Mexico’s drug corruption has more to do with US demand than crooked politicians

Wait 5 sec.

The US president, Donald Trump, asserted in early February that Mexican drug-trafficking organisations have an “intolerable alliance” with the government of Mexico. His remarks have cast a pall over bilateral relations already strained by recent talk of tariffs and military interventions. Although the two nations have sometimes clashed in the past, Mexico is today a close US ally. It is America’s top trading partner, with two-way commerce totalling US$807 billion (£640 billion) in 2023. And joint US-Mexican anti-narcotics collaborations stretch back nearly a century. Trump’s accusation was, therefore, as unexpected as it was explosive. It has brought figures from across the Mexican political spectrum together in condemnation of what Mexico’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, called “baseless slander”.The Mexican government is, on paper, a resolute enemy of the drug trade. However, the undeniable existence of drug-related corruption in Mexico means the reality is a little more complex.Since the birth of the Mexico-US drug trade in the early 20th century, certain government officials have turned a blind eye to the activities of drug traffickers in exchange for bribes. This “indirect” government involvement in the drug trade has always been by far the most prevalent form of drug-related corruption in Mexico.From the 1930s onwards, political bosses, police chiefs and military commanders in Mexico’s so-called “golden triangle” states of Sinaloa, Durango and Chihuahua taxed illicit opium production in the areas under their authority. They also sabotaged anti-drugs campaigns waged by other branches of government, in order to avoid conflict with their constituents and take a cut of their profits. Similar intrigues took place in the key trafficking hubs on the US-Mexico border, like Tijuana, Ciudad Juarez and Nuevo Laredo. Read more: How the 'Mexican miracle' kickstarted the modern US–Mexico drugs trade Over the second half of the 20th century, Mexican and US drug enforcement efforts created an ever-more profitable black market. Low-level corruption accompanied the expansion of drug production and trafficking south into other areas of Mexico like Nayarit, Michoacán and Guerrero. Nowadays, the indirect involvement of local representatives of the Mexican government in the drug trade has become a fact of life in such places. But zones of drug production or trafficking still constitute only a fraction of Mexico’s total territory. This means corrupt local officials comprise a tiny minority of the overall government workforce.There are, however, also cases in which higher-level representatives of the Mexican state – or even entire government institutions – have participated directly in the production, transport or sale of illegal drugs. Such cases are relatively rare. But, they are inherently higher profile than the more routine, “looking the other way” kind of corruption. They are, therefore, more likely to make headlines in the US and from there inform popular and even national political discourse. The earliest such case is probably that of revolutionary military commander Esteban Cantú. Between 1915 and 1920, Cantú constructed a powerful political regime and funded important local development projects in the northern state of Baja California. He did so by taxing the import, sale and production of smoking opium first legally and then, when President Venustiano Carranza banned the practice, illegally. High-level official involvement in the drug trade became more frequent as the trade itself became ever more illicit and profitable. In 1940, Sinaloa governor Rodolfo Loaiza cut a series of deals with the up-and-coming drug trafficking organisations of his native state. An attempt to double-cross them cost Loaiza his life in 1944. Around the same time, political campaign manager Carlos Serrano looked to regional drug smugglers to help fund Miguel Alemán’s successful run for the presidency. Serrano was rewarded with command of the newly created, US-backed Federal Directorate of Security (DFS) secret police force. He soon used this position to move directly into opium trafficking himself.After US president Richard Nixon declared a “war on drugs” on both sides of the border in 1971, increasing crackdowns provided more opportunities for the same Mexican officials charged with enforcing prohibition to cut deals with traffickers. Resulting squeezes on supply also caused prices to soar and made such deals increasingly lucrative for government officials. By the mid-1980s, the DFS had become so deeply immersed in the drug trade that several of its agents were implicated in the Guadalajara Cartel’s murder of US Drug Enforcement Administration agent Enrique “Kiki” Camarena. The agency was disbanded soon after. But US demand for drugs continued unabated through the 1990s and into the 21st century. The profits offered by involvement in the drug trade proved hard to resist for a select number of high-ranking government officials, including members of the federal cabinet and state governors. Even Genaro García Luna, the architect of Mexico’s modern “war on drugs” ended up on the take. He is now serving 38 years in a US prison for colluding with Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán’s Sinaloa Cartel. Joaquín ‘El Chapo’ Guzmán being led away by Mexican law enforcement personnel after his arrest in 2014. Octavio Hoyos / Shutterstock An ‘intolerable alliance’?The indirect involvement of Mexican government officials remains far more common than direct or institutional involvement in the drug trade. Such corruption is largely opportunistic, rather than systematic, which is why it remains concentrated in areas where drug production and trafficking are particularly prevalent. It is also not limited to the Mexican side of the border. Plenty of crooked American cops and politicians have cut deals with traffickers over the years, too.Trump’s recent attacks on the Mexican government are not an accurate diagnosis of a uniquely Mexican problem. They are more of a headline-grabbing shot across the bows in the context of the renegotiation of many different aspects of the US-Mexico relationship. In the end, the issue of drug-related corruption in Mexico has less to do with its own government and more to do with American society’s own insatiable demand for drugs. Crackdowns on the cartels inevitably cause the price of drugs to rise, increasing the temptation of Mexican officials to try and grab a piece of the pie. As a businessman like Trump should be able to see, it’s not government corruption that drives the US-Mexican drug trade, but the iron laws of supply and demand.Nathaniel Morris has previously received funding from the Leverhulme Trust, the Arts and Humanities Research Council and University College London for research that has fed into this article. He is also a member of Noria Research.