Mexicans claim that the war in drugs only made the cartels more violent and the state authorities more tainted. The result is that guiltless onlookers are often caught up in the crossfire. For periods, drug transferring groups have used Mexico's fragile political system to make "a network of corruption that ensured distribution rights, market access, and even official government protection for drug traffickers in exchange for lucrative bribes," (Shirk,2011).
Payan contended in his article The Drug War and the U.S.-Mexico Border: The State of Affairs that the roots of the drug war stem from the resentment policymakers had towards the counterculture revolution of the late 60’s. Mind-altering drugs such as marijuana, cocaine and heroin were in great demand, and many small gangs in Mexico had taken advantage of the opportunity. Nixon saw the rising clamor from conservatives against the trafficking and use of these substances; so he instituted the DEA, coin...
The United States has had a long-standing policy of intervening in the affairs of other nations when the country has thought it within its best interests to do so. Since the 1970’s the United States has tried to impose its will on other nations to combat the most pressing political enemy of the day often linking the war on drugs to the matter to stoke support both domestically and abroad. In the times of the Cold War, this enemy was communism and the government tried to make the connection of the “Red Dope Menace” insinuating drug links with China, Castro’s Cuba, and the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. However, as the world has evolved and communism’s prominence has waned, there is a new enemy whose existence has become intertwined with the drug war. That enemy is terrorism. The connection has gone so far that politicians and journalists have coined a new term to describe the link calling this new problem of our time “Narco-terror.” This paper will examine US efforts to control the drug trade and fight terrorism in Colombia, Peru, Afghanistan and the desired and often undesired consequences that have come about because of those efforts.
It is common knowledge in the United States that Prohibition is a failure. In the 1920’s alcohol was made illegal by the US government during Prohibition. Rather than preventing alcohol consumption, this only created organized crime groups and a black market for the substance. The policy did not only fail to alleviate the US from drug use, but also lead to the formation of organized criminal associations and dangerous substitutes for these drugs. The same issues apply when drugs are made illegal (Thornton 1). Today there is an immense black market
Rawlins, Aimee. "Mexico's Drug War." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 11 Jan. 2013. Web. 05 Feb. 2014. .
Since 2006, a growing issue of drug smuggling and trafficking has arisen between Mexico and the United States. Not only does this issue affect the economies of the two countries but also the social life of the populations.
A former director of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency’s Mexican office once stated:” The heroin market abhors a vacuum.” The truth in this statement can be extended to not only the heroin trade but also the trade of numerous other drugs of abuse; from cocaine to methamphetamines, the illicit drug trade has had a way of fluidity that allows insert itself into any societal weakness. Much like any traditional commodity good, illicit drugs have become not only an economy in and of themselves, they have transformed into an integral part of the legitimate global economy. Whether or not military or law enforcement action is the most prudent or expedient method of minimizing the ill-effects of the illicit drug trade is of little consequence to the understanding of the economic reality of its use in the United States ongoing “War on Drugs”. As it stands, not only has the illicit drug trade transformed itself into a self-sufficient global economy, so too has the drug-fighting trade. According to a CNN report in 2012, in the 40 years since the declaration of “The War on Drugs”, the United States Federal Government has spent approximately $1 trillion in the fight against illicit drugs. Additionally, a report in the New York Times in 1999 estimates that federal spending in the “War on Drugs” tops $19 billion a year and state and local government spending nears $16 billion a year. Given the sheer magnitude of federal, state, and local spending in the combat of the illicit drug trade, one would reasonably expect that the violence, death, and destruction that so often accompanies the epicenters of the drug economy would be expelled from the close proximity of the United States. While this expectation is completely reasonable to the ...
The U.S. government has instituted the following ways for enforcing its foreign drug policy: interdiction, eradication, legislative reform. Interdiction is the attempt to stop drugs as they are en route to the United States. This remains to be a formidable task; because of the enormous size of the United States, policing its vast borders has proven to be extremely difficult. For example, the United States has over 12,000 miles of shoreline, through 300 ports of legal entry, and over 7,500 miles of border with Canada and Mexico. The jurisdiction of these border points fall under all of the above mentioned agencies and military branches. Herein lays the first problem of foreign policy on drugs, determining which agency/branch has rightful control over which part of the border. The DEA and FBI have overlapping roles in when it comes to enforcing drug policy. Miscommunication often happens when attempting to interdict drugs because of overlapping jurisdiction between two government agencies. According to the Drug Policy Alliance, the United States has spent over $25 billion on s...
We now stand at a crucial moment where we need to take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Namely, whether the situations in Colombia and Mexico have been progressing forward with the impact of drugs lessening or perhaps the opposite- the drug war and the effects of it on the respective countries are exponentially growing worse and worse. Then we need to construct a series of steps that will ensure the gradual decline of drugs and their effects on Colombia and Mexico. The reality of it is that the drug war has had its toll on the Colombian and Mexican people significantly, yet this is not to say that these are the only two nations suffering greatly from this dreadful and precarious situation. Where a multimillion dollar illegitimate business is found, there will surely be some sort of resistance and armed group willing...
In this report, I examine the United States’ “War on Drugs” in Colombia, and show how American involvement in Colombia has been a dangerous and counterproductive use of money.
The modern Drug War’s roots can be dated back to US anti-imperialist sentiments against the British since the 19th century. More recent incarnations of these sentiments are figures such as Richard Nixon, Harry Anslinger, and George Bush. Drugs such as ...
We are the Drug Policy Alliance. (2014, February). A brief history of the drug war.
The United States has a long history of intervention in the affairs of one it’s southern neighbor, Latin America. The war on drugs has been no exception. An investigation of US relations with Latin America in the period from 1820 to 1960, reveals the war on drugs to be a convenient extension of an almost 200 year-old policy. This investigation focuses on the commercial and political objectives of the US in fighting a war on drugs in Latin America. These objectives explain why the failing drug policy persisted despite its overwhelming failure to decrease drug production or trafficking. These objectives also explain why the US has recently exchanged a war on drugs for the war on terrorism.