Change Drug Control Policy Now

Published in El Espectador
(Colombia) on 29 March 2012
by María Teresa Ronderos (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Drew Peterson-Roach. Edited by Mark DeLucas.
As the social and human devastation of the U.S. “war” on drugs in Latin America grows, skeptical voices have risen in tone and in scope.

At the next Summit of the Americas, President Santos has proposed openly debating this theme: “We have shed the greatest amount of blood and paid the highest cost, and after 40 years one must stop and reflect.” After publishing the book “Políticas antidroga en Colombia: exítos, fracasos y extravíos,”* the University of the Andes created an institute that will dedicate itself to the study of this thorny issue. The president of Guatemala, Otto Pérez Molina, urged his Central American counterparts this week to sign a security plan that would include the legalization of drugs.

Six months ago, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, on which sit people ranging from Fernando Enrique Cardoso and César Gaviria to the former president of the U.S. Federal Reserve, Paul Volker, released a report that encouraged “experimentation by governments with models of legal regulation of drugs to undermine the power of organized crime and safeguard the health and security of their citizens.”

At last, the powerful are acknowledging that, through either excessive submission to northern power or a lack of imagination, we have been misled into a suicidal policy that has drowned our weak democracies in blood and corruption. The challenge for us now is not to wait for Washington to give us the green light for legalization, continuing all the while with [our] quasi-military repression of the drug trade, worsening the “narcos”’ violent responses.

We are urged to reduce immediately the collateral damage of prohibitionism as well as that of narco-trafficking. Mark Kleiman, a clear-minded professor at the University of California, has for years been speaking about concentrating on protecting populations instead of reducing the flow of drugs. He proposed, for example, that if the Obama administration seriously wished to help Mexico in its fatal hour, it should launch a fierce police campaign in order to ruin the U.S. market for Mexico’s most violent cartel. The message would be to punish most strongly the most brutal, not those exporting the most drugs.

A similar philosophy lies behind the Police Peacekeeping Units in Rio de Janeiro, which have reduced killings by 27 percent in three years. According to an official quoted in the Mexican magazine Proceso, the key is “having changed the focus; the objective is for the state to recover territories controlled by ‘narcos’ instead of dedicating itself to fighting drug traffic.” And he explained how the prior policy of undertaking war-like police operations to seize drugs and weapons was useless, as these were quickly replaced, while the lives of policemen, neighbors and young gang members were, in exchange, lost forever.

It takes daring to speak publicly about revising drug-control policy when one is president of a stigmatized country such as Colombia or Guatemala. But more courage would be required to change the focus of the current criminal policy. And instead of dedicating billions of pesos and much of the strength of the armed forces and the judiciary in pursuit of the “cursed drug,” the priority must shift to lessening the brutal effects of narco-trafficking.

Today, the opposite takes place. And so, if somebody who has committed crimes against humanity in Colombia were to confess to having exported cocaine to the United States and were to reveal the supply route, he could go free in a few years, and with a visa. The lesson is clear: It’s not important how many people you kill; the only thing that matters is that you don’t traffic drugs. It should be exactly the reverse.

* Translator's Note: The title of the book, which is not yet published in English, might be rendered as “Anti-Drug Policies in Colombia: Successes, Failures and Diversions.”


A medida que crece la devastación social y humana de la “guerra” estadounidense contra las drogas en América Latina, las voces que cuestionan han ido subiendo de tono y de calado.

El presidente Santos propuso debatir el tema abiertamente en la próxima Cumbre de las Américas: “Hemos derramado la mayor cantidad de sangre y pagado el costo más alto, y a los 40 años uno tiene que parar y reflexionar”. Luego de sacar el libro Política antidroga en Colombia: éxitos, fracasos y extravíos, la Universidad de los Andes creó un instituto que se dedicará al estudio del espinoso tema. El presidente de Guatemala, Otto Pérez Molina, instó esta semana a sus pares centroamericanos a firmar un plan de seguridad que incluya la legalización de las drogas.

Hace seis meses la Comisión Global de Políticas de Drogas, en la que están desde Fernando Enrique Cardoso y César Gaviria hasta el expresidente de la Reserva Federal de Estados Unidos, Paul Volker, sacó un informe que alentó a “los gobiernos a que experimenten con modelos de regulación legal de las drogas a fin de socavar el poder del crimen organizado y para salvaguardar la salud y la seguridad de sus ciudadanos”.

Por fin los poderosos se están dando por enterados de que, por exceso de sumisión al poder del norte o por falta de imaginación, nos embarcaron en una política suicida que ahoga a nuestras débiles democracias en sangre y corrupción. El desafío ahora es que no nos quedemos esperando que Washington nos dé luz verde para legalizar, mientras seguimos con una represión cuasimilitar del negocio que empeora la respuesta violenta de los ‘narcos’.

Nos urge reducir de inmediato los daños colaterales del prohibicionismo y del mismo narcotráfico. El lúcido profesor de la Universidad de California Mark Kleiman está desde hace años hablando de concentrarse en proteger a la población y no en reducir el flujo de drogas. Propuso, por ejemplo, que si el gobierno Obama quería ayudar en serio a México en su hora fatal, debería lanzar una aguerrida campaña policial para arruinarle el mercado estadounidense al cartel mexicano más violento. El mensaje sería: castigamos más duro al más brutal, y no al que más droga exporte.

Una filosofía parecida está tras las Unidades de Policías Pacificadoras de Río de Janeiro que han reducido las muertes en un 27 por ciento en tres años. Según dijo un directivo a la revista mexicana Proceso, la clave es “haber cambiado el foco; el objetivo es que el Estado recupere los territorios controlados por los ‘narcos’ en vez de dedicarse a combatir el tráfico de drogas”. Y explicó cómo la anterior política de operaciones policiacas bélicas para incautar droga y armas era inútil, pues éstas eran sustituidas con rapidez y, en cambio, las vidas de policías, vecinos y de jóvenes pandilleros se perdían para siempre.

Se necesita valentía para hablar públicamente de revisar la política antidroga, cuando se es presidente de países estigmatizados como Colombia o Guatemala. Pero mayor coraje requeriría cambiar el foco de la política criminal actual. Y en lugar de dedicarle billones de pesos y mucho del esfuerzo de las Fuerzas Armadas y de la justicia a perseguir la “droga maldita”, habría que volver prioridad reducir los efectos brutales del narcotráfico.

Hoy pasa lo contrario. Así, si alguien que ha cometido crímenes de lesa humanidad en Colombia confiesa haber exportado cocaína a Estados Unidos y entrega una ruta, puede quedar libre en pocos años y con visa. La lección es clara: no importa cuánto mate, lo único que vale es que no trafique. Debería ser exactamente al revés
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

Germany: Trump’s Tariffs: China Acts, Europe Reacts

Indonesia: Trump’s Chaos Strategy Is Hurting His Allies, Not Just His Rivals

Indonesia: Trump Needs a Copy Editor

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Topics

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Australia: What’s Behind Donald Trump’s Latest Crypto Adventure?

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Sri Lanka: As Albanese Stands Tall, Let’s Stand by Her

Indonesia: Trump’s 19% Tariffs: How Should We Respond?

Turkey: Conflicting Messages to Syria: US Supports Integrity while Israel Attacks

Related Articles

Colombia: The End of the Dollar’s Reign?

Colombia : Trump’s Strategy against Maduro

Colombia: The ‘Toy’ Trump Gave to Musk

India: Will Fallout at Home, Abroad Restrain Trump Disruption?

Australia: Trump’s Tariff Tango Will Only Reinforce His View that Bullying Works

1 COMMENT