The U.S. President Donald Trump government is weighing launching drone attacks on Mexican drug cartels as part of a sweeping initiative to fight criminal gangs smuggling narcotics over the southern border, NBC News reported.
Talks between the White House, Defense Department and intelligence officials, which are still in the preliminary stages, have included potential drone attacks on cartel leaders and their supply networks in Mexico with the assistance of Mexico’s government, the sources said.
Still, the government has made no conclusive decision and reached no final agreement regarding fighting the cartels. And unilateral covert action, without Mexico’s approval, has not been dismissed and could be considered a last-resort option. It is uncertain whether American officials have presented the idea of drone strikes to the Mexican government.
If Mexico and the United States move forward together with drone strikes or other measures, it would not be the first time they have initiated a joint effort to combat the cartels, nor would it be the first instance of American military and intelligence collaborating with Mexico’s law enforcement and military.
However, the Trump administration’s proposal may be unprecedented in terms of the number of U.S. personnel involved and the deployment of American drones to target cartel members and resources.
Launching a military offensive against the cartels in Mexico without the government’s approval could be seen as a violation of international law. However, both Democratic and Republican administrations have asserted that the United States has the right to defend itself against threats from a nation that can no longer secure its own territory.
Supporters of using drones argue that if sufficient military pressure is applied to the cartels, they will determine that the cost outweighs the profits they can make from fentanyl. However, some experts and former U.S. officials involved in counternarcotics are doubtful, suggesting that drone strikes could end up being purely symbolic or, even worse, backfire politically for Mexican leaders and threaten future collaboration.
It appears that U.S. unilateral military action in Mexico is now a real possibility for the first time since 1914, when the United States assaulted and occupied the port of Vera Cruz. There is no question that if unilateral action were taken within Mexico, it would plunge the bilateral relationship into a severe decline. It would be sent into a tailspin, as it would constitute a breach of international law and an act of war.
Fostering U.S. cooperation with Mexican law enforcement remains the most promising strategy to target the cartels. Interrogating key figures within the gangs’ networks would be more effective than drone strikes. Dropping bombs may be tempting. It will achieve little and carries significant risks.
Former law enforcement officials and diplomats are doubtful that military action can substantially reduce fentanyl trafficking. They contend that there is no quick fix and that the solution must involve strong cooperation with Mexican authorities, scanning technology at border crossings, tackling money laundering, and enlisting the support of private companies that manufacture the chemicals used to produce the drug.
The drug is so potent and portable that it doesn’t need the extensive logistical networks typically linked to plant-based drugs. The cartels do not operate large pharmaceutical labs to manufacture fentanyl; instead, they rely on little more than a metal tub, with chemicals mixed using a shovel or a long stick. Most of the smugglers transporting the fentanyl across points of entry are U.S. citizens, who can easily cross the border back and forth.
