Cartels as 'Heroes'? Expert Warns U.S. Deployment in Mexico Could Strengthen Drug Cartels

From the "largest deportation in history" to eradicating drug cartels "off the face of the Earth," President-elect Donald Trump's second term ambitions are as sweeping as they are controversial, sparking widespread debate over their feasibility.

In charge of executing Trump's border security plans, his returning border czar, Thomas Homan, recently told Fox News that the Trump administration intends to designate cartel members as terrorists, which would enable the expanded use of federal resources to deal with them. In a separate interview with News Nation, Trump himself hinted on wanting to address border cartel violence with a "military operation."

To assess the potential outcomes of U.S. military intervention in Mexico, the Latin Times spoke with Dr. Jeremi Suri, an award-winning global affairs lecturer and author. Suri believes Trump's plans could ultimately backfire and unintentionally strengthen the criminal organizations he aims to dismantle.

According to the global affairs expert, militarizing the border, combined with mass deportations, could ultimately boost cartels' recruitment efforts, drive Mexican authorities to collaborate with these criminal organizations, and position cartel members as 'heroes' in the public eye by undermining Mexico's perceived sovereignty.

Cartels, already embedded in many Mexican communities as de facto providers of jobs and resources, could leverage U.S. intervention to present themselves as defenders of Mexican sovereignty, Suri explains.

In this Q&A, Dr. Suri also delves into why Trump's strategy could disrupt U.S.-Mexico relations and, inadvertently, relations with other Latin American countries to the point that it could benefit China.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

LT: What are the diplomatic and legal implications of potentially deploying U.S. military forces in Mexico to combat cartels?

Dr. Jeremi Suri: Well, I mean there is a question of course of Mexican sovereignty, right? And the Mexican government has always jealously guarded its sovereignty as any country would, and so any deployment of American forces against the cartels would require Mexican permission.

Any violation of that would lead to potential conflict between American forces and Mexican police or military forces. And so you could have a very strange situation where the cartels and the Mexican police are cooperating against the U.S. military in one setting or another. This is a very dangerous setting.

The United States should not be sending any force into Mexico without clear Mexican consent. We also rely of course on Mexican policing and military force on that side of the border, and so this could undermine that.

It could have the effect—I don't want to predict this, but it could be possible—that American military bullying of Mexico could actually have the opposite effect of making the border less secure.

LT: How so?

JS: By discouraging Mexican cooperation and trust with the United States. So much of what happens at the border is about informal cooperation and formal cooperation between U.S. and Mexican forces, and that relies on some degree of trust.

And if that is broken, it's very hard to manage the border.

LT: And how might military deployment impact Mexico's own efforts against organized crime?

JS: I think American military deployments, on the one hand, when coordinated with the Mexican government, can be incredibly helpful because the United States can provide equipment, the United States can provide surveillance technologies, things of that sort.

So the United States can be very helpful particularly in terms of resources.

But it can backfire because if a greater United States military presence in the region occurs, that can actually lead local actors to resist the U.S. and support the narcos.

And so you can be in a situation where the narcos actually become more popular as a response to what is seen as American incursions, right?

Where in essence, they become the defenders of Mexico and they're seen as more popular by Mexican citizens."

LT: Has this happened in any other place before?

JS: Yes, this has happened repeatedly in places like Colombia and Panama, where heavy-handed American activity or heavy-handed American behavior has turned someone like a Noriega into a local nationalist hero.

The best way to build up local support south of the border from people who are suffering—the best way to get them to like you, is somehow to say you're resisting Yankee imperialism. And that's what we'll see.

I mean, and it's not illegitimate as you know, right? In some areas, the narcos are actually the local government in a sense, right? They're the ones who are, you know, providing people with wages and sometimes with food aid. And so they already build a community of support.

And then if they're seen as resisting the United States, this makes them into local heroes.

LT: And how might this, combined with the tariffs and deportations Trump plans to implement, impact the overall U.S.-Mexico relationship?

JS: So I think, big picture, and I felt this—I was in Mérida about a month and a half ago to talk to a group of leaders of Maquiladoras—you know, what I felt was that Mexico will always look for a friendly relationship with the United States.

It's necessary for Mexico. It has no alternative. There will always be some cooperation.

But the big takeaway for me is that this pressure from the U.S. is encouraging Mexican business people and Mexican political leaders to look at alternatives to the U.S., particularly China. It makes other partners more attractive.

It doesn't mean that [Mexicans] will not partner with the U.S., but they are less trusting, less willing to depend upon the U.S. So it's very rational to be more open to China and other partners.

So this is a win for China.

LT: How might other countries with close ties to the U.S. view these actions? Could this set a precedent in international policy?

JS: Yes, I think throughout Central and particularly in Latin America, countries are noticing this. Brazil is in the same situation. If you look at things, you know, Lula has been very careful to maintain friendly relations with the U.S., but he's also been more open to China, and even to Russia.

Lula has not condemned the war in Ukraine. So these countries are going to balance more against the U.S. and open themselves to more non-U.S. partnerships and relationships. And Mexico will be a model for some of them.

LT: Shifting to deportation policy changes and their relationship to organized crime, what immediate and long-term effects could arise in Mexican border cities if all U.S. deportees and asylum seekers are sent there?

JS: I think it will completely undermine any order in these towns and communities because you'll have this influx of people coming in that don't want to be there. The first wave of people sent over the border will be people with criminal records, of course. And so it will completely undermine order in those areas, which will create more pressure for more immigration again.

So it's like becoming a hamster on a hamster wheel.

I mean, it's an immediate humanitarian problem because you have large numbers of people in locations where there are very few resources, often in the summer, in very hot weather, and they're in essence in camps. And putting people in camps, we know this as historians, right? It's unhealthy, but it also encourages criminality.

Who runs the camps? Who ends up with authority in those environments? You know, bullies of one kind or another. So it creates a terrible dynamic. It is much more hygienic and actually much more orderly to manage asylum seekers on the U.S. side of the border.

LT: How might mass deportations impact criminal organizations in border cities?

JS: Well, they become an easy group to recruit, right?

So we're actually helping the cartels to recruit because we're giving them people who are desperate, who can't escape them, who they can make promises to, who will therefore do things for the cartels and develop loyalty to the cartels because it's the only option they have.

It's the same thing that happens in prisons, right? People join gangs, we're creating a fertile seedbed for recruitment by cartels.