Mexican Hollowing

By Dave Anderson:

I have long thought that the primary cartel goal in Mexico is not a collapsed state, as we see that Somalia is too dysfunctional for large scale, complex criminality in the anarchic south, but a hollow state that maintains the pretenses and appearance of sovereignty but not the capability to effectively control its territory or its population.  

It is nice to see that my amateur analysis is starting to get picked up in the US government decision apparatus, as Small War Journals passes along an interesting paper from the Army War College.  Here are a couple of highlights:

generates relatively uncontrolled coercion and violence, and its perpetrators tend to create and consolidate semi-autonomous political enclaves (criminal free-states within the Mexican state) that develop into what the Mexican government has called

“Zones of Impunity.” In such zones, criminal quasi states may operate in juxtaposition with the institutions of the weak de jure state, and force the local population to reconcile loyalties and adapt to an ambivalent and precarious existence that challenges traditional values as well as the law...

The drug cartel, the enforcer gangs, and the Zetas operating in Sinaloa have marginalized Mexican state authority and replaced it with a criminal anarchy. That anarchy is defined by bribes, patronage, cronyism, violence, and personal whim. One is reminded of Thomas Hobbes description of life in a “State of Nature.” That is, life is “nasty, brutish, and short..."

What makes these small private armies so effective is the absence of anyone to turn to for help. Weak and/ or corrupt state security institutions, as in Mexico, are notoriously unhelpful and tend to be a part of the problem—not the solution. In such a vacuum, only a few relatively well-armed and disciplined individuals are capable of establishing their own rule of law...

the Zetas organization does not appear to be intent on completely destroying the traditional Mexican state political-economic-social system and replacing it with its own. Rather, the Zetas demonstrates a less radical option; it apparently seeks to incrementally “capture” the state.   [my emphasis]

To accomplish this aim, the leaders of the Zetas have determined that—at a minimum—they need to be able to freely travel, communicate, and transfer funds all around the globe. For this, they need to be within easy reach of functioning population centers. Thus, the Zetas does not find the completely failed state particularly useful. It would prefer to have Mexico as a weak but moderately functional international entity. The shell of traditional state sovereignty protects the Zetas from outside (U.S.) intervention....

Comments

[red pill junkie]

To me, Mexico could never fall into the category of 'failed state'.

Because then, we'd have to acknowledge that at some point in its story it managed to function as a 'successful state'; and that is hardly the case.

The primary function of a state, it's raison d'etre, is to grant security and a minimum of services to its population. To provide food, education and health services to all, or at least a majority of its population. To make use of its monopoly of force in order to uphold a body of laws intended to maintain the cohesion of society.

Never in 200 years of Mexican history has this been ever achieved.

No, Mexico is not a failed state: Mexico is a still-born state.

Saludos,

Red Pill Junkie
Mexico City