Jonathan Maza

Omar García Harfuch and the relaunch of security as a priority for the Mexican State: From moral discourse to institutional effectiveness

22 octubre, 2025Jonathan Maza

The first year of Claudia Sheinbaum’s government marks a turning point in public security and national security policy: Mexico is transitioning from rhetoric to results, from ideology to intelligence.

The appearance of Security Secretary Omar García Harfuch before the Senate of the Republic was not just an exercise in accountability, but an act of political affirmation: the Mexican State is recovering its capacity to govern the territory and control violence. For some, the speech marked a silent break with the recent past; for others, it is something closer to change without rupture. Where there were once moral promises, today data, results, and structures are presented to demonstrate that security, for the first time in a long while, is explained through effectiveness.

Toward the Second floor of the Transformation in security matters: The state recovers ground

In the analysis of Secretary García Harfuch’s speech during his appearance before the Senate, it is clear that his political intention is to show that Mexico is entering a new stage of the Fourth Transformation: one where security is no longer defined by narrative, but by the State’s capacity to produce measurable and sustainable results.

Beyond the numbers—which were many and compelling—the political message was another: the institutional reconstruction of public security as the backbone of Claudia Sheinbaum’s government. That is why what we heard was not a simple speech to applaud achievements, but a roadmap toward a more ambitious project: a modern, technologized, and intelligence-based State Security, which will have costs in terms of both resources and a new social pact regarding citizens’ freedoms.

From this argument arise the recent constitutional and legal reforms in security matters that have been legislated in the last year, subject to criticism from various actors who have considered them contrary to citizens’ freedoms and the progressivity of human rights.

During the past six years, security in Mexico was explained through a moral narrative: «the good against the corrupt,» «hugs instead of bullets.» That narrative had its historical moment to help implement a new regime, but it also had its limits.

Today, under Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration, the strategy seems to have shifted to different ground: institutional efficiency, federal-territorial coordination, and police professionalization to provide support for the second stage of the Fourth Transformation (4T) political project, of which President Sheinbaum is a part, moreover as its first president emerging from that political movement without origins in the old regime.

In a Senate with an official majority and a testimonial opposition, Secretary Harfuch presented figures that speak of a country that, despite its wounds, is beginning to recover operational capacity and institutional trust. The 46% decrease in crime-related homicides compared to 2018, the dismantling of more than 1,500 methamphetamine laboratories, and the capture of more than 35,000 violence generators are data that by themselves send an unequivocal message: the State is returning to exercise control over the territory.

But it is not just about numbers; it is about a reconstruction of the Mexican State from its most sensitive architecture: security.

The new map of security in Mexico

The states and regions mentioned in the speech—Guanajuato, Jalisco, Nuevo León, Guerrero, Tabasco, Tamaulipas, and the northern border—were not chosen at random. They are, at the same time, the country’s industrial nodes and the main corridors of organized crime.

The message is clear: security and economic development are no longer separate issues. In a context of nearshoring, energy investment, and industrial relocation, the federal government’s priority is to protect critical infrastructure and supply chains, especially in the center and north of the country.

The deployment of 10,000 National Guard elements in seven border entities and the record seizures of cocaine, weapons, and fentanyl not only reflect operational efficiency: they reaffirm the political will to build, from the Mexican side of the border, a wall of sovereignty based on intelligence and actions with strategic impact, not just rhetoric, especially in a context of enormous pressure from the United States under the Trump administration.

Cooperate without subordinating

An aspect little commented on, but of enormous strategic relevance, is the new relationship with the United States. The transfer of 55 high-profile criminals to U.S. prisons is a calculated gesture: it shows willingness to cooperate, but also sovereign decision-making capacity, albeit aware of the existing asymmetrical relationship.

Harfuch has achieved what few officials in recent administrations have: being a reliable interlocutor for Washington without renouncing the nationalist narrative that characterizes the 4T. That skill, forged in his career as a police officer and as a politician, makes him today one of the most influential actors with the greatest projection toward 2030.

Peace as a public good of the State

Perhaps the most important message of the speech was not said with words, but with structure: every achievement, every figure, every operation was presented as a result of inter-institutional coordination between the Army, Air Force, Navy, National Guard, and state governments.

That way of presenting the results conveys a central idea: security does not depend on one person, but on a system. A system that, with its imperfections, is beginning to function with its own logic.

The concept of lasting peace appears not as an ethical promise, but as a measurable institutional goal: criminal intelligence, territorial presence, and verifiable reduction of crimes.

In summary, it is about governing the territory again from the State’s public policy, and not from reaction or improvisation.

A new political cycle

President Sheinbaum knows that security will be the thermometer of her six-year term. In view of the 2027 midterm election that will renew the Chamber of Deputies and the eventual mandate revocation referendum, advances in this area could define the political direction of her government and the legacy of which she is a part.

