The usage of recreational drugs among American youth poses one of the biggest challenges for the country’s future. The United States, by virtue of sharing a lengthy border with neighboring Mexico, is susceptible to illegal trafficking of drugs within its jurisdiction. Moreover, over the last thirty years or so, the influx of illegal immigrants from Mexico has made the task of curbing drug trade close to impossible. But, however challenging the War on Drugs prove to be, the law enforcement authorities cannot give up on their mission, for unfettered drug trafficking across the border would have serious negative consequences in the long run. The following passages will present the reasons why the U.S.A. Must stay engaged with Mexico in the War on Drugs.
When the Ronald Reagan Administration initiated its famous War on Drugs program in the 1980s with the catchy slogan “Just Say No”, the focus of the program was not exclusively Mexico. At that time, different pockets of Latin America posed threats of varying degrees, including Columbia and Brazil. But due to its proximity to the United States, and the increase in demand for cocaine and marijuana, Mexico has emerged as the greatest threat in recent decades. Compounding the problem of drug trafficking is the internal political chaos in Mexico. The Mexican governments of past and present have tried various methods and tactics for bringing the drug cartels under control, but to no avail. It is a reflection of the government’s inability to reign in the drug cartels that policy makers in Mexico are resorting to radical alternatives. For example, some policy makers are pushing their case “to decriminalize possession of small quantities of drugs such as marijuana, cocaine, LSD, methamphetamines, heroin, and opium if these are for personal use” (Serrano, 2009). The rationale behind this proposal is that legalizing individual drug consumption will undermine incentives for drug cartels to continue their trade. Such proposals betray Mexican government’s feeling of desperation. There is little evidence to suggest that if and when such proposals turn into enacted laws drug trade and consumption will decline. In the United States, a contrarian trend has been followed with respect to narcotics laws, which has made sentences handed to those found guilty highly disproportional to the extent of their crime. As Ian Weinstein succinctly points out,
“In the system of narcotics prosecution, prosecutorial power often is unchecked and sentences often are unpredictable, but generally are quite harsh. Narcotics sentences have been decreasing steadily for almost ten years–a troubling instability–and there are wide disparities in sentences among similarly-situated defendants. Too many defendants receive sentences that are out of proportion to the wrongfulness of their conduct and too few will accept the risks that come with trying to enforce their rights in the face of often overwhelming prosecutorial power. Meanwhile, the vast increase in prosecutorial power to control narcotics sentences is at the core of the problems with federal narcotics sentencing”. (Weinstein, 2003)
Yet, despite this dis-proportionality in sentencing, there is empirical evidence that suggests a reduction in illegal drug trading activity within the United States. Seen in this backdrop, the proposed decriminalization of narcotics trade in Mexico is only likely to exacerbate the problem. Given the ineffective political system in Mexico and the uncertainty surrounding possible legal remedies, it is all the more necessary for the American government to engage with Mexico and come up with robust measures to check drug trafficking. Although the drugs originate from across the southern border with Mexico, their destination market is largely the United States. For example, the wholesale cocaine distribution system in the United States is run by mafia dons living underground in Mexico. Furthermore, “Traffickers operating from Mexico now control wholesale cocaine distribution throughout the western and mid-western United States. Mexico-based trafficking groups in cities such as Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Diego, San Francisco, and Seattle control the distribution of several tons of cocaine”. (www.policyalmanac.org, 2004) If the U.S. Government does not take prompt action to control this ever widening distribution network, then the problem will escalate to endemic proportions in a few years.
Apart from the health hazards posed by consumption of drugs, the narcotic trade links across the border with Mexico creates new security threats to the nation. While the diplomatic relations between Mexico and the United States is quite amicable, the same cannot be said about other neighboring nations. For example, there are the cases of Cuba and Venezuela, whose relations with the United States is acrimonious. If the drug trafficking routes from Mexico are not dismantled, then there is a real threat of infiltration from these hostile nations. Given that Cuba was a strong ally of the Soviet Union during the Cold War era and that Venezuela has openly expressed its opposition to the United States’ foreign policy initiatives, the narcotics trade routes from Mexico could undermine stability of civil society in the U.S. Already, there is the precedent of the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the world came very close to a catastrophic world war. With increase in the amount and potency of nuclear arsenal across nations, such fragile geo-political equations should not be allowed to develop. Further down the continent, leading latin Aemrican nations are forging formidable alliances in the name of ‘social justice’, the prime manifestation of which is the World Social Forum meetings. There are a strong socialist undercurrent behind this movement, which has the potential to undermine the authority of the United States on the world stage. Keeping all these realities in mind, the United States government should continue to stay engaged with Mexico in the war against drugs.
WORKS CITED
Nadelmann, Ethan. 2003. Addicted to Failure: It’s Time for Latin America to Start Breaking with Washington over the War on Drugs. Foreign Policy, July-August, 94+.
Petras, James. 2002. U.S. Offensive in Latin America: Coups, Retreats, and Radicalization. Monthly Review, May, 15+.
Strobel, Warren P. 1997. U.S. Promises $6 Million to Mexico to Fight Drugs: New Anti-Narcotics Force to Replace Corrupt One. The Washington Times, 6 May, 4.
Weinstein, Ian. 2003. Fifteen Years after the Federal Sentencing Revolution: How Mandatory Minimums Have Undermined Effective and Just Narcotics Sentencing. American Criminal Law Review 40, no. 1: 87+.
G. Serrano, The failing war on drugs in Mexico, retrieved on Monday, September 21, 2009, from <http://trendsupdates.com>
Drug Trafficking in the United States, U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, posted on Added May, 2004 at <http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/drug_trafficking.shtml>