President Donald Trump has made a historic step in the conflict with Latin American drug cartels, signing quietly a directive allowing the Pentagon to consider military action against organizations his administration has designated as terrorists. This is a radical shift for US policy, from old-fashioned law enforcement and intelligence support to the threat of direct US military action beyond its own borders.
According to the reports, the order paves the way for potential U.S. military action at sea or overseas against these cartels. The officials have already begun to develop plans to target these organizations, though the details are being closely guarded.
The Trump administration frames this policy in terms of the presumption that cartels are now a national security threat equal to terrorist organizations. Several of the largest cartels—six of which have a Mexican base of operations—were formally designated as foreign terrorist organizations last spring. This designation allows U.S. agencies, including the Department of Defense, to take steps outside of normal law enforcement procedures.
But the diplomatic and legal environment is not without nuance. According to American law, labelling a group as a terrorist organization will facilitate asset freezes and travel restrictions, but will not have the immediate effect of making military strikes legal.
The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, and international law prohibits working in a foreign country except by permission. Legal analysts have argued that any out-of-congress externally launched attack beyond a congressionally approved war would raise basic questions of national and international legitimacy.
Mexico has also responded vehemently. President Claudia Sheinbaum repudiated any suggestion of U.S. military intervention in Mexico and asserted, “The United States is not going to come to Mexico with the military. We cooperate, we work together, but there’s not going to be an invasion. That’s eliminated.” Sheinbaum continued to state that Mexico maintains its doors open for information exchange and cooperation, but its sovereignty cannot be assumed.
The Trump administration puts this directive in the context of trying to respond to the threat of fentanyl and the RELATED cartel-driven violence. The pundits are quick to note that in the new approach, deterrence and demonstration of power become more crucial than the long-term reforms that underpinned previous efforts like Plan Mérida and the Bicentennial Framework that emphasized local capacity building, judicial reform, and public health concerns.
The constitutional foundation for such a militaristic approach is thin. While freezes and sanctions are well within American prerogative, attacks abroad without congressional or world institution approval can be illegal under both U.S. law and international convention. The United States has a dismal history of interventions in Latin America, and unilaterally imposed policies would precipitate diplomatic crises, stoke nationalist sentiment, and challenge cooperation on security, immigration, and commerce.
Nevertheless, something has been achieved. American troops and intelligence along the border and in the oceans have been strengthened. Surveillance flights have been increased, active-duty and National Guard troops have been sent to the border, and intelligence exchange with Mexican troops has been enhanced. But Mexico has dug its heels in: no U.S. ground troops, no drones, and no direct U.S. military intervention on its territory.
The dynamics of the cartel world are another obstacle. Mexico’s criminal underworld, analysts explain, is a mosaic of more than 440 organizations ranging from international networks to local gangs. Bungled assassinations may kill leaders but are likely to reproduce blood territorial wars, leading to further instability.
For now, Trump’s directive is a daring—and provocative—attempt to reorder America’s contribution to the fight against drug cartels. Whether it proves fruitful or spawns new challenges is impossible to say, but one thing is sure: the price for U.S.-Mexican relations, regional stability, and the rule of law has never been higher.