Topics include:
1) Mexico's drug gangs don't want to destroy the state, they just want to rent it,
2) Does Afghanistan need the Phoenix Program? Part II
Mexico's drug gangs don't want to destroy the state, they just want to rent it
The U.S. Army War College's Strategic Studies Institute has published a disturbing research paper written by Professor Max Manwaring. Titled A "New" Dynamic in the Western Hemisphere Security Environment: The Mexican Zetas and Other Private Armies, the paper discusses how Mexico's drug cartels and the private armies they finance are systematically displacing legitimate state authority across Mexico and Central America. Those who follow events in the region will not find much new in that assertion. What is new is Manwaring's description of the untapped potential of Los Zetas - the private army associated with the powerful Gulf Cartel -- and why it will be especially difficult for either the Mexican or U.S. governments to counter the organization's power.
Los Zetas was born in the late 1990s when the Gulf Cartel began recruiting soldiers from the Mexican army's Airborne Special Force Group. The Gulf Cartel was able to provide the deserters with far more pay, prestige, and side benefits than the Mexican government could. The project was a huge success; the cartel used the organization, training, discipline, experience, and equipment the former soldiers provided to greatly expand its operating territory, smuggling routes, debt collection, and capacity to intimidate or kill opponents. Los Zetas went on to recruit soldiers from the Guatemalan army's special forces and from other militaries in the region.
According to Manwaring, Los Zetas is no longer merely an enforcer for the Gulf Cartel, but an independent military force that rivals the power of legitimate governments in the region. It has used the enormous cash flow it receives from drug smuggling to acquire state-of-the-art weapons and electronics technology and to build intelligence-gathering, logistics, and operational planning staffs that Western military commanders would not only recognize but envy.
So do Los Zetas's commanders aim to seize control of the Mexican state? Probably not, according to Manwaring -- at least not directly. Los Zetas (and other cartel leaders in the region) want to weaken but not completely destroy the traditional authority of the state. Los Zetas and cartel members need to travel outside the country, communicate, and conduct financial transactions. Most important, these transnational criminal organizations greatly benefit from the Mexican government's zealous protection of its sovereignty -- this keeps the U.S. government one step away from interfering with the cartels.
Viewed in this light, Los Zetas and other such transnational private military forces may be much more dangerous to stability and legitimate governance than al Qaeda or religion-inspired terror groups. The multi-billion-dollar drug-smuggling business seems to buy far more military capability, foot soldiers, high and low-level government officials, and neighborhood support than religious exhortation does. It is easy to organize against al Qaeda's highly unpopular vision of society. For Los Zetas, it's business, not political -- there can be a cut of the action for everyone. That might make Los Zetas and their private military cousins the more insidious threat to legitimate governance.
Does Afghanistan need the Phoenix Program? Part II
A Dec. 8 Washington Post article by Griff Witte discussed the Taliban's shadow government in Afghanistan. According to Witte, the Taliban is preparing for its return to power "by establishing an elaborate shadow government of governors, police chiefs, district administrators and judges that in many cases already has more bearing on the lives of Afghans than the real government." In the 1960s the Viet Cong organized a similar shadow government in South Vietnam. The United States and South Vietnamese governments responded with the controversial Phoenix program, which infiltrated and crippled the Viet Cong cadre organization. President Barack Obama has tasked General Stanley McChrystal and the rest of the U.S. government to "reverse the Taliban's momentum." Does Afghanistan need its version of the Phoenix program?
In my July 31 column, I discussed a recent RAND Corporation report on the Phoenix program that was commissioned by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The purpose of the report was to review the effectiveness of Phoenix's techniques and assess whether the U.S. and Afghan governments could use those techniques effectively in Afghanistan.
Phoenix's principal technique for attacking the Viet Cong's organization was to recruit South Vietnamese citizens (many former soldiers) and send them back to their home provinces and villages. There they would make contact with the Viet Cong, infiltrate the organization, and collect intelligence on its structure and membership. Military and paramilitary forces would then arrest or kill the Viet Cong members. The Central Intelligence Agency, which was the lead agency for Phoenix, carefully selected the infiltrating agents based on an assessment of their motivation (often based on revenge), reliability, and adaptability.
The RAND report noted that, aside from a few exceptions, neither in Iraq nor Afghanistan has the U.S. government aggressively recruited indigenous agents to infiltrate insurgent organizations. The report offered no explanation for the neglect of this seemingly basic counterinsurgency technique.
