If you’re an expat in Mexico, you may be wondering what this election has in store for us. If you’ve been following the news during this election cycle and in the year before, you’ve likely noticed a disturbing tread: a lot of candidates, particularly those running for local office, have been killed. A lot.
And that’s besides all the activists and journalists.
Sadder still is the fact that the killers are pretty much completely getting away with it. This fact that leads us to a painful truth: the people who say they’re in charge are not usually the people who actually are in charge.
Why not?
Why can’t the government control the violence?
Like a lot of things, it’s complicated. But I think our editor Kate Bohné put it very well in her Substack essay, Bullets, not hugs. When democracy truly came to Mexico (with Vicente Fox’s election in 2000), it disturbed the uneasy, corruption-enabled peace that had been in place for decades. It also failed to provide a mechanism for rooting out the small-time players of “the old guard” at the municipal and law enforcement levels: “This shift exposed the “gray zones” of criminal-state collusion to the pressures of election cycles, which at a municipal level, are frequent (mayoral terms are only for three years). Under the one-party system, these local arrangements among cops, officials and smugglers were somewhat stable, but with the end of PRI hegemony, they became fractured.”
AMLO’s famous phrase of “hugs, not bullets” is not turning out to be, in the end, a winning strategy. I, like many, gave it the benefit of the doubt: if Calederón’s strategy of targeting the powerful cartels with everything we had led to an unprecedented time of violence in Mexico, perhaps a softer approach was in order. The idea was to take a pro-social approach to keeping young people from joining cartels in the first place by offering them plenty of opportunity to be successful otherwise, and meanwhile, to not take a swinging bat to the hornet’s nest of well-armed and well-organized criminal gangs the way Calderón did.
Unfortunately, most analysts have concluded that the result has mostly been what looks an awful lot like warm embraces for the bad guys and bullets for everyone else. I think we can all agree that this is not a winning strategy.
The problem isn’t a nationwide one
These problems, of course, are localized: there are very safe places in Mexico and there are very unsafe places in Mexico, the same way you’d find in any other country.
But the fact that cartels feel so emboldened in their efforts to control elections on the local level is disturbing at worst, terrifying at best: they are extremely well-organized, and the fact they’ve been so successful in eliminating so many candidates they consider unsatisfactory certainly makes it seem like they’re two very big steps ahead on all fronts.
Terror sucks, but terror is extremely effective.
And it’s not that people don’t care. It’s simply that the problem seems too big to handle. How does one drain the ocean we’re all swimming in of sharks? (Actually, I need a better analogy, as sharks aren’t even close to being as dangerous as the cartels are…humans, maybe?).
On a national level, Mexico just doesn’t have the resources to send in a literal army to protect small-town mayorial candidates; and even if they did, there’s been plenty of documented collusion between criminal groups and the armed forces, anyway. It’s not that all of them are corrupt; most are not. But as we all know, it doesn’t take a majority to poison a group.
Are expats affected by any of this?
Mostly not much; as foreigners, we’re barred from participating in politics anyway, and most of us gravitate toward communities with reputations for safety when deciding where to visit or to live already. But it does mean that we need to make a point of not being naïve when evaluating the risks of certain actions. As a handful of unlucky foreigners and quite a lot of Mexicans can attest to, the bad guys here do not mess around.
So when you’re “doing your research,” make sure you’re also paying special attention to things like the reputations of certain driving routes if you decide to come by car (which I would not recommend, though I know plenty of people who have without a hitch). Keep your embassy’s emergency contact number on speed dial, and maybe even permanently share your location with someone back home.
I’m not saying that you need to live in fear; what I am saying is that you need to remember that the justice system in Mexico is very, and perhaps extremely, different than the system you’re likely used to, and unnecessary risks should be 100% avoided.
Much to your shock, I am sure, I personally have not yet figured out a safe and fair path forward for so many swaths of Mexico to get out from under the drug cartels’ thumbs.
And anyway, Mexico’s ongoing security issues are for Mexico to solve, and I do believe that this will happen, especially as more opportunities for individuals and the country as a whole open up.
In the meantime: have fun, yes, but stay safe, and remember that part of the fun and the risk of traveling is the fact that you simply can’t be in charge of everything that happens: be strategic about the risks you decide to take.
Sarah DeVries is a writer and translator based in Xalapa, Veracruz. She can be reached through her website, sarahedevries.substack.com.
Sometimes I feel that there are two realities in Mexico, the superficial positive reality that the government projects to the world, especially to tourists and potential investors.. AMLO downplays any negative violent events in Mexico, which he blames the opposition for magnifying. But the other reality that many Mexicans, especially the poor and working classes live in every day is dark and sinister. From what I’ve read no one seems to know how to break the cartels hold on power in Mexico. AMLO’s approach not to actively use violence against them, probably saves lives in the short run, but most likely emboldens them to engage in more and more illegal activities, effecting more and more of the populace and also the economy until eventually the government will have to curtail these activities, probably with force, but by this point it might be too late to undo the damage and halt their increasing power in Mexico.
Well summed up Barbara. Unfortunately I think it would take another ruthless dictator like Porfirio Diaz to clean this country up. Not only is that unlikely but the collateral damage would be awful, like last time. These situations tend to either resolve with a complete criminal takeover or the people do install a ruthless dictator who will kill the criminal class in sufficient numbers to drive them back underground.\
No easy solution. Expats need to stay out of the way and avoid the hot spots.
Great article–and comments. Thanks Sarah for having the courage to write the reality.
There really is only one solution, and we would have to look to Bukele of El Salvador to show how it could be done. But it’s only Mexico’s decision to make.
