US President Donald Trump has indicated a potential military campaign against Mexican drug trafficking organizations, stating that the United States must take action against its southern neighbor. This remark follows the recent US overthrow of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, who has been accused of “narco-terrorism.” During an appearance on the television show “Fox and Friends,” Trump asserted, “We have to do something,” emphasizing that the Mexican government has repeatedly declined his offers to eliminate the cartels.
In subsequent statements, Trump reiterated his commitment to targeting these groups, claiming, “We’ve knocked out 97% of the drugs coming in by water, and we are gonna start now hitting land, with regard to the cartels.” His remarks reflect a belief that Mexico, as the primary producer of fentanyl and a key transit route for cocaine from Colombia, is a logical target for a renewed war on drugs. However, experts warn that Trump’s simplistic portrayal of the Mexican drug trafficking landscape fails to capture the complex reality on the ground.
Understanding the Fragmentation of Cartels
For decades, popular media has depicted Mexican cartels as hierarchical organizations led by notorious figures such as Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán. In the 1980s and 1990s, a handful of cartels dominated the drug trade. Today, the situation has changed dramatically. According to Eduardo Guerrero, director of Lantia Intelligence, around 400 disparate groups operate across Mexico. “They’re practically everywhere,” he noted, highlighting the fragmentation of what were once powerful cartels.
The most formidable of these groups, the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, has expanded from 45 to approximately 90 organizations in recent years. Guerrero explained that this fragmentation necessitates a more intricate strategy to effectively combat and dismantle these networks. Even capturing prominent drug lords does not guarantee a decrease in drug trafficking, as the market for these substances remains robust.
Analysts argue that past efforts to eradicate cartel leaders have often backfired, leading to increased violence and competition among smaller factions. The “kingpin” strategy, which involved targeting high-profile figures, has resulted in the emergence of new leadership and persistent drug flow into the United States. Benjamin T. Smith, author of “The Dope: The Real History of the Mexican Drug Trade,” remarked, “If you took out the CEO of Coca-Cola tomorrow, you wouldn’t stop Coca-Cola sales.”
The Challenge of Governance and Control
The security situation in Mexico is further complicated by the fact that “no one is firmly in control, neither the cartels nor the government,” according to Falko Ernst, a researcher specializing in Mexican organized crime. In some regions, such as Mexico City, the government maintains authority, while in others, armed groups operate freely. This creates a patchwork of power dynamics that complicates any singular response to the issue.
Cartels have increasingly established ties with local economies and political structures. During the 2024 national elections, crime groups openly attempted to place their candidates in various offices, resulting in the assassination of three dozen candidates and widespread intimidation. The infiltration of crime into local law enforcement has allowed cartels to operate their own intelligence networks, leveraging threats and coercion to maintain control.
Removing the heads of these organizations will not dismantle their extensive support systems. A recent study published in Science estimated that cartels employ between 160,000 and 185,000 individuals across the country, indicating their integration into the fabric of local economies.
In response to Trump’s characterization of the Mexican cartel problem, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly pointed to the newly released National Security Strategy and the historical context of the Monroe Doctrine, which seeks to prevent external powers from intervening in the Western Hemisphere. Kelly stated, “The administration is reasserting and enforcing the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, control migration, and stop drug trafficking.”
While the Mexican president has maintained a cooperative relationship with the Trump administration, she has firmly rejected the idea of US troops entering Mexico. Claudia Sheinbaum, the mayor of Mexico City, emphasized her desire to collaborate with the US but insisted on maintaining Mexico’s sovereignty. She pointed out that a military intervention could provoke significant backlash from the public and her political party, the leftist Morena party.
Sheinbaum has been proactive in addressing drug trafficking, deploying thousands of troops to the US border to intercept narcotics and migrants. Since Trump took office, she has also facilitated the transfer of numerous drug-trafficking suspects to the United States. Any unilateral military action from the US could jeopardize diplomatic relations with a key trading partner.
Trump reiterated his concerns, stating, “We have to do something” about the drugs “pouring through Mexico.” He suggested that Sheinbaum is hesitant to accept assistance from the US, claiming, “The cartels are running Mexico.” In a recent news conference, Sheinbaum attempted to downplay Trump’s comments, expressing confidence in the communication between Mexico and the Trump administration, and stated, “Yes,” when asked if she believed it was unlikely that Trump would pursue military action.
The dynamics between the US and Mexico have shifted, as Trump’s military rhetoric introduces uncertainty into an already complex relationship. Following the US action against Maduro, there are concerns that the US is positioning itself as a dominant power in the region, a move that has implications for all Latin American countries. As stated by Brenda Estefan, a professor of geopolitics, the US action establishes “a new structure of power that no country in Latin America can ignore.”
