Scott Stewart makes the interesting observation that along the border, in terms of geography, culture and economics the boarder lands are in many ways very similar, with relatives even living on both sides. Yet, the security situation shows a very clear demarcation between Texas and the Mexican border states.
He then discusses how the drug trade impacts both, and why there is such a clear difference between the two areas.
For some odd reason, all of this talk about the Mexican border brought to mind the independent Sci-fi movie Monsters. As a result, the film's female lead Whitney Able lands the honor of being this article's Hot Stratfor Babe.
The film's premise is that six years earlier a NASA probe bearing aliens life samples crashed in Mexico, and now all of northern Mexico is the "Forbidden Zone". A free lance photographer (i.e., a bum) is tasked to bring his rich boss's daughter back to the States. One thing leads to another, and they lose their ferry tickets and have to hire a guide to take them through the Forbidden Zone to the U.S. border.
Although frequently over-rated by critics, it's not a bad movie. The director is successful in disguising just how slender his budget was, and his low key approach means he avoids many pitfalls -- for example he never beats you over the head with the obvious irony of Americans hiring a coyote to smuggle them back into the States.
However, like many independent film makers, he has trouble finishing what he's set-up, which brings us to the completely ridiculous scene that brought this movie to mind as I pondered border movies for a Hot Strafor Babe. The two have been hacking their way through a jungle when they come upon an Aztec pyramid. They climb to the top and, just a mile or two to the north is the U.S. border.
Yes, in this film the south bank of the Rio Grande is a rain forest, and you can see downtown El Paso from the top of Aztec pyramids dotting the landscape. One wonders what sort of grades the film makers got in grade school geography. I won't spoil the goofy ending for you (and yup, it gets goofier), but will recommend you watch it if it ever pops up on TV. There are many parts of it that are well done enough to warrant a viewing.
CORRUPTION: WHY TEXAS IS NOT MEXICO
By Scott Stewart, May 19, 2011
As one studies Mexico's cartel war, it is not uncommon to hear Mexican politicians -- and some people in the United States -- claim that Mexico's problems of violence and corruption stem largely from the country's proximity to the United States. According to this narrative, the United States is the world's largest illicit narcotics market, and the inexorable force of economic demand means that the countries supplying the demand, and those that are positioned between the source countries and the huge U.S. market, are trapped in a very bad position. Because of this market and the illicit trade it creates, billions of dollars worth of drugs flow northward through Mexico (or are produced there) and billions of dollars in cash flow back southward into Mexico. The guns that flow southward along with the cash, according to the narrative, are largely responsible for Mexico's violence. As one looks at other countries lying to the south of Mexico along the smuggling routes from South America to the United States, they too seem to suffer from the same maladies.
However, when we look at the dynamics of the narcotics trade, there are other political entities, ones located to Mexico's north, that find themselves caught in the same geographic and economic position as Mexico and points south. As borderlands, these entities -- referred to as states in the U.S. political system -- find themselves caught between the supply of drugs flowing from the south and the large narcotics markets to their north. The geographic location of these states results in large quantities of narcotics flowing northward through their territory and large amounts of cash likewise flowing southward. Indeed, this illicit flow has brought with it corruption and violence, but when we look at these U.S. states, their security environments are starkly different from those of Mexican states on the other side of the border.
One implicit reality that flows from the geopolitical concept of borderlands is that while political borders are clearly delineated, the cultural and economic borders surrounding them are frequently less clear and more dynamic. The borderlands on each side of the thin, artificially imposed line we call a border are remarkably similar in geographic and demographic terms (indeed, inhabitants of such areas are often related). In the larger picture, both sides of the border often face the same set of geopolitical realities and challenges. Certainly the border between the United States and Mexico was artificially imposed by the annexation of Texas following its anti-Mexico revolution as well as the U.S. annexation of what is now much of the U.S. West, including the border states of Arizona, California and New Mexico, following the Mexican-American War. While the desert regions along the border do provide a bit of a buffer between the two countries -- and between the Mexican core and its northern territories -- there is no geological obstacle separating the two countries. Even the Rio Grande is not so grand, as the constant flow of illicit goods over it testifies. In many places, like Juarez and El Paso, the U.S.-Mexico border serves to cut cities in half, much like the Berlin Wall used to do.
Yet as one crosses over that artificial line one senses huge differences between the cultural, economic and security environments north and south. In spite of the geopolitical and economic realities confronting both sides of this borderland, Texas is not Mexico. The differences run deep, and we thought it worthwhile this week to examine how and why.
Same Problems, Different Scope
First, it must be understood that this examination does mean to assert that the illicit narcotics market in the United States has no effect on Mexico (or Central America, for that matter). The flow of narcotics, money and guns, and the organizations that participate in this illicit trade, does have a clear and demonstrable impact on Mexico. But -- and this very significant -- that impact does not stop at the border. This illicit commerce also impacts the U.S. states north of the border.
Certainly the U.S. side of the border has seen corruption of public officials, cartel-related violence and, of course, drug trafficking. But these phenomena have manifested themselves differently on the U.S. side of the border.[continued after jump]
