watch book tv every weekend on c-span2. announcer: monday is the observance of veterans day and at that morning we will bring you remarks from officials who plan to speak at arlington national cemetery. watch the wreathlaying, plus a ceremony, beginning at 11:00 in the morning on c-span. watch the c-span network live next week as the house intelligence committee holds the first public impeachment hearings. the committee, led by adam schiff, will hear from three state department officials starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern on wednesday on c-span3. and william taylor, and deputy assistant secretary of george -- assistant secretary of state, george kent. then the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine will appear before the committee. follow the impeachment inquiry, live on the c-span networks online at c-span.org or listen live with the free radio app. wood is the

director of the mexico institute at the wilson center, here with us to talk about the u.s. efforts, the mexican efforts to fight the drug cartels and this is also a follow-up to the horrible attack earlier this week in mexico of u.s. citizens, members of the latter-day saints sect that lives there. what does this is just about the cartels in that area of mexico? guest: good morning. in addition to recognizing the recognizee have to that this is a story that has repeated time and time again, week after week in mexico. very few of the stories receive this kind of coverage, but there are communities across the country that face this kind of threat, this kind of violence from drug cartels. that particular part of mexico, in chihuahua, son

othera, between the border of the two states, it's clear the organized crime groups have the upper hand of the local authorities and the federal government has not been able to deploy sufficient force to dissuade them from engaging in this kind of action. host: this attack happened a couple weeks after the story that didn't make as much news in the united states, a horrific gunfight that happened down there between the cartels and the mexican government, the federal forces. uest: yeah, in the city of culican, the heart of the sinaloa cartel and the federal government went in and tried to arrest two of el chapeau guzman's sons and detained them but decided to release them after the sinaloa cartel having themselves deployed hundreds of people in the streets with weapons took citizens and members of the armed forces hostage and threatened to kill them if those two sons were not released.

we have to recognize there's some kind of connection between what happened in culiacan and the broader trend towards the boldness of the cartels which they feel at this point in time that the federal government is not in a strong position. they feel as though they have the upper hand that they can actually deploy more force and of course they can get away with it. impunity is a very important issue in mexico today. host: you mentioned el chapo guzman's sons, after many years and efforts by the united states is in a united states prison but his sons obviously are of age to be a very strong influence still in mexico. we didn't solve all the problems by the arrest and imprisonment of el chapo, did we? guest: no. and it raises the bigger question, for the past 12 years the united states and mexican governments working together have used what they call the kingpin strategy, trying to take out the upper echelons of drug cartels and organized

crime groups in mexico. while it does result in bringing certain individuals to justice, what it doesn't do is lower the levels of violence and certainly doesn't seem to reduce the flow of drugs across the border. so in fact we can make the argument and many people have made the argument, when you take out the capitals, the top levels of organized crime groups, what we get is the hydroeffect, you cut off one head and other heads grow and snap at each other and the fragmentation of a organized crime group results in higher levels of violence. host: let me ask you about u.s. efforts to help mexico and ask you what's known as the merida initiative. the initiative is aimed at disrupting organized criminal groups, enhancing mexican public security and border and judicial institutions, implement better infrastructure and technology at borders, strengthening mexican communities against organized crime. when did this come into existance? guest: created in 2007, an agreement between presidents george w. bush and phillip

calderon of mexico. it was groundbreaking, mexico and the united states had never entered into any security agreement before and many compared it to norad, the agreement between the united states and canada that this would be the armed forces security agencies working side by side and building trust and in fact over the last 12 years that's what we've seen. what is doubtful, though, is whether or not this has actually reduced levels of violence. what would have happened if we hadn't had this kind of cooperation between the two countries? but what we are seeing is that year after year the number of homicides in mexico is growing. last year we had 36,000 homicides. and this year it looks as though those numbers will be even higher. host: duncan wood is our guest, talking about the fight against mexican drug cartels. 202-748-8000 is the number for democrats, republicans 2-704-8001 and independents,

202-748-8002 and we welcome your comments on twitter. wj and a tweet at c-span also text us. the president tweeted this after the incident, he said this is the time for mexico with the help of the united states to wage war on the drug cartels and to wipe them off the face of the earth. we merely await a call from your great new president. ow is that received in mexico? guest: language matters. and the fact the president used the word "wage war" brought a negative reaction in mexico because people began to speculate he was talking about a military intervention and of course that raised enormous suspicions of people across the political spectrum in mexico that the united states would actually intervene. what happened in the end is the president of mexico did call president trump and they had a conversation. but the president said he doesn't really want the united states help in this issue, that

this is a mexican problem and that mexico will take care of it. but i have to say i think that may be a missed opportunity because even though the president's language by using the word "war" was inflammatory, there is an opening here for rethinking the merida initiative and putting more resources into bilateral security corporations and beginning to take a stronger stance across the country on the issue of violence and organized crime. let me just say one thing here about what is going on in mexico. this president in mexico has created something called the national guard, a new police security force which has a national reach. and it was created with great fanfare earlier on this year and the idea was this would be used to tackle organized crime. because of pressure from the united states, many of the soldiers in that national guard are now being used to stop central american migrants from crossing over the border in southern mexico. we need to see those national

guard troops, those elements need to be used for fighting organized crime across the country. host: what's the best thing the united states can do to help mexico fight cartels. guest: it has to be a multidimensional strategy. the basic principles of the merida principles are sound and we need a greater intelligence corporation and transfer of resources for training purposes and we need to see perhaps less pressure on mexico in terms of stopping the flows of central american migrants. host: let's hear to callers from baldwinville, massachusetts, bob, good morning, on the independent line. caller: good morning. host: you're on the air. go ahead. caller: all right. i would like to know if there's any way -- if the mexican government can't get these people under control, why don't we just go in and do it anyway? they can't take care of them and they can't fight with them without losing against them, so you know, they're not going to be able to do anything against us [ host: you're calling for the s. to intervene mill sterile

