Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
The situation of insecurity and generalized violence is, without a doubt, the problem that shakes the country the most. All surveys agree on this fact: of the issues that most concern Mexicans, it is insecurity that is mentioned most frequently.
Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the presidential candidates are frequently discussing the issue. And they are proposing very conflicting visions. For the pro-government candidate, the drug trafficking problem is very localized and under the control of the federal government. She proposes integrating the National Guard into the Army to elect judges and justices by popular vote. She recycles the idea that the government should continue giving support to young people to avoid their incorporation of guns for hire. She counterposes her peace proposal and does not seek a war against the narco. It is a less popular way of saying that she will continue with the “hugs, not bullets” policy. She assures us that AMLO’s strategy has been successful.
Xóchitl Gálvez, in contrast, rejects the “hugs, not bullets” strategy as successful. Instead, she says, it failed, and a new strategy is needed. The National Guard must be a civilian force with civilian command. State and municipal police must be strengthened with better salaries, weapons, and intelligence. She proposes a mega-prison for dangerous criminals, support for people searching for the disappeared, and a binational commission to manage customs. The time has come to confront crime directly and without fear.
Movimiento Ciudadano (MC) goes for the humanist side of the problem. It proposes to eliminate the “prohibitionism” of drugs, presumably through its legalization. It does not define itself before the “hugs, not bullets” policy, which could be interpreted as an endorsement of AMLO’s policy. Neither does it explain its position on the character of the National Guard: it does not say whether it should be civilian or military. MC’s humanism allows it to swim in the turbulent waters of insecurity and violence with an ambiguity that makes it seem more identified with AMLO’s policies, in general.
And, even amid the political debate, the violence of organized crime continues its path without visible restrictions and with a tendency to increase its territorial control.
Here are some hard facts without ideology. In the last five days, the daily average of murders by organized crime has been 65. Some view the data with horror; others claim it is a sign of improvement. Up to 5 months before the end of López Obrador’s six-year term, the total number of intentional homicides has reached the astronomical figure of 181,143. There are 206 days left until the end of this six-year term. In Calderón’s six-year term, there were 120,463 intentional homicides, and in Peña Nieto’s term, there were 156,066.
That is to say, the strategy that Sheinbaum claims is successful and correct is the one that has generated the most numerous intentional deaths in the recent history of the country. This is, to put it coldly, the balance of official data on intentional murders.
The obvious is that the political narrative can be imposed over reality. Often, the hard data are ignored to allow the narrative of power to impose itself and reign. But that does not mean that the narrative will win out at the end of the road over the hard data. Reality is cruel: It allows us humans to think we have mastered it until it reacts and crushes us.
In terms of insecurity and violence in Mexico, the reality is overtaking the political narrative at breakneck speed. Soon, we will see armed columns of drug traffickers parading on Mexico City’s Reforma and Insurgentes avenues as Zapata and Villa did when they took the city during the revolution. But these are not revolutionaries: they are narcos who come to impose their law with blood and fire.
Therefore, we must take the hard facts seriously and act accordingly. Only their accomplices or the truly naive will stand in the way of the hard decisions that must be made.
[email protected]
@rpascoep
Further Reading: