Thread: Commitment needed to end U.S.-Mexico border violence

http://www.mexidata.info/id533.html

Monday, July 4, 2005



Commitment needed to end U.S.-Mexico border violence



By Jerry Brewer



Mexico’s current and intensely serious dilemma with internal and northern border area violence is by no means exclusively its own. It has world tentacles, as well as critical global attention.



International thoughts and concerns have come from the “Independent Task Force on the Future of North America,� among others, formed by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The task force’s membership includes U.S., Mexican, and Canadian consultants, as well as corporate leaders and former government officials. Creative strategies from these “stakeholders� could certainly impact an eroding and collapsing internal government structure in Mexico.



Trafficking in drugs, humans and arms are the elements that raise the outcry and voices of citizens to the highest levels imaginable on both side of the U.S.-Mexico border. And this is clearly terrorism.



Terrorism is characterized as the unlawful use of violence, or the threat of violence, to coerce or intimidate a government or a society. Protection from this menace requires both an offensive capability and a defensive program. The defensive actions must prevent or mitigate hostile actions against resources, facilities and critical information such as strategic intelligence. All of these recommendations assume the trustworthiness of our partners.



The primary building blocks that must be placed in this new foundation of partnering are trust, eliminating/controlling corruption, adhering to the principles of ethics at all levels, and instilling the values for respecting human life. Mastering this level of commitment will demonstrate the unified effort and trust required between government, military, police, and the diverse indigenous sectors. Principles of democratic policing require training, monitoring, and vetting personnel for human rights violations and unethical practices that bring destruction to the organizational infrastructure. This would in fact serve to initiate and foster public confidence in the willingness and ability of those entrusted to protect.



Successful partnering with the U.S. in this fight along the border, and Mexico’s commitment to not compromise sensitive operations and intelligence, are key factors. This is more than likely the Achilles heel impeding serious progress, due to deep-rooted ethical and economic weaknesses that permeate fair and honest economies in favor of terror-enforced initiatives.



Commitments on both sides of the border are of paramount concern in each element of the overall “team� effort. There is a vast network of legitimate investment and economic alternatives at stake here. Mexico supplies a good share of U.S. oil and manufactured items. The U.S. needs to understand that it is not under attack by a hostile country, but rather it is a conflict with criminal elements motivated by terrorist notions. Moreover, we are seeing that the combatants are no longer confined to the Mexican side of the border.



To consistently anticipate and effectively respond to this spontaneous, volatile and quick moving escalation of events, it requires intense cooperation and the mechanisms of cohesive teamwork to mitigate this inherent risk to both nations. Quality of life issues should be the main motivator as both sides degrade the opportunities for the criminal elements to perform and hide. Territory occupied by these elements must be taken back in expedient fashion. Aggression must be contained and eliminated.



Currently representatives from both sides of the border are engaged more in talks than cooperation or commitment. Mexicans must not wait for bureaucratic discussions and decisions to take back their cities and streets. The bodies continue to pile higher, with those who are employed to protect dying in large numbers, all of which tears at citizens faith and trust in anyone to believe in.



A proactive strategy, in lieu of sending and removing troops as a “visual� show of force, would be to adopt a bold initiative of “zero tolerance.� Saturation patrols and immediate response to the locations of violence would not only reclaim the area, but also show criminal elements that there is and will be swift reactions to every action perpetrated.



Areas cordoned off and tactical personnel deploying within serve to place fear back in those who use fear as one of their primary weapons. Criminal elements and their illicit businesses cannot stand this type of heat for long, and are forced or displaced away from those they seek to control.



Mexican officials, by committing to unify proactive strategies to aggressively suppress, deter and combat violence, would be seen by citizens and the world as heroes in the fight for their country and its economic survival. As well, such commitment would most certainly inspire cooperation and be met with a dedicated spirit of unity by the populace.



â€â€

Terrorism is characterized as the unlawful use of violence, or the threat of violence, to coerce or intimidate a government or a society

Think about that within the realms of our Constitution.

Could this mean that if you tell a senator that he/she will not be reelected if they vote a certain way that you could be considered a terrorist?