Maybe because some commentators have no sympathy for Calderón, because they continue to wait for a ray of light, or because they haven't been able to move out of the web of the Cold War, there is a narrative against the combat of organized crime. As is customary, politicians move according to public opinion, and they have agreed on an initiative for a domestic security law that, instead of strengthening the army, seeks to weaken it.Here's Jorge Fernández Menéndez on the same issue:
There is a bit of everything in the mix: fair complaints about the violations of human rights (which are very few, but spectacular), natural failures of a military operation in a civilian area, bad intentions, hidden agendas, memories of youth, and lots of politics. But it's a very delicate topic, and it's not beneficial to treat it like that.
We have to remember what the problem is: organized crime. A phenomenon in all societies, but in Mexico it is particularly grave for two reasons: first, for the quantity of money that is moved is very large, and second, because the vast majority of the authorities that should combat it work for it. They are two overlapping reasons, without a doubt. Money buys the authorities, which permits criminals to move more money, and the spiral grows.
[A]s it was passed in the Senate, it doesn't have the support of the armed forces, there exist nuanced differences among the, but the main points of the law, as it was passed, confront an clear opposition to these commands: it doesn't facilitate the operational capacity of the army and the navy, on the contrary, it imposes innumerable holds on their actions and doesn't assure judicial security to the commands and, particularly, General Guillermo Galván objects with insistence before legislators, and that it takes from the commander-in-chief, the president, real control over the armed forces, to disperse control among mayors, governors, the National Security Council, and Congress, in a legal mess that could turn military operations into a chaos. If we add to this topics related to military justice we will have, as we warned with great foresight before this law was approved by the Senate, the components for a perfect storm regarding the armed forces and civil power.I don't think that limitations on the army necessarily weaken it, especially not in the long term. However on second thought, I do think that requiring local officials to get involved when the army is deployed domestically has the potential to create problems, depending on how the practice develops. In any event, Fernández reaction seems excessive, and the fact that Mexico's military brass is upset about a limitation to its autonomy is not in and of itself evidence that it's a bad idea.