The possibilities of Mexico becoming a narco-state or a failed state are zero.
Mexico is on the edge of the abyss—it could become a narco-state in the coming decade.
I have no idea what could have provoke the change in tone --a valentine for Mexico?-- but I'd guess it might have something to do with the overheated nature of the debate on Mexico in recent weeks. Whatever the case, it is welcome.
2 comments:
I think the definition of "narco-state" varies.
(1) A state in which organized crime, funded by the drug trade, bribes cops and judges on a regular basis. Bad enough.
(2) A state controlled by organized crime.
My take is that warnings that Mexico was headed towards (1) turned into reports that Mexico had become (2).
But ... I could very easily be wrong.
I think the definition of narco-state varies based solely on the rhetorical needs of the speaker in the moment in which he is speaking. Either option one or two could qualify, and I agree that Mexico is headed toward or already has landed in option 1 and people made too much of it, but a lack of semantic rigor on the labels for Mexico is a consistent problem. With such an amorphous label as narco state, the author has an obligation to define it. I imagine, like I said in the post, that McCaffrey meant to open some eyes about Mexico, but was a little bit unsettled by people lumping his comments in with the rest of the comments that Mexico is failing.
Post a Comment