NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Over the many years of the United States, they have suffered terribly from cross -border influences trafficking in people and drugs Mexican cartels. From an opioid crisis stimulated by fentanil to broader issues of public security from Cartel’s crime and violence, the US communities submitted the head of these transnational whips. This is sad, but not new.
We are used to thinking about it as a domestic problem, but it is also the case that the Mexican government violates international right by allowing the damage that results from its territory to apply to America and its citizens.
Allowing so much damage to America and her citizens to get out of Mexico, The Mexican government violates international law Not managing to restrain criminal companies in the center of illegal trade. A careful analysis of international legal principles, state responsibilities and contractual obligations makes it clear that Mexico neglects his duty to prevent the damage arising from his territory (International Law Commission, 2001).
At the core of this argument is the principle of state responsibility for works committed by non -state actors. According to articles of the International Law Commission on State Liability for International Unjust Acts, the state may be responsible if it does not take reasonable measures to prevent predictable damage to other countries (International Law Commission, 2001).
The suspects of Mexican drug cartel members armed with rifles were arrested on the Texas side of the southern border this week, the authorities said. (Texas DPS)
In the case of Mexican cartels, the Mexican government did not take any attention in reducing the activities of these organizations, despite having possessed both the capacity and obligation to do so (Cassese, 2005). When criminal activity like drug trade and people The result of significant damage to American citizens, the principle of obligatory zeal requires Mexico to take concrete actions to alleviate these risks.
It is ironic that one of the most famous cases of implementation of this principle occurred on our northern border in the arbitration of a trace of topionica between America and Canada before World War II.
Furthermore, international law supports the principle of non -intervention, which forbids the state to allow its territory to be used as a driving pillow for activities that harm the other country.
The case of the Krfu seminar channel is undergoing a state of state to ensure that their territories do not become lines for external aggression (International Court of Justice [ICJ]1949). By allowing Mexican cartels to act with the relative unpunished, Mexico allows the situation in which its soil becomes a safe haven for criminal elements that directly harm America and its citizens.
In the implementation and implementation of strong security measures, Mexico gives up his responsibility to prevent cross-border damage-crowning the principle of non-intervention in international law.
Mexican international liabilities are further illuminated by participating in several key contracts intended to combat transnational organized crime. As the signatory of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention), Mexico explicitly obliged to bring measures to combat organized criminal groups, drug trafficking, human trafficking and people’s smuggling (United Nations, 2000).
Similarly, contracts such as the unique convention on intoxicating drugs (1961) and the convention against illegal traffic in intoxicating drugs and psychotropic substances (1988) impose legal duties to the Member States for control and preventing illegal drug trafficking (United Nations, 1961; United Nations, 1988).
Inadequate implementing its domestic laws against cartels and not interfering with their transnational networks, Mexico has long violated these international obligations. This deficiency is not mere administrative supervision; It represents a fundamental failure in accordance with the rule of the international law, contributing directly to the crises that plague the American community.
US Border Patrol after agents received shooting from cartel members in Mexico while patrolling in Fronton in Texas last week. (Texas Department of Public Security)
Although the cartels are powerful, even de facto governments in some parts of Mexico, this does not liberate Mexico because of its responsibilities for international law. The doctrine of the deep audit holds that the state must take all reasonable measures, given its ability to prevent damage from non -state actors.
Click here for more Fox News opinions
In this respect, the continuous expansion of cartel activities and their devastating effects on American society indicate that Mexico did not fulfill this minimum standard of care. Instead of viewing these challenges as justification for inactivity, they should serve as a catalyst to work on more effective solutions.
Furthermore, the tangible impact of cartel trade and violence on US communities cannot be neglected. Epidemia of Fentanil – a crisis that is largely stimulated by chemicals and methods of production associated with Mexican cartels – requested an incredible human toll (centers for the control and prevention of the disease [CDC]2020) and tense public resources across the United States (drug implementation administration [DEA]2021).
In the implementation and implementation of strong security measures, Mexico gives up his responsibility to prevent cross-border damage-crowning the principle of non-intervention in international law.
In addition to losing life, economic and social costs associated with illegal drug trade draw an urgent need for action. Allowing its territory to be used as the center for these activities, Mexico not only threatens its own family security, but also contributes to a wider pattern of transnational damage that violates the established standards of international behavior.
Click here to get the Fox News app
Therefore, it is clear that the Mexican government violates international law without controlling the activities related to cartels under well -established state liability principles, doctrine of depth zeal and obligations embedded in international contracts, which is Mexico himself (Palermo Convention, 2000; Individual Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961).
Although challenges remain on the ground, the failure to act against the cartel is a violation of both the spirit and a letter of international law, with strong consequences for American citizens. Holding Mexico responsible for these transnational damage is not just a matter of legal principle – it is an urgent imperative for public security protection and supporting the integrity of the international legal order.
