End the Drug War

All the evidence suggests that the efforts to crush Mexico's violent drug cartels have failed. Why won't the White House listen?

BY FULTON T. ARMSTRONG | MARCH 20, 2012

What more evidence does the U.S. government need to understand that the current approach to fighting the Mexican drug cartels is failing?

The U.S. general who commands military forces in North America testified before a Senate committee last week that, while the "decapitation strategy" has succeeded in killing some of Mexico's major drug figures, it "has not had an appreciable effect" in thwarting the drug trade. Regional leaders see it even more dimly, as evidenced by their frustrated reactions to Vice President Joseph Biden's visit to Mexico and Central America this month. That trip suggested the White House just doesn't grasp that the approach launched by George W. Bush's administration in 2007, and continued essentially unchanged by President Barack Obama, has been irrelevant at best and disastrous at worst.

Mexico is far from being a "failed state," but its skyrocketing violence threatens our interests as well as its own. Our economies, our people, and our problems are interdependent. We use the drugs, but Mexicans get shot up. It's not right.

The evidence of policy failure is undisputed: 47,000 Mexicans dead since President Felipe Calderón took office in December 2006; the continuing flow of hundreds of tons of cocaine and thousands of tons of marijuana into the United States despite post-9/11 border controls and anti-immigration fences; and more than $20 billion in drug cash and many thousands of U.S. guns streaming south into Mexico each year.

The Bush administration's "Mérida Initiative," a scaled-down version of the efforts to combat drug smuggling in Colombia, has cost U.S. taxpayers $1.6 billion. Politicians and bureaucrats feel good about Mérida, because it has facilitated unprecedented cooperation between the United States and Mexico and the demise or capture of a dozen drug kingpins. They've been pushing the same approach -- albeit in a more piecemeal fashion and less generously -- on Central America.

But it has barely made a dent in the drug trade it aims to stop. For every drug capo taken down, several lieutenants have surged forward to keep the business going -- but in a manner much harder for U.S. and Mexican intelligence to detect. That was one of the unheeded lessons from Colombia: taking down the ostentatious, sports car-driving bosses yields a political boost, but the atomization of the drug trade makes it much more challenging to combat.

Both sides deserve blame in choosing this approach. They both pushed for a Colombia-style military approach, and they both failed to advance serious solutions to mounting human rights abuses.  As a result, doubts among Mexicans about the government's ability to provide even basic security are deeper. The scary prospect of paramilitary groups taking affairs into their own hands has also emerged: The group that dumped 35 bodies on a main street in the southeastern city of Veracruz last September called itself the "Mata-Zetas" -- the killers of a ferocious gang called the Zetas -- and issued self-righteous warnings reminiscent of the paramilitary terrorists in Colombia.

Both the U.S. and Mexican governments have shown glimmers of recognition that the Mérida Initiative, with its heavy military emphasis, has failed. In early 2011, then-U.S. Ambassador Carlos Pascual tried to nudge both countries' bureaucracies and resources toward social, economic, and justice programs that would address the underlying causes of Mexican violence -- less sexy than helicopters, but more strategically important. His "Beyond Mérida" approach was removed from the State Department website after he stepped down as ambassador.

Although the Mexican government's public position remains the same, officials have also grasped that it's time for a change. At a meeting with governors, judges, and mayors 18 months ago, a frustrated Calderón challenged them to help him, saying, "What I ask, simply, is for clear ideas and precise proposals on how to improve this strategy."

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

Fulton T. Armstrong has worked on Mexico, Central America, and counternarcotics at the National Security Council, National Intelligence Council, CIA, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He is a senior fellow at American University's Center for Latin American and Latino Studies.

MALCOLMKYLE

4:28 PM ET

March 20, 2012

Regulate and Tax

Prohibition has triggered the worst crime wave in history, escalating gang warfare even beyond what was experienced in the dark-days of alcohol bootlegging.

* It has created a black market with massive incentives to hook both adults and children alike.

* It has put previously unknown and contaminated drugs on our streets.

* It has made these substances widely available even in schools and prisons.

* It has created a prison-for-profit synergy with drug lords.

* It has helped remove many important civil liberties from the very citizens it falsely claims to represent.

* It has grossly inflated the number of people on welfare who can't find employment due to their felony status.

* It has grossly escalated Murder, Kidnapping, Extortion, Theft, Muggings and Burglaries.

