Drugs: A Tentative Step Forward

On the thorny issue of drug legalization, there was a step forward yesterday, albeit a tentative one. The United States admitted that it is willing to talk about specific programs to outline concrete plans of action, and at the same time agreed that the Isthmus [Central American] and Mexican governments have the right to talk about plans and actions, rather than just making declarations that, in practice, don’t lead to any positive results.

The statement in this regard was given by William Brownfield, who heads the Department of State’s anti-narcotics bureau and will come to the Isthmus in two weeks. Brownfield joins Janet Napolitano and U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden, who visited the region to (among other things) reject President Otto Perez Molina’s suggestion to legalize drugs, a suggestion which has also been rejected by Washington and by the United Nations itself.

The U.S. official pointed out an issue that should be of direct interest to Guatemala: The need to present a plan on how to carry out the suggested legalization and how to face its undoubted and obvious consequences. Moreover, he referred to the potential problems of using military force in anti-drug tasks. He took no chances, explaining that the battle against these problems will last about 15 years before solutions can be found.

In addition, Brownfield is unsure about the stance of the countries theoretically allied with Guatemala’s position, such as Mexico and Colombia. The latter country has already indicated that it will not take the matter to the Summit of the Americas and that it will not promote an initiative in this regard, as requested by the Guatemalan president to his Colombian colleague, Juan Manuel Santos, whom he informed yesterday.

It can be pointed out that President Pérez Molina achieved his goal of placing the issue of drug legalization on the table. So far, this issue has not had a positive response outside of the demonstration of support by the British Parliament. But it has indeed had negative responses, as was the case with El Salvador and, in a way, with Colombia. Separately, the Guatemalan government seems to be willing to open itself up to those sectors where the issue of drug legalization is addressed, but only from a theoretical perspective. Little to nothing is known about the thinking of the public majority, which is, of course, entitled to be heard.

If the issue of drug legalization were to come strongly to the fore, Guatemala’s loneliness in supporting this issue and its possible presentation at the Presidents’ Meeting would be a clear result of the naiveté of the country’s ministry of foreign affairs. The support of countries and institutions that are geographically close to Guatemala should be sought and obtained before embarking on an adventure that wouldn’t do well.

The discussion about whether or not to legalize drugs is a necessary option. On this, everyone agrees. But in any case, it should be done in a group, not alone, because nobody will have the political courage to portray the issue. If there are no allies, Guatemala has no choice but to prepare itself for the frontal impact resulting from its decision to fight the war as it does now.