Obama’s Big Omission
Published in La Nación
(Argentina) on 30 September 2011
by Andrés Oppenheimer (link to original)
(Argentina) on 30 September 2011
by Andrés Oppenheimer (link to original)
Translated from
by Camden Luxford.
Edited by Mark DeLucas.
While the headlines regarding the U.N. General Assembly have concentrated on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, there is another conflict that has passed almost unnoticed, despite the fact that it causes many more deaths: the “War on Drugs” in Mexico, Central America and the northern part of South America.
To my surprise, in his inaugural address to the U.N. General Assembly, U.S. President Barack Obama spoke extensively about Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Ivory Coast and various other conflicts around the world, except for the one that is next door to the United States.
Obama’s speech was, regarding all of these crises, correct in many aspects, including his reminder to the world that Israel has legitimate concerns regarding its security after being invaded several times by its neighbors. But it was strange that Obama failed to use even once the words “drugs,” “cartels,” “organized crime” or “Mexico,” ignoring a war that has caused almost 40,000 deaths in Mexico alone in the last five years — many more than in the recent uprisings in the Middle East — and that is becoming one of the greatest obstacles to economic growth in the region.
According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Latin America is one of the most violent regions in the world, with an annual average of 25 murders per 100,000 inhabitants. Last year, 18,000 people were murdered in Central America, obliging governments to spend $4 billion on security, an increase of 60 percent as compared to four years ago, according to the UNDP’s figures.
As expected, one of the few presidents who raised the issue was Felipe Calderón, of Mexico. After Obama spoke about the tyrants who repress their populations in Iran, Libya, Syria, and other countries, Calderón said: “We should be aware, my friends, that organized crime is, today, killing more people than all of the dictatorial regimes together. Dozens of thousands of people, especially between Mexico and the Andes, are dying.”
He added that the drug trafficking cartels are becoming more powerful than many of the region’s governments, thanks to their huge earnings, and because they have easy access to high-powered weapons from the United States.
The solution? The U.S., and other high-powered weapon-producing countries, must establish stricter controls to stop these arms ending up in the hands of the cartels, said Calderón. Further, the drug-consuming countries ought to do more to reduce the demand.
Positioning himself closer than ever to those who propose the legalization of drugs, Calderón said that if the U.S. and Europe weren’t able reduce the consumption of drugs, they should explore “other options, including market alternatives that would avoid the continued role of drug trafficking as the origin of violence and death in Latin America and the Caribbean.”
Rafael Fernández de Castro, professor at ITAM University in Mexico, who was, until recently, an adviser to Calderón and who is conducting a UNDP study about the violence in Latin America, told me that, despite the public admission by Obama’s government in 2009 that the U.S. shares responsibility in the drug trafficking violence in Mexico, not much has changed since then.
“The strategy of the United States has not changed much. It is still based in drug interdiction in Mexico and Central America. That is, they keep fighting the war only to the south of their border,” he told me. “If we don’t do something soon, this cancer will end up destroying our democracies.”
My opinion: There is no doubt that Obama had good reasons to concentrate on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, on Iraq and Afghanistan, but he committed a serious error when he failed to speak about the war on drugs in his neighboring countries. It is a bloody conflict that, as well as leaving an enormous number of people dead and undermining institutions, is becoming the major obstacle to economic growth in the region. It doesn’t just drain resources that should be directed towards education and health, but is also driving away foreign investment and killing tourism.
There are many things Washington could do, including enacting greater control over the sale of semi-automatic weapons, beginning a serious debate as to whether the legalization of marijuana would allow more resources to be allocated to the consumption of harder drugs, and — as was suggested in an article by Mark Kleiman in Foreign Affairs magazine — focusing the war on drugs on the fight against violent drug traffickers, in instead of indiscriminately pursuing all users.
Instead of omitting to mention the problem, Obama should have placed it alongside the Middle Eastern conflicts in the center of the international political agenda, and should do much more to resolve it in a more effective manner.
To my surprise, in his inaugural address to the U.N. General Assembly, U.S. President Barack Obama spoke extensively about Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Ivory Coast and various other conflicts around the world, except for the one that is next door to the United States.
Obama’s speech was, regarding all of these crises, correct in many aspects, including his reminder to the world that Israel has legitimate concerns regarding its security after being invaded several times by its neighbors. But it was strange that Obama failed to use even once the words “drugs,” “cartels,” “organized crime” or “Mexico,” ignoring a war that has caused almost 40,000 deaths in Mexico alone in the last five years — many more than in the recent uprisings in the Middle East — and that is becoming one of the greatest obstacles to economic growth in the region.
According to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Latin America is one of the most violent regions in the world, with an annual average of 25 murders per 100,000 inhabitants. Last year, 18,000 people were murdered in Central America, obliging governments to spend $4 billion on security, an increase of 60 percent as compared to four years ago, according to the UNDP’s figures.
As expected, one of the few presidents who raised the issue was Felipe Calderón, of Mexico. After Obama spoke about the tyrants who repress their populations in Iran, Libya, Syria, and other countries, Calderón said: “We should be aware, my friends, that organized crime is, today, killing more people than all of the dictatorial regimes together. Dozens of thousands of people, especially between Mexico and the Andes, are dying.”
He added that the drug trafficking cartels are becoming more powerful than many of the region’s governments, thanks to their huge earnings, and because they have easy access to high-powered weapons from the United States.
The solution? The U.S., and other high-powered weapon-producing countries, must establish stricter controls to stop these arms ending up in the hands of the cartels, said Calderón. Further, the drug-consuming countries ought to do more to reduce the demand.
Positioning himself closer than ever to those who propose the legalization of drugs, Calderón said that if the U.S. and Europe weren’t able reduce the consumption of drugs, they should explore “other options, including market alternatives that would avoid the continued role of drug trafficking as the origin of violence and death in Latin America and the Caribbean.”
Rafael Fernández de Castro, professor at ITAM University in Mexico, who was, until recently, an adviser to Calderón and who is conducting a UNDP study about the violence in Latin America, told me that, despite the public admission by Obama’s government in 2009 that the U.S. shares responsibility in the drug trafficking violence in Mexico, not much has changed since then.
“The strategy of the United States has not changed much. It is still based in drug interdiction in Mexico and Central America. That is, they keep fighting the war only to the south of their border,” he told me. “If we don’t do something soon, this cancer will end up destroying our democracies.”
My opinion: There is no doubt that Obama had good reasons to concentrate on the Palestinian-Israeli dispute, on Iraq and Afghanistan, but he committed a serious error when he failed to speak about the war on drugs in his neighboring countries. It is a bloody conflict that, as well as leaving an enormous number of people dead and undermining institutions, is becoming the major obstacle to economic growth in the region. It doesn’t just drain resources that should be directed towards education and health, but is also driving away foreign investment and killing tourism.
There are many things Washington could do, including enacting greater control over the sale of semi-automatic weapons, beginning a serious debate as to whether the legalization of marijuana would allow more resources to be allocated to the consumption of harder drugs, and — as was suggested in an article by Mark Kleiman in Foreign Affairs magazine — focusing the war on drugs on the fight against violent drug traffickers, in instead of indiscriminately pursuing all users.
Instead of omitting to mention the problem, Obama should have placed it alongside the Middle Eastern conflicts in the center of the international political agenda, and should do much more to resolve it in a more effective manner.