Majority of Mexicans Want More U.S. Help in Drug War

A U.S. Army National Guardsman at his post along the U.S.-Mexico border near Nogales, Arizona, on Jan. 17, 2007. Photo: Department of Defense.

This summer, Mexicans will go to the polls to choose their country's next commander-in-chief. But the new president will also have to deal with ominous developments in the drug war and the fact that few Mexicans believe the government's strategy is working. He or she will also have to negotiate with the U.S. on the scope ' and responsibilities ' of America's role in fighting the cartels.

The reason is stunning. More than half of Mexicans (52 percent) want an increased U.S. role in the drug war, and 28 percent want the U.S. military to intervene on Mexican soil, according to polling conducted by The Dallas Morning News, Mexico's El Universal and Texas Spanish newspaper Al Día. Only 21 percent of Mexicans say the government's strategy is working, though 64 percent think the military should continue 'leading the fight' against the cartels. Ending the drug war through striking a deal with the gangsters is as popular as the current strategy: Only 21 percent think it's a good idea.

'That tells you that Mexicans are really, really tired of this drug war, and they would rather see an end sooner than wait years fighting this by themselves,' Jorge Buendía, president of polling firm Buendía & Laredo, told The Dallas Morning News. Buendía added that because many Mexicans blame the U.S. in part for the drug war (with plenty of justification), many are becoming 'more pragmatic and tolerant about alternatives.'

Especially with no end in sight. On Sunday, the Mexican military discovered 49 headless bodies dumped on a highway connecting the border city of Reynosa to the northern metropolitan city of Monterrey. According to news reports, Mexican officials pointed to the Zetas as the likely killers. (The Zetas have denied responsibility.) Two other mass 'dumps' of dismembered bodies were reported earlier this month, one in Guadalajara and another in the border city of Nuevo Laredo. Northeastern Mexico ' near the Texas border ' and Monterrey have also seen a renewed conflict between the Zetas and the Sinaloa Cartel as the latter move in to contest increased Zetas control of the region, a conflict that Latin America security analyst Patrick Corcoran wrote 'is expanding across Mexico' into a prolonged turf war.

The alternatives have as much to do with politics as they do with military strategy. The ruling center-right National Action Party, or PAN, appears to be headed for a major defeat in July elections, setting up the return of the moderate Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, which ruled Mexico as a single-party state for much of the 20th century. The PRI's candidate, front-runner Enrique Peña Nieto, has pledged to defeat the cartels and has proposed a new national police force comprised of former soldiers to phase out the military on city streets. (Left-leaning candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador, now polling in second place, has vowed to end the drug war.)

But if Mexico's politicians have been unable to stop the violence, then there's no guarantee an increased U.S. presence will succeed where Mexico has failed. Likewise, the Mexican government will not allow the U.S. to deploy troops against the cartels, and Mexican laws prohibit foreign military and police from operating in Mexico. Foreign nationals ' which would include U.S. soldiers ' are subject to tight regulations which makes carrying weapons difficult.

The U.S. and Mexico have routed around these restrictions by allowing U.S. federal agents and civilian military employees to assist Mexican forces in an advisory role. U.S. agents have also been caught in the fighting. In February 2011, Mexican narcos shot and killed U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Jaime Zapata as he and another agent traveled through northern Mexico. The U.S. also operates a small drone fleet along the border and even into Mexico proper to spy on the cartels, though critics have cited high costs and poor results at stopping smuggling. The U.S. has also been pumping billions in aid to Mexico's police and military forces.

'The majority of the Mexican population isn't angry that [President Felipe] Calderon is using the military to fight organized crime. They're angry that he's done such a lousy job of it,' blogged Latin America security analyst James Bosworth. He added that this is 'not an argument that the U.S. should have large numbers on the ground in Mexico,' he said. 'That would be a disaster. Those numbers would quickly reverse to enormous opposition once the troops were actually there.'

But the fact is: The U.S. shares some responsibility, or even most of it. And it's possible the data might open the space for an increased U.S. role. After all, demand for drugs north of the border fuels the cartels, and U.S. weapons and ammunition helps keep them in the fight.

'Hiding from the debate every time a criticism comes up isn't just bad policy, it's bad politics. More transparency about cooperation in an environment where citizens want to see more cooperation should be an obvious policy,' Bosworth said.

Though, it looks like we'll have to wait until the next Mexican government comes to power ' and whether a second-term Obama (or first-term Romney) administration will be open to expanding a U.S. presence. Either way, the drug war is likely not going to end anytime soon.