and synchronization of Federal, state, local, and tribal border security and law enforcement activities along the Southwest border.”

In Arizona ACTT’s Unified Command comprises ten officials from DEA, ICE, CBP, US Attorney’s Office, Arizona Department of Public Safety, Arizona HIDTA, and the Arizona border sheriffs. According to the Border Patrol, ACTT has all the counterdrug actors in Arizona “sitting around the same table and sharing information” to meet the “common goal.”

While visiting the Arizona border on Feb. 11, 2011, Alan Bersin, the commissioner of Customs and Border Protection (CBP), hailed the accomplishments of ACTT, pointing to -- as the top-listed achievement -- “the seizure of more than 1.6 million lbs. of marijuana,” along with relatively small amounts of cocaine and methamphetamines. Praising ACTT, the CBP commissioner declared: “We will force smuggling organizations out of their entrenched positions here in Arizona north of the border and south of the border with the help of Mexican law enforcement.”

Typical of the disconnect between ACTT’s reported accomplishments and the targeting of TCOs, Bersin did not attempt to explain how ACTT had in any way contributed to the dismantling of the transnational criminal organizations supposedly targeted by ACTT.

Also see related articles and policy reports:

I encourage you to join the Border Wars Google Group to follow/discuss border security, immigrant imprisonment, and drug policy issues at:

http://groups.google.com/group/border-wars



Friday, September 9, 2011

Media Release: On the Border Ten Years After 9/11

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 9, 2011

INTERNATIONAL POLICY REPORT

Policy on the Edge
On the Border Ten Years After 9/11
WASHINGTON, DC – None of the 9/11 terrorists illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border, and no foreign terrorists have been apprehended on the southwestern border over the past ten years.  Yet, ten years after 9/11, the border line is where national security, homeland security and border security converge.

Policy on the Edge (
PDF | HTML) is a policy report from the Center for International Policy that examines the security buildup on the southwestern border over the past ten years. Tom Barry, director of CIP’s TransBorder Project, chronicles how the security politics of the border have shifted over the past 10 years from an initial focus on terrorism to “illegal aliens”, and then to “criminal aliens,” and most recently drug prohibition and the drug war in Mexico.

Despite massive expenditures and the new commitment to border security, our border policy remains unfocused and buffeted by political forces – with Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry saying that he and the American people are “fed up” with the Obama administration’s border policies.

According to Policy on the Edge, (
PDF | HTML) the border security framework has fostered alarmist politics about border threats and wasteful spending. "Absent necessary strategic reflection and reform," writes Barry, "the rush to achieve border security has bred dangerous insecurities about immigration and about the integrity of our border, while giving new life to the flagging war on drugs at home and abroad."

“Like the ill-considered invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan and the ‘global war against terrorism,’ the post-9/11 border security buildup has drained our treasury while doing little to increase our security,” said Barry.

Barry concludes, "Bankrupt and without strategic direction, it is time to rein in the border security bandwagon and to establish new regulatory frameworks for U.S. border policy."

Ten years after the country embarked on the border security and homeland security bandwagons  -- with tens of billions of dollars spent annually to “secure the border” by the Homeland Security, Justice, and Defense Departments – it is time to review, evaluate, and change course.

The report recommends a new policy framework that charts the way forward through regulatory solutions—for immigration, drugs, gun sales, border management—that are more pragmatic, effective and cost-efficient than current policies.

The full report is available on the Center for International Policy's website (PDF | HTML). 
 For media interviews contact:

Tom Barry
tfbarry2007@gmail.com
Cell 575.313.4544

ACTTing Out in Arizona – Where the Drug War now has a “Unified Command”


·        Arizona is “ground zero” in the reconfigured war on drugs.

·        Numbers tell the story of the failed drug war and a misguided combat against transnational crime.
·        ACCT is a paper alliance created to demonstrate Obama’s border security/transnational crime strategy.

·        It’s all about marijuana and immigrants – the same old story of border control, now called border security.
Arizona and the U.S.-Mexico borderlands are the “ground zero in the war on drugs.”

