In El Universal, Vicente Fox discusses having a ceasefire (tregua) with drug trafficking organizations. He cites other examples, such as Chiapas, the Central American civil wars, as well as Colombia under César Gaviria and also Andrés Pastrana. He acknowledges that each of these examples is quite different and had varying levels of success.
What I hope he does in future columns (which he says he will write) is to explain much more clearly how very different the DTOs are. The other conflicts were ideological, fundamentally left-right. The left was struggling against the more conservative status quo. The essence of a ceasefire and dialogue was the belief that some sort of middle ground existed, or at least could be articulated. Perhaps one or both sides rejected this middle, or felt it went too far in one direction or the other, but if no middle ground can be envisioned, then there is nothing to discuss.
This is problematic for the DTOs, which are not ideological. They do not care if the president is Felipe Calderón or AMLO. Their goal is profit, and their political stance at any given time will relate back to that. What middle ground is there? Fox even says he is not talking about negotiating or ceding anything. If that is the case, then it seems he is hoping they will lay down their arms for the good the country. That is not an "invitation to audacity." That is an invitation to be ignored.
h/t Patrick Corcoran