To the Drug Czar’s Ears

The refusal of Washington to legalize drugs hinders the ability to take new actions against illegal drugs.

Today Gil Kerlikowske, Obama’s drug czar, began a three-day official tour in Colombia. On his second visit to the country, the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy will hold a meeting with President Juan Manuel Santos and Colonel Oscar Naranjo and get to know firsthand several local experiences.

Regarding protocol statements, the broad outlines of Washington’s position have already been established by Kerlikowske in an interview with this newspaper. While the resources for “Plan Colombia” continue to dwindle, Mexico has become the new battlefront against drug cartels. In fact, the drug czar has visited the country of the Aztecs four times and the Mexican border seven times. However, the presence of the U.S. drug czar in Colombia cannot be seen without remembering some thoughts of a debate on the future of national security. The outlook for production, traffic and consumption of illicit substances has changed in the last years in the U.S. and Colombia.

The failed referendum to legalize marijuana in California makes it clear that the Americans are not only consumers but also large producers. Besides cultivating marijuana, Americans make ecstasy and methamphetamine in home laboratories and traffic prescription drugs. The office of Kerlikowske acknowledged two weeks ago that the emergency care for abuse of legal pharmaceuticals exceeded by 23 percent the amount for the rest of the illicit drugs. According to the 2010 United Nations World Drug report, while cocaine consumption tends to stabilize in the United States, the use of stimulants increases. It is not a surprise that the emphasis of Obama’s administration is, in the words of the drug czar, “to reduce the number of drug users; addiction is a disease.”

Colombia has seen an increase in its domestic consumption and in the ease of obtaining drugs as well. Drug trafficking is used not only to finance guerrilla groups and criminal gangs, but also to help growing retail businesses in cities. The relationship between violence and coca production spreads from “taxes” on the drug crops of the jungle to the “pots” of parks and public squares of the neighborhood. After the murder of two college students in Córdoba, there has been a territorial dispute between two drug gangs, “Urabeños” and “Paisas,” over the traffic of alkaloids.

These changing scenarios in both countries, which have been in agreement for a long time, call for the revision of some current strategies that indicate depletion and the need for exploration of other approaches. Nevertheless, the position of Washington is decisive: “Say no to legalization.” Unfortunately, this refusal prevents countries like Colombia from seeking new measures in the fight against drugs: more treatment, prevention and reduction of the demand for drugs in the streets of New York and Bogotá, in addition to the interdiction of our forests.

The funny thing is that that intransigence of the White House is not an obstacle for Washington to endorse community initiatives for “generous” treatment of a drug dealer, such as the “Drug Market Initiative” in some of its cities. New dynamics of consumption and production require fresh approaches in the fight against drugs. Especially the collapse of the taboos surrounding the discussion of other approaches.