That’s the assessment of the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission (ACJC), the state office that receives federal criminal-justice grants -- and which then redistributes these Department of Justice (DOJ) grants to Arizona’s multiagency drug task forces and other counternarcotics programs.

Making the essentially same threat assessment about the border’s frontline status in protecting the U.S. against the transnational threat of illegal drug flows, the Obama administration launched its Southwest Border Initiative in March 2009, calling it the “way ahead” in combating drug trafficking.

As part of that 2009 initiative, which brought together the resources of the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and Justice (DOJ), DHS launched the Arizona-based Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats (ACTT) in September 2009, describing it as an “innovative” and “unprecedented” multiagency assault on crossborder drug trafficking.

ACTT claims to be directing allied forces against the transnational threats emanating from the Sonora-Arizona drug corridor. The loose alliance pulled together by DHS represents the latest manifestation of the federal-state drug war strategy – one that began taking shape after the declaration of the “war on drugs” in 1971 and became institutionalized in the late 1980s especially after congressional approval of Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.

In the new lexicon of the Obama administration, the old “war on drugs” has been superseded by the new combat against “transnational threats,” “transnational organized crime,” and transnational criminal organizations” (TCOs). This switch in counternarcotics terminology was formalized with the July 2011 release by the White House of its Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime.

Twenty-four years after ACJC entered the state’s “war on drugs” and nearly two years after ACTT started targeting transnational crime on the Arizona border, there has been no official evaluation of the progress in this transnational combat at ground zero. Yet the Obama administration, along with two border states (Texas and Arizona), continue to channel more revenues and personnel into border counternarcotics operations.

Multi-Agency Drug Task Forces as Drug War Instruments

ACJC was established in 1987 to serve as a funding reciprocal for the expected flood of federal dollars for drug task forces and other counternarcotics operations that follow the expected passage of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act.

When ACJC began receiving these new counternarcotics grants from the Justice Department, Arizona had four multijurisdictional narcotics task forces. Known commonly as narc squads, these are undercover units of police and sheriff deputies that form the vanguard of the domestic drug war.

Today, Arizona has sixteen such multijurisdictional counterdrug forces. Despite the 24 years of drug war grants and narc squad expansion in Arizona, drug consumption and drug flows in the state have boomed, as year after year of ACJC’s own statistics show.

According to ACJC, the ACJC-supported drug “task forces operating along the border are the first line of defense in marijuana, drug-trafficking operations.”  

In 2007 marijuana seizures rose to 276,906 pounds, up from 221,205 pounds in 2004. Nonetheless, ACJC acknowledges that “marijuana remains readily available and is considered the most widely used illegal drug throughout the state.”

The other nexus for drug war funding and operations along the Arizona-Sonora border is the Arizona High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) group. Like ACJC and other similar state offices, HIDTA, which has affiliates throughout the nation, was also a creation of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.

The White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy, also created by the 1988 drug legislation, directs the expanding national network of HIDTAs.

Like ACJC, the Arizona HIDTA relies exclusively on federal funding for counternarcotics operations. HIDTA’s longtime goal has been to “disrupt and dismantle” the drug trafficking organizations – which is the same goal of the newly created ACTT.

Since the late 1980s the Justice Department, which includes the Drug Enforcement Administration, has served as the federal government’s leading drug warrior agency, leading and funding the domestic drug war in Arizona and throughout the nation.

But after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the drug war bureaucracy expanded along with the nation’s security and intelligence apparatus. The new Department of Homeland Security has become a major federal partner in the drug war at home and abroad. Transferred from DOJ to the newly created DHS, the border and immigration agencies – Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) -- stepped up their counterdrug roles as part of their post-9/11 security mission to protect the nation against “dangerous people and goods.”

The creation of ACTT by DHS underscores the new role of border and immigration enforcement agencies as drug warriors. Through its recently established Operations Coordination Center in Tucson, the Border Patrol coordinates ACTT. 

