tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28102563208194151732024-03-13T20:04:09.379-07:00malcolm beithWar in the world...malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.comBlogger299125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-91020588226463923582016-01-13T13:28:00.003-08:002016-01-13T13:33:39.566-08:00Sean Penn and ChapoHaven't blogged for ages. But Sean Penn's Chapo interview has given me a tiny bit of interest in doing so. So here goes, let's see if I can keep this up as a regular thing This is my take on Sean Penn's interview with Chapo, all based on speculation and my minimal knowledge of psychology...<br />
<br />
<b>Sean Penn’s Chapo Interview Could Have Been Perfect — But Chapo Knew His Game Plan</b><br />
<br />
<br />
Everything Sean Penn did and said during his now-infamous interview with Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman Loera was laughable — and yet, likely planned to perfection. Unfortunately, Penn failed to elicit the responses he hoped for because Chapo knew enough elementary psychology to stand his ground.<br />
<br />
Why did Sean Penn whip his penis out and pee in front of the drug lord? For effect, most likely: narcissists — which Chapo is, at least somewhat, according to a psychological profile of him conducted while he was in prison between 1993 and 2001 — are often believed to be prudish in nature, put off by those normal actions that make us human — like peeing, sex, and… farting. <br />
<br />
“At this moment,” Penn writes, “I expel a minor traveler’s flatulence (sorry), and with it, I experience the same chivalry he’d offered when putting Kate to bed, as he pretends not to notice.”<br />
<br />
Again, Penn tried to get some sort of reaction out of the drug lord. No such luck. Just “chivalry.”<br />
<br />
The knight in shining armor complex so popular with those who perceive themselves as above the rest of us mere mortals.<br />
<br />
Penn repeatedly refers to himself as a “gringo” when in fact he’s a world-famous actor, unrecognizable only to someone living on Mars for the past few years. Folks in the hills of Sinaloa have Internet — I’m quite sure they’ve heard of him and probably seen some of his bootleg films. There’s a reason for the “gringo” reference: he’s bringing himself down to a human level — all the better to try to portray Chapo as some sort of grandiose character living beyond his own ego. <br />
<br />
Penn is even too human to use a laptop — do people even make laptops anymore, he asks, rather ridiculously; again, an effort to show him as a man who lives among people, not in the technological realm but in the touchy-feely one that Hollywood loves to much.<br />
<br />
The realm where people have dreams, and are content with themselves, to use pseudo-psychological-speak. A world where people do not aspire to change the world. A world that many of us know if we’ve taken the online “Are you a narcissist?” quiz that circulates the Internet on a regular basis.<br />
<br />
Next question for Chapo: “Do you have any dreams? Do you dream?”<br />
<br />
Next: “If you could change the world, would you?”<br />
<br />
Next: “What is your relationship like with your mother?”<br />
<br />
These questions could have trapped Chapo like the cornered scolded naughty boy he appears to be in the opening shot of Rolling Stone’s video footage. They’re standard psychological questions which might have revealed a fair amount about his character. But Chapo is sharp and apparently, aware enough to have deflected them adequately.<br />
<br />
“Whatever is normal,” he replies when asked about his dreams. “But dreaming daily? No.” <br />
<br />
That is indeed pretty normal. When pressed, he says his hopes and dreams are to “live with his family.”<br />
<br />
Does he want to change the world? “For me, the way things are, I’m happy.”<br />
<br />
“Perfect,” he says of his relationship with his mother. “Very good. Care, love.” His mother, incidentally, is the head of an evangelical church in the mountains of Sinaloa, from which Chapo hails. No ordinary grown man’s relationship with his mother is perfect. It simply can’t be, given the dynamics involved in most adult relationships.<br />
<br />
The interview ends with Chapo looking straight at the camera with his head tilted slightly back, clearly the one controlling the proceedings which he’s been puppeteering all along in a way that anyone has met him has seen and experienced firsthand. Finally, after saying that the people can decide what to think of him — see, Chapo claims to believe in democracy, to care about what other people think of him — he’s asked to define himself. <br />
<br />
He’s a “person who’s not looking for problems in any way. In any way.”<br />
<br />
He’s come a long way from the cowering man in the initial image. Rolling Stone let the man have the last word from a position of strength.<br />
<br />
Rolling Stone failed because it tried to flip the script and let Chapo hang himself with flimsy psychoanalysis, but Chapo was just too sharp for an ordinary “gringo.” He flipped it all right back at them, just as he’s done to the authorities and the countless victims in Mexico’s drug war all these years.<br />
<br />malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-51282368536984575892014-02-13T07:16:00.001-08:002014-02-13T07:16:07.543-08:00There's a lot of skepticism surrounding the alleged connections between drug trafficking and terrorism. Perhaps rightly so: shortly after 9/11, the Bush administration backed a Super Bowl commercial pushing the connection between drugs and terrorists like Osama bin Laden, much to the consternation of pro-legalization advocates. "It's a cynical, cheap shot to take in the current political environment," said one New York-based advocate of drug law reform. "To make it sound like a kid who smokes pot is responsible for putting cash in the hands of Osama bin Laden is ludicrous." <br />
<br />
But the connection, however tenuous, is real. No, your average pot-smoking kid probably doesn't contribute to Bin Laden's riches any more than your average SUV user; but there is real concrete evidence of drug trafficking and terrorism being linked.<br />
<br />
The reason they're usually connected is, quite simply, a matter of desperation. Terrorism tends to stem from frustration at a system that is not allowing for advancement; when terrorism fails and ideology takes a back seat, and reality hits, drug trafficking enters the picture. It's an easy way to make quick money, and it's never difficult to find new recruits to peddle your drugs. Life is hard for most people, and a desperate and exploitative person can easily find a way in. Traffickers can easily utilise the same business connections and the same underground routes that terrorists use, much in the same way an old boys' network might operate.<br />
<br />
Look at the FARC in Colombia, which has declined in recent years in part because of dwindling ideology. Around the late 90s, it became clear the FARC's Marxist ideology was no longer carrying it forward, and that it needed to turn to drug trafficking to support itself. Already a designated terrorist organization, the FARC was now also a drug trafficking organization (or DTO, in US authorities' parlance).<br />
