The militarization of governance in Mexico

Original drawing for Ojalá by @pazconadie.

Opinion • Ramón I. Centeno • September 3, 2026 • Leer en castellano

This is the first in a series of articles examining militarization organized by Ojalá. —Eds

For the last quarter century, discussion of militarization in Mexico has centered around the missions assigned to the armed forces by the president. Over time, and especially since 2006, the military’s responsibilities have expanded.

Sooner or later, the army’s increasing influence within the Mexican state was bound to alter the political system.

It’s now clear that we have reached that threshold.

Today, the armed forces are not merely an instrument of civilian power, but its primary partner. A civilian-military coalition has emerged as the main axis of power in Mexico.

The turning point, of course, was Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s election as president. Militarization under his “left” government, reached unprecedented levels.

López Obrador, who was president from 2018 to 2024, dismantled the Federal Police, a civilian institution that responded to the Executive Branch, and replaced it with the National Guard, an Army-controlled police force. 

Although this was a decisive change, through which the military secured a monopoly on arms at the federal level, AMLO collaboration with the country’s generals and admirals went much further.

AMLO sought the army’s support for the “Fourth Transformation”(the name of his political project, intended to set it apart from previous administrations). The armed forces became eager participants, pushing through flagship mega-projects including the Mayan Train and the Interoceanic Corridor. 

Colloquially, this is best understood as a win-win situation. 

Progressivism embraced militarism, and the military embraced progressivism. The alliance yielded benefits for both, as numerous experts have documented.

Co-governing with the military? 

Now, how has this phenomenon impacted the political system? Scholar Rebecka Villanueva Ulfgard and I explored this question in a recent article in which we demonstrated the armed forces have already assumed a role in Mexico’s governability. A true political leap toward co-governance through a legislative initiative by the president.

During her first year in office, Claudia Sheinbaum scored the passage of a new National Public Security System Law.

In Article 20, the new law established something unprecedented: “The Federal [Public Security] Cabinet is the federal government’s executive decision-making and coordinating body on matters of national security and governability.”

Since then, the Security Cabinet—its common name—has enjoyed “executive decision-making” capacity. The term is vague in meaning, but reflects the new balance of power.

The Security Cabinet was established in 2005 as an inter-institutional body for the coordination of security policy. Its primary function was to “define the instruments for evaluating and monitoring policies, strategies, and actions related to public security.”

Twenty years later, the Security Cabinet’s scope has been expanded from “public security” to “governability,” broadening its remit from “monitoring” to “executive decision-making.” Simultaneously, the military’s representation within the Security Cabinet has grown.

The Federal Police, dissolved in 2019, was under the jurisdiction of the Secretariat of Public Security (SSPC), which is now a weaker partner within the Security Cabinet. 

The armed forces lobbied lawmakers against Sheinbaum's attempt to strengthen the surveillance powers of the downsized SSPC. In the end, the Army or Secretariat of National Defense (SEDENA) acquiesced to Sheinbaum’s push for increased surveillance powers after they were also granted to the National Guard, which was also incorporated as a member of the Security Cabinet.

Today, six civilian offices, including the President, are full members of the Security Cabinet. The other three full members belong to the military: the Army, the Navy, and the National Guard.

The Attorney General's Office (FGR in Spanish) also belongs to the Security Cabinet, but as a guest rather than a full member. The Army, furthermore, has dual representation as a secretariat (SEDENA) and via its control of the National Guard.

Who’s really in charge?

The President’s morning press conference, called “La Mañanera” is considered the most important communication tool of the Morena government. But the composition of the Security Cabinet provides a more accurate representation of Mexico’s key leadership today.

This image shows the six key members of the Security Cabinet as well as the Office of the President. The Security Cabinet’s center of gravity rests with its six full members: three civilians and three uniformed officers. The apparent tie is resolved, for now, in favor of the civilians, as Claudia Sheinbaum holds the presidency of the Security Cabinet. But beneath her, there is a new distribution of power.

In addition to being dedicated to national defense, the military now plays a role in key functions of the Mexican state that—at least in law—previously fell exclusively to civilians: public safety and governability.

Through Sheinbaum’s reform of the Security Cabinet, SEDENA and the Secretariat of the Navy (SEMAR) extended their reach into areas of public administration.

Mexico still has a modern democracy, understood in a minimalist sense: elections are still considered fair, free, and competitive. However, that baseline standard is deteriorating. In parallel, the military has increased its influence within the political system.

Mexico presents a unique case of democratic decline (or “autocratization”). The executive branch gained greater power through an alliance with the military. Today we are facing a civil-military autocratization, a recent phenomenon in a global context of democratic decline.

These surprises from the left in power have yet to fully crystallize. The coin is still in the air. 

Like any collective art form, politics requires knowing what we’re up to in order to improve it. But at this moment, how many people know that the military already plays a role in Mexico’s executive decision-making on governability?