In a move that has sent ripples through diplomatic circles and reignited debates over sovereignty and security, the Trump administration is actively weighing a range of military options to combat the persistent threat posed by Mexican drug cartels. According to reports from Bloomberg and The New York Times, the administration's consideration of military force marks a dramatic escalation in the United States' approach to Latin American security, signaling a willingness to adopt aggressive tactics that could reshape US-Mexico relations for years to come.
The deliberations, which have intensified over the past week, span a broad spectrum of potential actions. Current and former US officials familiar with the discussions told The New York Times that options on the table include naval destroyers launching missile strikes targeting cartel leaders and infrastructure, as well as drone strikes and naval operations designed to degrade cartel capabilities. Notably, officials have emphasized that there are no plans to deploy US ground troops inside Mexico—a line that both Washington and Mexico City appear determined not to cross.
These military options are not a sudden development. In fact, a multi-agency working group—drawing personnel from the Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, and other key agencies—has been analyzing the feasibility and risks of a military approach since the early days of President Trump's current term. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was reportedly briefed weeks ago on these options, though no final decision has been made. The Pentagon, for its part, has remained tight-lipped, referring press inquiries to the White House, which has declined to confirm or deny whether any authorization for military strikes has been given.
The Trump administration’s consideration of military action comes on the heels of several bold moves against narcotics trafficking. Earlier this year, the administration designated eight Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs), a step that expands the US government’s toolkit for targeting these groups. On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order declaring a national emergency, arguing that the cartels posed “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.”
Following these declarations, the US military has ramped up its presence along the southern border, deploying thousands of troops and sending Navy warships to patrol coastal waters near Mexico. Surveillance operations have also intensified, with increased drone flights over Mexico and along the border. Intelligence agencies such as the CIA, National Counterterrorism Center, and NSA have been ordered to focus more intently on cartel activities, and the CIA has expanded drone surveillance missions over Mexican territory—though, as of now, these drones have not been authorized for lethal strikes.
Inside the Pentagon, the establishment of the Joint Service Interagency Advisory Group—led by retired US soldier Eric Geressy and including US Special Operations and FBI personnel—reflects the administration's commitment to a coordinated, cross-agency response. Top commanders from Northern Command and Southern Command have also been involved in the deliberations, underscoring the broad operational scope of any potential actions.
But as Washington weighs its next steps, the prospect of US military strikes inside Mexico has met fierce resistance from Mexican officials. President Claudia Sheinbaum was unequivocal in her response to the reports, stating, “This has nothing to do with Mexican territory. The United States is not sending its military to Mexico. We cooperate, we collaborate, but there will be no invasion.” Mexico’s Foreign Ministry echoed her stance, emphasizing that any security agreement must be rooted in “mutual trust, shared responsibility, sovereign equality, respect for territorial integrity, and cooperation without subordination.”
US Ambassador to Mexico Ronald Johnson sought to allay concerns, pledging in a statement that the two countries would work together—rather than unilaterally—to dismantle cartel networks. “This is not about the United States acting alone. It is about building a joint, unshakable front with Mexico to defend our citizens, dismantle the cartels’ networks, and ensure that the only people who need to fear for their future are those who profit from murder, addiction, and chaos.”
The administration’s hardline stance is not limited to Mexico. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently visited Central America, advocating for expanded US military use of the Panama Canal and increasing pressure on leaders in Colombia and Venezuela. The Trump administration has doubled the reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro to $50 million, and it has engaged in a war of words with Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro. These moves, analysts warn, risk fueling anti-American sentiment and could strengthen autocratic regimes in the region.
Experts have expressed concern that even the public discussion of military options could have unintended consequences. Jorge Restrepo, director of CERAC, a Bogota-based research institution, cautioned, “This will strengthen autocratic regimes like the ones in Venezuela or Nicaragua, and the anti-American sentiment in Mexico, Guatemala and even in Colombia.” James Bosworth, founder of political risk firm Hxagon, added that cartels have the capacity to retaliate on US soil in ways that terrorist groups like al-Qaeda “could only dream of.”
The Trump administration’s focus on the fentanyl crisis—a central theme in the president’s campaign and policy agenda—has added urgency to the debate. While President Trump has criticized Mexico’s efforts to stem narcotics flows, pointing to the surge in fentanyl trafficking as a national emergency, the data tells a more nuanced story. In June 2025, US Customs and Border Protection seized 704 pounds of fentanyl at the border—half the amount seized in June 2024. Analysts attribute this decline to a mix of factors: internal conflicts within major cartels, regulatory crackdowns by China on precursor chemicals, and possibly a reduction in fentanyl use in the US. Some also credit the administration’s troop deployments along the border for deterring traffickers.
Yet, the complexity of Mexico’s criminal landscape defies easy solutions. According to Lantia Intelligence, more than 500 cartels, gangs, and mafia-style organizations now operate across Mexico, engaging in a dizzying array of illicit activities beyond drug trafficking—including extortion, oil theft, illegal logging, mining, and even operating call centers. Many of these groups have forged alliances with local and regional politicians, making the problem deeply entrenched and resistant to purely military remedies.
As the US and Mexico prepare to sign a new security agreement in the coming weeks, both sides remain adamant that cooperation—not confrontation—must be the order of the day. Victoria Dittmar of Insight Crime observed, “If that were to be broken, it would indeed break the relationship of trust and would require a rethinking of joint security strategies.”
The coming months will reveal whether the Trump administration moves forward with its contemplated military options or continues to prioritize intelligence-sharing, joint law enforcement, and border security enhancements. For now, the balance between sovereignty, effective action, and regional stability remains as delicate—and as fraught—as ever.