<br />
Interestingly, when terrorist groups turn to drug trafficking, it apparently makes it easier for the authorities to apprehend their leadership. Since roughly 2002, US authorities have extradited dozens of senior FARC members to the US on drug trafficking charges rather than terrorism charges. Likewise senior drug warlords in Afghanistan have been brought stateside for trial on drug charges, rather than terrorism, even when they were implicated in the former.<br />
<br />
None of this really changes the fact that U.S. and Western European consumers are responsible for the drug intake, rather than it being a national security threat, but that said, the connection between terrorism and drug trafficking is very real indeed. <br />
<br />
<br />
malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-70199206128910965492014-02-12T09:50:00.001-08:002014-02-12T10:03:41.181-08:00It's been some time since I blogged, utmost apologies. Now that I've completed my Master's Degree, I'm going to start blogging more regularly, on topics related to war. <br />
<br />
But first, I want to comment on the schmaltz surrounding the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. While tragic, his death was marked by hundreds of articles lamenting the failure of the drug war and heroin addiction in the United States. <br />
<br />
Not one article that I read placed the blame of heroin consumption on U.S. consumers of the drug. Not one article that I read noted that 80,000 people have died in Mexico in the past several years alone due to U.S. consumption of drugs like heroin. <br />
<br />
Not one article that I read noted the fact that a 12-year-long war in Afghanistan is coming to an end with little progress having been made in the fight against opium production. <br />
<br />
Not one article that I read noted that kids are dying on the streets of Chicago because of middle-class heroin use. <br />
<br />
There's a time for mourning, and there's also a time to put things in perspective. <br />
<br />
Addiction is indeed a serious issue, one that has long been overlooked. But not all addicts turn to heroin; not all addicts turn to methamphetamine; not all addicts turn to cocaine. Some just carry on with their daily lives, because that's what we, as humans, do. <br />
<br />
One can certainly argue that the war on drugs is not working. Heroin use in the United States is indeed on the rise (one estimate puts the jump at 373,000 users about six years ago to 669,000 in 2012) and I've not seen any data supporting a decline in other drug use. Pill use is once again on the rise (although in parts of Florida, I gather people are now switching to street heroin because it's cheaper than pharmaceutical opiates). <br />
<br />
But if Americans continue to use these drugs, while the DEA and other law enforcement agencies are doing their damndest to break down cartels in Mexico and elsewhere, trying to get a bead on global smuggling and the narco-terror nexus, seizing heroin mills in the Bronx capable of producing $8 million worth of heroin and stopping doctors from illegally prescribing pharmaceuticals or busting medical marijuana fraud in Detroit, then what hope is there of the drug war having any success whatsoever? <br />
<br />
Folks, if we're going to find a solution to the drug war, it has to come from us. Drugs are not a national security threat; the enemy lies within. Yes, the violence across the southern border is a serious concern, as is the gang threat in cities like Chicago, as is the threat of terrorists hooking up with drug traffickers. But the consumers are driving the demand, and if any progress is going to be made, people are just going to have to say no. (At risk of sounding like Nancy Reagan; I know it didn't work then but there's always hope.) <br />
<br />
Alternatively, they can find the underlying root of their addiction, and treat that with therapy, or work harder, or use their inner voice of reason. However we do it, we have to stop feeding the monster. <br />
<br />
(Tomorrow: Understanding the narco-terror nexus) malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-60935275993991455882012-09-29T04:26:00.002-07:002012-09-29T04:26:26.247-07:00It's been a while since I last blogged, my apologies to those who follow, I'm currently enrolled in a Master's degree course on War Studies. I will start blogging on subjects pertaining to my studies in the coming weeks; in the meantime, I'm going to post daily about some of the victims of the drug war in recent years, whose stories I've come across in my research.
Jan. 1, 2008
Mia Alvarado Rodriguez was tucked up in her bed in her parents' house in Ciudad Juarez, asleep. It was five minutes past midnight.
Her father heard a cry. He ran to the bedroom Mia shared with her three siblings. Mia was standing up, or at least, trying to. Blood was streaming down her front.
She had been hit by a stray bullet from an AK-47.
Mia would die six days later.
She was only three years old.
malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-9472390387010182372012-06-23T07:09:00.000-07:002012-06-23T07:11:07.013-07:00Chapo's son – or notApologies for not posting for some time, I've been busy working on other projects. Just wanted to offer a quick opinion regarding the arrest of Jesus Alfredo Guzman Salazar, one of Chapo's sons.
Or not one of his sons. It appears that the young man arrested in Zapopan on Thursday was actually Felix Beltran and not Chapo’s son, according to his attorney, Veronica Guerrero.
He was, however, found with a large cache of weapons and $160,000 in cash.
Everyone's jumping to criticize the authorities, who apparently were acting on intelligence provided by the DEA. My initial reaction, given the mistakes made in this drug war, are to do the same.
HOWEVER... every news report I've read seems to take the attorney's word for it. Given that this young man had weapons and vast amounts of cash on him, there is reason enough to believe he's guilty of something. And while I'm not gonna say that this guy is Chapo's son, I have little doubt that Chapo's son has a nice little alibi ready – fake ID in hand – in case of arrest, and an attorney ready to step in (as well as, in this case, someone to come and claim she is his mother). If he doesn't, then the Sinaloa cartel is not run the way I believe it is. I'm not saying this is all a show and an effort to manipulate the media, public opinion and the authorities, but it could well be.
So, I'm gonna wait and see with this story before pronouncing judgment. I should also mention that the authorities are investigating whether the marines involved in the arrest may have planted the weapons on Felix Beltran.
If so, that is a huge blow to US-Mexican cooperation, in my mind. The marines, and SEMAR (the navy) are far more trusted than the army. US agents have been turning to them more and more in recent years, due to trust issues, and if the marines are screwing things up, then that does not bode well for intelligence-sharing and joint ops. I sincerely hope this was not the case.
Stay tuned...
