President-elect Donald Trump's latest strategy to combat Mexican drug cartels involves deploying Special Forces soldiers to dismantle the powerful gangs, but defense experts caution that such an operation could be perilous and may even be outmatched. Tom Homan, Trump's newly-appointed border czar, recently emphasized their determination, stating the president-elect "will use [the] full might of the United States Special Operations to take 'em out" during an interview with Fox News.

This aggressive approach is not entirely new among hardline Republicans. Michael Waltz, who has been selected as the next national security adviser, previously spearheaded a congressional resolution aimed at giving then-President Joe Biden the authority to use military force against cartels funneling fentanyl into the US.

However, a report by the Cato Institute raises cautionary flags about this strategy. Brandan Buck, a research fellow at Cato, highlighted the elevated risks due to the Mexican cartels' enhanced military capabilities and tactical expertise. "Directing American Special Operations Forces against the cartels would put them up against a sizable near-peer competitor in asymmetric warfare," Buck wrote. This comparison suggests the US military might face significant challenges and limited advantages, drawing parallels to prior conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Among the most formidable cartels are the Sinaloa Cartel and the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG). The Sinaloa Cartel, characterized as one of the deadliest, controls significant territory in Mexico's northwest and is recognized by the US government as a leading global drug trafficking organization. Over the years, they have amassed a vast arsenal, including assault rifles, grenade launchers, drones, and anti-tank weapons. Some of these weapons are smuggled into Mexico, while others are supplied by Central American governments. Their fierce rival, the CJNG, has similarly advanced weaponry and has been implicated in using surface-to-air missiles.

The cartels' arsenal isn't the only concern. They are believed to benefit from training provided by former members of the Mexican military, many of whom received training from American forces. This scenario places US Special Operations at a disadvantage, facing a well-armed and tactically adept opponent.

Buck's report draws stark parallels between potential engagements with the cartels and past US military experiences in counter-insurgency operations. The cartels could adopt guerrilla warfare tactics akin to those used by the Taliban or Islamic State, leveraging local terrain and population support to mount ambushes and hit-and-run attacks. The densely populated urban areas, where cartels often operate, further complicate military engagements and elevate the risk of civilian casualties.

In addition to these challenges, the cartels could retaliate with attacks on American soil, mirroring the strategies of past drug lords like Pablo Escobar. Buck also suggests that the cartels might learn and adapt tactics from larger conflicts, such as those observed in the Russia-Ukraine war, where the use of man-portable weapons systems and drones has shown to level the playing field.

The Trump administration faces a complex decision. Deploying troops without Mexico's consent could be perceived as an invasion, akin to Russia's actions in Ukraine. Diplomatic, political, and legal ramifications would need careful consideration. Alternatively, an agreement with Mexico, offering funds and support in exchange for US involvement in eradication efforts, might present a more feasible solution.

Overall, while tackling the cartels is imperative, a purely military response carries significant risks and may lead to prolonged US involvement with uncertain success.