Security and Safety in Mexico

rfay — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:30:34 +0000

We've told you about the highways and our greatest risk in every country - the traffic. But many of you were most worried that we'd be abducted by drug-traffickers or thrown in prison by the "federales." And some have asked us why we weren't bringing a gun (Don't bring a gun to Mexico! You'll go straight to jail if it's discovered at a border crossing!).

In terms of our everyday experience, we have to tell you that Mexico seems to be the safest country we've traveled in on our trip so far. Our perceived level of risk both to person and property is lower than in either Canada or the United States. Nobody has bothered us or our stuff in any way.

Now we'll have to admit that we're not careless travelers and we keep our eyes on our things and don't leave our bikes unattended. We're experienced third-world travelers. And if somebody says an area is dangerous, we listen carefully and try to evaluate the risks. And we also have to admit that we aren't likely to be seen as good kidnapping subjects, since there's nobody to ask for a ransom. Most people here think our bikes are pretty cool, and pretty expensive by Mexican standards, but they don't seem to think we have all that much money (or we'd be going by car, right?) So maybe our risk level is lower because we're a small target. But I don't think so. I think Mexico is just a mighty calm, friendly place.

The other day I read the US State Department's advisory about Mexico. It could get you *really* scared! Basically, they say that you need to travel only on the toll road (the fancy interstate highway here) during the daytime, and with your windows rolled up. It's SCARY! And it contrasts so starkly with our experience. I'm sure that every incident they cite is true, but I think there's a lack of perspective. They're reporting "risk" in absolute terms - suggesting that you shouldn't take any risk. What they really should be doing is saying something like: "When you're in the subway in Mexico City you should take the same measures you would take in any metropolitan subway." Or "When you're driving on the highway and you see something that doesn't look right, you should be careful, like you would anywhere in the world." They just say "don't do this and don't do that" because it's so risky, without putting it in the context of our U.S. risk level. People get shot in our home city of Denver, and that's really bad. But we don't think about it at home. I believe that fewer people are murdered annually in a Mexican city the size of Denver,
but the State Department doesn't make that kind of comparison. They just make you fear and act as if you can manage risk by avoiding risky situations, rather than calculating and dealing with risk.

We're going to miss Mexico a lot. And we may have to learn a lot more about managing our security in Guatemala and Honduras. We'll see. But we have to tell you it sure feels like a friendly, safe place to us.

Politics and Security in Colombia

rfay — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:15:55 +0000

You´ve all heard of Colombia and the tremendous security/drug/paramilitary/guerrilla problems they´ve had over the years. Some of you told us not to go here because of what you had heard. We decided to go, however, because of what we heard from the cyclists who had actually passed through: it´s a calm country, beautiful, with incredibly friendly people. And that´s what we´re finding too. We haven´t had any problem, but we do read the paper and we do see the results of the strain they´ve had over the years.

Basically, Colombia got buried under the corruption of drugs and the challenge of a revolutionary insurgency for decades. They seem to be digging their way out over the last ten years or so, and the current president, Alvaro Uribe, is immensely popular for the progress he´s made. The guerrilla group, the FARC, is still there and still holds some very important hostages, some that it's had for more than 8 years. But it seems to be declining in power and influence. You might wonder from reading the paper that their primary reason to keep holding those hostages is that it's their last grasp on power. The FARC seems to be still quite dependent on the drug trade for its financing.

During the guerrilla years, private security forces were created by the big landowners, and developed into what's called "paramilitary forces" here. Essentially, they became private armies in their own right. Several of them have been "demobilized" and information about these demobilized forces and the fact that some aren't really demobilized is in the papers daily. They too are identified with the drug trade.

And of course you all know about the drug mafias of Colombia. Everybody remembers Pablo Escobar and the Medellin Cartel of the 1980's. Pablo was killed in 1993, and Medellin is a calm, safe city. However, the drug trade continues at a high level from various place, with the collaboration of guerrillas and paramilitary and people who just want to be rich, as well as the campesinos who grow the Coca leaf. (Remember that coca is a traditional product used by local people for millenia. However. the market created by the demand for cocaine in the developed world turns it into a different kind of product.)

We have had a bit of experience with the security issues. Every day we ride past military checkpoints. The soldiers are everywhere. Everybody feels that the highways are very safe as a result. However, as we rode through the lowlands we came through an area of great drug influence. In one town, the coca-growing campesinos from the nearby mountains were trying to close the major highway we were riding in protest over the government's coca eradication program. They want more support - if the government is going to destroy their crops in the US-sponsored coca eradication program, they think they should be compensated and helped to move to other crops. We heard about this protest and some occasional violence for days before we arrived in Taraza, but when we rode through nothing was happening. We didn't even see the demonstrators. But we didn't tarry to look for them either.