PS - Meantime, here's a link to a recent Newsweek International article on Mexico's generals and their side of the war on organized crime.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/06/17/in-mexico-s-drug-war-generals-may-stand-down.htmlmalcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-75173271872430741372012-03-13T12:38:00.002-07:002012-03-13T13:26:21.338-07:00Close but no cigarApologies, it's been a while since I last blogged. Been busy, studying up on counterinsurgency and how it might be applied to Mexico. Also finished writing another book: Hasta El Ultimo Dia (Ediciones B, Mexico) which should now be on sale in Mexico only (at most bookstores.)<br /><br />My thoughts on the latest news about Chapo: There was a close call, apparently, near Los Cabos, in late February. According to the Associated Press, Chapo was recently at a private residence between the Cabo San Lucas Highway and the beach, in Baja California Sur. <br /><br /><br />Two men and two women were arrested at the house.Jose Cuitlahuac Salinas, Mexico's assistant attorney general in charge of organized crime investigations, told the AP: "We know he (Chapo) was there."<br /><br />But when, exactly?<br /><br />The operation to raid the home, one of several multi-million dollar exclusive properties along that route, apparently started on Feb. 21. The operativo apparently took a few days. (a few days – to raid a house ?????)<br /><br />Then, to quote the AP: "Salinas said he didn't know if this time Guzman was in the house with only four other people and lacked the expected entourage of bodyguards and surveillance equipment, which reportedly normally includes helicopters. He would not give details of how the operation was carried out or what the four may have told authorities.<br /><br />"That's classified information," he said.<br /><br />This time? So, when was Chapo in this house then? This month? Last year? The guy has hundreds of houses throughout Mexico. More details please.<br /><br />* * * <br /><br />I'm not saying the authorities are lying, but some have in the past just to get the feds off their backs. As for Chapo, well, he is a master of misinformation and manipulation, as can be expected of such a powerful and elusive drug trafficker. A close call during his wedding in the mountains in 2007 was not a close call; according to my reporting, he deliberately disseminated a fake wedding date so the authorities would come, after he had already gotten married. He could easily have told the people in the house to tell the authorities he was there while he was basking in the sun in Mazatlan.<br /><br />This latest raid is not clearly a sign that the authorities are really going after Chapo, in my mind. <br /><br />"We're still searching," Salinas told the AP. When asked if the authorities are close, he just smiled, the AP reported.<br /><br />This last bit is interesting. The Mexican authorities usually get prickly when asked questions about failing to catch Chapo; they've been fielding these questions for over a decade now, after all, and the frustration is understandable, given that he is just one man in a massive equation. Salinas' smile doesn't really mean anything necessarily, but it does make you wonder whether something is up. A press conference by Interior Secretary Alejandro Poire following the raid, in which he mentioned Chapo, also adds to the sense of wonder: is something going on? <br /><br />Everyone knows capturing Chapo won't end the war on drugs. But it would silence Calderon's critics, and give the PAN good momentum going into the July elections. So lots of people are talking about a so-called October Surprise. Thankfully, the PAN has already silenced those conspiracy-minded critics who said the Sinaloa cartel was being protected. There have been so many arrests of high-ranking Sinaloa members since 2009 that few would dare say the PAN was protecting Sinaloa now.<br /><br />(That said, the conspiracy theories do continue on account of Chapo's corruption network, and the allegations that he played a role in turning on his comrades when they were no longer useful to him. But that doesn't make the government complicit in any way.)<br /><br />I do believe Chapo's days are numbered. But not because the authorities say so. I believe it because I believe Chapo and his cronies believe it. <br /><br />On Jan. 30, 2009, according to DEA agent testimony coming out of the Vicente Zambada-Niebla trial, three DEA agents met with a source in Mexico City. The source allegedly told them that he had been instructed by Chapo to meet with Vicente Zambada-Niebla; Chapo and El Mayo, apparently, were interested in having the heir to the Sinaloa throne cooperate with the DEA in order to expunge his existing US charges. <br />DEA agent Manuel Castanon testified that he told the source that they would consider the possibility of a meeting with Zambada-Niebla, but no promises were made.<br /><br />On March 17, 2009, DEA agent Castanon allegedly arrived in Mexico City and met with another agent at the Sheraton Hotel on Paseo de la Reforma, just down the street from the U.S. Embassy, they met up with Agent Fraga and several other DEA agents operating out of Mexico City. <br /><br />At 12:30 pm that night, Zambada-Niebla allegedly arrived. The DEA agents allegedly talked to him, but made no promises. They were unable to make promises without clearance from their superiors; they were also unable to make an arrest as they don't operate in Mexico in that capacity. They allegedly discussed the possibility of setting up a meeting in another country, maybe even the United States. <br /><br />Zambada-Niebla left. <br /><br />Just a few hours later, he was arrested by the military and federal police in Colonia Jardines del Pedregal, outside of a home located at número 269, Calle Lluvia.<br /><br />He is now on trial in Chicago. <br /><br />Please buy Hasta El Ultimo Dia to find out more.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-56438648652223690132011-12-06T19:47:00.000-08:002011-12-07T06:32:56.090-08:00Enrique Pena Nieto and the three little booksMexican and international commentators are, unsurprisingly, having a field day over presidential candidate Enrique Pena Nieto's inability to name three books that influenced his life at the Guadalajara Book Fair over the weekend.<br /><br />But the real story isn't that he hasn't read three books. He has. Of course he has. He's a well-educated man, with a bachelor's degree from the Universidad Panamericana and a master's in business.<br /><br />The real story is that it is quite possible, with all the posturing and puppeteering going on, both during his governorship and his campaign, with all the political platitudes he's dished out over the years, that he has forgotten how to think for himself. And when asked a question about his own life, his personal life, books that changed that life, he can't actually remember. This might even be more worrisome than if he had not read any books, if he's to be the next president of Mexico. <br /><br />The Mexican people need a person as their president, not a puppet.