Introduction
Senator Lilly Téllez, a member of the Panista party, recently called for “a war with all the force of the State” against drug cartels and accused Mexico City’s mayor, Claudia Sheinbaum, of allowing them to grow unchecked. Her call resonated with the frustration of millions of Mexicans who are tired of impunity and fear. However, translating this anger into public policy is a different matter: Mexico has already fought such a war and lost.
Political Calculation Behind Téllez’s Demand
Téllez’s demand is not only fueled by indignation but also political calculation. For months, she has portrayed the government and Morena as accomplices of organized crime. Her rhetoric aims to mobilize a dissatisfied electorate, position her as a hardline opposition voice, and pressure the executive to demonstrate strength. The war rhetoric sells: it projects leadership, order, and bravery. However, behind the slogan lies a proven recipe that only exacerbates the chaos.
The Failed War of 2006
In 2006, Felipe Calderón declared the same war, deploying the military onto the streets and promising to reclaim territory and restore peace. Instead, he achieved a more violent country: over 120,000 deaths, thousands of disappeared individuals, and a fragmented drug trade with more than 150 armed groups. The force without justice or intelligence only succeeded in dividing the criminal landscape, increasing deaths, and weakening the state.
The Dangers of Repeating the Formula
Repeating this formula would be as futile and dangerous as the previous attempt. Without effective prosecution, impartial judges, functional forensic systems, and police forces with internal controls, any military offensive will end as always: more violence, more victims, and less state authority. Prolonged militarization erodes civil authority, normalizes abuses, and deepens impunity. If this is compounded by the corruption that permeates local police, public ministries, and courts, the result is a vicious cycle where violence perpetuates itself, and justice remains elusive.
The Alternative: Intelligence, Not Military Force
Mexico needs financial persecution, weapon and chemical precursor control, asset seizures, and genuine coordination between prosecutors. It requires protected investigators, resource-equipped experts, independent courts, honest officials, and clear objectives: fewer homicides, more convictions, and a stronger state. The fight against crime begins in courts and banks, not in barracks. It also demands serious international cooperation under clear rules that strengthen Mexican institutions, not replace them.
Conclusion: Mexico Needs Justice, Not More Violence
Mexico is tired of criminals, but a war cannot fix the corruption and neglect that have plagued the country for decades. The root causes of violence—poverty, impunity, inequality—cannot be destroyed with bullets. If Téllez wants results instead of just projecting herself as the opposition’s presidential candidate in 2030, she should demand budgets for prosecutors, witness protection, and transparency in crime statistics.
Key Questions and Answers
- Q: Why is Téllez’s call for another war problematic? A: Her proposal echoes the failed 2006 war, which relied on military force without addressing underlying issues like corruption and impunity.
- Q: What are the consequences of repeating Mexico’s previous military approach to drug cartels? A: It would only exacerbate violence, weaken state institutions, and deepen impunity.
- Q: What alternative solutions does Mexico need to tackle its drug cartel problem? A: The country requires financial persecution, weapon and chemical precursor control, asset seizures, and genuine coordination between prosecutors, along with international cooperation under clear rules that strengthen Mexican institutions.