Ms. DeVries has described Mexico’s violence and corruption succinctly and accurately, I think. And she correctly refrains from positing simple answers. The outlandish profits from the drug trade destroys all people and systems that stand in opposition.
My view [as a US expatriate here], is that the enemy, the problem, the issue, the scourge will not cease until the marketplace changes. That is, until the population of the USA stops taking recreational drugs!! Until that day comes [as it will in some far-distant time], this fire will rage on.
It so saddens me that it is my countrymen who have loosed this scourge, and they are beyond the reach of Mexicans who must pay the price with the endangerment of their lives and welfare.
In my opinion, those who want access to ‘unapproved’ drugs should be allowed to purchase them at Unapproved Drug Stores. Access should be limited to those 26 yrs and older, willing to take the responsibility for the pharmacology of euphoria, toxicity, and possible death. Savings from the ‘War on Drugs’ would go to treatment of people who decide to exit this life of drugs. We do not need to expend more lives in Mexico or anywhere else to ‘protect’ those who want this lifestyle
i agree, bradford one way to take control from the crims selling the illegal stuff is to legalize it yes that might be an overly simplistic solution but there is a lot of logic behind it like prohibition in the US from the 1920’s -30’s
and the”war on drugs” that followed they were massive failures the State cannot hope to exert its’ will on the peoples’ need for an escape from the pain of living.
bradford gilman imo
From your lips to Gods ears.
It isn’t going to happen.
If drug trafficking ceases to be profitable, will not the cartels turn more towards other illegal activities–like extortion, human trafficking, kidnapping, armed robbery, etc? Removing the drug trade might make things LESS safe for us! These are not good guys; They are not going to go get “honest” jobs (that pay pitiful wages) if their money tree is taken away from them.
Bingo. Bad is Bad and Bad will just change to a different revenue source. The drug cartel maybe the safest of all. As long as they can make money doing this business they will leave the avocado farmers, bus drivers, taco stands, etc. Alone.
Lake Texcoco Ecological Park, nice park, good idea of AMLO to move the Texcoco airport to the AIFA, otherwise there would now be a half-finished flooded stretch of concrete here.
Ups, sorry reply under the wrong article
Talking with a Dr who has lived here all her life. Her answer was “you could not use the law to breakdown the cartel.” She might have a point.
Well said Robert Dailey. I agree that most of the violence in Mexico derives from transporting drugs to our neighbour, the USA. In return we get their guns. Both trafficking systems must be addresses.
I agree with much of this article and some of the comments made here, but I whole heartedly disagree with giving up. There are many examples of what governments can do to minimize these illegal crime spreading groups – the US during the mafia era of the 1920s, El Salvador, Colombia and Chile. Please do not suggest that the government should give up. Never give up!
Most politicians rely on an oppressed people to remain in office. An independent society questions their government. The U.S. has become similar to Mexico. They no longer have president’s elected. They are *installed. AMLO feigns to cater to the poor. When in reality he caters to the syndicate. Smoke and mirrors.
Mexico has an example to live by, it doesn’t have the will to do it. Mexico is much richer than El Salvador, yet their president built huge prisons and declared an emergency to reign in the gangs/cartels there. It can be done here also. But the Mexican people would rather opt for electing politicians that promise free everything and deliver nothing. AMLO has been a huge failure yet they are ready to elect his had picked successor. Just like the blue states in the north that are failing, but the people keep on electing Democrats. You get what you elect.
Blue state resident here. We aren’t failing. Educate yourself.
Blue states are failing? You probably don’t know, or want to believe, that it’s the blue (donor) states that are carrying the red (taker) states but then again you probably don’t turn off Fox Spews long enough to do your own research.
Looks like the country is in for another six years of the samo-samo…
Another blue state resident here: “We aren’t failing. Educate yourself.” Yes, + !. But instead of falling into the horror of the Red v. Blue hate mongering that we’re forced to suffer so acutely in the USA, let’s agree that this is an excellent article with many excellent comments following it. Certainly paramount in any long term solution is the issue Mr. Daily brought up: drug dependency in the United States. As long as there is such a high level of demand and profit, suppliers will meet that demand, and Mexico, due its proximity to the market and relative ease of access, will be that supplier. Demand-side solutions are as complicated for any U.S. government as are supply-side solutions for any Mexican government, but clearly the U.S. can commit many more resources (financial and other) to reduce the demand than Mexico can to reduce the supply. Until we Americans face the root of the issue, which starts with asking ourselves why so many other Americans find life better on drugs than off, we will continue to experience high levels of violence and social instability here, and we will continue to be co-conspirators in the slaughter of many thousands of Mexicans and primary contributors to the current climate of fear that affects citizens, residents and tourists alike.
nicely summarized,i believe the deep human need to alter our reality is ancient and inbred, “even bats, moose and birds eat copious amounts of fermented fruit the “drunken monkey” hypothesis posits that attraction to alcohol derives from an evolutionary linkage among the sugars of ripe fruit[alcoholic fermentation and consumption by human ancestors”(nih.gov). I would encourage reading the entire abstract from which I copiously quoted.
as my previous comment attributed too little scientific background about the use of intoxicants in humans I offer the important important information taken from the same website to which I cited: genomic evidence for natural selection consistent with sustained exposure to dietary ethanol in diverse taxa (including hominids and the genus Homo) over tens of millions of years.
(ncbi.nim.nih.gov)
NATURAL SELECTION consistent with tens of millions of years of the genus homo pretty much says we were naturally selected based on the consumption of intoxicants if you’ve read this far maybe you’ll be amazed at how intransigent the need to have altered states of reality is and why prohibition will always fail