* It has diverted scarce law-enforcement resources away from protecting citizens from the ever escalating violence against their person or property.

* It has overcrowded the courts and prisons, thus making it increasingly impossible to curtail the people who are hurting and terrorizing others.

* It has evolved local gangs into transnational enterprises with intricate power structures that reach into every corner of society, helping them control vast swaths of territory while gifting them with significant social and military resources.

Imagine if we were to chop down every single tree on the planet as a response to our failure to prevent tree-climbing accidents. That's what our misguided drug policy looks like. Isn't it time we all stood up and told the government we're tired of being beaten and jailed so that pharmaceutical companies can poison and kill us for obscene profits?

Prohibition Prevents Regulation : Legalize, Regulate and Tax!

 

HURRICANEWARNING

8:36 PM ET

March 20, 2012

marijuana should be legalized

...however, the criminal gangs selling it, and violently protecting their turf will not go away. For the most part, criminals are criminals, and while legalizing marijuana would solve part of the problem and many "wrong place, wrong time" criminals might legitimize themselves; overall, the big fish will still be in business selling Coke, Meth, Ex, Heroin, guns, prostitues, whatever. The point is, we need to capture and kill as many of these people as possible not because they sell drugs but because, like bin laden, they are societal outliers and threaten the safety of the public. In business terms, they are defective hardware, and they must be scrapped.

I would wager that the real reason this "decapitation" strategy hasn't worked in Mexico as well as it worked in Iraq, is because it isn't being executed by JSOC and the CIA. They are relegated to assisting and training. If we really unleashed our defense machine upon these cartels, they would not be able to withstand the "industrial counter-terror" strategy we used in Iraq. Since that's not an option though, I guess we're stuck waging the drug war for the next million years. Oh well, better than waging an actual war I suppose.

 

JFAIR

11:51 AM ET

March 21, 2012

You Must Be Joking

"I would wager that the real reason this "decapitation" strategy hasn't worked in Mexico as well as it worked in Iraq, is because it isn't being executed by JSOC and the CIA."

In case you haven't noticed, the Iraq war was a tremendous failure. After we did not find WMDs, the mission shifted to a "new front on terror". The truth is that there was no terrorism in Iraq before we invaded. We created the front and extremist brought the terror. The false pretenses of WMDs was supported by a false NIE written by your precious CIA.

Regardless of whether Iraq was a complete failure or not, JSOC and the CIA are helpless against the market forces of supply and demand. Ratcheting up the violence has not and will not stop the flow of drugs into the USA.

 

DIOGENES' ONIONS

1:24 PM ET

March 21, 2012

Ridiculous

The determinist strains in your response are drivel. Criminals are not "societal outliers" (whatever that means), but are rather rational individuals who are, like all of us, provided with a palette of options. They choose the easiest ones. So do you and I.

Now, of course there are sociopaths, psychos, etc in existence. But to imagine that it is mental illness itself that is the root cause of criminality opens up a lot of doors I doubt you are prepared to walk through. Here's one; if dangerous criminals are mentally ill, and not simply rational individuals making socially distasteful choices, then how is it that one can plead insanity in court? Why is that an excuse?

Even scarier, if you're right, why are we routinely executing and imprisoning the mentally infirm?

"They are defective hardware, and they must be scrapped." Maybe you've heard the rule that the first one in an argument to bring up Hitler loses. I'll spare the comparison because I think you've already made that allusion clear.

 

SQUEEDLE

2:06 PM ET

March 21, 2012

"In business terms"????!!

If one is going to complain about "social outliers," let's start with you, referring to human beings "in business terms" as "defective hardware" which "must be scrapped."

Someone who dehumanizes so easily, and calls for the capture and massacre of mass numbers of people, I consider to be "defective" and shouldn't be allowed input on decisions affecting anyone else's life but their own. Such a solution is literally sociopathic, brutal, and frankly, disgusting. Take yourself to countries where this sort of thing is practiced, and you will find people living in fear of being pointed out as a drug dealer, prostitute, etc. if they happen to piss off the wrong person or make the wrong alliances. Social Darwinism is just poorly disguised eugenics, an utter failure and demonstrably so.

Your solution will not produce a thriving, prosperous country; it will result in an oppressive, militarized regime with a brutal society just like the places that already implement such things, and I am sick to death of ignorant computer-chair "activists" like you, who either have no real world experience to speak of or somehow managed to let life's important lessons zip right by, sitting behind a keyboard proposing faceless virtual justice. I don't know about the rest of you, but I am 110% against such a society and will actively fight it to my dying breath.

