Group items tagged

Two south Texas city council persons wrote a book last year on the effect of the illegal drug trade out of Mexico and the effectiveness of US policy responses. Their conclusion: Legalization of marijuana the "least bad" option at this point, as the only way to effectively battle the criminal cartels that export drugs is economically. Here I think is an example of ways in which international black and grey markets, in this case the illegal drug trade, can affect policy.

Unfortunately, we won't know if legalization of a drug will have a net positive impact on society until we try it. Although history does provide some analogies that could help policy makers make a decision, such as prohibition.

Many Latin American countries seem to be considering drug legalization to be the "least bad" and necessary solution to the heinous drug trafficking problems present Mexico, Columbia, Bolivia and Peru for example. I believe legalization efforts are a step in the right direction. Sadly, wealthy countries such as the United States and Western Europe drive the demand for drugs from Latin America, but we do not suffer the consequences of trafficking or the war on drugs. Instead, people who have nothing, poor coca growers and drug mules who have no other options, are punished most harshly for rich people's cocaine. This is clearly unjust. Although legalization would be a complicated and messy process, I hope that in the future Latin American countries as well as the United States will come together and legalize drugs so that fewer people will suffer in the illegal trafficking process.

Of particular interest in this article is the methodology utilized to combat the increasing threat of Mexican drug cartels. Operation Fast and Furious underlines the fact that at the core, Americans are being forced to consider with more and more gravity the problem of Mexican drug cartels. The fact that "hundreds of weapons" were able to be lost, and subsequently passed into cartel hands, just goes to show the desperation of the United States government in concern to this real and visceral threat on our southern border. Furthermore, the article shows the problem in using weapons and ammunition to further a purpose. We saw the misguided delivery of weapons backfire on us during the Soviet-Afghan conflict, so it leaves one wondering when we'll figure out that this may not be the best way to engage in foreign policy.

To what extent do you think this is a domestic policy issue for the US as well as a foreign policy issue? Certainly the Central and South American countries rightly point out that if demand for drugs wasn't so fierce in the US the drug trade would be greatly diminished. Not to mention that drug crimes are one of the reasons that we have so many people in prison, along with the enormous costs (in money and lives) that are consumed in keeping the prison system going. Is this a topic where social scientists should be able to help out? To what extend does what we know from social science and medical science inform our laws? Even if we couldn't work out completely the demand issue on our end, is it possible if we made a significant dent in it, that it would make enough of a difference that progress could be made at the production end in disrupting that node? It seems to me we don't hear much from scientists in regard to this issue -- why not?

This article lays out the reasons why Uruguay's government is considering legalization of marijuana. It has already been decriminalized and full legalization would allow the government to benefit economically from production. The profits could stimulate the economy and even be used to treat drug addicts and go towards drug education. Also, legalization would take power away from deadly cartels.

This article was very interesting. To me, it seems that Uruguay has been searching for a way to combat what the war on drugs has done to the cartels. This is vastly different to the approach the United States is taking in regards to marijuana. I wonder if we will see any of the affects here, in addition to how the U.S. government views government controlled marijuana. I feel that ong term, the different drug strategies could potentially change the U.S.'s current stance on drug policies if they prove their effectivness.

wow, great discussion! I've been working my way down from the top adding some comments and was wondering about decriminalization up above! This reminded me that there's a ballot initiative in Washington state this election year that could pass re legalization of marijuana, which would put the states vs the feds in an interesting position if so. I was looking for some info, and found this background on a site called ballotpedia -- which I didn't know existed and am definitely going to be using in the future! http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Washington_Marijuana_Legalization_and_Regulation,_Initiative_502_(2012)

Another article on the war on drugs. This article explains that the Guatemalan president suggested drug decriminalization in front of the UN General assembly, and said that it should coincide with increasing military pressure on drug violence. Legal drug use would be state controlled, much like the use of tobacco and alcohol in the United States.

It certainly seems like decriminalization would take the money and violence out of the equation (or at least, a great deal of it). Certainly, Prohibition in the US re alcohol was a big mistake in regard to criminal activity, and even with the problems alcohol currently causes, there are still forms of control (laws, public attitudes, health advisories)...Would it help if we put more effort into scientific studies on addiction? Do we know enough in that regard to circulate public information that would be relevant? Why don't we have conferences about this topic where the issues are debated? I'd like to see something like that at OU, with input from the law school, and the sociologists, psychologists, law enforcement, Latin Americanists, etc. etc. It could be very enlightening. Too dangerous a topic, though? But we should be able to talk about anything at an education of higher learning...

Here's another article regarding current drug policy in Latin America. In this article the author explains why this joint declaration (no pun intended) is particularly unique since it triggers an actual evaluative process within the UN.

In reading this article, it is clearly stated that the U.S.'s war on drugs was of little benefit to the whole of Latin America. It seems that the joint declaration is a last effort to relieve some of the violence and upset occuring from drug wars. Interestingly, I feel this evaluative process could be what is necessary to relieve some of the surrounding tensions. The U.S. and Latin American need to find a common goal from which to work, in order to improve the struggles are ongoing.

This article is fascinating. It discusses the drug violence in Brazil, and what could be done to combat it. The police are working to recover slums in order to prepare for the 2016 Olympics and the World Cup. Here, it is questioned what will happen to the drug stricken areas.

It's interesting to think that drug violence or youth culture could be impacted in such a way. However, I wonder if this is a phenomena unique to Brazil, or if it could be applicable to countries like the United States.

This article discusses the implications of the US giving surveillance aid to Latin American countries. US officials have in recent years aided Latin American governments with surveillance equipment in order to bolster their reach in their own territories. The primary thought has been that this will help the governments with anti-drug traffickin operations, however, recent evidence has emerged that these technologies have been repurposed to silence judges and opposition voices. This goes to illustrate the danger in providing potentially corrupt governments with US aid, that is, the danger of misappropriation (this true for any form of aid). As such, as the United States becomes more and more comfortable with the idea of Latin America as a global player in the tech market, we must still utilize caution in regards to where and how we provide aid to bolster these governments and markets.

This is a good article examining Latin America and its place within the foreign policy of the United States. Specifically it questions the reasons why Latin America did not come up in the final presidential debate on foreign policy.

This is a really good article. The United States often just doesn't seem to take Latin America seriously, and we have a somewhat tainted history of involvement in that area. This needs to change.

It's not an article, but I found it funny, and it pertains to Latin America.

Can't solve supply and demand problems without looking at the demand side, right? Seriously, though, the illegal drug trade is a good area for thinking about science and politics -- when we think about science and politics we tend to think of the hard sciences, but where the social sciences and medical sciences fit in terms of these human behavior issues is critical. To what extent are those in the behavioral sciences taken seriously by policymakers? When we think of legalization or decriminalization of drugs, are there interesting comparative medical and/or social scientific studies about the aftermath? Would that be useful info to know for the public, or are these matters only for experts? This would relate to the Ecuador article below as well--

Mexico's president-elect Enrique Pena Nieto has asked the United States to extend the focus of the United State's relationship with Mexico beyond the war on drugs and illegal immigration. He asks that the two countries bolster economic ties and investments in energy. In general, the United States seems to portray a very negative image of Mexico that focuses solely on violence rather than emphasizing the ways in which the countries could develop together.

I felt that this article was interesting leading up to the election. It explains the varying differences between Romney and Obama's policy regarding Latin America. Romey's policy plan that he has adopted seems to be very agressive and confrontational regarding Latin America. Reading this article made me heavily question Romney's plans. I do not always feel agression grants the best results. After the ongoing violence that has risen from the insuing war on drugs, this approach seems harsh. Although it does point out Obama's hands off approach (for lack of a better term), the article does outline Romey's opinions and strategies.

I'd sure like to hear more about other parts of the world in terms of the issues in the presidential and senatorial/congressional elections. I know that the Middle East is incredibly important, but in this increasingly interconnected global world other regions are vital as well, given the global scope of issues such as climate change and the global ocean, not to mention the issue of adjusting to working together across cultures as a general issue. But I'm always surprised that we don't think more "hemispherically" when we think about international relations in terms of public debates. Perhaps as the percentage of US citizens with Hispanic ancestry increases this might change? Perhaps it is related as well to the fact that Americans don't put as much effort into learning foreign languages as other countries do...perhaps if more of us were fluent in Spanish there might be more awareness of what is going on elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere? Maybe more foreign exchange programs as well as a consequence would help?