Trouble South of the Border

Mexico has popped up rather prominently on the Joint Operating Environment 2008 report. This is a report published by the United States Joint Forces Command, the military command in charge of almost all conventional forces in the continental U.S.

This report warns of the possible rapid collapse of our neighbors to the south. Currently, towns on the border between the U.S. and Mexico are riddled with violence. Battles between drug cartels and between these cartels and government forces have left these towns in a defacto "failed" cities with little actual authority being exercised from Mexico City. "Failed" being the more palatable word for "anarchy."

Daily security for Mexican citizens is a nightmare in these failed towns. Kidnapping, political corruption, and common crime are nearly unchecked. Given Mexico's 2000 mile border with America and the proximity of the epicenter of this crisis to that border, it is not inconceivable that a refugee crisis could emerge in the near future sending thousands and thousands of Mexican nationals to America seeking safety.

Add this strain to an already historically weak U.S. economy and you have the potential for a crisis to which the government may not be able to effectively respond. If Mexico as a whole fails, this will almost certainly require U.S. intervention. What form this intervention could or would take is uncertain.

What is certain is that any U.S. intervention that involved ground troops, even if only utilized as peacekeepers, would spark grassroots resistance. This resistance may even take on a criminal aspect as the drug cartels would probably prefer a weak Mexican government to any sort of peacekeeping operation with its checkpoints and US/UN soldiers milling about. The prospect of such a hostile environment towards drug running may cause various cartels and criminal gangs to unite.

This is all gross speculation on my part, of course. I don't, however, think that what I have speculated about is beyond the realm of possibility. These days entering failed states (or entering a functioning state and toppling it) is messy, messy business. Iraq and Afghanistan are all the examples you need. Afghanistan had failed before we entered and Iraq afterwards. In both cases our soldiers there are mired down in a political, religious, and sectarian bog from which there is no clear-cut path to victory.

America must learn its lesson from Iraq. We failed to learn the lesson of the defeat we inflicted on the Soviets in Afghanistan during their invasion. The lesson is this: A low intensity, low-cost war waged by guerrilla fighters can bog down the world's best militaries, causing massive financial strain on the invading nation's economy.

This is how the Soviets were laid low and may yet be a very central contributing factor to how America is laid low. This relates to Mexico in that if we manage to extract ourselves from Iraq and Afghanistan without destroying ourselves in the process, it would be pouring gas on the fire to then go and repeat the same mistake in Mexico.

Annexation of Mexico wouldn't work for a variety of reasons. One of the primary reasons would be that if Mexico were made into a state or a series of states within our union, then there would be no restriction on travel for millions of poor and dispossessed Mexicans to travel north looking for opportunity. The infrastructure disparities between the two nations alone would be daunting.
West Germany had a much easier proposition in absorbing East Germany. While German Unification certainly was not easy, they at least had the advantage of a common language and culture from which to start.

No, a failed Mexico is a giant shit sandwich that America would be virtually alone in having to eat.