 

HURRICANEWARNING

2:16 PM ET

March 21, 2012

you two are such incredible

you two are such incredible drama queens it's not even funny.

Concerning criminals being "sociopaths": I would wager that many are. In fact I think that is a VERY accurate way to describe the people in charge of criminal organizations. Much in the same way as many hedge fund managers and Wallstreet execs are sociopaths. You also don't seem to understand what "insanity" or "mental illness" really is. Because sociopathy is not either of those things. Rather it is described by most psychologists as a moral way of being; somebody who doesn't fit into society and rather uses people like tools to get what they want. Jeffery Dhamer was a sociopath, for example, he could not plead insanity in court becuase he wasn't insane. In fact he was the opposite of insane, he was completely clear headed and lucid, he just simply didn't care about his victims at all. He was defective human hardware. Just like most drug cappos. Anyone who beheads entire families without remorse is considered, almost by definition, a sociopath. So...your argument is basically useless. And your insinuation that I am somehow like hitler for supporting the eradication of inhuman monsters who behead pregnant women and innocents without a thought, is baseless and below ignorant. You must not really understand history, who hitler was, or who the cartel leaders actually are. Hint: they're not poor farm boys who are just trying to make a living.

In regards to Iraq: I never ever said that the invasion of Iraq was a smart idea. What I was saying, and any military historian would agree with me here, is that JSOC and the CIA (in coordination with the surge) were extremely successful at wiping out AQ in Iraq. In less than a year they managed to kill so many terrorists that the ones who were left no longer had the knowledge to create effective bombs, or orchestrate effective schemes. JSOC became so good at targeting and killing individual leaders that it was executing 20 raids or more a night across the country for over a year. They absolutely decimated AQ, and were the primary reason there was enough temporary stability for us to leave the country. In Mexico, the cartels don't have the same type of support or "talent pool" as the jihadists did in Iraq, and once they're wiped out, there wouldn't be many left to stand up in there place. Example: When Escobar died, noone else stood up to take his place. There were other small fry's. But never another figure like escobar.

 

JFAIR

4:09 PM ET

March 21, 2012

Granted the problem in Mexico

Granted the problem in Mexico as devolved into Narco-Terrorism, but there is a vast difference between AQ and the Zetas. The Zetas command an illegal multi-billion dollar industry and AQ fights to the death for a radical ideology. So long as a market exist for billions to be made, someone will always be available to fill the vacuum left by the latest captured or killed drug boss.

 

BLUE13326

12:08 AM ET

March 21, 2012

Maybe the Obama adinistration

Maybe the Obama adinistration should stop selling the cartels high-powered guns, as a start.

 

CHRISPATS

5:18 AM ET

March 21, 2012

operation wide reciever

look it up obama took a really really bad idea and doubled down on it

 

JFAIR

11:53 AM ET

March 21, 2012

It is disingenuous to blame

It is disingenuous to blame Obama for the Drug Cartel violence plaguing Mexico. He is just continuing the same foolish policies Presidents have been following for over 50 years.

 

MONGO46538

2:57 PM ET

March 21, 2012

Election Year ...

Once Obama get's re-elected I have a sneaking suspicion his next socio-bomb will be to decriminalize or legalize Pot and possibly other organic drugs. But in an election year, the ultra right wing fanatics would have a field day...

 

YALL DUMBAZZ IMO

4:04 AM ET

March 24, 2012

Disingenuity

I'm pretty sure it's disingenuous to assert to an imbecilic public that change will be coming to Washington whilst simultaneously accepting the billions from those who throw cash at political races for one reason - and one reason only - you know the reason why the wealthy invest in security. And yet you're confused about the realities of democracy, or you pretend to be. You're an enigma, really; full of contradictions and illusions. Cynical and idealistic, simultaneously. Apathetic and passionate, at the same time. Or near enough to fool anyone watching (though I'm not sure anyone ever is) into thinking you're convincingly bi-polar. But then some creeps who are perfectly vile have made "mood swings" something people are ashamed of. Whereas sociopathic butchering...mauling one's own for profit or political 'expediency'...sacrificing the national interest for the perceived interests of a few multi-national 'entities'?

