90 Critical Days: U.S. Intervention Scenarios and Risks in Mexico’s Cartel Conflict
By Ghaleb Krame
The leak published by The New York Times on August 8, 2025, revealing a secret directive from President Donald Trump authorizing the Pentagon to use military force against Mexican cartels designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTO), triggered a wave of public reactions. Most came from commentators, media outlets, and some analysts who, without applying methodological rigor, resorted to historical comparisons and alarmist narratives, often lacking technical grounding or verifiable data.
In contrast, this Krame Report adopts a technical and evidence-based approach, aligned with scientific principles, to examine how U.S. intervention against Mexican cartels could be configured. Through a structured methodology, probable scenarios are modeled, risks are assessed, and solid conclusions are drawn—avoiding speculation and prioritizing verifiable facts up to August 12, 2025, 12:55 PM CST.
The analysis horizon is set at 90 days, as this is the period in which the highest likelihood of operational changes materializing after the issuance of the directive is concentrated, based on historical precedents and the pace observed in recent deployments. This timeframe also allows for monitoring the evolution of scenarios already underway—such as ISR and naval operations—which, although part of the status quo, could be significantly intensified or transformed, generating operational and diplomatic impacts that justify their inclusion in the model.
Methodology
The analysis is conducted using a rigorous methodology designed to minimize bias, prioritize verifiable data, and structure an objective scenario model. The process consists of five phases:
Data Collection
Sources: Reports from reputable media (The New York Times, Washington Post), posts on X with verifiable references, Pentagon statements, official declarations from the Mexican government (Secretariat of Foreign Affairs, President Claudia Sheinbaum), and legal frameworks (National Defense Authorization Act, U.S. Code Titles 10 and 50, Article 76 of the Mexican Constitution).
Timeframe: Information gathered up to August 12, 2025, 12:55 PM CST, covering events since January 20, 2025.
Types of Data: Chronology of military actions (e.g., 330 surveillance flights, deployment of destroyers USS Gravely and USS Spruance, 200+ Stryker vehicles, 10,000+ troops), statistics (86% reduction in illegal crossings), and analytical reactions.
Filtering and Verification
Inclusion Criteria: Information confirmed by multiple sources, specific quantitative data, and technically rigorous analysis.
Exclusion Criteria: Speculative narratives (“imminent invasion”), X posts without references, and opinions with evident political bias.
Cross-Verification: Systematic comparison between sources (e.g., Pentagon reports versus official Mexican statements) to ensure accuracy.
Categorization
Military Events: Aerial surveillance (MQ-9 Reaper drones, RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft), naval operations (destroyers), ground deployments (Strykers, troops), and bilateral cooperation (training in Campeche, 10,000 Mexican personnel).
Reactions: Sensationalist (speculative), moderate (contextual), and technical/scientific (data-based).
Legal/Diplomatic Frameworks: Designation of cartels as FTOs, Mexican legal restrictions, and bilateral agreements.
Scenario Modeling
Identification of five scenarios: ISR/aerial surveillance, naval operations, selective drone strikes, covert special forces operations, and direct ground intervention.
Probability assessment based on legal restrictions, operational capabilities, precedents, and bilateral cooperation.
Cost-benefit analysis (advantages, limitations, risks) for each scenario.
Risk Assessment
Operational risks (cartel asymmetric response), diplomatic risks (breakdown of relations), and strategic risks (cartel fragmentation, route displacement).
Mitigation through shared intelligence and financial sanctions.
Probable U.S. Intervention Scenarios
Based on the event timeline (January 20 to August 9, 2025) and the methodological analysis, the following are the probable scenarios for U.S. intervention against Mexican cartels, ranked by feasibility and classified as continuity or escalation.
1. Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Operations with Drones and Spy Aircraft
Probability: 80–90% (High)
Description: Intensification of the 330 surveillance flights reported up to August 2025, using MQ-9 Reaper drones and Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft to monitor drug trafficking routes, fentanyl laboratories, and cartel leader movements in key regions such as Sinaloa, Michoacán, and Tamaulipas. Estimated coverage: 70–80% of identified fentanyl routes.
Operational Configuration: Launch from U.S. bases (Fort Bliss, Texas) or aircraft carriers in international waters, with intelligence-sharing with Mexico under bilateral agreements. Includes Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) collection.
Advantages:
Respects Mexican sovereignty by operating from U.S. territory or waters.
High effectiveness, contributing to an 86% reduction in illegal crossings in sectors such as Del Río and record fentanyl seizures.
Low political profile, minimizing diplomatic tensions.
Limitations:
Requires Mexican authorization for flights in its airspace, currently partially restricted.
