Immigration, drugs, oil and Mexico. Connect the dots because it matters

I was catching up on some magazines this weekend past and finally read The Economist’s article, “State of siege.” I generally love the well written articles in The Economist, but this one left me incredulous. I couldn’t tell whether it was seriously calling for the U.S. to do more in the WoD or less and then I realized that I was reading a perfect news article; it reported some facts and left the reader to do more research to make up his mind. Here are some of the facts from the piece:

IT IS so hot in Veracruz that they put ice in the beer. Even then, it rapidly grows tepid. But for the heat, you could confuse much of this port city with a slice of American suburbia—apart from a few square blocks of the faded colonial centre. Chain franchises line the streets and traffic flows smoothly. Until recently, Veracruz, far removed from the border, which is the front line of Mexico’s drug war, has been relatively calm. But the steamy heat has failed to prevent the upsurge in Mexico’s narco-violence reaching its once peaceful streets.

Earlier this month gunmen armed with automatic rifles shot up a betting-shop in the town, one of five around the country that were simultaneously attacked. In March, two bodies were left wrapped in a sheet at the local television station. A few days later, a severed head was delivered to the town’s army barracks. Last autumn a local crime reporter was murdered. None of this has made headline news; in Veracruz, as in much of the rest of Mexico, such horrors have become the norm.

…

In this country of just over 100m inhabitants, there were 1,600 murders in 2005 linked to organised crime, 2,200 in 2006 and more than 1,200 so far this year. When he took office on December 1st, Mexico’s new president, Felipe Calderón, vowed to make the fight against organised crime his top priority. The army was promptly sent in to the worst trouble spots where the local police were either too few, too ineffectual or too corrupt to cope. Plans were also announced to restructure the less venal, but also ineffectual, federal police.

…

But the real problems of Mexico’s law-enforcement apparatus are systemic. Federal police account for only 6% of the country’s security personnel, notes Mr Medina Mora. And however grave the problems at federal level, they are worse at state level, and even more dire locally. Samuel González Ruiz, former head of the attorney-general’s organised crime unit, says that, without electoral reform, any attempt to improve policing is doomed to failure. Elections, even at the local level, are so expensive that drug money inevitably finds a way in. Unless elections are made cheaper, drug lords will always find local protectors, he says.

According to the UN’s World Drug Report, the wholesale price of cocaine in the United States in 2004 (the most recent year for which figures are available) was a third of what it was in 1990. Late last year, Mexico’s Congress passed a law decriminalising possession of small amounts of drugs; 94% of drug cases in the country are for possession. But Vicente Fox, the outgoing president, vetoed the law under pressure from the United States. “The limits on Mexico’s autonomy in these matters are not small,” Luis Astorga, an expert on crime at Mexico City’s National Autonomous University, notes wryly.

These things immediately reminded me of my WBAP radio interview last year. I was discussing (poorly due to my nervousness) the libertarian position on the War on Drugs, immigration, and foreign policy with a very friendly host. I commented then that Mexico was trying to end their “in your face” drug problems by decriminalizing, but that the U.S., as usual, stepped in and pressured Fox to veto.

But, because of the article I read, I did some more digging and came across some interesting stuff. To really understand what our “leaders” are doing, you may need a timeline. For brevity, I will give you my conspiracy chick “cliff’s” notes.

First, in 2002, our selected president issued this position:

WASHINGTON — President Bush said Tuesday that ground has been lost in the war on drugs and that it is time to re-energize the fight.

So, the president unveiled the administration’s national drug control strategy.

“We’ve got a problem in this country. Too many people use drugs. And this is an individual tragedy, and as a result it’s a social crisis. There is no question that drug use wreaks havoc on the very fabric that provides stability for our society,” Bush said Tuesday in remarks at the White House.

Behind the scenes was the Petroleos Mexicanos/U.S. oil giants link:

22-09-03 Just across the Texas border, Mexico is sitting on a gold mine of natural gas. But instead of extracting it, the state-owned oil monopoly is importing gas at record rates from the United States.
Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, has long channelled most investment to oil, scarcely supporting natural gas. Now, however, Mexico’s gas demand is booming and pricey imports from Texas are skyrocketing, putting more pressure on high US gas prices.

