The article explores the implications of designating drug traffickers as narco-terrorists, questioning whether this classification includes American entities involved in trafficking networks. Zavala highlights the complexity of narcoterrorism, suggesting that the term lacks concrete evidence and is politically motivated. He argues that it empowers the U.S. to justify military intervention in Mexico, posing risks to the delicate bilateral relationship. Zavala expresses concern that the narrative around narcoterrorism manipulates realities and coerces Mexico into alignment with U.S. interests, undermining its sovereignty and security policies.
If they are going to designate traffickers as narco-terrorists, will they also include the Americans who are part of these networks? Because we are not just talking about the famous drug cartels, but also trafficking networks, money laundering, arms smuggling and other structures, many of which are incorporated in the United States.
Rather than describing realities, narcoterrorism is based on spectral notions, on political phantoms that are used to force Mexico to align with Washington's interests.
By using the concept of narcoterrorism, the US government empowers itself to intervene militarily in Mexico. That is something very complicated, because intervening in that way would seriously damage the binational relationship.
I believe that in addition to the bravado, the Mexican government has generally been aligned because in the end our security policy has always been subordinated and violated.
#narcoterrorism #us-mexico-relations #drug-trafficking #military-intervention #political-implications
Collection
[
|
...
]