Drug Dealers, Guns and Territory

The United States can only have it perfectly clear: The entire region resents the war on drugs that it must confront, endure and finance due to the insatiable demand for drugs on the other side of the border, in the city of Juárez. The other source of this painful fight, the greed of those in the South willing to do anything to amass a fortune trafficking drugs, inspires less reproach perhaps because it lacks a singular, concrete face. The regional security summit presented an opportunity for all of the countries involved to deliver their messages to Secretary Clinton, even if she would not listen to them. The region is willing to fight drug trafficking, but it necessitates joint responsibility. You cannot ask Central America the impossible. These nations are incapable of financing a battle that will bleed them to death if the United States does not finance the major part of it.

What no one dares to ask, however, is to end the conditions that have caused so much death — that the market is opened, that the ban is lifted, that the sale of drugs becomes regulated. This is because Central Americans also seem to understand the position of the North very well. Washington does not accept slackers when it comes to confronting drug trafficking. They hear the cries for the excesses and atrocities that have come with the war against the cartels loud and clear, but they have neither considered changing the policy concerning the ban on drug trade nor are they willing to foot the entire bill for the fight.

The payment relationship that the Secretary of State seems to suggest is three to one: For every dollar the United States contributes, Central American taxpayers should contribute three. Needless to say, as Clinton did herself, the largest businesses and wealthiest citizens should bear these costs. We all are familiar with the lack of progressive tax structures in the region, and it is better not to dream up a moon made out of cheese. The United States promises to impose limits on the sale and distribution of weapons from their country to Mexico, but to tell the truth, Central American drug traffickers do not need the gringo gunsmiths’ aid to arm themselves. In the region, so many guns remain as a result of our internal wars, and there is so much corruption among the local armies, that they can simply open up the powder keg in any of the barracks in Guatemala or El Salvador and stock up on lead and hand grenades.

The most disheartening realization, however, is that Washington sees Colombia and Mexico as examples to follow. And we already know what that means — open war against the cartels, resulting in the killing of many innocent people and the limiting of civil liberties. Look at the fight carried forward by Mexican poet Javier Sicilia, who lost a son to drug-related violence and the harshness of the authorities in facing his claim. In other words, the war must continue.

The most worrisome thing for Guatemala is that without solid institutional framework, it enters the war under highly vulnerable conditions. In part due to our history and geographical proximity to Mexico and the United States, the violence has intensified here. Even Honduras and El Salvador have not experienced the bloodshed that Guatemala has. On the other hand, they share a common crime and death toll with our country that are the result of the crimes that already present an enormous challenge for their own states. If only they could live this war like Nicaragua has, or Costa Rica and Panama to a certain extent, with much fewer deaths and more tolerance.