Soon, the burgeoning gas needs south of the border could spell opportunity of another kind for US companies.

But what that article doesn’t talk about is the Pemex/U.S. immigration link:

A spokesman for Republicans on the International Relations Committee, Sam Stratman, noted that immigration in the United States and Pemex in Mexico “are very emotional issues that are very difficult to discuss rationally.”

“We certainly understand that the final decision on issues concerning Pemex rests with the Mexican government and the Mexican people,” he said. “This resolution is not aimed at promoting ownership of any piece of Pemex by American oil companies.”

But then, in January 2005, the U.S. issued a travel advisory for her citizens traveling to Mexico. It said:

This Public Announcement is being issued to alert U.S. citizens to the current security situation along the Mexican side of the U.S.-Mexico border in the wake of increased violence among drug traffickers. Although the majority of travelers in the region visit without mishap, violent criminal activity, including murder and kidnapping, in Mexico’s northern border region has increased. The overwhelming majority of the victims of violent crime have been Mexican citizens. Nonetheless, U.S. citizens should be aware of the risk posed by the deteriorating security situation. This Public Announcement expires on April 25, 2005.

That warning was terminated January 21, 2006 and Baja Insider said:

Although the situation along the border states has changed little from when the first travel warning was issued one year ago.

What has changed is the US governments position on oil surpluses it wished to purchase from Pemex, the national petroleum company of Mexico. Many years ago a deal was struck with Pemex and the US to supply Mexican oil products to the US markets. US concerns agreed to pay a slightly higher than market price for the petroleum products with an option to purchase more at the same price. Mexican concerns anxiously sign the agreement paying them higher than market levels for the oil.

The situation in the Middle East ensued and crude oil prices soared. US interests pressed their demands to purchase the optional quantities of oil at the now far below market prices. Mexico of course, resisted,

It would appear that, in order to put the negotiating screws to Mexico, the State Department issued travel statements aimed to hurt Mexico’s fragile travel industry. Mexico was forced to agree to fill a majority of the optional oil sales at the reduced prices.

But, in 2007 there is another travel advisory due to drug crime, President Bush recently visited Mexico to discuss oil, and we have a new amnesty bill.

Oil has never been something I learned much about, but I did learn some basic math back in elementary school. I want to make a point on the number of people killed in Mexico. Again, The Economist claimed:

In this country of just over 100m inhabitants, there were 1,600 murders in 2005 linked to organised crime, 2,200 in 2006 and more than 1,200 so far this year.

Let’s assume that the article is correct with the ~100m/#killed statistic. At current time, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates just over 300m people live in our country. In 2005, there were about 16,692 murders in the U.S. I think that Mexico is doing a little better in the murder department than we are in the U.S.

And on the corruption issue, the magazine mentions the high price of elections. Perhaps America should take heed of the mention and realize that it is the same here whether the cash comes from drug dealers or corporate friends.

I’ve always said that our immigration problem is not a people problem; it’s a wealth redistribution problem. I’ve always called the War on Drugs an assault on personal liberty. I’ve read (non-fiction) books that implicate some of our government agencies in drug trafficking and oil wrestling. I don’t think you have to be a tin foil hatter to connect the dots in this Mexico fiasco.

No, drugs and immigration aren’t the problems. Bad “leaders’ are attempting to poison our minds so that we are blind to what they do. Our problem is that most of us have become too apathetic to even pay attention anymore. We’ve become too lazy to take care of ourselves and some people demand laws that are detrimental to their families.

The Economist article closed beautifully,

Until America substantively changes its drug policy, Mexico’s policymakers, capable though they may be, seem doomed to fight a losing battle. Government officials have grown fond of saying that things may have to get worse before they get better. But it is hard not to wonder whether they might not just be getting worse before they get still worse.

but I’ve taken the liberty of fixing it to make it nearly perfect:

Until America substantively changes its drug everything policy, Mexico’s policymakers everyone, capable though they may be, seems doomed to fight a losing battle. Government officials have grown fond of saying that things may have to get worse before they get better. But it is hard not to wonder whether they might not just be getting worse before they get still worse.

~ by Miche on June 26, 2007.