Also see related articles and policy reports:


I encourage you to join the Border Wars Google Group to follow/discuss border security, immigrant imprisonment, and drug policy issues at:


Thursday, September 8, 2011

Military on the Border Combating Transnational Drug Threats


Remember when there was all the concern in the 1990s among activists and progressive policy advocates about the militarization of the border? Timothy Dunn wrote an excellent book titled The Militarization of the U.S.-Mexico Border, 1978-1992.


Over the past ten years, however, questions about the appropriateness of having the U.S. military -- and U.S. intelligence apparatus -- directly involved in border control operations have faded. There is a bipartisan consensus around a post-9/11 concept of border control called border security. 


Ranging across the entire political spectrum is support for "securing the border" -- some because they fear immigrants, others because they believe it will stop drug flows, some because there is so much money to be made in homeland security contracts, and others because they say it's a precondition for immigration reform.


In the Republican presidential candidate debate, Rick Perry called for the use of Predator drones to patrol the borderlands. That may seem like an outlandish and very expensive proposal, but DHS is already collaborating with the U.S. military (and private contractors) in the deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles of Predator provenance. 


The Bush administration institutionalized the border security framework, and the Obama administration is putting its own mark on border security policy with its new strategy to combat transnational threats. As part of this new overlay, DHS has created the Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats (ACTT) in Arizona.


Given that ACTT was created to combat transnational threats and protect national security, it is not surprising that the Defense Department claims a role in ACTT operations.



At the request of DHS Assistant Secretary Alan Bersin, JTF-North [the El Paso-based Joint Task Force Bravo] provided support to the Alliance to Combat Transnational Threats…. JTF-North facilitated intelligence and operational planning, and provided sensor capabilities during execution of this intelligence-driven operation.
Through JTF-North’s missions and activities, USNORTHCOM continues to sustain important relationships with Federal law enforcement agencies in securing our nation’s borders against drug traffickers and their associated activities. Robust collaboration exists today between JTF-North and operational-level leaders in CBP, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Drug Enforcement Administration, and the FBI… [by way of USNorthCom’s] Counternarcotics (CN) Programs.  USNORTHCOM’s CN Program is an integral part of the defense and security of our nation.
As part of ONDCP’s new border counternarcotics strategy, the “Intelligence Community” and DOD are involved in formulating and coordinating “Common Operating Pictures” and “Common Intelligence Pictures” with other federal partners and local law enforcement agencies. 

This collaboration bringing together the nation’s military and intelligence apparatuses with border law enforcement agencies will adhere to the information-sharing restrictions specified in the August 2010 Executive Order on Classified National Security Information Programs for state, local, tribal, and private sector entities. 

But the real danger is not that local law enforcement will share classified national security information with the public or with the nation's enemies. 

Rather the danger that all this alarmism about national security and transnational threats along the border will feed the politicking of the border hawks -- and lead to still more waste and misguided drug, immigration, and border policies.

For more information about ACTT, see the new TransBorder Policy Report: ACTTing Out the Drug War at Ground Zero. 

Border Wars is Out!

The reason for the exclaiming and exclamation point is that Amazon already sold out its initial stock (perhaps only a couple ordered from MIT Press!).

Weird thing is that I didn't know, and only found out this morning after getting an email from MIT publicity asking  me where the author copies should be sent.  Seems that I will need to do my part helping out the MIT publicity department! Never have a used so many exclamation points -- not proper form for a policy analyst!

Anyway, here's the book description from MIT Press and the Amazon link.

Border Wars
Tom Barry

Post-9/11 security anxiety. A renewed war on drugs. Inaction on immigration. Economic collapse. All of it makes for a combustible brew, and the fire is burning hottest on the Southwestern border.

The Tea Party and its allies celebrate the rogue states of the Southwest as a model for the nation in their go-it-alone posturing and tough immigration-enforcement talk. In Border Wars, dogged investigative journalist Tom Barry documents the costs of that model: lives lost; families torn apart; billions of wasted tax dollars; vigilantes prowling the desert; and fiscal crises in cities, counties, and states. Even worse, he warns, the entire nation risks following their lead.