That is why Harfuch’s speech before the Senate, more than a simple appearance, should also be read as an internal political message: the security cabinet has direction, method, and results. In an administration that seeks to consolidate its own stamp within the Fourth Transformation, security has become the bridge between political legitimacy and technical effectiveness.

Mexico seems to be leaving behind the stage of narratives to enter that of results; therefore, the challenge now will be to sustain those results over time, ensuring they do not depend on names or circumstances, but on solid, reliable, and permanent institutions.

Security is not a goal: it is a continuous process of learning and adaptation, and perhaps for the first time in a long while, the Mexican State is beginning to show that it has learned to learn.

Harfuch’s speech was not the closure of a cycle, but the beginning of a new one: that of a country that, with all its contradictions, is once again believing that it can govern its destiny through intelligence, law, coordination, and cooperation.

Omar García Harfuch y el relanzamiento de la seguridad como prioridad del Estado mexicano: del discurso moral a la eficacia institucional

22 octubre, 202522 octubre, 2025Jonathan Maza

El primer año del gobierno de Claudia Sheinbaum marca un punto de inflexión en la política de seguridad pública y la seguridad nacional: México transita de la retórica a los resultados, de la ideología a la inteligencia.

La comparecencia del Secretario de Seguridad, Omar García Harfuch, ante el Senado de la República, no fue solo un ejercicio de rendición de cuentas, sino un acto de afirmación política: el Estado mexicano está recuperando su capacidad para gobernar el territorio y controlar la violencia. Para algunos, el discurso marcó una ruptura silenciosa con el pasado reciente, para otros, se trata de algo más cercano a un cambio sin ruptura. Donde antes hubo promesas morales, hoy se presentan datos, resultados y estructuras para demostrar que la seguridad, por primera vez en mucho tiempo, se explique desde la eficacia.

Hacia el Segundo piso de la Transformación en materia de seguridad: El Estado recupera el terreno

En el análisis del discurso del secretario García Harfuch, durante su comparecencia ante el Senado, es claro que su intención política es dejar ver que México está entrando en una nueva etapa de la Cuarta Transformación: una donde la seguridad ya no se define por la narrativa, sino por la capacidad del Estado para producir resultados medibles y sostenibles.

Más allá de los números —que fueron muchos y contundentes—, el mensaje político fue otro: la reconstrucción institucional de la seguridad pública como columna vertebral del gobierno de Claudia Sheinbaum. Por eso, lo que escuchamos no fue un simple discurso para aplaudir logros, sino una hoja de ruta hacia un proyecto más ambicioso, una Seguridad de Estado, moderna, tecnificada y basada en inteligencia, pero que tendrá costos tanto de recursos como de un nuevo pacto social en materia de libertades para los ciudadanos.

De este argumento nacen las recientes reformas constitucionales y legales que en materia de seguridad se han legislado en el último año, objeto de críticas por parte de distintos actores que las han considerado como contrarias a las libertades ciudadanas y la progresividad de los derechos humanos.

Durante los pasados seis años, la seguridad en México fue explicada desde una narrativa moral: “los buenos contra los corruptos”, “los abrazos contra los balazos”. Esa narrativa tuvo su momento histórico para ayudar a la implantación de un nuevo régimen, pero también ha tenido sus límites.

Hoy, bajo la administración de Claudia Sheinbaum, la estrategia parece haber virado hacia un terreno distinto: la eficiencia institucional, la coordinación federal-territorial y la profesionalización policial para darle sostén a la segunda etapa del proyecto político de la Cuarta Transformación (4T), del que la presidenta Sheinbaum forma parte, además como su primera presidenta emanada de ese movimiento político sin orígenes en el antiguo régimen.

En un Senado con mayoría oficialista y una oposición testimonial, el secretario Harfuch presentó cifras que hablan de un país que, pese a sus heridas, empieza a recuperar capacidad operativa y confianza institucional. La disminución del 46% en homicidios dolosos respecto a 2018, el desmantelamiento de más de 1,500 laboratorios de metanfetaminas y la captura de más de 35 mil generadores de violencia son datos que por sí solos envían un mensaje inequívoco: el Estado está volviendo a ejercer control sobre el territorio.

Pero no se trata solo de números, se trata de una reconstrucción del Estado mexicano desde su arquitectura más sensible: la seguridad.

El nuevo mapa de la seguridad en México

Los estados y regiones mencionados en el discurso —Guanajuato, Jalisco, Nuevo León, Guerrero, Tabasco, Tamaulipas y la frontera norte— no fueron elegidos al azar. Son, al mismo tiempo, los nodos industriales del país y los principales corredores del crimen organizado.

El mensaje es claro: la seguridad y el desarrollo económico ya no son temas separados. En un contexto de nearshoring, inversión energética y relocalización industrial, la prioridad del gobierno federal es proteger la infraestructura crítica y las cadenas de suministro, especialmente en el centro y norte del país.