-- militarily? caller: i definitely him. if they can't take care of those people. how many thousands of people die? they have a hundred people a day dying because of these guys and you let them run around, as the man said with impunity. host: how close to the u.s. border has all of this been happening, including this latest incident? guest: about 800 kilometers from the u.s. border, about 500 miles, so it's a fair distance. and what we do know is that the violence in mexico doesn't cross over the border. there's a very hard line there and has nothing to do with barriers or border walls but has to do with the fact the public security institutions here in the united states work, and organized crime is detered from engaging in such violent acts on this side of the border. it's very -- i think it's very easy to say let's send in the troops from the united states. we have to recognize the united states doesn't exactly have a wonderful record of going out around the world and stopping

violence. i think we have to say there's not really an appetite in washington or the rest of the country now for other military interventions regardless whether or not it would work. and certainly if this was to happen, there would be a very, very negative reaction in mexico. and that could jeopardize all kinds of other levels of cooperation on migration, on drugs, and in particular on trade. host: reporting on the time line of that massacre on monday in mexico, "the new york times" appeased today, nytimes.com writes for all the years the drug wars ravaged mexico, the common refrain has often been used to make sense of the unthinkable toll repeated by government officials, members of law enforcement, many mexicans themselves, that the violence mostly claims the lives of criminals of those involved in the ruthless underworld of those who walk the wrong path but the killings here in eastern son othera -- sonora obliterated that in the wrong way and mexico suffered the deadliest year in two

decades, the murders of innocent mothers and children stripped away any pretense the mayhem is largely targeted and therefore contained. guest: there has been this argument from successive mexican governments it's predominantly the criminals, those engaged in organized crime or connected to them that pay the price. what we do see time and time again, it's not the first, but time and time again we've seen that communities, families, minute bystanders have been caught in the crossfire. this case in particular, i think it is very interesting because the liberon family has a long history of actually challenging organized crime groups through social activism and two members of the family of course were murderered in 2009 after a kidnapping. one of the brothers after that became a dedicated activist who is fighting organized crime and raising the issue of peace and justice in the country and in august of this year, he actually made a public denouncement of organized crime

groups in the region and that i think is directly connected and does appear to an retaliatory act and i'm not saying it was deserved by any stretch of the imagination but it does show the mexican government appeared to be unable to protect citizens who take a stand. host: let's hear from laguna california, mike on the independent line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i'm a libertarian so my philosophy is not to use the government to try to protect adult boneheads from themselves so i'd end the drug war which is in my opinion a foolish replay of alcohol prohibition causing all the same social problems, without alcohol prohibition we never would have gotten al capone and without drug prohibition we never would have heard of el chapo so we should restore the american government to the original standing principles, allow adults to use whatever they want as long as they bear responsibility for it. may i have your comment, please?

guest: i would be delighted to respond to that. there is a very active debate in mexico going on now about the legalization of drugs. the mexican congress has recently proved legislation legalizing marijuana and there are proposals out there for the legalization of other drugs as well. but of course the legalization of drugs in mexico would just be one very small step towards this. what we really need to see, as you say, is a debate here in the united states about it. now, i mean, there are many different sides to this argument, however, you know, it's true that demand for drugs in the united states is what's driving the violence in mexico, along with lack of rule of law in mexico, the flow of weapons south wards from the u.s. to mexico and of course the flow of money across the border as well. but the public health consequences here in the united states, you look at what would happen with widespread legalization or even decriminalization of other kinds of drugs.

we have a little experiment going on, of course, in terms of marijuana here in the united states, in many states, but that r or not we can take on to cocaine or heroin or other drug is another question and society is certainly divided on the issue. host: "the wall street journal" opinion writers criticize american drug users after the massacre, the cartelization of mexico american drug users are complicit in the murder and mayhem saying americans should acknowledge that their role and drug habits play in fueling this wanton violence. the council on foreign relations report americans spent almost $150 billion in 2016 on cocaine, heroin, meth and marijuana and synthetic opiods like fentanyl. guest: we need to raise that issue time and time again. when somebody takes a trip to vegas or is at a party and there's a line of coke there, you have to think, how did this substance get here to the united states? what are the social costs that were paid by other people, and

really do i want to support that kind of activity? and i think that's an issue which isn't raised often enough and we tend to talk about the public health consequences without recognizing that cocaine, heroin have a enormous social cost and a cost in terms of violence and lives. host: rafael next, republican line. caller: good morning, good morning. this is a very important conversation, and my question has been, why not criminalize the drug usage, particularly in the hollywood celebrity population which increases the defense for all these drugs coming into the united states. i think we should be blamed for whatever is happening in mexico relations to the marketing that definitely is drugs. thank you. guest: what you're essentially saying is that there is a huge part of the responsibility for the violence in mexico here in

the united states. and that takes it to the principle of co-responsibility or shared responsibility between the two countries. a principle which was enacted in the late 2000's and became the basis in fact for the merida initiative that the two countries have been pursuing ever since. the idea is that the united states has to share the responsibility for the problem and therefore needs to be part of the solution. and clearly, questions of reducing illegal drug demand in the united states is part of that. also trying to control the flow of weapons south to mexico so we stop fueling the violence and working together on money laundering or anti-money laundering needs football very important part of it. one problem i see right now is that there is a tendency to throw all the blame on mexico. and so your point i think is very, very welcomed. we need to recognize what's happening here in the united states actually does have those costs for mexico.