This is perfectly sane; dignified even. Just ask the creeps who claim they cannot be trusted with protecting you from medicine; they'll tell you. Sorry.

You'll have to die from the poisonous substitutes instead.

I don't know what the caper is of the writer, who suggests that regulation is an "imperfect solution" to a problem he seems confused about, or incapable of clarifying or accurately defining. For all I know, he means well. I don't like being forced to state uncomfortable truths. I especially don't like placing myself in a position of risk for redundancy's sake. And I am not convinced that any of you are even real.

Here is what I think * and some facts **.

**100% of people have ADHD. Or maybe you can concentrate indefinitely?
**The provably-superior medical treatment for ADHD (that is presently available to science) is produced by Ovation Pharmaceuticals (US firm) and regulated by the FDA (*not the creeps some imagine them to be, I suspect). It sells under the brand name Desoxyn. There are some generics available, I think. Oh, you may recognise Desoxyn by it's other name; Methamphetamine.
**Not many criminals in the healthcare industry know about Desoxyn, but some physicians do. Sufferers of extreme and dehabilitating ADHD (the disorder you also have) report the efficacy of the medicine affords them the ability to live functional, productive lives; when they'd lost hope after trying more 'traditional' and 'harder' drugs (like Adderall).
*I don't know much about it, because the evidence keeps getting squashed by that old "national security" card; but trailing back as far as Nixon (i.e. the start of the Drug 'War') there seems to be a long and murky relationship between the CIA and the illicit drug cartels of the world. This is inherently understandable and the way I see it, not remotely controversial. What else did you think "national security" and "secrecy" powers would be used for? You're not living in the Cold War anymore*, what's all this spying stuff about and why the need to hide things from public scrutiny? (*you weren't living in the Cold War during the Cold War either, but that's neither here nor there)
**In 2001, Chapo Guzman 'escaped' from a maximum security prison. How about that! A-mazing 'luck'. In 2011, Chapo Guzman was listed by Forbes as a billionaire. But how did he manage this feat?
**In a nutshell? He tricked the DEA into taking out opposition cartels and giving his Sinaloa cartel a free pass. Newsweek recently ran a story on this peculiar and embarrassing fact, quoting one academic expert describing Guzman's strategy to be "smart, it's very very smart".
*Really? Smart? These things are relative, I guess. I think most 12 year olds would agree with me, that this is not exactly advanced complexity. Therein lies the uncomfortable implication, of course. The question that no one is asking, "How did the DEA get made to look like imbeciles by a Mexican cartel drug lord?"
*I have a theory. Perhaps you have a better one? My theory is that Guzman didn't trick the DEA. I assert that the DEA is not "dumber than a 5th grader". My theory is that Guzman takes orders from above. That's where my theory stops.
*I have a simultaneous, unrelated theory. Commercial enterprises should not be allowed to contribute to political campaigns or democratic bids for electoral office. How can citizens be expected to compete against faceless and shadowing corporate multi-nationals, in a democratic process? The Supreme Court appears to be corrupted. Time to clean house.
**For some of you who are confused by rhetoric and sleazy media Spam; "57% of fighter pilots deployed in Desert Storm used stimulants; of those, 61% reported them [Essential] to mission accomplishment." -- Source: Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center, "Performance Maintenance During Continuous Flight Operations: A Guide For Flight Surgeons," NAVMED P-6410, Jan. 1, 2000, p. 10.

100% of the people in the world have ADHD. And a miracle drug for treating ADHD is banned in every nation on the planet; blockaded at the border? Whilst the killer poisonous substitute can be purchased from criminals on every inner-city street corner in the world.

Only in the US I think, is Methamphetamine still regulated (albeit quietly). Desoxyn does not kill anyone. I don't believe it's even addictive. It's certainly not poison. And it kills no one. Meth kills, they tell you. They're 'confused'. You need to connect the dots on why they Prohibit medicines.

The joke is on you. On us. On humanity (assuming you're even real).

 

FORLORNEHOPE

4:03 AM ET

March 21, 2012

Failed State

What do you call a country whose inability to enforce its own laws on narcotics and firearms on its own territory causes murder and mayhem in its neighbours? Well, normally, you would call it a failed state but perhaps in this case we can just call it the United States. Seriously, if Mexico followed the "drone wars" approach and sent its agents to "take out" street drug dealers and dodgy firearms dealers in the US, who could complain?

