JOURNAL: Shutting down traditional media in Mexico

Mexico's slide into global guerrilla warfare took another baby step today as the regional paper, Cambio Sonora, shut itself down due to security threats from drug gangs. The paper had already stopped most of its investigative reporting into the drug industry, but that was insufficient (likely a correct decision since 7 journalists have been killed since October and the newspaper has suffered two grenade attacks). The breadth of this violence against the media and its apparent randomness (as opposed to selectivity) demonstrates conflicting motives and a loss of central control (which strongly indicates a shift in organization form).

Of course, you can still find narcocorridos, torture/death videos and other messaging from the gangs.

Comments

[JDubbs]

John,

How far away is Mexico from being a failed state? Is their a compromise of chaos with the govt and narcos or is this just business as usual south of the border? Also do you think this will effect mex-american populations in border states? I've always believed that most people leave their native lands because of the chaos, be it war, criminals or corrupt oppresive govts.

[john SCOTT]

Reporters being killed has been ongoing for a while. Your analysis consistently misses the point that in existing nations people have more to lose than gain by throwing their lot in with the bad folks (or ignoring them). Look at Venezuela, once the lower/middle classes can't buy bread because it's too expensive due to inflation, watch out for the next coup. Mexico has always been a sort-of wild-west.

nothing new hear, move along now

[John Robb]

JDubbs, with oil money running out and the militarization of this conflict, this is going to get very ugly, very quickly.

JScott, you are exactly right in that this has been going on for a while. However, it is telling us something that I think is interesting about the organizations in control. In regards to the rest, not sure what you are aiming at.

[Duncan Kinder]

I often entertain the notion that, in politics, things often work as the late Stephen Jay Gould asserted they work in evolution - that there is not gradual, constant change but rather there tends to belong periods of stasis interrupted by sudden , radical punctuated equilibrium.

Under the Gould-type thesis, things generally shall cook along for some time, with Lou Dobbs worried about the fine print in the latest immigration bill and the DOD continuing to spend hundreds of billions to fight a conventional war against the former Soviet Union. Then something apparently - and in and of itself - minor shall occur in Mexico, in Columbia, in Somalia, in Nigeria, or elsewhere. And the results shall be drastic.

The sudden, precipitous collapse of the Soviet Union illustrates how this could work. In hindsight, we are able to say that various structural factors made the Soviet Union weak, but that was far from apparent during the 70's and 80's.

The original rise of Islam, shortly after Mohammed, also illustrates this thesis. Then the two great superpowers, Byzantium and Persia, faced each other down. Then, from out of nowhere came this new thing, Islam, that swept them off the board. We can with hindsight cite things like the schism following Chalcedon, the Justinian plague, and the effects of the Byzantine / Persian wars of the 620's as factors explaining this change - but at the time it was a massive surprise.

[Fabius Maximus]

Congrats on your coverage of what might be the disintegration of Mexico's polity. So far as I know, despite its importance few are watching. You, Stratfor, a few others.

Perhaps that is the most remarkable aspect of the situation. Hopefully DoD and the intel community are on top of this.

Esp. interesting as immigration is such a hot political topic – and the leadership of both political parties strongly favor an almost open border with Mexico.

[Britmex]

In the past everything led back to the government in DF - whether legal or otherwise. Journalists were not killed because they did as they were told. Newspapers relied on government subsidies and paid their people a pittance. The journalists topped up their wages with government slush funds. Note that they were not being paid to write or not write a particular story, rather they were being integrated into the government machine.

In the past Mexico has fallen apart when the central regime could no longer control activities in the provinces. It happened in 1810 and then again in 1910. In both cases the country fell into a ten year period of war where everyone fought everyone else.

In both cases the cause of that conflict was not repression, but the regime's failure to repress: thus all the pent-up tensions were let loose.

Today, Mexico had democracy which means that repression is no longer an option. As with 1810 and 1910, the government is losing control of the provinces.

Whether the provincial elites who feel that they have lost out over the past few decades will make common cause with the drug lords is another matter. If they do the country will collapse once again.

[Cavolonero]

I wish I was in Tijuana / Eating barbequed iguana
I'd take requests on the telephone / I'm on a wavelength far from home
I feel a hot wind on my shoulder / I dial it in from south of the border

I hear the talking of the DJ
( Can't understand just what does he say ? )

I'm on a mexican radio. I'm on a Mexican, whoa-Oh, radio
I'm on a mexican radio. I'm on a Mexican, whoa-Oh, radio

[dano]

The USG, via the State Dept, has provided the Mexican government with the means for electronic intelligence gathering on (at least) the cell phone and internet infrastructures. See the LA Times story at http://tinyurl.com/2k5h5h. One can probably assume that US technicians will be training the Mexican operators. It's probably also safe to assume that NSA and Ft. Huachuca will have a backdoor into the system as well. The story says the US will have access according to publicly available documents the Times saw. The Times does not provide links to the documents, and both the USG and MG declined to comment.

[Bill Moore]

John,

I agree with the others that you are the only blogger/author that seriously addresses the crisis in Mexico and its potential impact on our security interests. I frequently link people that should be interested from a security stand point to your posts, but surprisingly they don't see much to worry about. I would love to see a psychological study on why we need to ignore problems until they are a crisis, such as Al Qaeda prior to 9/11.

On another note, would you please clarify what you mean by Global Guerrilla? The guerrilla/warrior aspect I understand, it is the global label that remains vague. AQ has several transnational operatives and affiliated groups around the world, so the global label makes sense. The situation in Nigeria is localized (although the impact is global), yet they're labeled as global guerrillas also, among numerous others. I don't want to trip over mouse turds, because as soon you put a label on something you restricted your understanding with a definition, so if it is just a loose term to describe a condition then I'll let it go.

[enigma_foundry]

A point here:

While it is certainly possible that Mexico itself will become a failed state, once that occurs, there will be increased motivation from regional actors to reconstitute each area under their control into a small statelet.

By this process, the former Mexico would become a collection of smaller states. That certainly seems possible, as certain areas have distinct ethicity and culture, and that's not necessarily a bad option at all, for some in the US. Certainly better than having a complete Mexico with an anti-US administration, right?

[Joshua]

enigma foundry: Indeed, Mexico's official name is the "United Mexican States" (!), which implies that if the nation falls apart, those pre-existing individual states would have to sink or swim on their own. The northern border states might even try to join the U.S. someday, if they feel sufficiently threatened by more lawless and belligerent states to the south.

[Bill Moore]

I thought the lawless states were in Northern Mexico?