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-47665092051724078962011-11-23T16:31:00.000-08:002011-11-23T17:39:05.126-08:00Ron Paul and the drug warRon Paul is getting a fair bit of credit for some of the matter-of-fact things he said in the last debate, particularly his comments on the drug war. A sampling: <br /><br />“I think the federal war on drugs is a total failure. You can—you can at least let sick people have marijuana because it’s helpful, but compassionate conservatives say, well, we can’t do this; we’re going to put people who are sick and dying with cancer and they’re being helped with marijuana, if they have multiple sclerosis—the federal government’s going in there and overriding state laws and putting people like that in prison. Why don’t we handle the drugs like we handle alcohol? Alcohol is a deadly drug. What about—the real deadly drugs are the prescription drugs. They kill a lot more people than the illegal drugs. So the drug war is out of control. I fear the drug war because it undermines our civil liberties. It magnifies our problems on the borders. We spend—like, over the last forty years, $1 trillion on this war. And believe me, the kids can still get the drugs. It just hasn’t worked.”<br /><br />On the surface, the guy seems smart, and almost compassionate. Calling it like he sees it; even echoing the anti-drug war, left-leaning crowd which argues that the $1 trillion spent on a drug war that has not really reduced consumption and has only filled up U.S. prisons. According to some media reports, Paul really caught the attention of the so-called youth vote with these comments.<br /><br />But look closer: Paul goes on to mention the "real deadly drugs." Prescription pills. Anyone know what the DEA's new No. 1 priority is? Going after, yes, prescription pills. <br /><br />Now, I'm not a drug war-basher just for the sake of bashing, as anyone who has read The Last Narco will tell you. I'm not really for drugs, nor really against them, except when they clearly destroy lives. Personally, I don't like them because I prefer beer.<br /><br />I'll even go so far as to say that I support the drug war as it exists today, because I haven't seen a truly viable alternative (no, nationwide legalization is not viable, because it won't ever happen.)<br /><br />But what I don't support are politicians twisting their own opinions to pander to certain crowds. If the DEA makes pills its priority, does anyone really think the war on traffickers of other drugs will ease up? Why would it? An all-out war on pills would mean a bigger budget because you've got one more illicit substance to go after; that budget could and most likely would be allocated pretty much anywhere a vast bureaucracy likes. <br /><br />Again, I'm all for going after pills, and the people who sell them to unsuspecting victims illegally. It's a sordid affair, and needs to be stopped. But please, don't pretend to be against a $1 trillion war that will only continue if you go after the pills!<br /><br />It's this easy: I, ––––––––, think the DEA should go after prescription pills, perhaps the deadliest drug threat of them all. I recognize that the drug war has not entirely succeeded, especially in the eyes of many critics, and we need to seriously examine how to better combat the drug scourge in the future. Debating legalization is futile, unless you, the American people, decide to actually vote for it (California didn't; I somehow doubt the rest of you will). So in the meantime, we will add prescription pills to the long list of illicit substances our authorities will go after, and do our utmost to fix the underlying societal issues that are turning our kids to drugs.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-37348031095765841252011-11-22T12:29:00.000-08:002011-11-22T12:42:43.673-08:00Chapo's cash and clean soldiersFollowing the news that the Mexican military seized $15 million in cash allegedly belonging to Chapo in Tijuana, I want to bring up a point that is rarely mentioned in the drug war: the soldiers actually brought the cash in.<br /><br />Imagine stumbling upon $15 million in cash. You've searched a car, and there, just sitting there, is $15 million. You could pocket that cash and walk across the border into the US, and you'd never be heard from again. Neither you nor I can really fathom that amount of money. Nor, if we are entirely honest, can we imagine not being tempted to walk off with it. Yet these soldiers turned the money in to their superiors. They didn't take any of it (as far as we know). Kudos.<br /><br />Incidentally, most news reports are claiming that this is the second-largest seizure of cash during the Calderon administration. It's actually the third. Here's an account (from The Last Narco) of the largest seizure and how a few honest cops refrained from taking a slice of the $207 million that was seized in Zhenli Ye Gon's Mexico City mansion.<br /><br />//Antonio (not his real name) once helped lead a raid on a mansion in the swanky Mexico City district of Lomas de Chapultepec. The property belonged to Zhenli Ye Gon, a Chinese-Mexican businessman who the authorities believed was importing methamphetamine precursors for Chapo and the Sinaloa cartel.<br /><br />Antonio and his crew found an enormous stash of cash in the mansion: 207 million in US dollars, 18 million Mexican pesos, 200,000 euros, 113,000 Hong Kong dollars and nearly a dozen gold bullion coins.<br /><br />Antonio and another top police commander (his superior, on that occasion) wanted to make sure none of the cops walked off with any of the loot. So they ordered their men to empty their pockets and remove their clothes prior to leaving the scene. They did; no one had stolen anything. The other commander and his men then began to leave, but Antonio blocked him. No, everyone, he told the ranking man. What my men do, I do. So the two of them stripped down to their underwear.<br /><br />Antonio and his superior (as well as their subordinates) were both clean – that time. But the superior officer would later be charged with links to organized crime and, specifically, receiving vast amounts of cash from one cartel in exchange for information on anti-narco operations.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-79634742096441755942011-11-19T13:38:00.000-08:002011-11-19T13:43:32.556-08:00No. 2 No. 5While all the recent news has focused on the helicopter crash that killed Interior Secretary Francisco Blake Mora and of course, the conspiracy theories surrounding it, few journalists have pointed out that he is not only the second No. 2 to die in an aviation tragedy during this administration; his death makes successor Alejandro Poire the fifth interior secretary in as many years.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-70843334748114984492011-11-11T10:57:00.001-08:002011-11-11T12:20:36.229-08:00Mexican interior minister dies in helicopter crashSo the Mexican authorities have declared Francisco Blake Mora dead, after a helicopter crash outside of Mexico City. Blake Mora, the nation's interior minister, or No. 2, was headed to Cuernavaca. <br /><br />This is the second interior minister to die in an aviation disaster during the Calderon administration – the first, Juan Camilo Mourino, was a close friend and ally of Calderon's, and died in a plane crash in Mexico City on Nov. 4, 2008.<br /><br />I am not a conspiracy theorist, but seriously, this is all very suspect no matter how one looks at it. At the very least, it's time Mexican officials got either a) better helicopters/planes or b) better pilots.<br /><br />My condolences to the families of the eight who died in the most recent crash.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-55774712728108096772011-11-07T09:30:00.000-08:002011-11-07T10:15:33.110-08:00Chapo on Forbes' listOnce again, Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman has been named to Forbes' list of most powerful people in the world, occupying the no. 55 spot for no apparent reason.