By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A rear admiral in the Mexican navy was shot and killed in Manzanillo, a key port city on the Pacific coast. This marks one of the highest-ranking military officers slain in Mexico in a decade, with the last such incident occurring in 2013 when a vice admiral was killed in Michoacan. While attacks on high-ranking officers are relatively rare, the Mexican government has increasingly entrusted the navy, army, and National Guard with law enforcement duties, placing them at the forefront of the fight against drug cartels. Manzanillo’s strategic location for drug smuggling, with direct shipments from Asia, makes it a highly valuable target for cartels seeking to import precursor chemicals for fentanyl production.
Read the original article here
The brazen killing of a Mexican navy rear admiral by gunmen underscores the escalating power and audacity of criminal cartels in the country. This tragic event, one of the most high-profile killings of a high-ranking military officer in over a decade, highlights the deep-seated corruption and lack of control that plague Mexico’s security apparatus.
It’s clear that cartels are not just powerful, but they’re also extremely well-equipped and operate with impunity. They’ve managed to obtain weaponry and armored vehicles that rival, and in some cases surpass, the Mexican military’s arsenal. This raises a critical question: how do these cartels acquire such sophisticated weaponry?
The answer likely lies in a complex web of corruption and black market arms trafficking. The ease with which cartels obtain advanced weaponry is a testament to the failure of Mexican authorities to effectively combat their activities. The cartels have also infiltrated the Mexican government, using bribery and intimidation to influence law enforcement and political decisions.
The “hugs not bullets” policy, adopted by the Mexican government, has been widely criticized for its ineffectiveness in dealing with cartel violence. Critics argue that it has emboldened criminal organizations while failing to provide a tangible solution to the problem.
The United States, which has long been embroiled in Mexico’s drug wars, finds itself in a difficult position. It has faced criticism for its role in the rise of Mexican cartels, with some arguing that American policies have unintentionally fueled their growth and power. The US has also been criticized for its interventionist approach in Latin American countries, with many pointing to disastrous outcomes in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan as cautionary tales.
However, the question of whether the US should intervene militarily in Mexico is a complex one. There are valid concerns about the potential consequences of such action, including the risk of escalating violence, creating instability, and alienating the Mexican government. Moreover, the presence of US troops on Mexican soil could further fuel anti-American sentiment.
Perhaps the most important factor is the deeply embedded nature of the cartel problem. They are not just criminal organizations, but rather intricate networks that have infiltrated all levels of Mexican society. Simply targeting the leaders of these cartels will likely not be enough to dismantle them; their power lies in their deep roots and their ability to adapt and regenerate.
Ultimately, addressing the issue of cartel violence in Mexico requires a multi-pronged approach. It requires a commitment from the Mexican government to combat corruption, strengthen its law enforcement agencies, and address the underlying social and economic factors that contribute to the problem. It also requires a more collaborative approach from the United States, focused on supporting Mexico’s efforts to address the problem, rather than resorting to unilateral intervention.
The killing of the rear admiral is a stark reminder of the grave danger posed by cartel violence in Mexico. It’s a tragedy that underscores the need for a comprehensive and effective solution, one that recognizes the complexity of the issue and the need for a long-term commitment from all stakeholders.