As Barry explains, the lack of coherent federal policy on immigration and drug war conduct and the uncritical embrace of all things in the name of national security has opened doors for opportunists from boardrooms to governor’s offices in Texas and Arizona. Corporate-prison magnates eagerly swallow up undocumented immigrants into taxpayer-funded dungeons, border sheriffs and politicians trade on voters’ fears of Latinos and "big government," and pro-business policy institutes and lobbyists battle the public interest.

Border Wars offers a stark portrait of the domestic cost of failed federal leadership in the post-9/11 era.

About the Author

Tom Barry, Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for International Policy, is author of many books, includingThe Great Divide and Zapata’s Revenge. His article “A Death in Texas” was a finalist for a 2010 National Magazine Award for reporting in the public interest.






I encourage you to join the Border Wars Google Group to follow/discuss border security, immigrant imprisonment, and drug policy issues at:

http://groups.google.com/group/border-wars

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

Rick Perry on Border Security at Texas Public Policy Foundation

Governor Rick Perry met briefly (36 seconds) on the tarmac of the Austin airport when President Obama traveled to Texas a year ago.  

Perry wanted more time with the president to discuss the issue one which he rode to victory in the primary contest and in the general election against his Democratic opponent.  It wasn’t the issue of his forthcoming book, Fed Up!, which is a tirade against big government and for states’ rights and unregulated private enterprise. Rather, Perry’s pressing concern was about border security.

“My hope was to have a very frank, face-to-face discussion [with the president] about the issue of border security,” lamented Perry, who took advantage of the occasion to hand a letter to the president complaining about his administration’s failure to secure the border.

Later that day Perry had a chance to talk at length about border security in Texas.  The Texas Public Policy Foundation, a conservative think tank in Austin with close ties to the governor, had invited the governor to address border security as part of its Lone Star lecture series. 

During his speech Perry criticized the Obama administration’s border control policy as “lackadaisical” and “an abject failure,” while warning that “spillover violence” from Mexico was wreaking havoc in Texas.  Not only was the drug-related violence spilling over into the Texas borderland but also was taking the form of increased “transnational gang” violence in the state’s interior cities.

In contrast to the get-government-off-our-backs messaging of his book Fed Up!, Perry insisted that the “federal government step up” and “secure our borders.”

The political community in Texas has long been aware of the governor’s close relationship with the Texas Public Policy Foundation.  The ideological alliance between the governor and the policy institute was underscored by the publication of Fed Up!, which Perry described as a product of his partnership with TPPF.  Within Texas, the governor’s political closeness with the institute was again highlighted when on Perry keynoted the institute’s 2011 Policy Orientation Conference, a traditional gathering of Texas Republicans.

In November 2002 the Texas Monthly profiled James Leininger, the founder of TPFF and a longtime Perry campaign contributor. In her “Mr. Right” story, Texas Monthly reporter Karen Ollson wrote:

What makes Leininger one of the most powerful people in Texas politics is less the amount of money he has given over the years than the broad reach of his spending and his commitment to a conservative agenda. By pumping tens of thousands of dollars into the previously ignored State Board of Education races, he turned an obscure committee of retired teachers into an ideological hornet's nest, whose debates over curriculum and textbook content have made national news. In addition to funding candidates personally, Leininger has launched several political action committees to support conservative judicial and legislative candidates and advocate for school vouchers. He has, moreover, established an entire politics and policy conglomerate in Texas. He founded and provided seed money for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, an increasingly influential conservative think tank, in 1989. He has invested millions in private school voucher programs in San Antonio, the first of which he initiated in 1993. Some regard the state Republican party as an extension of his empire; its chair, Susan Weddington, is a former Kinetic Concepts [a company founded by Leininger] employee, and the $475,000 Leininger donated to state party and caucus committees in the 2000 election cycle far exceeded the amount contributed by any other individual or organization in Texas, according to a report by the Center for Public Integrity.
After Perry announced his candidacy, Texans for Policy Justice issued a report titled Rick Perry’s Heavenly Host. The report observes:


Perry might never have been governor—nor now be a presidential candidate—but for James Leininger. In a game-changing 1998 race then-Texas Agriculture Commissioner Perry was elected Lieutenant Governor. That victory secured Perry’s automatic promotion to governor two years later when President-Elect Bush abandoned the Governor’s Mansion. Perry narrowly won his fateful 1998 race against Democrat John Sharp, capturing just 50.04 percent of the vote. This squeaker victory was secured by an eleventh-hour media blitz that Perry paid for with a last-minute, $1.1 million loan. Leininger and two other Texas tycoons guaranteed the loan, which supplied more than 10 percent of the $10.3 million that Perry raised for that election. Leininger’s family and company PAC contributed $62,500 to that Perry campaign. Leininger also was the No. 1 contributor at the time to the Texas Republican Party (then chaired by former Leininger employee Susan Weddington), which sank $82,760 into that Perry campaign. “I congratulate Leininger,” Perry opponent John Sharp said at the time. “He wanted to buy the reins of state government. And by God, he got them.”
Last weekend as Hurricane Irene dominated the national news, Leininger was hosting a meeting of Christian evangelicals and Perry at the right-wing magnate’s estate. As Dallas News reporter Wayne Slater noted in his Aug. 24 article, “A Marriage Made In Heaven”:

When Rick Perry heads this weekend to Jim Leininger's ranch for a confab of Christian conservatives, he'll be on hallowed ground. Leininger has long been one of Perry's financial angels. He's been a leading proponent of school vouchers and bankrolled the campaign to ban gay marriage. And he's given large sums to Perry campaigns over the years. In some quarters, he's seen as saving Perry's political career with a last-minute infusion of $1.1 million to fuel Perry's 1998 victory as lieutenant governor.
With Perry assuming frontrunner status in the race to become the Republican Party’s standard bearer for the presidency, the policy positions of the TPFF and its donor base deserve a closer look by the national media and electorate.

On Aug. 18 the  Border Lines of the Center for International Policy published a profile of the Texas Public Policy Foundation and its relationship to Perry titled “The Fed Up Think Tank in Austin,” which stated: If Rick Perry goes to Washington, it's likely that he will bring with him the conservative policies and principles of the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

I encourage you to join the Border Wars Google Group to follow/discuss border security, immigrant imprisonment, and drug policy issues at:


Monday, August 22, 2011

What's So Frightening About Mexico's Drug War and El Sicario




What’s so frightening about El Sicario isn’t that it’s so shocking in its details of drug war violence. The humanity of this “Autobiography of a Mexican Assassin” stays with you more than its inhumanity. 

The chronicles of the unnamed sicario (common term for a hitman in Latin America), as related to Molly Molloy and Chuck Bowden, include graphic detail of killings and torture. 

But we have already seen and heard much of it. Over the past four years, there has been no dearth of images and reports of the horrific violence that has besieged many parts of Mexico. Graphic photos and video of mutilations and torture sessions are readily available on the internet. If you missed all that, border law enforcement officials and the Border Patrol are busy presenting slide shows of the violence in schools and other public venues to warn about the consequences of drug use.

But what sticks with you after reading El Sicario (Nation Books, 2011) are not the horrors and magnitude of the drug-related violence in Mexico but the humanity of the story – how easily and understandably a person could become a killer for drug money. That’s truly frightening given the extent of the illegal drug market in the United States and Europe and its deepening penetration of less developed countries like Mexico.

He recalls his boyhood in a Juárez colonia – the special day at the circus with his dad – and his early dream of escape from poverty to a life of wealth and power. Easy money for smuggling drugs into El Paso led to a deeper involvement in the drug trade, along with the allure of favors of women, drugs, and spending money, especially after he agreed to enter a police training academy under the auspices of the drug trafficking organizations (DTOs). 

But years of killing as a drug cartel enforcer took an emotional, physical, and spiritual toll, eventually leaving him open for the first time to the seductive appeal of a highway billboard:

“If You Have Problems, Call Upon Him”

By helping this repentant killer tell his story, editors Molloy and Bowden offer the reader what is truly an inside story. In the telling, this sicario helps us understand how the hopes and dreams of a young man from Juárez can turn to a life of professional killing. It’s an insider story that provides an unusual window into the political economy of Mexico and its intersection with the drug market, both in Mexico and across the border in the United States.

As he begins his tale -- from child to sicario to religious redemption -- the killer tells us that, as a boy, he kept thinking about the day when finally he “could be somebody” – a person who could say: “I want that. And have it. I wanted to be the man who could wish for a really big house, and have it.”

It wasn’t that he was born a criminal, raised in a dysfunctional family, born evil. Rather he was at heart a consumer who, like most of us, wanted more – and the multi-billion dollar drug trade created by drug prohibition let him have it.

Looking Back to Mexico

Living in exile in the United States, the sicario looks back across the border with deep pessimism. Although he occasionally expresses sympathy for the government’s campaign against the cartels, this reformed assassin more often describes a political and criminal justice system that is thoroughly corrupt and compromised. 

God, the United States, and a handful of uncorrupted journalists and government prosecutors (generally killed off) offer the only possible paths to salvation and hope.

Disgracefully, everything in that country is evil. There is so much corruption that it can have no end, no matter how much help Mexico gets from other countries.

Sadly, desgraciadamente, all of our law enforcement academies in Mexico – the different police forces, the investigative police, the military police, and the army – have been used by the narco-trafficking organizations as training grounds for their future employees.  

 Who has the power? Try to imagine who has the power in this kind of government. When all of the open spaces, the back roads, and the streets are guarded and patrolled by the Army. So, who is allowing all of the drugs to pass?

The killing fields of Mexico, according to the sicario, are mostly unreported and undiscovered. In his opinion, it is often only when the DEA tracks the whereabouts of its informants that the mass graves are uncovered.

I think that here in the border region, that…well, let’s say that if there are one hundred of these narco-fosas [narco-graves], maybe only five or six of these places have been discovered.

As most close observers of Mexico’s drug war have noted, the common view (propagated by both the Obama and Calderón administrations) is that the 50,000 reported killings over the past four years are largely the result of inter-DTO violence. But the government’s war and the inter-cartel turf wars have spawned what the sicario calls a new breed of gang members he deprecatingly calls “the imitators.”

Within what Howard Campbell calls the “drug war zone” (in his book by the same name), the sicario describes a breakdown in cartel control and the rise of “imitators” without the traditional “professionalization” and “codes” that once guided the work of cartel assassins like himself.

There are no more real codes [such as not killing women and children] no more rules in business. Before, the different cartels that were working in the country respected the codes and arrangements that had been established. Now, there are no codes, they are all lost.

Inter-cartel violence isn’t the only explanation for Mexico’s recent drug-related violence. “Times have changed,” he says. The leading drug trafficking organizations have also been killing the “punks” that he says are imitating the cartels and have also branched into non-drug crimes like car thefts.

Compounding the problem is the rise of domestic drug trafficking and consumption of crack, cocaine, and methamphetamines. “Mexico has now passed from being an exporter and transporter of drugs and is now a consumer country,” he observes.

As the U.S. reinforces its border, the introduction of drugs into the United States is decreasing. So the narcos now are trying to addict the children in the schools in Mexico. They are now working to hook people who work in the maquiladoras [factories]. And they are recruiting women to distribute drugs.

Indispensable United States?

The sicario’s new world view is shaped more by moral imperatives (good and evil, temptation and redemption) than by policies and markets. This is a worldview consistent with Washington’s own morally-driven drug war and drug prohibition policies.

He acknowledges drug-related corruption in the United States, although “in the United States they at least make an effort to stop the corruption. But in Mexico they don’t even try.”

The sicario notes that the “government has some successes,” although only up to a point. In his view, “The successes have mostly been due to the experiments that the DEA is now carrying out in Mexico, and the [Mexican] president is doing what the DEA orders.”