<br /><br />Well, Forbes gives reasons, ie, a methodology of sorts. Forbes measured "how many people a person has power over." It looked at the person's "financial resources," then asked whether "a candidate [is] influential in more than one arena, or sphere." Lastly, Forbes "gave consideration to how actively the candidates wield their power."<br /><br />Patrick Corcoran has some good thoughts on the matter here: <br />http://estepais.com/site/?p=35954<br /><br />My thoughts, as someone who has researched Chapo for a fair amount of time now:<br /><br />One thing to take into account on power lists is the fear factor. For instance, mention the name of President Felipe Calderon in Sinaloa, and you will most likely elicit a chuckle. I like Calderon, and I respect him, but that doesn't change the fact that in places like Sinaloa, people regard him as a pendejo. <br />Mention Chapo's name, on the other hand, and you get fear, awe, trembles, respect. That's power.<br /><br />And what about his power as a brand? In 2007, Chapo was being written off by everyone in Mexico. Now, his name is as well-known as Pablo Escobar's. When one thinks of the global drug trade, one thinks of Chapo. Some idiot rapper even named his album after him.<br /><br />I think another criteria for power should be likely effect of death or departure. For instance, if President Barack Obama resigned tomorrow for no apparent reason, the world would be in shock. There would be ripple-effects all over the place. Everyone would be wondering what happened, why, buzzing about what might happen next.<br /><br />If Chapo were to retire tomorrow, or die, or be captured, what would happen? It's all speculation, but there would likely to be serious violence throughout Sinaloa, perhaps throughout Mexico. I still believe there are contingency plans in place for retaliation against the authorities if they nail him. (Disclaimer: this is based on no evidence whatsoever, just a hunch.)<br /><br />Lastly, what about connections to power? A senior Mexican general was allegedly sent by a high-ranking administration official to talk to Chapo to ask him to contain the levels of violence in Sinaloa. When a member of the army – undoubtedly the most powerful entity in the country, at least officially – is sent to talk to you, to effectively ask for your assistance, that is power indeed.<br /><br />Long story short, I think Chapo should be included on Forbes' list. But I think they should have included a little more info on why he belongs there, given how murky details on his financial resources etc really are.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-75477732476467019512011-11-03T04:23:00.000-07:002011-11-03T11:02:50.893-07:00Enique Krauze weighs inMexican historian and publisher Enrique Krauze has written a piece for Bloomberg View which several friends have sent along, recommending on Facebook and the like.<br /><br />As a big fan of Krauze (ok, I admit I have never read more than three paragraphs of his stuff, but I've always wanted to write for Letras Libres) I eagerly opened the link to the article.<br /><br />This is what I got:<br /><br />"Mexico, battered by an interminable narco war, hasn’t found a firm consensus on how to combat organized crime."<br /><br />My response: Mexico's congress, often battered by its own stubbornness, hasn't found a firm consensus on much in recent years. Just look at the gridlock since 2000. Police reforms are stuck there for a reason. As for Mexicans, well, polls do show that more than 70 percent of people favor the death penalty for narcos, and more than 80 percent support the use of the military in the drug war.<br /><br />"In Spain, which has been plagued by the violence of the Basque group ETA, such a consensus was slow to develop..."<br /><br />My response: ETA is not and never was part of a multi-billion dollar industry. Please don't compare rotten apples and rancid oranges. <br /><br />"A major factor impeding agreement on a program of action is a rejection, by many Mexicans, of the law-enforcement policies pursued by President Felipe Calderon. Nevertheless, in a recent poll by the Pew Research Center, 83 percent of respondents approved of the government’s deployment of the army against the cartels."<br /><br />My response: Did I miss something here? Did you just undercut your own argument in the following sentence?<br /><br />"Yet a strong undercurrent of opposition to Calderon’s strategy has been expressed in the recent countrywide marches of the Movement for Peace, founded by the poet Javier Sicilia after his son was murdered by men connected with a drug cartel for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, as has happened to so many innocents in recent years."<br /><br />My response: Come on, Dr Krauze. You know full well that Sicilia's movement, as moving and inspiring as it seems, is not likely to be very different from past movements, led by the likes of Alejandro Marti. Marches bring awareness, but right now, Mexico is hardly an under-reported news story of yesteryear. People need security now, not some poet speaking out and shedding tears on their behalf and taking up the president's time by having a nice little televised dialogue with him about things he already knows and is trying to fix.<br /><br />"A complete acceptance of Calderon’s strategies is by no means required to secure a broad national consensus against organized crime."<br /><br />My response: Thank God for that. I'm no fan of authoritarianism, but Calderon is the president, and definitely needs some leeway to just do what he thinks is right. He shouldn't have to ask permission on every detail of his plan; sometimes I wonder if some Mexican pundits have taken this whole democracy thing a bit far. <br /><br />"Like many others, I would criticize the overwhelming emphasis on a military solution... [and the lack of] focus on the corrupt connections between power and crime."<br /><br />My response: No one has said the military is a solution. Every single government official that I know of says the eventual aim is to get the military back in the barracks as soon as it is possible. It has done so on several occasions in Tijuana and Ciudad Juarez, only to have to bring them back in. As for focusing on the corrupt connections between power and crime, well, I would agree with that if the Calderon administration hadn't thrown its drug czar in jail, arrested a top DEA-backed commander, thrown 30 or so Michoacan officials and mayors in jail (let's ignore the fact that they were later released due to lack of evidence), and so on. Sure, much more needs to be done, but Operation Clean House wasn't all smoke and mirrors.<br /><br />"A society mobilized to confront so grave a problem as the cartel violence in Mexico cannot tolerate inefficiency and corruption in its political leaders. But it must be equally firm in its rejection of, and active opposition to, criminals."<br /><br />Response: Agreed. <br /><br />A link to the article is in the title of this post.