El despliegue de 10,000 elementos de la Guardia Nacional en siete entidades fronterizas y los decomisos récord de cocaína, armas y fentanilo no solo reflejan eficiencia operativa: reafirman la voluntad política de construir, desde el lado mexicano de la frontera, un muro de soberanía basado en inteligencia y acciones con impacto estratégico, no únicamente en retórica, especialmente en un contexto enorme presión desde Estados Unidos con la administración Trump.

Cooperar sin subordinarse

Un aspecto poco comentado, pero de enorme relevancia estratégica, es la nueva relación con Estados Unidos. El traslado de 55 criminales de alto perfil a cárceles estadounidenses es un gesto calculado: muestra disposición a cooperar, pero también capacidad de decisión soberana, eso sí, a sabiendas de la relación asimétrica existente.

Harfuch ha logrado lo que pocos funcionarios en los últimos sexenios: ser interlocutor confiable para Washington sin renunciar a la narrativa nacionalista que caracteriza a la 4T. Esa habilidad, forjada en su trayectoria como policía y como político, lo convierte hoy en uno de los actores más influyentes y con mayor proyección rumbo a 2030.

La paz como un bien público del Estado

Quizá el mensaje más importante del discurso no fue dicho con palabras, sino con estructura: cada logro, cada cifra, cada operación fue presentada como resultado de la coordinación interinstitucional entre Ejército, Fuerza Aérea, Armada, Guardia Nacional y gobiernos estatales.

Esa forma de presentar los resultados transmite una idea central: la seguridad no depende de una persona, sino de un sistema. Un sistema que, con sus imperfecciones, comienza a funcionar con lógica propia.

El concepto de paz duradera aparece no como una promesa ética, sino como una meta institucional medible: inteligencia criminal, presencia territorial y disminución comprobable de delitos.

Se trata, en síntesis, de volver a gobernar el territorio desde la política pública del Estado, y no desde la reacción o la improvisación.

Un nuevo ciclo político

La presidenta Sheinbaum sabe que la seguridad será el termómetro de su sexenio. De cara a la elección intermedia de 2027 que renovará la Cámara de Diputados y a la eventual consulta de revocación de mandato, los avances en este rubro podrán definir el rumbo político de su gobierno y del legado del que ella forma parte.

Por eso, el discurso de Harfuch ante el Senado, más que una simple comparecencia, debe leerse también como un mensaje político interno: el gabinete de seguridad tiene rumbo, método y resultados. En una administración que busca consolidar su propio sello dentro de la Cuarta Transformación, la seguridad se ha convertido en el puente entre la legitimidad política y la eficacia técnica.

México parece estar dejando atrás la etapa de las narrativas para entrar a la de los resultados, por ello, ahora el reto será sostener esos resultados en el tiempo, garantizar que no dependan de nombres o coyunturas, sino de instituciones sólidas, confiables y permanentes.

La seguridad no es una meta: es un proceso continuo de aprendizaje y adaptación, y quizá por primera vez en mucho tiempo, el Estado mexicano comienza a mostrar que ha aprendido a aprender.

El discurso de Harfuch no fue el cierre de un ciclo, sino el inicio de uno nuevo: El de un país que, con todas sus contradicciones, vuelve a creer que puede gobernar su destino desde la inteligencia, la ley, la coordinación y la cooperación.

Why do societies honor their fallen in combat? A necessary reflection for Mexico

2 octubre, 2025Jonathan Maza

Honoring the fallen is not about glorifying war, but about dignifying the sacrifice for peace and building a more just and humane national memory.

“Show me the manner in which a nation cares for its dead and I will measure with mathematical exactness the tender mercies of its people, their respect for the laws of the land, and their loyalty to high ideals.”

William Ewart Gladstone

Every year, the United States comes to a halt on the last Monday of May to honor its fallen soldiers on Memorial Day. This is more than a tradition; it is a reminder of sacrifice, duty, and the profound link between a nation and its history. This practice, however, is not exclusive to the Anglo-Saxon world; it is part of the very history of humanity. In Mexico, by contrast, we still lack a day to remember—with dignity—our own who have fallen, especially in the daily struggle for security and peace.

The memory of the fallen throughout history

From ancient Greece to our present day, honoring those killed in combat has been a fundamental part of the social and political life of many nations and peoples. In Athens, the public funeral was a civic ritual that reminded all citizens of the valor of those who had died for the polis. This is demonstrated by historical accounts of public funeral rites for soldiers, such as the celebrated «Pericles’ Funeral Oration,» which established a civic canon: the fallen soldier was an example of virtue and dedication to the common good. In ancient Rome, inscriptions and triumphal arches immortalized the military glory of its heroes.

