Mexico, the Failed State Debate, and the Merida Fix

• NCJ Number: 249621
• Journal: The Geographical Journal Dated: November 2015 Pages: n/a-n/a
• Author(s): C. Gallaher
• Date Published: November 2015
• Length: 0 pages
• Grant Number(s): 2011-IJ-CX-0001
• Agencies: NIJ-Sponsored
• Publication Type: Research (Theoretical); Report (Study/Research); Report (Grant Sponsored); Legislation/Policy Description; Legislation/Policy Analysis

Annotation

This paper examines the discourse of 'shared responsibility' that the governments of the United States and Mexico created through the 2008 Merida Initiative.

Abstract

This discourse fixed the terms of a debate that stood in the way of bilateral cooperation, i.e., are Mexico's drug cartels terrorists, and if so is Mexico in danger of failing? Specifically, the discourse does three things. First, it clarifies the formal position of both governments that Mexico's drug cartels are criminals, not insurgents. Second, by using the term 'transnational criminal organisation' (TCO) to label the cartels, the United States accepts some responsibility for them. Finally, the discourse establishes a territorial notion of sharing so that United States participation inside Mexico is limited. Although 'shared responsibility' has been characterized as a 'paradigm shift' in how the two countries deal with one another (Benitez Manaut 2009, Revista Mexicana de Politica Exterior 87), this article argues that it reinforces a militarized status quo. By defining 'shared responsibility' as an obligation between states, the two countries do not have to articulate a joint responsibility to Mexico's civilians, who bear the brunt of both the cartels and the bilateral fight against them. This framing also helps explain the U.S. Government's muted response to abuses by the Mexican military since the agreement took effect. (Publisher abstract modified)