Laura's Blog: U.S. Military Intervention in Mexico an Open Secret

A March 15 article in the New York Times revealed what many knew, others suspected and some just preferred to ignore: U.S. military intervention in Mexico goes way beyond what the American and Mexican public are told by their governments.

The article reported that presidents Calderon and Obama agreed in their Mar. 3 meeting to continue U.S. surveillance flights within Mexico. They also agreed to open a second "fusion" center for counternarcotics work in Mexico.

The revelations in the NYT reinforce our contention that while most of the press focused on the supposed friction between the leaders, this month's summit emphasized both government's heavy political investment in a failing and costly drug war.

They also fuel criticisms that, with the tacit compliance of the Calderon administration, the Pentagon and U.S. agencies such as ATF, FBI and DEA progressively treat Mexico as their turf when it comes to security operations.

The Mexican government confirmed the U.S. drone flights in its airspace, issuing a press release that stressed that the flights are used at the request of the Mexican government for specific purposes.

An AP story following up on the New York Times article cited sources stating that drone flights actually began in early 2009 as a result of a proposal by the U.S. government. The first planes used were the Predator Bs, followed by the much larger Golden Hawk beginning in February of this year. 

The AP story ends by noting,

"Starting in 1990, U.S. Customs pilots routinely flew small Cessna Citation 2 jets with a Mexican co-pilot over northern Mexico to hunt for drug-runners' aircraft. The program, known as Operation Halcon, started after U.S. efforts to stop drug smugglers flying small airplanes into the U.S. territory prompted traffickers to land just on the Mexican side of the border and then load up drugs for a drive north.

In May 2001, former commissioner of U.S. Customs Service Charles Winwood told a U.S. Senate committee that Customs had two Cessnas stationed in Mexico, one in Hermosillo and the other in Monterrey. The U.S. had others stationed elsewhere in Latin America. Operation Halcon ended in part because U.S. officials could not get the Mexican government to give U.S. personnel immunity in case of an accident in Mexico."

"An accident" would appear to mean the death or injury of Mexican civilians. The question that immediately springs to mind is, 'Has the Calderon government effectively granted that immunity now that it allows the U.S. drone flights?'

Members of the Mexican Congress have attacked the "cooperation" due to a lack of transparency, violations of national sovereignty and possible violations of the constitution. The Calderon adminstration has responded by saying that the program is completely legal and justified in the context of the need for sophisticated intelligence to fight the drug cartels.

 Mexico's "Plausible Deniability"

In the NYT article, retired DEA chief of international operations Mike Vigil makes this remarkable admission:

“It wasn’t that long ago when there was no way the D.E.A. could conduct the kinds of activities they are doing now. And the only way they’re going to be able to keep doing them is by allowing Mexico to have plausible deniability.”

Mexico, with its long history of nationalism and U.S. invasions, is uniquely sensitive to U.S. intervention. Many experts believe that the degree of U.S. involvement permitted by the Calderon administration is unprecedented. As security analyst Abelardo Rodriguez writes "...the character of current transnational threats and the establishment of a security perimeter defined by Washington that includes Mexico and Canada now means that the [Mexican] Armed Forces find themselves moving toward unprecedented security and defense collaboration with the 'Colossus of the North.' It is important to step back and examine the risks that come with such changes from the perspective of Mexico’s national interest."

The drone flights, the binational office for drug war operations opened by the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City, and the active participation of hundreds of U.S. agents in Mexican territory have alarmed many Mexicans. Both governments have attempted to reinforce the rhetoric of "shared responsibility" while keeping mum on what that means on the ground. But as press reports, Wikileaks cables and declarations from U.S. officials reveal the extent of U.S. involvement, plausible deniability by the Calderon administration is becoming increasingly diffcult.

That was more than obvious this morning when Mexico's National Security Council spokesperson Alejandro Poire faced nearly an hour of questioning from radio host Carmen Arristegui.  Poire admitted to the drone flights, stating that they form part of binational cooperation in intelligence. However, he refused to answer specific questions regarding when they began, how many flights have been authorized, under what conditions they are requested or whether the flights constitute a violation of national sovereignty.

Poire's 'plausible deniability' breakdown went beyond the drone issue. He also refused to respond to evidence that armed U.S. agents operate in Mexico by citing the legal prohibition on armed foreign agents as though the mere existence of a law precludes its violation. Despite open declarations of numerous U.S. agents that they do in fact carry weapons in Mexican territory, the spokesperson only agreed that perhaps an investigation was in order when pushed by Arristegui.

Poire offered no further information on the second "fusion center" for drug war cooperation, as reported in the New York Times. The first would seem to be the Mexico City office located on Reforma 265.

If I had to guess, Ciudad Juarez would appear the likely location of a second center. As I noted in the last blog on the wikileaks cable, Juarez is a sore spot for both governments since its disastrous levels of violence make it increasingly difficult for them to justify current drug war strategy. There are high political stakes in showing progress in the troubled border town before Mexico's 2012 presidential elections in Mexico and as the U.S. Congress faces growing opposition to funding the Merida Initiative. 

The present political climate is likely to produce more denial, plausible or not. That's why press investigations, whistleblowers and independent analysis will prove crucial in tracking the drug war and militarization that is rapidly advancing in the region.