As one of his first actions just hours after taking office on Jan. 20, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to designate international drug cartels and other gangs as foreign terrorist organizations. The order specifically mentions Tren de Aragua and MS-13, saying their “campaigns of violence and terror in the United States and internationally are extraordinarily violent, vicious and similarly threaten the stability of the international order in the Western Hemisphere.” While the order did not mention any Mexican cartels, it said cabinet secretaries could identify additional crime groups to be designated. What will the order practically mean for the fight against organized crime groups? How useful will it be? How effective will cooperation be between U.S. authorities and their counterparts in Mexico and elsewhere in Latin America?
Carrie Filipetti, founder and president of the Vandenberg Coalition: “President Trump’s declaration of international drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) is a fulfillment of a central campaign promise: the commitment to take American national security at our border seriously. The biggest change in labeling these cartels FTOs rather than the more traditional TCO—transnational criminal organizations—is the authority it grants in designating those who provide ‘material support’ to the entity. This authority doesn’t have to be used, but it could be a major hammer to use on those who have turned a blind eye to these gangs’ violent behavior. Both Tren de Aragua and MS-13 are not only dangerous—Tren de Aragua, in particular, has played a significant role in escalating our border crisis. So, too, have Mexican cartels, whose trafficking of drugs killed over 100,000 Americans last year, and who trafficked enough lethal doses of fentanyl into the United States to kill every single American. What could this mean? Given the intentional weaponization of immigration by Venezuela’s Maduro regime, the administration may designate Nicolás Maduro and his insiders under this material support clause—opening the door to the much more significant state sponsor of terrorism designation. So, too, might it use future designations of Mexican cartels to hold the Chinese Communist Party responsible for its material support as it incentivizes the delivery of fentanyl precursors to its Mexican partners. Regardless, I suspect we are seeing just the beginning of the Trump administration’s actions to impose a cost on those who have aided illegal immigration or illicit drug trafficking.”
R. Evan Ellis, Latin America research professor at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute: “President Trump’s executive order actually only establishes a process for recommending new designations of foreign terrorist organizations under the legal authority of the Immigration and Naturalization Act, and specially designated global terrorists under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The two acts do not directly create the authority for military action on foreign territory. Designation may facilitate criminal prosecutions, options to freeze terrorist assets and authority to expel immigrants. It also facilitates criminal actions against those helping them, including governments and companies involved in their corruption, and even the people and businesses that pay them protection money. The legacy of U.S. military intervention in Mexico, including the 1916-17 campaign into Mexico by General John Pershing to capture Pancho Villa, has made Mexicans sensitive that the designation of the Sinaloa and Jalisco Nueva Generación cartels could lead to U.S. military action in their territory. Ironically, the ultimate result could be positive. President Trump’s national security advisor, Mike Waltz, and Mexico ambassador nominee Ronald Johnson have deep understanding of the uses and limits of the military. They, and Secretary of State Rubio, understand Mexico’s sensitivities but also how embedded the cartels are in Mexico’s government and economy. The threat of U.S. military action could ultimately overcome past posturing that has impeded the necessary meaningful, respectful military cooperation over the shared threat from the cartels, including the drug deaths they cause in the United States, and the violence they wreak in Mexico, mostly with guns from the United States.”
Amanda Mattingly, former U.S. diplomat and founder of ACM Global Intelligence: “Designating Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs) or specially designated global terrorists (SDGTs) would have an enormous impact on U.S.-Mexican bilateral relations. The foreign terrorist designation of cartels along with the threat of U.S. military action in Mexico, the reinstatement of the ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy, the threat of 25 percent tariffs, and the withdrawal of U.S. foreign assistance sets the stage for a Trump-Sheinbaum showdown. No doubt the Mexican government needs to go after the cartels—and many Mexican nationals desperately want more help from the United States in targeting the cartels and the corruption that has allowed them to amass an estimated 30 percent of Mexican territory. But disregarding Mexican sovereignty is not U.S.-Mexican cooperation, which is needed to fight drug trafficking and migrant smuggling. The negative economic effects of the accompanying threats to Mexico will also stretch Mexico’s willingness and capacity to work with the United States to carry out the enforcement required for such a designation. Meanwhile, defining the cartels as FTOs will expose many Americans to potential penalties, as U.S. companies may be doing business inadvertently with Mexican companies that could be affiliated with a cartel or cartel members. In recent decades, the cartels have operated like violent organized crime groups and have infiltrated other economic activities in the country, including mining, manufacturing, agriculture and tourism. Finally, while the cartels have committed brutal acts of violence and their illegal activities have spilled over the border, they are not committing political acts of violence against civilians like ISIS, Al Qaeda or the ELN have done. In addition to the larger political and economic consequences of the designation, it could also have the unintended consequence of diluting what is truly considered a foreign terrorist organization.”
Raúl Benítez Manaut, professor at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM): “President Donald Trump is building a new national security doctrine—identifying large criminal groups as terrorist organizations. After World War II, anti-communism defined several national liberation movements and left-wing armed groups as threats to U.S. security, mainly until 1990. Later, after the 9/11 attacks, a second security doctrine defined fundamentalist Islamic groups and the countries that support them or where they are located as promoters of terrorism. A third doctrine defined highly organized criminal organizations, mainly those that transport drugs such as cocaine and fentanyl to the United States from Colombia, Venezuela and Mexico, as terrorists that are to be combated as such. This leads to major legal and diplomatic problems. If groups such as the Sinaloa Cartel, the Jalisco Nueva Generación Cartel and Tren de Aragua are defined as ‘terrorists,’ all their collaborators, direct and indirect, are also terrorists. For example, if a multinational mining company in Mexico pays a monthly fee to a criminal group, it can be accused of sponsoring terrorism. If avocado and lemon farmers in Michoacán pay money under duress to large criminal groups in order to harvest their produce from their fields, they would be considered allies of terrorists. In the United States, arms sellers to Mexican criminal groups would also be sponsors of Mexican terrorist groups. Is Trump going to punish the members of the National Rifle Association in Texas for selling weapons to Mexicans? These are questions that force us to think about how the new criminal enemy to the security of the United States will be constructed and who will fight it.”
The Latin America Advisor features Q&A from leaders in politics, economics, and finance every business day. It is available to members of the Dialogue’s Corporate Program and others by subscription.
