For a democratic nation to maintain its sovereignty, it needs the intelligence to face threats and protect the state and its people. In recent comments, President Claudia Sheinbaum seemed to suggest that the enemy was the intelligence apparatus and not the criminal organizations that have plagued the population. Her knowledge and experience must not be ignored, must not be wasted, and must not be silenced or disregarded. Never in the history of Mexico, and probably in no other democratic country (that I have been able to identify), have the heads of civilian intelligence publicly gathered to call for the importance of having an institution responsible for CIVIL intelligence for national security. With the conversion of CISEN to what it is now the National Intelligence Center (CNI) and the restructuring of the Security Cabinet during the six-year term of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the Mexican government's capabilities to produce intelligence that allows the executive to make decisions to protect, anticipate and mitigate threats to the country's national security were compromised. This comment made it clear that in the government there is no clarity or willingness to understand what the objectives and priorities are, nor the differences between public security and national security. There are recurring issues that demand attention and the recommendations expressed during the presentation by the five former directors: The importance of differentiating between national security intelligence and public security, the role of the armed forces, socializing the issue of national security, recognizing that threats are multidimensional, the danger of the territorial control of criminal organizations, the diversity of new threats, the influence and pressures from the United States, the participation and coordination of actors and institutions beyond the armed forces and intelligence agencies. Which institution will provide the president with information on the impact in Mexico of the fall of the current Cuban regime? Cuban intelligence? One of the greatest risks to a country's security and sovereignty is to depend exclusively on the intelligence capabilities of another nation, even if there is an ideological, political or strategic coincidence. And one of the fundamental tools to protect democracies is institutional and capable intelligence agencies. With the disappearance of CISEN, the institution's capabilities to pursue dangerous criminals were weakened, as well as its ties with the political and business class, potential risks from foreign actors seeking to destabilize the country, the eventual appearance of another pandemic, risks to the global economy with national impact, or risks to the agricultural sector such as the borer worm, or the immediate impact of climate change in the country, or the possibility of an international terrorist group seeking to carry out sabotage against an oil platform or an attack against an embassy in Mexico City. Who is providing the political analysis of the eventuality that the United States carries out a unilateral operation against a target identified as a terrorist? But the president still has time to rescue the country from what seems to be an escalation of violence and ungovernability. This was one of the many headlines plastered on social networks and media that reported what was a historic moment: This week I had the honor of moderating a panel where five former heads of the Center for Research and National Security (CISEN) participated, who presented their book 'National Security in Mexico - reflections and proposals from experience'. Present were Jorge Carillo Olea (1989-1990 and first director of CISEN), Jorge E. Tello Peón (1994-1999), Alejandro Alegre Rabiela (1999-2000), Eduardo Medina Mora Icaza (2000-2005) and Guillermo Valdez Castellano (2006-2011). And although as moderator I had the opportunity to study the book presented by the former directors in detail, it is important to read the authors' words directly. The book and the public presentation of the former CISEN directors will surely be seen as an attack on the current government and the national security strategy implemented. Will they have to depend on U.S. intelligence? Through an exercise of self-inspection, they would see that President Claudia Sheinbaum's historical legacy will be defined in large part by whether she and her security team can reduce violence and the territorial control of criminal organizations, as well as mitigate the impact and other national and international threats looming over the country. She redefined the CNI's objectives as an institution whose priority is to face criminals and serious crimes, and not 'the opposition'. Among these five men, they accumulate more than 200 years of experience in the area of National Security. 'Spy nest meets at ITAM'.