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-74205103915128670102011-10-26T21:32:00.000-07:002011-10-26T21:33:27.743-07:00Drug war opposition and supportI wrote a short piece on the polarity of voices in the drug war, for Voice of Mexico, a friend's web site. Here it is (link in title of the post, too)<br />http://www.voiceofmexico.com/articles/the-fog-of-factsmalcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-1463724770030079462011-10-26T17:35:00.000-07:002011-10-26T17:43:19.681-07:00Creel's drug war planPAN presidential hopeful Santiago Creel on Wednesday pulled a smart political move by declaring he would break with the current drug war strategy (which he condemned) and then laying out plans that fit perfectly into the currently designed template. <br /><br />Creel, no ally of Calderon within PAN circles, said he would change "everything" if elected in 2012. "The direct, frontal, expansive strategy is a strategy that should end with this administration."<br /> <br />Creel said that he would begin to take the army off the streets - he gave a 24-month withdrawal timeframe – and insisted the priority should be going after the cartel's revenue streams, going after money laundering, and cleaning up prisons. <br /><br />This is no different from Calderon's strategy. In fact, according to a senior official I spoke with about the matter about a year ago, it is considered to be Phase 4 of the current drug war plan. So, clearly, Creel has calculated that by bashing the current administration's strategy, he will win political points with an increasingly disillusioned electorate, while also appeasing the powers that be inside the PAN (and of course, winning friends internationally – the US has invested $1.4 billion in Merida Initiative money towards this drug war strategy; so does anyone think things are going to change dramatically in the next sexenio?)malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-60686028004835461022011-10-18T11:52:00.000-07:002011-10-18T12:35:28.855-07:00Calderon interview with NY Times/Chapo stuffThe New York Times interview with President Felipe Calderon is really pretty interesting, if you read the Spanish transcript rather than the edited version. (Link in title of post.)<br /><br />I won't analyze it, or go into the statements about the PRI, but will comment on his remarks about Chapo, which are now generating buzz in Mexican dailies.<br /><br />Here's what he says: (in response to a question about Chapo's wife giving birth to twins in a Los Angeles hospital and how she might have made it there)<br /><br />Calderon: Well that you have to ask US border authorities. Because the [customs/immigration checkpoint] one has to cross in order to get to Los Angeles is American, not Mexican. If Chapo was in Los Angeles I'd ask the Americans why they didn't catch him. I don't know if he was in Los Angeles, but those are questions I have. <br /><br />NYT: But he/she (unclear from context whether NYT is referring to Chapo or his wife) had to travel across Mexican territory to get to LA.<br /><br />Calderon: He/she is not in Mexican territory, and I suppose/guess that Chapo is in US territory. Here the surprising thing is that he or his wife are so comfortable in the United States, which makes me ask myself... How many families [of drug lords] or capos would be more comfortable on the northern side of the border than on the southern side? What does Chapo Guzman gain by having his family in the United States?<br /><br />Calderon, speaking about Chapo and other capos: Chapo, like other leaders, Los Zetas, Lazcano... these are very protected people, people who have very complex cover networks. In the specific case of El Chapo, we suspect his area of influence extends through the Sierra Madre Occidental, between the states of Chihuahua, Durango and Sinaloa, which allows him great mobility and regardless of what operations we conduct to catch him, he has a way of detecting [the authorities] at dozens of kilometers distance, hours away. <br /><br />Certainly, during my administration, the Mexican army has arrived, probably twice, at a site where Chapo had been just hours before. Sooner or later, he and other leaders will fall.<br /><br />NYT: Do you want Chapo dead or alive?<br />Calderon: Frankly, I don't wish death upon anyone.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-20609849374119401302011-10-06T17:30:00.000-07:002011-10-06T17:33:17.428-07:00Them's fightin' wordsI might have to reconsider my last post: La Jornada has published a scathing editorial in the aftermath of Fast and Furious, asking whether the United States is an "ally or enemy?"<br /><br />Link in title of the post.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-78078118829361823682011-10-06T12:17:00.001-07:002011-10-06T12:32:08.810-07:00Global Post piece on US military assistance to MexicoGlobal Post has an interesting story on US military assistance to Mexico. (Link in title of post). <br /><br />The headline: US troops aid Mexico in drug war... The US doesn't need to invade — it's already there.<br /><br />The piece, by Ioan Grillo (admittedly a very good foreign correspondent in Mexico), is decent, and outlines the ways in which the U.S. is offering assistance to Mexico in the drug war. <br /><br />Then, however, Grillo proceeds to write: "But few in the U.S. are aware how entrenched their military machine has already become south of the Rio Grande. The rising American presence has caused consternation in Mexico, a strongly nationalist country that annually celebrates the ninos heroes, child soldiers who died fighting the U.S. in 1847.<br />Some commentators here say new American involvement violates Mexico’s constitution."<br /><br />True, some commentators have indeed noted their offense to US assistance on the ground; they have also expressed unease at the amount of US agents (DEA, FBI, ICE) on their soil.<br /><br />"<span style="font-style:italic;">Some commentators</span>." <br /><br />This is important; over the past few years, there's been a notable shift in US-Mexican relations, one that few media have dared report. The shift is this: there has been very little public outcry (even from the traditionally anti-gringo Left) over US assistance in the drug war. Even La Jornada has refrained from outright gringo-bashing, because, well, they realize Mexico needs all the help it can get. "Consternation?" Not to much.<br /><br />So what's the point of this statement in the Global Post article? In my mind, it's simply an attempt to rile people up, to try and throw a spanner in the works by harkening back to bygone eras of nationalist fervor – rather than a real effort at serious reporting of a serious issue.<br /><br />I welcome thoughts on this subject. Sovereignty is obviously an important issue in this drug war, and it's important to put Rick Perry's comments in proper context. But as reporters, I think it's equally important to look for the facts and then make the point, rather than the other way around.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-45059875278631922192011-10-04T12:19:00.000-07:002011-10-04T13:16:52.622-07:00Chronology of bloodshedThe video released by the matazetas just recently has some new elements to it, and the killing of 35 alleged zetas in Veracruz seems to be a ratcheting up of drug violence. So I thought I'd do a quick recap of the violence, and how it has evolved. I welcome any incidents that I've left out:<br /><br />2005 – Video featuring La Barbie and his men interrogating, torturing and then killing four alleged Zetas is uploaded onto the Internet.<br /><br />Sept. 2006 – Five heads are rolled onto a dance floor at the Sol y Sombra nightclub in Uruapan, Michoacan. La Familia takes credit, mentions "divine justice."<br />This is the first mention of religion in context of drug cartel violence. It is not the first beheading, but it garners much media attention.