GOP hawks, Trump advocate invading Mexico

Alexander Ward of Politico reported that—

A growing number of prominent Republicans are rallying around the idea that to solve the fentanyl crisis, America must bomb it away.

In recent weeks, Donald Trump has discussed sending “special forces” and using “cyber warfare” to target cartel leaders if he’s reelected president and, per Rolling Stone, asked for “battle plans” to strike Mexico.  Reps. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) and Mike Waltz (R-Fla.) introduced a bill seeking authorization for the use of military force to “put us at war with the cartels.” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said he is open to sending U.S. troops into Mexico to target drug lords even without that nation’s permission. And lawmakers in both chambers have filed legislation to label some cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, a move supported by GOP presidential aspirants.

via Politico.

Daniel Larison pointed out—

The supporters of attacking the cartels have unsurprisingly not thought through the predictable negative consequences that their war would have.  

Among other things, it would cause huge numbers of people to flee the areas where the U.S. launches attacks, and many of them would probably try to seek refuge in the United States. If they think the migrant crisis is bad now, this would be practically guaranteed to make it much worse.

The intensified violence and displacement would further destabilize Mexico, and it would likely make U.S. cities along the border much less safe.

The U.S. is usually insulated from most of the worst spillover effects of its unnecessary wars because it has fought almost all of them on the other side of the world, but that won’t be possible when the war is on our doorstep.  

Even if many Americans don’t care that intervening in Mexico would be flagrantly illegal and wrong, they will care when it blows up in our faces.

via Eunomia.

Larison also wrote—

In recent weeks, more members of Congress have expressed their support for using force against the cartels, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga).  In a recent interview with Steve Bannon, Taylor Greene said, “The real drum we should be beating for war is the one against the Mexican cartels, because that’s the one I’m beating.” 

Military intervention against the cartels is a fundamentally unserious and reckless proposal that will not remedy any drug-related problems that our country has.  At best, it is a bad answer to a real problem, and at worst it is a desperate exercise in distraction and demagoguery.  Further militarization of the drug war is the worst thing that the U.S. could do.  [snip]

Supporters of intervention against the cartels tout the success of Plan Colombia as an example that what they are proposing can work, but they are wrong.  As Daniel Raisbeck of the Cato Institute has explained, “Plan Colombia’s anti-narcotics element was an unqualified failure.”

In the Colombian case, the U.S. had the cooperation of a partner government and it still didn’t work. U.S. military intervention is rarely successful at the best of times, and attempting to use the military to police drug cartels in defiance of the local government is sure to fail. 

There is no question that the Mexican government is opposed to the proposed intervention.  Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has been adamant that Mexico will not tolerate any interference in its affairs. Calling the proposed military intervention “irresponsible” and an “offense to the people of Mexico,” López Obrador stated again earlier this month that his country must be respected. 

“We are not a protectorate of the United States or a United States colony,” he added.  The anti-cartel resolution is a throwback to the worst periods in U.S.-Mexican relations when our government trampled on our neighbor’s sovereignty at will.  If it passed, it would be a cause of intense resentment against the United States.

There is also a constitutional concern with the resolution.  As a matter of principle, Congress should never again grant the president the sort of sweeping authority that it gave in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.  This anti-cartel resolution is arguably even less limited and more prone to abuse than the 2001 AUMF. 

Responsible Statecraft.

If I thought it was possible to eradicate the cartels’ murderers and torturers by military action, I might be open to the idea.  The cartels are indeed terrorists under any definition of that word.  

But having seen the outcome of the invasion of Iraq and the “war on terror,” I know this is not necessarily the answer.  Invading Mexico would make the drug lords heroes and patriots in the eyes of ordinary Mexicans.

∞∞∞ 

Many Republicans calling for an invasion of Mexico are skeptics about the war in Ukraine.  Ex-President Donald Trump, for example, has called for “peace without delay” in Ukraine.  He told Sean Hannity that, if elected, he could end the war in 24 hours.  

Peace advocates shouldn’t be fooled.  Washington is full of politicians who want to diminish the U.S. war effort in one part of the world only in order to wage a bigger war effort in another part.  This is true of top Democrats as well as Republicans.

LINKS

Republicans Rally Behind the Stupidest Possible War by Daniel Larison for Eunomia.

A cartel war is an insane way to address the fentanyl crisis by Daniel Larison for Responsible Statecraft.

Colombia’s Drug Trade by Colombia Reports.  About the U.S. drug war in Colombia.

Tags: Donald Trump, Mexican drug cartels, Republicans