The elimination of drug kingpin Nemesio “El Mencho” Oseguera Cervantes might appear as a conclusive win in the drug war. However, in Washington and elsewhere, it is also seen as a more calculated move: a tangible reaction to increasing U.S. pressure that has altered Mexico’s strategy toward the cartels.
The mission, conducted with U.S. intelligence backing, highlights the growing cooperation between the two nations as fentanyl smuggling continues to be a primary political and security concern in the United States.
Sen. , R-Texas., informed Digital that he personally cautioned Mexican authorities last year that Washington anticipated more robust measures. “Last August, I traveled to Mexico. I visited El Salvador, Panama, and Mexico, and I held meetings with high-level officials in the Mexican government. The point I made to them was that they had to become earnest about combating the cartels to halt the flow of drugs into America and to stop human trafficking into America. I informed them that if they did not get serious, President Trump was going to.”
“This preceded the Maduro raid,” Cruz continued, “Yet the raid was not unexpected — it was evident the president would take necessary steps to protect America. I must note that Mexico has shifted direction significantly, and this operation is a clear example of that shift. Thousands of Americans are living today because Trump was re-elected and Republicans gained control of Congress. Had the Democrats’ open-border policies remained, thousands more Americans would have perished from murder, other violent crimes, and drug overdoses.”
Melissa Ford Maldonado, director of Western Hemisphere at the America First Policy Institute, stated to Digital that the strike indicates a wider change in motivations influenced by Washington.
“U.S. pressure has undoubtedly influenced Mexico’s conduct. Pressure is the sole factor that forces the Mexican state to move,” Ford Maldonado stated. “The Trump administration has clearly connected trade influence and even the potential for independent action to Mexico’s effectiveness against the cartels, which has entirely transformed the incentive framework in Mexico City. When Washington calls for observable outcomes, Mexico feels compelled to generate something observable.”
She noted that the killing aligns with this pattern. “The elimination of El Mencho is an effort to achieve that,” she explained. “El Mencho was one of the hemisphere’s most sought-after individuals, and his cartel ranks among Mexico’s most violent and militarized. His demise provides the Mexican government with a specific achievement to highlight — a high-value target — and to assert they are producing results. However, these are merely tactical successes, intended to ease immediate pressure from Washington.”
Ford Maldonado warned that prominent eliminations have not historically led to enduring peace.
“The issue is that tactical victories do not equate to strategic transformation. Tactical wins are no longer sufficient. If they were, the extensive record of prior arrests and extraditions would have resolved this problem already. I think Washington is now seeking something more profound: the dismantling of the environment that enables cartel power to flourish. Mexico has a system of , territorial dominance, and political safeguarding, and it must tackle the political and financial networks that maintain the cartels’ authority.”
She also highlighted that could add complexity to the story.
In June 2020, Omar García Harfuch, who was then Mexico City’s police chief, survived an commonly linked to El Mencho. García Harfuch now serves as Mexico’s secretary of security and citizen protection and led the operation that resulted in the cartel leader’s death.
“Consequently, there might be additional motivations at play,” Ford Maldonado remarked. “The Jalisco New Generation cartel has been engaged in a protracted and extremely violent , which some consider the traditional cartel ally of the Morena government. Therefore, if the Mexican government targets the rivals of a cartel it has long been suspected of condoning or cooperating with, that by itself does not demonstrate a genuine end to collusion between the state and cartels.”
For the present, she said, the killing is noteworthy but not conclusive.
“Regrettably, past experience indicates that eliminating a cartel leader seldom yields long-term stability. It temporarily interrupts command and control,” she concluded. “Whether this marks an authentic pivotal moment hinges on subsequent actions, namely whether law enforcement progresses beyond targeting prominent cartel figures and starts challenging the political and financial systems that support them. Until that happens, this is important, but it is not revolutionary.”