Risk of asymmetric retaliation (estimated 15–20% increase in violence), such as attacks on infrastructure.
Evidence: Confirmed overflights on February 3 and 19, 2025, with 330 total flights reported.
Continuity Indicators: Mexican intelligence cooperation and operational success make this the most likely scenario.
Classification: Continuity Scenario. Although already underway, monitoring is relevant because the presidential directive could expand its geographic scope, increase mission frequency, or change rules of engagement, thus altering its impact and risk profile.
2. Naval Operations in International Waters
Probability: 70–85% (High)
Description: Maritime patrols with Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, such as USS Gravely and USS Spruance, in the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific, focused on interdicting fentanyl shipments and chemical precursors from Asia.
Operational Configuration: Destroyers equipped with advanced surveillance systems and Coast Guard detachments for lawful operations, operating from international waters. Occasional coordination with the Mexican Navy.
Advantages:
Avoids direct violations of Mexican sovereignty.
Complements aerial surveillance, with relevant seizures recorded in 2025.
Reinforces deterrent presence without requiring Mexican authorization.
Limitations:
Limited impact on land-based cartel operations.
Risk of perceived provocation, as seen with USS Gravely’s port call in Veracruz on April 25, 2025.
Evidence: Confirmed deployments on March 18 and 21, 2025, with active patrols through April.
Continuity Indicators: Sustained operational capability and absence of legal restrictions to operate in international waters.
Classification: Continuity Scenario. While already in execution, its evolution merits analysis because changes in patrol frequency, introduction of new platforms, or extension to sensitive areas could shift its deterrent profile and diplomatic reactions.
3. Selective Drone Strikes
Probability: 40–60% (Medium)
Description: Use of armed MQ-9 Reaper drones for precision strikes against cartel leaders or critical infrastructure, such as fentanyl laboratories, in rural areas to minimize collateral damage.
Operational Configuration: Launch from U.S. bases or aircraft carriers, employing Hellfire missiles or laser-guided bombs. Requires precise intelligence to identify high-value targets.
Advantages:
High accuracy, reducing civilian casualties compared to ground operations.
Proven effectiveness in counterterrorism contexts (e.g., Al Qaeda).
Limitations:
Violates international law if executed without Mexican consent, contravening the U.S. War Powers Resolution.
Risk of cartel fragmentation, with an estimated 15–20% increase in violence, similar to post-“El Chapo” Guzmán capture effects.
Considered a “red line” diplomatically by Mexico.
Evidence: Drone overflights on February 19, 2025, suggest preparation for this scenario.
Viability Indicators: Dependent on Mexican authorization or imminent threat justification, reducing its likelihood.
Classification: Escalation Scenario. Represents a substantial change from the status quo, shifting from passive ISR operations to unilateral lethal actions. Its inclusion in the directive would significantly expand rules of engagement and increase diplomatic and operational risk.
4. Covert Special Forces Operations
Probability: 30–50% (Medium)
Description: Deployment of elite units (Green Berets, Navy SEALs) to capture or eliminate cartel leaders, with CIA intelligence support and possible coordination with Mexican forces.
Operational Configuration: Small teams (4–12 operatives) infiltrated from the border or via aerial insertion, operating in areas such as Culiacán or Tierra Caliente.
Advantages:
Low profile, reducing media visibility compared to open operations.
High success rate in high-value captures, such as Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada in 2024.
Limitations:
High operational risk due to cartel armament and tactics (RPGs, armed drones).
Official Mexican rejection of foreign troops on its territory.
Evidence: Green Berets training Mexican marines in Campeche (Feb 17–Mar 30, 2025) may indicate preparation for such missions.
Viability Indicators: Dependent on covert cooperation with Mexican authorities to avoid a diplomatic crisis.
Classification: Escalation Scenario. Not part of current dynamics; implementation would cross a direct intervention threshold, increasing risks of armed confrontation and bilateral tensions.
5. Direct Ground Intervention
Probability: 5–15% (Low)
Description: Large-scale incursions of regular troops (10,000+ deployed at the border, with Stryker vehicles, M1 Abrams tanks, and Black Hawk/Chinook helicopters) into Mexican territory to combat cartels.
Operational Configuration: Combat brigades from Fort Bliss or the National Defense Area in El Paso, with objectives of territorial control and destruction of criminal infrastructure.
Advantages:
Overwhelming capability to neutralize cartel forces in direct combat.
Long-term deterrence through visible military presence.
Limitations:
Violates Article 76 of the Mexican Constitution and international law.
High risk of civilian casualties and violent escalation, with cartels resorting to guerrilla tactics.
Explicit opposition from the Mexican government.