With the advent of modernity, the veneration of fallen soldiers transformed into state policy, giving rise to memorials, national cemeteries, and official dates of commemoration. The underlying reason is clear: remembering the fallen not only honors their sacrifice but also reinforces collective memory, national identity, and the moral fabric of the community.

Why do we commemorate those killed in combat?

Sociology and anthropology offer key insights into why natural societies, such as the family and the nation, pay homage to their dead—especially to those who virtuously and heroically give their lives in the service of their families, communities, and nations.

Émile Durkheim, the French sociologist and philosopher considered one of the founding fathers of sociology along with Karl Marx and Max Weber, explained that collective rituals like military funerals are essential for maintaining social cohesion. Maurice Halbwachs, a French philosopher and sociologist known for developing the concept of collective memory, described it as a process that gives meaning to the past from the perspective of the present. And Benedict Anderson, the renowned historian, political scientist, and essayist known for his work Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, argued that nations are built through shared symbols—precisely like martyrs and, in secular states, heroes: the soldiers and police officers who have fallen in combat and are linked to the most sublime patriotic values.

Honoring the fallen, then, is not merely an act of piety or respect; we can affirm that it is a civilizing mechanism, a way of building the culture of a national community.

The case of the United States and its fallen

The American Memorial Day originated after the Civil War as a way to pay tribute to fallen soldiers by decorating their graves with flowers. The first national observance took place on May 30, 1868, at Arlington National Cemetery. Over time, the commemoration expanded to honor all U.S. military personnel who have died in service. It was not until 1971 that it was established as an official federal holiday, honoring more than one million who have fallen in various wars, from the First and Second World Wars to the more recent conflicts in the Middle East. It is, therefore, a date of solemnity, but also of national unity for that country.

For many years, I have been singularly struck by this American commemoration, especially with regard to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which maintains a Memorial Wall at its headquarters in Langley, Virginia, for its fallen agents. Each star represents an agent who died in the line of duty, many of whom remain anonymous for reasons of security and operational confidentiality. On that wall is the inscription: «In honor of those members of the Central Intelligence Agency who gave their lives in the service of their country.» The anonymity of many stars has not meant that these individuals are forgotten, but rather stands as a sign of respect for the quiet service of those agents and their families in protecting their country.

And what about Mexico? The offficial and social silence

In Mexico, we do not have an official day dedicated to the soldiers, marines, and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty. There are isolated tributes, military ceremonies, and moments of silence, but no national date for their public recognition and commemoration. This is true in a country where, since the beginning of the 21st century, more than six thousand security personnel have died confronting organized crime.

Why does this widespread custom not exist here? It seems necessary to question the reasons behind this, to confront them, rethink them, and modify our attitude toward a reality that, from my point of view, requires acknowledgment to begin forging a national consciousness about the heroism shown amid the tragic loss of Mexican citizens over nearly twenty years of fighting organized crime. Perhaps it is because our security institutions have suffered erosion, criticism, and in some cases, mistrust. Perhaps it is because the war we are living—even if it is not called such—has been fragmented, with grief that is private, not collective.

We are living in a different time in Mexico, the product of a new era that requires us to build civilization. I consider it essential that we begin to change our view of life and death in the conflicts we have faced—and continue to face. This is especially true for those who have virtuously chosen to live and give their lives for the peace, security, and defense of our homeland. This is not for the sake of militarism, but for historical justice, memory, and national identity.

Commemorating and honoring those who have given their lives to defend others is an act of civility. It compels us not to forget that the peace we Mexicans seek—the synthesis of a national aspiration cherished since our genesis as a nation—is sometimes built upon lives given in silence. Police officers in rural and urban municipalities, soldiers in marginalized regions and mountains, marines on dangerous coasts and seas, and investigative agents from various corporations who never returned home.

We need a memorial. We need a date that reminds us and revitalizes our longing for justice, peace, and security through the memory of those who often perish anonymously in the course of their daily duties to keep us safe. We need a narrative that recognizes the courage of those who die serving, regardless of whether they wear a military or police uniform.

A proposal: A National Day for Peace and the Fallen

I propose that we consider June 21st—the summer solstice, a symbol of light and renewal—as a possible National Day for Peace and the Fallen. It would be a day to honor those who fell while seeking a safer, more just, more livable, and peaceful Mexico. In keeping with the character of our history, memory, and national identity, this day would not be to glorify war, but to recognize the valor of those who chose to protect, serve, and defend the peace and security to which all Mexicans aspire.

Memory is not just about looking to the past; it is about choosing, from the present, what we want to be as a country. It is about commemorating and projecting our identity. Is it time to take that step?

What are your thoughts? Share this article if you believe Mexico should build a dignified memory for those who have given their lives in the struggle for peace.
Follow me on X (Twitter) and LinkedIn for more analysis on security, intelligence, and public policy.