Like many U.S. analysts, the sicario worries that a window of opportunity to crush the cartels may be closing as the Calderón sexenio draws to a close.

I think that the United States law enforcement needs to take advantage of the Calderón government, because he will allow them to do whatever investigation they want. Many other governments will not allow them to go so far. Another government will not allow the same cooperation and availability of their military to work with the United States. The United States needs to take advantage of this situation.

Editors as Drug War Guides

It wasn’t the opportunity write another headline story in the attention-grabbing drug war in Mexico that brought Molloy and Bowden to the sicario and his story.

In their respective introductions to the book and in their respectful editing of his story, Molloy and Bowden exhibit an interest in getting past the headlines to the fundamental truths of the drug trade and to the politics and economics that foster it: how easily dreams and ambitions can lead to violence and evil when surrounded by an immensely profitable international illegal drug market.

In El Sicario and in other books and journalism, Bowden has taken us to the heart of Juarense darkness. Bowden’s reputation brought him to the attention of this sicario, who tells his story both as part of his new redemptive path and in the hope that his story may help end the violence and evil of the drug trade and drug war.

Once again we are in debt to Bowden for helping us understand the borderlands and the border drug world -- not just through his reporting but also by way of his often stunning insights and frank reflections.

But here, as in such other of Bowden’s works as Murder City: Ciudad Juárez and the Global Economy’s New Killing Fields and Juárez: The Laboratory of Our Future, there are instances of analytical overreach, when impressions turn too quickly to provocative -- sometimes dubious -- generalizations.

For those who follow the scourge of the drug war and know the corruption of Mexico’s political economy, some of Bowden’s generalizations and declarations resonate and often affirm our own inchoate but perhaps less dramatic assessments. Bowden certainly has earned the right over his many years of reporting about the border to say what he believes and to share his worldview with us. We credit him for daring to reach into the complexities of the border, immigration, and Mexico for the back-story.

In the preface, Bowden once again articulates his conviction that the violence and social disintegration of Juárez are emblematic not only of the drug war, but also of the global economy – the murder city as the laboratory of our globalized society’s future.

“I believe,” writes Bowden, that “he [el sicario] is going to be part of our future. Killers like him are multiplying. The global economy has brought ruin to many, and he is a pioneer of a new type of person: the human who kills and expects to be killed and has little hope or complaint.”

He sees Juárez as a manifestation of an emerging Mad Max world created by a heartless global economy that alienates the individual, erodes ethical foundations, and destroys collective identity.

Extrapolating from the Juárez experience, Bowden offers a grim postmodern phenomenology. The sicario, writes Bowden, “does not fit our beliefs or ideas. But he exists, and so do others who are following his path.”

In this world, the statements of American presidents about Mexico mean nothing because they insist on a Mexico that does not exist and that has never existed.

Such provocative writing sets us searching for underlying meanings and forces behind Mexico’s drug violence and reminds us that official truths are usually lies.

We pause to reflect after reading Bowden, which is his special contribution to the Mexico drug war discussion. We are grateful for this challenge to reflect and reconsider. But questions need to be asked about the degree to which Bowden’s own answers reveal truth and reality.

“The sicario takes us to the real Latin America, not a place of magical realism, but a place of murderous realism.” Yes, perhaps for those who see Latin America with rose-colored glasses as a land bursting with tropical color, joyful living and solidarity, there may be a need for a closer look.

But whatever the meaning of “murderous realism,” the phrase is a stylistic and analytical step much too far – a deliberately vague generalization that distracts and does little to help us understand Latin American politics and people.

Complexity and simplicity often run parallel or intersect in Bowden’s reflections, as does his observation:

In some ways the book reminds me of the Illiad, a self-contained strange world that by its very existence upends all the lies and assumptions of our world. In the Illiad humans are toys for the gods’ pleasure. In this book humans are toys that are tortured and murdered by unseen forces wearing the mask of the Mexican state.