Evidence: Deployment of 200+ Strykers and over 10,000 troops at the border (Mar–May 2025), without confirmed incursions.
Viability Indicators: Very low, due to legal constraints and diplomatic cost.
Classification: Disruptive Escalation Scenario. Would represent a complete rupture of the current cooperation framework, radically altering the bilateral relationship and security dynamics in the region.
U.S. Intervention Scenarios Against Mexican Cartels in the Next 90 Days
Risk Matrix Narrative:The chart below places each scenario according to diplomatic risk (X-axis) and operational risk (Y-axis). The size and color of each bubble reflect its estimated probability: larger, warmer bubbles = more likely. ISR and Naval Operations combine high probability with moderate severity, concentrating cumulative risk through frequency. In contrast, Drone Strikes and SOF are less likely but have higher severity, implying high costs if triggered (diplomatic and strategic flashpoints). Direct Ground Intervention remains at minimal probability but maximum severity—critical if activated, though unlikely within the 90-day horizon.
Conclusions
The analysis developed in this Krame Report goes beyond simply listing intervention options—it provides a differentiated framework that separates three key categories: what is already happening, what could change, and what would be disruptive.
What is already happening: Continuity scenarios such as ISR operations and naval patrols constitute the current core of the U.S. strategy. While they do not represent a qualitative shift, their monitoring is essential to detect signs of intensification, geographic reorientation, or reduction—factors that could alter their effectiveness and the bilateral balance.
What could change: Controlled escalation scenarios, such as selective drone strikes or the covert deployment of special forces, involve diplomatic and legal thresholds that, if crossed, would modify the degree of involvement and the political–operational risk.
What would be disruptive: A direct ground intervention, although low in probability, would fundamentally alter the bilateral relationship, the balance of power, and criminal dynamics, generating a new strategic framework that would be difficult to reverse.
This categorized approach allows not only for anticipating the likely course of the next 90 days but also for establishing early warnings on moves that may signal a transition between categories. Thus, the model not only diagnoses the present but also provides a forward-looking tool for informed decision-making.
Within the evaluated 90-day horizon, U.S. intervention against Mexican cartels is most likely to take the form of a combination of Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) operations using drones and specialized aircraft, along with naval patrols in international waters, and, to a lesser extent, selective drone strikes. This configuration reflects its high operational feasibility, deterrent capability, and lower diplomatic risk compared to ground operations or high-profile covert incursions.
On the opposite end, a direct ground intervention remains highly unlikely, given its legal incompatibility with the Mexican Constitution and the explicit rejection by President Claudia Sheinbaum of foreign troops on Mexican soil. Field evidence (≥50 documented ISR flights, constant naval deployments, 10,000 U.S. troops at the border) supports the probability hierarchy established in the model.
While these measures have contributed to reducing illegal crossings by up to 86% and increasing fentanyl seizures in key areas, relevant risks remain:
Estimated violent escalation of +15–20% stemming from pressure on criminal structures.
Breakdown of bilateral cooperation, especially if diplomatic “red lines” are crossed (kinetic drone strikes or SOF without consent).
Geographic displacement of drug trafficking routes to other regions, potentially expanding the problem.
The Risk Matrix confirms that the most likely scenarios (ISR/Naval) concentrate cumulative risks due to frequency, while the less probable scenarios (Drones/SOF) concentrate critical risks due to their potential impact.
Strategic Recommendations
Prioritize shared intelligence: Expand SIGINT and GEOINT exchange for ISR and naval operations, ensuring traceability and minimizing diplomatic frictions.
Preventive mitigation for critical scenarios: Establish diplomatic and communication protocols to manage incidents arising from drone or SOF operations, even if their probability is low, given their high severity.
Strengthen financial sanctions: Target money laundering networks and suppliers of chemical precursors, complementing operational pressure with financial strangulation.
Address structural causes: Simultaneously tackle domestic drug demand and the flow of weapons into Mexico, reducing incentives for criminal diversification.
Monitor key indicators (ΔP): Implement an early-warning system to detect changes that could quickly alter the probabilities of critical scenarios, such as tacit authorizations, mass-casualty incidents, or legislative shifts.
Periodic model recalibration: Review scenario weightings every two weeks to incorporate new operational and diplomatic evidence, maintaining the analytical relevance of the report.
NOTE: This Krame Report, grounded in technical methodology and verifiable data, provides a clear framework for understanding and anticipating the configuration of U.S. intervention against Mexican cartels, setting itself apart from the speculative narratives that have dominated public debate. The combination of probabilistic analysis, risk assessment, and strategic recommendations aims to equip decision-makers and analysts with an operational and forward-looking tool that enables not only reaction but anticipation in the evolving bilateral security environment.