The Impact of Third Generation Gangs in Central America
Air & Space Power Journal : John Sullivan : July 1st 2008

Link:
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2008/2tri08/sullivaneng.htm

Summary:
This is an analytical paper written by John Sullivan describing the evolution of criminal gangs and assigning different gangs a generational stage of 1 thru 3.

• First Generation Gangs are traditional street (or prison) gangs with a turf orientation. Operating at the lower end of extreme societal violence, they have loose leadership and focus their attention on turf protection and gang loyalty within their immediate environs (often a few blocks or a neighborhood). When they engage in criminal enterprise, it is largely opportunistic and local in scope. These turf gangs are limited in political scope and sophistication.
• Second Generation Gangs have a business focus. They are entrepreneurial and drug-centered. They protect their markets and use violence to control their competition. They have a broader, market-focused, sometimes overtly political agenda and operate in a broader spatial or geographic area. Their operations sometimes involve multi-state and even international areas. Their tendency for centralized leadership and sophisticated operations for market protection places them in the center of the range of politicization, internationalization and sophistication.
• Third Generation Gangs have evolved political aims. These are the most complex gangs and they operate—or aspire to operate—at the global end of the spectrum, using their sophistication to garner power, aid financial acquisition and engage in mercenary-type activities. To date, most 3 GEN Gangs have been primarily mercenary in orientation; in some instances, however, they have sought to further their own political and social objectives.

Sullivan then places MS-13 and the 18th street gang in the 3rd Generation. He also highlights the importance of the prison system in El Salvador to the culture and operations of MS-13.

Analysis:
I don’t agree with Sullivan’s paradigm, nor with his own estimation of MS-13 as a 3rd Generation gang. All told, I think this paper is interesting in that it highlights the importance of the prisons in El Salvador, but still flawed. What Sullivan calls, “First Generation Gangs”, I would simply call gangs. I think the word “gang” has certain immature or adolescent connotations. Group identity and belonging are the key motivators for the formation of gangs, which is why most gang members start in their teens. I guess it’s possible that gangs could evolve as their initial nucleus of members grows older. When you look at his definition for 3rd generation it seems like he is touching on aspects of terrorist organizations. When you start seeing sub national organizations that use violence to achieve political aims, I think you are well out of the “gang” framework and into the world of terrorism. Finally, does MS-13 have political aims? I guess you might be able to say that the assassination attempt on the ICE agent last month was an attempt albeit clumsy to shape policy? But I think that is pretty tortured analysis.