 

DIANA RELKE

5:20 AM ET

March 21, 2012

Decriminalize and tax

The US, with 5 percent of the world's population, consumes 50 percent of the world's illicit drugs.

If the US were interested in reducing consumption, it should do something about its surplus people -- young people who are permanently unemployed and turn to drug dealing to make a living. And I'm not talking about throwing them in jail.

The more drug dealers on the streets, the more drug addicts.

 

SEOSEMLT

7:46 AM ET

March 21, 2012

Agree

I totally agree with You. Jobless people just trying to find a money source for living (in most cases), drug dealing is one of them. Less people without job, less drugs sold. Teisininkas

 

HEP CAT64

6:41 AM ET

March 21, 2012

The only real way to improve Government and Law Enforcement

As someone with inside information on Mexican and US counterdrug efforts, I feel that nothing that has been tried for the last few decades can be effective without the following:
-A draconian control by citizens over thier leaders/politicians.
-High pay for the responsibilities of leadership in government and law enforcement
-Zero tolerance for corruptian.

If leaders/politicians and police know that they will be harshly prosecuted for accepting bribes or engaging in other forms of graft. They will not run for office if they are afraid of the consequences.

These consequences should include the death penalty for taking bribes, then allowing homicidal organizations to function freely in the society you represent.

Pay these leaders and law enforcement well, and protect them from those that would harm them, such as foreign influences or fringe political groups, i.e. anarchists or communists, etc.

A cooperative effort by citizenry and government, both of whom want safe streets for the children and elderly to walk upon, can change even hellholes like Ciudad Juarez. This may require difficult decisions and harsh enforcement at first, while you clean the house, but then things get better.

 

JFAIR

11:55 AM ET

March 21, 2012

You make a great point about

You make a great point about corruption but Mexico cannot pay near as well as the Cartels.

 

CEMAB4Y

8:19 AM ET

March 21, 2012

drugs won

The war on drugs is a holy war. There is no chance to win. Drugs already won. We might try a new tactic. Tell people who use drugs to stop using them.

 

FLEM

8:48 AM ET

March 21, 2012

National Destiny has always

National Destiny has always been in our hands. We just need to make the right decisions and act at the right time. While it seems many disagree with me... Only time will tell who is right on this issue. femmes

 

LITTLEMANTATE

10:21 AM ET

March 21, 2012

FP Falsehood & Snark- Mexicans are not dying for US cheap highs

they are dying because of War on Drugs profiteering: government institutions that benefit from the continued failed policies (ATF), and private prisons; congressional cowardice, stupidity, and greed; Democratic and White House sleazy political calculations, and mouth-breathers who insist that drugs remain illegal (but not tobacco, booze, or the plethora of mind-altering, legal drugs beloved of the middle-class) and the demagogues who cater to them. In short, typical DC stuff.

Don't blame the hippies, it ain't their cheap highs killing Mexicans. Blame the ideological and institutional heirs of that bureaucratic weasel Harry Anslinger

 

KORVOSCOP

10:28 AM ET

March 21, 2012

End of daily life war

I totally agree with You. If people just trying to find a money source for living and fashion wholesale (in most cases), drug dealing is one of them. Less people without job, less drugs sold. Teisininkas

 

MBL613

3:37 PM ET

March 21, 2012

Lessons not learned through just looking around

Just look around.

How many people stand on street corners selling illegal booze today?? None. How many people are killed today in the making, transporting, and selling illegal booze? None to very few. How many people are in jail today for these illegal activities? Hardly any. Finally, how much tax money is generated today for local and state governments through the sale of legal booze? Hundreds of millions to a few billion $. Is the current USA in the grip of "demon rum"? No.

All of the above are the essence of rhetorical questions. We all know the answers but forget that the same EXACT response to Prohibition : murder, huge prisoner population increase, MASSIVE illegal cash profits, daily creation of criminal groups to participate in the cash party, righteous political speeches against legalization / decriminalization (pure BS), inflation adjusted billion$$, etc. ad nauseam.

If I were in the dope trade I would certainly give financial support for the War On Drugs because legalization would destroy my very fine cash flow.

 

RANDYLEEPUBLIC

9:01 PM ET

March 21, 2012

Drug War?

Wake up children. The drug war is how the CIA keeps competition down. Any threat to their drug profiteering is dealt with swiftly and brutally. Besides, the prison-industrial complex demands "fresh meat". There will be no changes to our drug war policy until the US government is overthrown.