"Calderón's most enduring legacy may well turn out to be the death toll from his country's bloody drug war. Since 2006, some 45,000 civilians have died, and the body count continues to rise. The homicide rate increased by more than 260% between 2007 and 2010. And a new report by Human Rights Watch indicates that drug cartels and organized crime aren't solely responsible for the bloodletting. The military, deployed to protect civilians, may have caused many of their deaths, according to the group's study. The report is just the latest reminder that Calderón's security strategy, including his decision to deploy more than 50,000 soldiers against the cartels, hasn't reduced violence, and may in fact be fueling it," said the Times.
In terms of content, the editorial could just as well have been written by any one of several 2012 presidential candidates here who will heavily base their campaigns on opposition to Calderón's strategy of using Mexico's armed forces against the drug cartels. Calderón was elected in July 2006 and launched the controversial offensive in December of that year, shortly after taking office. His term ends next year and he cannot run again.
Let's deal with the facts first. The claim that "45,000 civilians" have been killed in the drug war may be accurate, provided we're including the tens of thousands of people who were killed while directly participating in drug trafficking - the bad guys, in other words. Many soldiers and police, and not a few local politicians, including at least 25 mayors, have also been murdered by cartel executioners and hit squads since 2006. And indeed, people whose only "crime" was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time have sometimes died. But to suggest that most of the drug war's victims have been innocents caught in the crossfire - much less killed by military forces - is as irresponsible as it is unfounded. The government makes a strong case that at least 90% of those killed have been cartel operatives, narcotics traffickers or gang members involved in other criminal enterprises.
The Times is justified in taking to task Mexico's military forces for those human rights violations which have occurred. But just what did the Human Rights Watch report say last week? HRW claimed that it had found evidence indicating that Mexican military forces are responsible for 24 killings and 39 unsolved disappearances in the matters presented to it for investigation, plus another 170 cases of torture (as that term is liberally defined in international law). Assuming the legitimacy of every one of those crimes - and more - does it even begin to place the country's armed forces on the same level as the butcherous drug cartels? Calderón met, responsibly so, with the report's authors at Los Pinos to formally receive and review their findings. Afterwards, very much to the point, he responded: "Criminals present the greatest threat to human rights."
Human rights violations by military forces operating in any theater of war, domestic or foreign, should always be thoroughly investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Mexico is doing so. In October, a military court martial convicted and sentenced to long prison terms 14 soldiers and officers convicted of killing five civilians in a 2007 case. To further check the claimed proclivity for violence against civilians by the armed forces, Mexico's Supreme Judicial Court ruled in July 2011 that henceforth, any such cases with human rights implications must be tried by civilian rather than military courts. In the five year war against the drug cartels, Mexican soldiers have been accused of no more civilian focused crimes than have American GIs operating in Iraq - and probably less. How many U.S soldiers were turned over to civil court jurisdiction in such instances, rather than tried in military tribunals? (Mexican Supreme Court strips military courts of criminal jurisdiction in offenses committed against civilian victims).
The L.A. Times also chastises Mexican justice generally, and urges prompt reforms. The editors allege - again in complete disregard of the facts - that "Most of the constitutional (legal) reforms approved on paper in 2008 remain on paper." But just the contrary is true. Only last week Yucatán state implemented the new mandatory system of "oral" criminal trials, closely modeled on adversary proceedings used in English common law nations for hundreds of years. Yes, it will take time, training and education for thousands of lawyers and judges in the 32 Mexican states, but it marks the beginning of a system of justice founded upon the dual cornerstones of presumption of innocence and the right to confront and cross-examine one's accusers in open court.
For decades a long succession of Mexican presidents - all of them members of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which may very well retake the office in 2012 - sat quietly in Los Pinos while drug trafficking grew exponentially and the cartels morphed into international terrorist organizations which now threaten the domestic security of many, including the U.S. When PAN president Felipe Calderón decided that "enough was enough" five years ago, the widespread corruption in local law enforcement agencies and infiltration by the cartels necessitated reliance upon federal troops. It's hard to trust a street cop who earns $300 USD per month. Anyone who does not understand these realities is simply ignorant of contemporary Mexican history. Too bad the L.A. Times is one of them. Its editorial readers expect and deserve a more considered analysis.
History will judge Felipe Calderón soon enough. As it will the United States of America, the biggest drug consuming nation in the world and the source of up to 100,000 assault weapons which have flowed south into Mexico in recent years - some of them at the instance of the U.S. government itself. A few weeks ago I wrote, "Mexico’s agony will continue. Everyone, everywhere knows so. But there is blame enough to share as we reflect on the reasons why it has to be this way." In the meantime, before the Los Angeles Times weighs in on the subject again, it should brush up on Mexican history.
Feb. 1, 2013 - HRW's condemnation of Mexican drug war reveals how little it understands conflict
Oct. 20 - U.S. State Dept. says Mexico is "witnessing the end of drug trafficking"
Sept. 6 - Peña Nieto transition team confirms: Mexican army will remain on the streets
Aug. 27 - Le Monde lashes out at Mexico's "spiral of barbarism" - and takes a swipe at U.S.
July 8 - Mexican voters got suckered on drug war
May 17 - Struggle against drug cartels, organized crime will be Calderón's legacy
Dec. 30, 2011 - Calderón strategy has been the right one
Oct. 13, 2011 - Drug cartels present greater threat to U.S. security than Iran, says State Department
Mexico's Continuing Agony
The Daily Obscenities of Mexico
Mexico, will you free yourself?
Mexico reveals massive disconnect between drug trade and resultant violence
No comments:
Post a Comment