<br /><br />Also in late 2006, the head of a decapitated Acapulco policeman is placed on a pike outside of the police station. <br /><br />2007 - Narcomantas start appearing on overpasses throughout Mexico, often accompanied by dead bodies of rival narcos. Some of the messages taunt rivals, others accuse the authorities (as high up as the president) of collusion with groups like the Sinaloa cartel. Some narcomantas, attributed to Los Zetas, attempt to lure soldiers to the other side with offers of "better salaries and benefits."<br /><br />During 2007 and 2008, beheadings become commonplace. Dozens of heads, sometimes left in coolers, are discovered alongside roads throughout Mexico. A couple are even discovered at Mexico City's airport.<br /><br />August 2008 – Thirteen apparent innocents – including several teenagers, a 4-year-old and a 16-month-old – are massacred in the Chihuahua town of Creel.<br /><br />January 2009 – 'El Pozolero' is arrested. Confesses to having dissolved more than 300 bodies in caustic soda for one drug cartel.<br /><br />Early 2009 – In Caborca, Sonora, a gang of Sinaloa cartel hitmen kidnap a group of rivals. Limb by limb, they saw them to bits. <br /><br />Some time also in 2009, the headless bodies of two men are thrown out of a small plane flying over Sonora. Stunned farmers discover them shortly after.<br /><br />September 2, 2009 – An attack on a rehab center in Ciudad Juarez leaves 18 dead. This would be the first of several attacks on rehab clinics nationwide. <br /><br />In 2009, there were more than 300 beheadings throughout Mexico.<br /><br />Around New Year's Eve, 2009: A thirty-six-year-old man is found dead in Sinaloa. His body has been cut into seven pieces. His face has been carved off, delicately. It was later found, stitched on to a football. A note was left with the ball: "Happy New Year, because this will be your last."<br /><br />August 2010 - The bodies of 72 migrants are found in a mass grave in Tamaulipas.<br /><br />December 2010 – 14-year-old Edgar Jimenez Lugo is arrested, confesses that he worked as a sicario and participated in four executions. <br /><br />February 2011 – Sicarios fail to find their target in Ciudad Juarez, so kill his three daughters (aged 12, 14, and 15) instead. <br /><br />March 2011 – A state police commander in Chihuahua is attacked as she walks her 5-year-old daughter to school; both die of gunshot wounds.<br /><br />Also in March, a young woman is bound and gagged, shot and abandoned in a car in Acapulco. Her 4-year-old daughter is discovered next to her, killed with a single bullet to the chest. That same week, according to the Washington Post, four other kids are killed in Acapulco. <br /><br />April 2011 – 193 dead bodies found in a mass grave in Tamaulipas.<br /><br />May 2011 – More than 180 bodies are dug up at five sites in Durango.<br /><br />There are more incidents, obviously, but these are the ones that spring immediately to mind.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-7255946213355777942011-09-22T20:31:00.000-07:002011-09-28T19:07:09.077-07:00The matazetasIn the aftermath of the recent killings in Veracruz, there's been a lot of talk about the so-called "matazetas," apparently an alliance between la Gente Nueva (originally from Sinaloa), la Generacion Nueva de Jalisco (from Jalisco) and possibly, the Gulf cartel. The Wall Street Journal has a fine piece on the subject and the fears of paramilitarization. (Link in title of post)<br /><br />Contrary to conventional wisdom (if there is any such thing in Mexico's drug war), the Matazetas are nothing new. Around 2004, when a Sinaloa cartel-backed kill squad known as Los Negros moved into Nuevo Laredo to take on the Gulf cartel and Los Zetas, the name "matazetas" was born (to the best of my knowledge, that is the first time it was mentioned.)<br /><br />Then in 2005/2006, when La Barbie took it upon himself to work with La Gente Nueva and try to instill the fear of God in Los Zetas in Tamaulipas, the term matazetas became commonplace. (One of the infamous videos of La Barbie's men executing Zetas, which were later uploaded onto the Internet, was titled "Be a patriot, kill a Zeta.") Throughout Tamaulipas, if you ask anyone with a decent memory, they'll tell you stories of the matazetas, and the fears that residents had back then that these apparent vigilantes, or paramilitaries as some are calling them, might take over. They might even admit that they preferred the Zetas running the show.<br /><br />Throughout 2007, Veracruz was in the midst of a raging turf war, too – the violence there is not that new, although it does appear to have intensified with the latest killing of 35 Zeta-affiliated gangsters. Back in 2007, Los Zetas was under threat from an armed wing of La Gente Nueva, according to newspaper reports. Chapo was trying to take the plaza.<br /><br />The local Veracruz chapter of La Gente Nueva went by another name, too, according to a Dec. 16, 2007, story in Mexico's leading newspaper, El Universal.<br /><br />"They're known as Los matazetas," wrote correspondent Edgar Avila Perez.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-63066579527437831322011-09-21T15:59:00.000-07:002011-09-21T16:23:59.086-07:00The significance of VeracruzSo 35 bodies were dumped in full display in Veracruz. (Link to AP story in title of post)<br /><br />The significance of this latest massacre should not be understated, in my view. Veracruz is traditionally a Zeta-Gulf cartel stronghold. I last went there in late 2008, and everything you could imagine was said to be run by Zetas. Bars, nightclubs, hotels – if you named it, locals likely identified it as a Zeta operation.<br /><br />Real Zetas, mind you, not the young thugs running around the country currently calling themselves Zetas for shits and giggles and to make a name for themselves.<br /><br />Rumor (based on a narcomanta allegedly left at the scene) has it that Chapo's Gente Nueva were responsible for the latest killings.<br /><br />If that's the case, and Chapo's people are moving in on Zeta turf in the southeast/gulf region, then this could spell serious trouble for an already volatile area.<br /><br />For several decades, the southeast corner of Mexico (Veracruz is at what I consider to be the tip of that corner) has been inhabited by both the Gulf cartel and the Sinaloa cartel. I don't know details of the arrangement by which they co-existed, but there is sufficient evidence that both big groups have been allowed to operate in the states of Veracruz, Quintana Roo and Yucatan. Veracruz and Cancun have both served as useful ports of entry for cocaine coming in from Colombia, as well as shipping points for drugs destined to Europe. <br /><br />So if Chapo's people are indeed going after rivals in Veracruz (the city), it could signal a shift of some kind. We already know that US officials believe the Gulf cartel leadership and the Sinaloa cartel have formed an alliance against the renegade Zetas, so this may be just another sign of that move. <br /><br />But we also know that the Sinaloa cartel is hellbent on expanding its operations, particularly to Europe, where drug consumption is up and law enforcement is down (would be nice to have a port like Veracruz in one's control). We also know that the goal of the Mexican authorities is not to end drug trafficking altogether (an impossibility) but to make it so difficult to traffic through Mexico that the cartels have to look elsewhere. <br /><br />Back to the Caribbean, for instance.