The sole reason for the existence of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is the destabilization of countries, governments, or organizations that oppose the nation’s highest interests; there is no other. All activities, in whatever form they take, must be understood as merely intermediate steps toward achieving that end.
It employs violent methods such as assassinations or coups d’état, or, as is the case with Mexico, it creates or perpetuates existing situations, like the many issues with which Trump threatens us daily. This is an idea that demanded deeper examination; it foreshadowed the U.S. demands for the extradition of the governor of Sinaloa and his alleged accomplices.
It wasn’t seen that way, and others will follow. The Chihuahua case, in addition to any legal proceedings that may arise, should be a case study for intelligence agencies, as it reveals not only facts that give rise to its political exploitation and media hype, but also, upon closer examination, exposes not only Trump’s aims, but also our lamentable human and institutional weaknesses.
Mexico’s destiny, from that country’s perspective, must align with its interests. Everything stems from this point; the methods and mechanisms are meticulously crafted. The United States would not attempt destabilization like it did to Salvador Allende’s government in Chile, by crippling its economy and instigating a military coup; but it has other equally perverse and effective resources at its disposal, such as soliciting favors in judicial matters, controlling critical trade in irreplaceable goods like gas, manipulating migration, influencing arms trafficking, and exerting influence over international banking. It has more than enough means.
As officials of a certain level, we lack a proactive culture regarding the defense of our own interests, which is why we are constantly being deceived. The reference is to the vast world of bureaucracy: secretaries and undersecretaries of state, directors of large corporations, state governors, and ambassadors, who handle highly sensitive information among themselves. We were not educated in prevention of any kind, from vaccines and fire extinguishers to warning of national risks.
This is simply a form of political blindness or insensitivity. To be consistent, let’s continue the reflection on the Chihuahua case, the unread message. This allows us to surmise at least two situations: that the governor acted as she did out of blatant ignorance of the matter, or that she acted from a cloud of arrogance and irresponsibility. Both positions are fueled by a lack of understanding of the subject: the governor blatantly ignored her own oath to uphold and enforce federal and state laws and accepted that, if she failed to do so, the nation would hold her accountable, which suggests a prior knowledge of the law before taking her oath, or she was unaware of what she swore to uphold.
Does the general lack of a preventative culture contribute to the governor’s conduct? Yes, undoubtedly, but it must be noted that the State has neither required nor promoted such education. There is no mechanism in place to inform high-level officials, one that adequately addresses the commitments they assume upon taking office, commitments that extend beyond their legal obligation to know the law.
Ignorance of the law is never a valid excuse. They should be warned that foreign agents operating in our country—whether American, Chinese, or Spanish, and there are many—tend to adopt, like chameleons, any external guise, but will always serve the same purpose. An obvious rule is that they adapt remarkably well to their assigned objective. While legally members of a foreign government, their formal identification is to pose as promoters, advisors, or instructors. They lead an open life, even if they don’t acknowledge their true nature.
They typically operate through multiple overlapping identities depending on their work environment, generally under diplomatic cover. When they are supposed to carry out extralegal missions, such as their presence in Chihuahua, they call them “covert or clandestine operations,” which have occurred with some frequency in Mexico. However, our legal system has been prevented from acting in the pursuit of justice due to international agreements, since, having been received as diplomats, they enjoy impunity.
They focus on specific, high-value targets that are generally legally accessible, not on broad clandestine deployments. At least 90 percent of their information needs are publicly available, which is why it is crucial to investigate what the two deceased individuals were actually doing in the mountains. From this entire situation, Governor Campos’s irresponsibility emerges as a negative lesson that must be learned, because after Sinaloa, more is coming.
Source: jornada
