Designating Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations in a bid to solve the narcotics trafficking crisis at the southern border might be counterproductive, according to Max Abrahms, a foreign policy expert specialized in counterterrorism.
“The truth is, counterterrorism is often ineffective and can even be counterproductive,” Mr. Abrahms, who teaches political science at Northeastern University in Boston, said in an interview on EpochTV’s “Crossroads.”
“The Mexican drug cartels are essentially conducting chemical warfare on everyday Americans affecting every community, town, and city in our nation,” they told the Biden administration, adding that those groups have developed “well-organized armed forces” to protect their lucrative trade from rivals and from the Mexican government.
But designating Mexican cartels as FTOs has broader implications beyond just giving more legal tools for law enforcement agencies, Mr. Abrahms cautioned.
“I think that’s problematic, because it lends itself to a counterterrorism solution,” he told “Crossroads” host Joshua Philipp. “As soon as we designate them as FTOs, Americans are going to regard these Mexico-based cartels not as primarily interested in the drug trade and profits, but as terrorist organizations like the Islamic State (ISIS), and there’s going to be more and more pressure for us to go after them in a kinetic fashion.”
Given the rather fast demise of ISIS—its self-proclaimed caliphate was dismantled in a matter of five years—many people may have the impression that kinetic military action is very effective when it comes to fighting terrorists. But that’s not always the case.
ISIS itself spawned out of an Iraq that had turned into a failed state following years of U.S. occupation there in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Mr. Abrahms noted.
For an counterterrorist effort to work, according to Mr. Abrahms, there needs to be international support and local support on the ground. In the case of eliminating ISIS, the United States was able to get both.
“Countries around the world, even countries that never agree on anything else—the United States, Europe, Sunni Gulf countries, Iran, Russia—were all anti-Islamic State,” he said. “Even on the ground Islamic State did not enjoy popularity, because it was, honestly, a very stupid terrorist group. It committed attacks all over the world against the most sacrosanct civilian targets, and then bragged about it over social media. This elicited the largest counterterrorism coalition that we’ve ever seen in history.”
By contrast, the fight against Mexican drug cartels is not much of an international concern, the professor said. On top of that, the cartels are a worse enemy than ISIS in terms of manpower.
“This would be a fight between the U.S. National Military and cartels, which actually have more members than Islamic State even dreamed of,” he told Mr. Philipp. “We’re talking about not just tens of thousands of members, but arguably hundreds of thousands of members, when you include all of the different people in Mexico who participate in this illicit drug network.”
“Furthermore, we wouldn’t be welcomed in by the Mexican government,” the professor continued. “The Mexican government, frankly, like any government, is careful to protect its national sovereignty. As soon as the United States starts intervening militarily in Mexico, we are going to reduce the [Mexican] government’s desire to to work with us.”
What also needs to be taken into consideration is that fact that there are already many Mexican gangs in the United States, Mr. Abrahms added. While currently, their primary goal is not violently killing U.S. citizens, they would start targeting Americans living inside the United States and abroad in retaliation to U.S. military intervention.
When asked about strategies to undermine the financial networks of cartels, Mr. Abrahms said he is more “sympathetic.”
“It would avoid many of the problems with kinetic operations,” he told Mr. Philipp. “When people think of counterterrorism they think of spies and, military force, but a lot of it happens at the financial level through the Treasury Department.”
“I do agree with the logic that these groups—unlike terrorist groups, that should be emphasized—are primarily motivated by profit,” he added. “If we could eat into their profits, that would be a disincentive for their current activities of running fentanyl across the border.”