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-75810739043615956152011-09-19T15:34:00.000-07:002011-09-19T17:24:43.880-07:00Games without frontiersIn early 2009, a lawyer believed to be representing the Sinaloa cartel named Humberto Loya-Castro allegedly approached DEA agents in an attempt to introduce them to a client of his – Vicente Zambada-Niebla, the son of El Mayo Zambada, and according to U.S. Justice Department indictments, ranked as high as Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman in the Sinaloa cartel. <br /><br />Loya-Castro allegedly indicated to the agents that Zambada-Niebla might be interested in cooperating with the authorities. DEA agents in Mexico apparently obtained permission from higher-ups in Washington, D.C. to conduct a preliminary introductory meeting with Zambada-Niebla, arranging to meet the lawyer and his client in Mexico City on March 18.<br /><br />According to what appears to be a government response to a motion filed by Zambada-Niebla in a Chicago court (where he is now on trial), two DEA agents flew to Mexico City on March 17, where they met with their Mexico City-based counterparts; their superior in Mexico City at the time allegedly met with them and "expressed concern" about U.S. agents meeting with such a high-level member of a cartel. According to the document, the ranking agent ordered his subordinates to call off their attempts to meet with Zambada-Niebla unless they received further explicit authorization to do so. <br /><br />DEA agents then allegedly met with Loya-Castro at a Mexico City hotel to break the news. But shortly after, Loya-Castro apparently returned to the hotel, Zambada-Niebla in tow. The DEA agents then allegedly informed the lawyer that they could not meet with Zambada-Niebla, who purportedly "indicated that he simply wished to convey personally his interest and willingness to cooperate with the U.S. government.<br /><br />This all is supposed to have happened on March 17, 2009. In the wee hours of March 18, Zambada-Niebla was arrested by Mexican authorities in the Lomas de Pedregal neighborhood of Mexico City (pic of the house above, courtesy of Google maps). In February 2010, he was extradited to the United States.<br /><br />NOTE: The information above was obtained from a PDF of what appears to be the government response to Zambada-Niebla's motion, which was posted on the web. I can't vouch for the veracity of the document, hence my use of "allegedly" and "apparently" above. More information as I find out more.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-35100384990475833122011-09-15T09:16:00.001-07:002011-09-15T09:23:40.721-07:00Viva Mexico!In honour of Mexican Independence Day, here's a recap of how I spent the celebrations two years ago, in Badiraguato, Sinaloa. (Excerpted from The Last Narco)<br /><br />As the rain fell hard, the last of Badiraguato’s revellers could be heard, singing, yelling profanities, stumbling or driving drunkenly home after the Independence Day festivities. They had just enjoyed a peaceful celebration – no violence at all, no shootings – much to the delight of local government and residents.<br /><br />Some local narcos, sporting gold chains, guns and fancy cowboy boots, had filed into the square at about 9 p.m. to listen to the live traditional banda tunes with the rest of Badiraguato, but they’d caused no trouble. Some were surely just wannabe narcos, too, dressing like those they aspire to become.<br /><br />A group of mothers, lined up in a row along the side of the plaza, looked on as one young narco grabbed the hand of a beautiful brown-haired girl of about fourteen. She was decked out in stilettos, an open-backed top and a short skirt. Her long nails were neatly painted, specks of glitter on her cheek reflected in the lighting. He dragged her out in front of the band and they began to dance sloppily – like teenagers – as the brass banda group churned out another lively, upbeat tune.<br /><br />Normally, the sight of an apparent drug trafficker and a dolled-up teen princess dancing to what can only be described as circus music would be sidesplitting. But in Badiraguato it’s the norm – the narcos love their banda, and they love their princesses.<br /><br />There was an air of calm to Badiraguato that Independence Day, 15 September 2009. The previous year had been a troubled one; homicides had dominated the talk of the town. ‘Mochomo’ – a nickname meaning ‘fire ant’ given to Alfredo Beltran Leyva – and Chapo had been at war, and no one really knew who was in charge any more. But now, with a pact between the feuding kingpins, there was control again and the violence was declining.<br /><br />Soldiers in the shadowy barracks at the far end of Badiraguato peered out over the walls to catch a glimpse of the festivities – they had not been invited but they would enjoy as much of the moment as they could. Some residents glared at the soldiers; all opted for silence while walking by. Only when they were out of the soldiers’ earshot did they resume their conversations.<br /><br />The air of calm in Badiraguato felt precariously temporary. The Sierra of Sinaloa was not what it once was. For several years, the region had been what one resident called a ‘marked zone’. The military was ever-present, but so were the narcos. By and large, the military avoided conflict, but that didn't mean the narcos weren't duking it out among themselves.<br /><br />Homicide had become so common in Sinaloa that it cost a mere $35 to have a rival murdered.<br /><br />On 15 September 2009, Independence night in Badiraguato, some locals hoped to see Chapo there. A group of local narcos had conducted a thorough review of their operations to make sure the marijuana was growing and being delivered at the pace they had promised. When he arrived, Chapo would be pleased.<br /><br />A helicopter circled overhead before the fireworks began. The next morning, the helicopter appeared again. The military was watching, waiting.<br /><br />Chapo never came.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-68874910437424730392011-08-30T23:06:00.000-07:002011-08-30T23:11:17.772-07:00From the Dept. of Terrible HeadlinesFox News has a new story about the Mexican drug war, with the headline: Is Mexico our ally or our Enemy?
<br />
<br />This is inflammatory nonsense. Disagree as the two nations might about what to do with the drug cartels and drug consumption, Mexico and the United States are allies, always will be (contrary to George Friedman's prediction that war will break out in the next 100 years between the two countries) and the media and politicians should stop stirring things up at a time when cooperation is at an all-time high, and is absolutely crucial to progress.malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2810256320819415173.post-63427842818167536342011-08-30T13:14:00.000-07:002011-08-30T13:17:28.284-07:00There is such a thing as a stupid questionEl Universal has a list of questions for readers on its web site, including one about making a pact with the narcos. The nonsensical nature of the questions just about sums up the feasibility of making such a pact.
<br />
<br />¿Te parece que debe pactarse con criminales?
<br />* ¿Crees que es posible vivir de la basura?
<br />* ¿Y tú, respetas a los policías?
<br />* ¿Te gustaría llegar vivir más de 100 años?
<br />malcolm beithhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11572047139102249019noreply@blogger.com0