Witte's recent article on the Taliban's shadow government showed why the employment of Phoenix techniques in Afghanistan might be a waste of effort. Even if such a program did reveal and destroy the Taliban shadow government, all that would remain in many parts of the country would be an empty political vacuum. According to Witte, the legitimate government has virtually no presence in many areas. And where officials and the government bureaucracy are present, their demand for bribes and inability to enforce security only seem to be alienating the population and increasing the appeal of the Taliban.
"Reversing the Taliban's momentum" might require a ruthless Phoenix program. But that alone would be insufficient. U.S. planners are well aware of the requirement for better and cleaner Afghan governance. Delivering that in a timely manner would seem to be more difficult than eradicating the Taliban's shadow government.
Comments
The RAND report noted that, aside from a few exceptions, neither in Iraq nor Afghanistan has the U.S. government aggressively recruited indigenous agents to infiltrate insurgent organizations. The report offered no explanation for the neglect of this seemingly basic counterinsurgency technique.
It should be noted that there was no direct attempt to recruit Sunni detainees to reinfiltrate at any given time in the BCT detention facilities---at least 2005 thru 2006.
In 2006 there was a very effective detainee recruitment program being run by an small unchartered CI team working out of Abu Ghraib as well as the attempt to get detainees to report on their fellow inmates at Camp Bucca. There were up to early 2006 absolutely no collection requirments on detainee activities ie anti government/guerilla training etc. at the JIDC in Abu Ghraib-and that was truly a missed opportunity.
The author is totally correct in assuming that it was a missed golden opportunity---the core problem was that there was a limited number of MI types who even knew how to recruit, assess, train and debrief available in the time line 2005-2007.
Previously, Bill Moore aptly highlighted the importance of integrating political solutions with force. Andrew Birtles article, Persuasion and Coercion in COIN Warfare - Military Review Jul-Aug 08, supports this argument by stating that "politics and force are inextricably linked in a dynamic, symbiotic relationship, and both are necessary to win. The great challenge is to find the right blend for a particular situation--a formulation that may well be different from that used at another time or place, even during the same conflict." (Birtle, 52)
History is replete with folks attempting "soft power" initiatives longer than they should and armies focusing on the kinetic aspects of a complex problem. With the threat that international drug cartels pose to US national security, the bureaucratic challenge becomes resourcing a comprehensive solution: a solution with adequate resources and an adaptive strategy that effectively manages diplomatic, security, information, and economic fronts. If Los Zetas is truly focusing on a business strategy and ignoring the political dimension, that will be their weakness.
Kudos to the research that highlights this emerging threat. When will we have enough of a "crisis" for a comprehensive response?
Do we need a Phoenix like program to be successful in counterinsurgency efforts? Over generalization is always dangerous, but the general character of insurgent warfare is political influence at the grassroots level(frequently imposed through a combination of coercion and offering carrots). It has been accurately been labeled a war of infiltration and subversion, and like the threat of termites to a house this threat can remain largely invisible until it is too late. The non-shooting aspect of the war (subversion) can be incredibly effective over time, so the counterinsurgent is obligated to develop laws against this type of subversion and aggressively puruse it.
However, removing this hostile shadow influence (which can manifest in many ways courts, providing essential services, infiltrating religious organizations, NGOs, youth fronts, etc.) will create a void that the government must fill immediately and effectively or risk further alienating the population they are attempting to win over. If the government simply identifies a medical facility, school, or a church / mosque, etc. has being a vehicle being used by the enemy to discredit the governmentand, and then arrests the bad actors without filling the void they just created, this action will be exploited by the enemy to further separate the populace from their government. It is not simply a manner of arresting or killing the bad actors, but rather a holistic approach that must be synchronized.
On the Zetas and the cartels, the 10 second synopsis is that their desired end state is a "hollowed" Mexican state that is a useful fiction for them in at least the Northern border region if not the entire country...
How do we cut the cash flow so the business does not pay well enough for everyone who matters to get a reasonable cut?
Noticeably absent in this summary of the dangers of the Mexican drug trade is the role of user -- esp. the groundswell of youngish middle-class Americans using for recreation, not addiction. Any effective approach to disabling the ruthless Mexican cartels and associated militaries would have to approach the critical supply-and-demand component of the problem. Otherwise, we doomed to an endless (and bloody) battle.