Bowden rightly insists that the violence in Juárez cannot be understood without recognizing the central role of the state not just as drug warrior, but also as drug trader. In his writing about the border, he also rightly points out that the violence in the streets of Juárez and at the hands of the sicario he interviews cannot be fully understood apart from the anomie and economic ruthlessness associated with the city’s maquiladora economy.

But, where is the evidence that this is the future of all communities integrated by outsourcing into the global economy? There are many evils in the global economy, surely, but gang violence, killing for hire (as the origin of the term sicario itself remind us), and epidemic social violence predate recent globalization trends.

No doubt that corruption and trafficking are widespread within Mexican security forces. But the putative equivalence between the state and the shadowy criminal underworld – “wearing the mask of the Mexican state” – tends to obscure at least as much as it helps illuminate the complexities of Mexico’s political economy.

Clearly the alienation and social disintegration related to the outsourcing development model embraced by Juárez should not be ignored. But it’s the city’s political geography as a border city and traditional smuggling corridor that are fundamental to its status as a “murder city,” not its role in the new global economy.

It could be argued that all such crossroads where complementary dimensions of the global economy meet will all give rise to the same reality and evil -- which is what Bowden seems to imply. But this doesn't always hold true. Nor, of course, is this type of routine killing and gang violence limited to the nexus points of the global economy. 

It’s not Bowden’s job, of course, to undertake comparative studies about the pervasiveness of cultures of murder and hopelessness in cities penetrated by the global economy’s outsourcing. Yet Bowden’s habit of conflating the global economy, mindless killing, and social despair in support of overly broad and ahistorical conclusions about “our future” and the global economy tend to undermine the essential integrity of his work.

Certainly, whatever connections exist between the maquiladora economy and drug violence merit our attention. Juárez may serve as a “laboratory” where these connections form and where they can be observed. Yet there is a danger of extrapolating without evidence and in the process leaving us with an even more superficial understanding of both the global economy and the illegal drug trade.

While less provocative, Molloy’s introduction is more helpful in understanding the reality of the drug world and Mexico. For those concerned about the policies and forces behind the drug war, Molloy’s introduction and details of the autobiography offer relevant information and insight about the structures of the drug trade and drug war.

“Historically,” explains Molloy, “the Mexican state has allowed criminal organizations to exist while at the same time maintaining control over them by designating a liaison to supervise their activities and take a cut of their income for the state. Whoever controlled the plaza kept crime orderly and profitable for the state. There have been variations of this concept in the United States as well…. In Mexico, the relationship is much closer, and it has become more significant in recent decades.”

Molloy, who monitors murders in Juárez on the Frontera List, disputes the common view that the surge of violence in Mexico is limited to those like this sicario who are the “soldiers” of the drug trafficking organizations. 

Instead, she notes, “the overwhelming majority of the victims are ordinary people and that most of them are poor: children, teenagers, old people, small-business proprietors who refused to pay extortion demands, mechanics, bus drivers, a woman selling burritos from a cart on the street, a clown juggling at an intersection, boys selling newspapers, gum, and perhaps nickel bags of cocaine or heroin on a street corner, an increasing number of women who are taking jobs in the drug business, and dozens of people who have been slaughtered inside drug rehabilitation clinics.”

Molloy and Bowden deserve our appreciation and respect for giving this ex-assassin the opportunity and freedom to tell his own story -- from his memories of mole sandwiches as a young boy on a family outing through his accounts of torture and killing as a routine drug trade practice to his reflections as a reformed and saved evangelical Christian. His story, apparently unscripted by the editors, gives us an inside glimpse not only into a largely hidden underworld but also into the mind and heart of a soldier in the drug trade.

What are the policies, principles, and beliefs that will bring the drug trafficking organizations and their imitators under societal control? Neither the editors nor the sicario offer a prescriptive agenda.

However, by helping us understand the complexity and forces that shape this drug trade underworld, we are certainly on better footing to evaluate such issues as border security, drug prohibition, Mexico’s drug war, and Washington’s own four decades of counternarcotics aid and intervention.


Join Border Wars Policy Group to follow/discuss border security, immigrant imprisonment, and drug policy issues at: