By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following the Mexican military’s killing of Jalisco New Generation Cartel leader Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes, also known as “El Mencho,” widespread violence erupted across Mexico. Twenty-five members of the National Guard were reported dead in Jalisco, along with other officials and civilians. Schools were canceled and governments warned citizens to remain indoors as cartel members blocked roads and set vehicles ablaze. The U.S. confirmed providing intelligence support for the operation, commending Mexico’s efforts against a major fentanyl trafficker.
Read the original article here
The recent tragic loss of 25 Mexican National Guard troops in Jalisco, following the killing of a cartel leader, paints a grim picture of the ongoing violence gripping Mexico. This incident is a stark reminder of the brutal reality faced by law enforcement and civilians alike in the protracted war against organized crime. The sheer number of casualties among the National Guard is particularly shocking, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of current strategies and the formidable capabilities of these criminal organizations. It’s a horrifying escalation that underscores the depth of the conflict and the immense human cost involved.
The question of how these groups can inflict such heavy losses on trained military personnel is deeply unsettling. It points to a level of organization, firepower, and tactical proficiency that rivals, and in some ways surpasses, that of national security forces. The cartels are not merely street gangs; they operate as sophisticated, well-resourced entities capable of mounting lethal ambushes and engaging in sustained firefights. Their ability to effectively counter and inflict casualties on the military suggests a strategic advantage that is difficult to overcome, highlighting a significant imbalance in this ongoing struggle.
The origin of the advanced weaponry wielded by these cartels is a recurring and critical concern. While the exact sources are complex and multifaceted, it’s widely believed that a significant portion of these high-powered rifles and sophisticated armaments originate from their northern neighbor. Straw purchases and gun shows in the United States are frequently cited as primary channels through which these weapons flow south, a disturbing testament to how easily illicit markets can exploit legal frameworks. While some equipment might be siphoned from Mexican law enforcement, the overwhelming majority of the advanced firepower appears to be an external import, fueling the cartels’ destructive capabilities.
The cycle of violence that ensues after the capture or death of a prominent cartel leader is depressingly predictable. Removing one figurehead, while seemingly a victory, often proves to be a superficial blow to organizations that are deeply entrenched and have established robust successor mechanisms. The history of such operations, like the previous arrest of Erick Salazar, known as “El 85,” demonstrates that the violence merely shifts, rather than subsides. The power vacuum created is quickly filled, and the underlying structures that allow these cartels to thrive remain intact, perpetuating the endless cycle of retribution and bloodshed. It’s a stark illustration that focusing solely on leadership decapitation, without addressing the root causes, is a strategy destined for limited success.
The notion that these cartels are comprised of “low-level thugs” underestimating their operational capacity. While many foot soldiers may indeed be poorly paid, often compensated with narcotics, the leadership and core operational members are far from mere street criminals. Many cartel operatives, including those within organizations like the CJNG, are reportedly former military personnel, including special forces. This background equips them with advanced combat training, tactical knowledge, and a disciplined structure that makes them formidable adversaries. They essentially operate as a rival military, often possessing immense financial resources and firepower, even if their manpower doesn’t always match that of the state.
The deep-seated corruption within governmental structures is another critical factor that enables the cartels’ enduring power. When these organizations have been allowed to operate and infiltrate government for decades, the lines between law enforcement, politics, and criminal enterprise become blurred. This infiltration compromises the state’s ability to effectively combat them, as key institutions can be compromised, leading to a loss of public trust and a weakening of the rule of law. This systemic corruption is not a minor impediment; it is a fundamental weakness that empowers cartels and makes decisive action exceedingly difficult.
The idea of a civil war in Mexico being the only solution is a terrifying prospect, but one that cannot be entirely dismissed given the current trajectory. Previous attempts at a full-scale crackdown have resulted in horrific death tolls, and the sheer size and influence of the cartels raise serious doubts about the government’s ability to achieve a decisive victory without incurring catastrophic losses. The topography of cartel-dominated regions, in some cases, resembles that of areas where major international powers have struggled for decades to establish stability. The question becomes whether a full-scale military engagement, with its immense human and societal cost, is a viable or even winnable path.
The economic drivers behind cartel operations are often overlooked in discussions focused solely on military solutions. Crime, at its core, is motivated by money and opportunity. Killing cartel members without addressing the underlying economic incentives and the conditions that foster recruitment – poverty, lack of opportunity, and corruption – is akin to treating symptoms while ignoring the disease. A comprehensive strategy must involve not only security measures but also robust economic development, job creation, and efforts to dismantle the financial networks that sustain these organizations. Without addressing these root causes, any military gains are likely to be temporary.
The complex relationship between the United States and Mexico in combating these cartels is a vital aspect of the discussion. While direct military intervention by the U.S. is a highly sensitive and politically charged issue, the offer of military aid and enhanced cooperation deserves serious consideration. The potential effectiveness of such assistance, particularly in providing advanced training, intelligence, and specialized equipment, could significantly bolster Mexico’s capacity to confront these powerful criminal networks. However, the political climate and differing national interests on both sides of the border present considerable challenges to implementing such cooperative strategies effectively.
The notion of “annihilation” as the sole response, while emotionally appealing given the level of violence, is an incredibly difficult and bloody undertaking. It implies a willingness to engage in what would essentially be a full-scale civil war, with potentially devastating consequences for the civilian population. While force is undoubtedly a necessary component in confronting these heavily armed and violent groups, a strategy of total annihilation carries immense risks. It raises questions about proportionality, the protection of innocent lives, and the long-term stability of the nation. A more nuanced approach, balancing robust security measures with efforts to address corruption and economic disparities, might ultimately prove more sustainable.