search instagram arrow-down

Sobre este espacio

Este blog está dedicado al análisis y discusión de temas relacionados con la seguridad nacional y la defensa. Aunque en este sitio se encontrará información primordialmente sobre México, también se abordarán temáticas que por su relevancia bien pudieran aplicarse a otras latitudes. El autor es fundador y Director de Inteligencia en Riskop, una firma mexicana de inteligencia estratégica y control de riesgos. Politólogo por el ITESM Campus Monterrey y egresado del William J. Perry Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies (DPCT 2016). Investigador Externo del Instituto de Investigaciones Estratégicas de la Armada de México y conferencista en el Centro de Estudios Superiores Navales y el Colegio de Defensa Nacional.

Algunos títulos recomendados

The evolution of modern strategic thought

The Ghost Fleet: A Novel of the Next World War

Out of the mountains: the coming age of urban guerrilla

Manual de Estudios Estratégicos y Seguridad Internacional

Fire on the water: China, America and the future of the Pacific

Insurgency and Counterinsurgency in modern war

Carl von Clausewitz is regarded as one of the most influential strategic thinkers of the 19th. Century. His work has provided us with a sound theory in regard to the nature of war and the various elements that shape it.

War is the continuation of policy by other means” is perhaps the most famous quote that politicians, security specialists, and practitioners repeat every time they try to explain Clausewitz’ theory.

Yet “On War” is such a complex body of historical revisionism and dialectical analysis that one can’t reduce it to a single phrase.

In my opinion -and I could be wrong on this- the very essence of Clausewitz’ treaty can be found in his description of the three variables that explain war: passion, reason, and chance.

All of Clausewitz’ work can be explained or analyzed through the lens of his Trinity.

According to the Prussian thinker, war is…

“…composed of primordial violence, hatred, and enmity, which are to be regarded as a blind natural force [passion]; of the play of chance and probability within which the creative spirit is free to roam [strategic opportunity]; and of its element of subordination, as an instrument of policy, which makes it subject to reason [strategic calculus] …”

captura de pantalla 2019-01-25 a la(s) 10.52.43

 

The first element of the Trinity, that is Passion, is related to the public or community. Chance refers to a country’s military/security apparatus, whereas Reason is associated to the Government or a political ruler.

For instance, if war is to be properly waged (even if not successfully), the Government should effectively define its political objectives, the military should correctly assess its capabilities and the people might give all of their support to the enterprise.

If one or more of these elements fails, the entire war effort crumbles.

It is not my intention to analyze all of Clausewitz’ theory here, but I do believe that his Trinity might just shed some light on why Mexico’s ongoing strategy to tackle fuel theft is failing.

First of all, we should stop calling this a “Strategy”, for it lacks a comprehensive definition and articulation of ends, ways and means. As of January 25th, the Government has failed to explain what the main political goals of its anti-fuel theft actions are.

As Ana Maria Salazar pointed out, no one really knows what the Federal Authorities visualize as a “win state” for the present situation. Does it aspire to reduce fuel theft to zero? Does it mean that a given percentage of organized crime groups have been detained?

So far, no one really knows.

For instance, the “Government/Reason” component of the entire “strategy” is almost absent, to say the least, unclear.

This takes us to the second component of the Trinity: Military/Chance.

When the Government doesn’t clarify what political objectives it is pursuing, the security/military apparatus might just don’t know how to align its capabilities to the entire effort.

This creates an operational gap that every police/military commander fears the most: while the political ends are not defined and the tactical situation keeps evolving, the strategy can’t be adapted to an ever-changing environment.

Finally, since almost 70% of Mexicans support the Government’s actions, it appears that the third component of the Trinity –People/Passion– is perhaps the only one properly aligned to the effort.

From a Clausewitzian perspective, Mexico’s anti-fuel theft strategy is full of passion, but lacks political reason and military chance.

At least so far.

As Clausewitz stressed almost 200 years ago, politicians should never ask what is militarily impossible. In that regard, as long as the Government does not define its political goals, the security/military apparatus will keep improvising and the people’s passion might fade away any time soon.

 

And that -I’m afraid- is a recipe for disaster.

One comment on “Mexico’s anti-fuel theft strategy: passion [and the lack of] reason and chance

  1. Enrique Conde says:

    I believe the first point in regards of the goal to reach is absolutely clear. Lopez Obrador’s government, planed and is taking one of many steps to end corruption and theft. Reducing fuel theft, and eventually eradication of such practice is the final goal.

Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: