War on drugs is over. What's next?

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (CNN) -- As the health care debate captivated America, a white flag was quietly raised along the violence-torn U.S.-Mexico border. In case you missed it, it was our nation's surrender in the war on drugs.

Addressing the sixth annual Border Security Conference in El Paso, Texas, on Monday, the director of the U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy, R. Gil Kerlikowske, said this administration's drug strategy will not be a war because a war limits what can be done.

"If the only tool is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail," Kerlikowske said. "That phrase -- war on drugs -- tells you that the only answer is, in fact, force. ... We want to have a different conversation when it comes to drugs."

At the same time, President Obama pledged ongoing cooperation with Mexico on drugs and immigration, but the details were sparse and the timeline shifting and uncertain.

As the war on drugs ends, what's our new strategy?

According to the El Paso Times, "Kerlikowske said his visit to El Paso was part of a national tour to solicit ideas before making recommendations to the president. Once unveiled, Obama's drug strategy will probably include treatment centers, education, drug courts, more cooperation with Mexico and increased law enforcement, Kerlikowske said."
Don't Miss

* White House to combat drug demand with rehab
* Obama talks drugs, trade on Mexico visit
* In Depth: Commentaries

I agree with all of the above, but since Kerlikowske asked, and since both he and the president have been somewhat vague and noncommittal on the topic, I would like to suggest some ideas regarding what "cooperation with Mexico" should look like to ensure our communal success in conquering the drug beast, regardless of the brand name attached to the campaign.

If decreasing demand for drugs is one side of the equation, decreasing the ability and desire to supply those drugs is the other side. As the United States broadens its approach, Mexico must do so as well.

"Cooperation with Mexico" involves convincing our neighbors to change culturally entrenched social hierarchies and dynamics that date to pre-Columbian times.

Unfortunately, it's easier and less disruptive to the existing power structure perpetuated by Mexico's ruling elite to wage a war against the cartels than it is to revolutionize a society that denies the vast majority of its members legitimate opportunities for socioeconomic advancement.

Yes, the war on drugs in Mexico has resulted in over 12,000 dead since 2008 and turned border cities like Juarez into combat zones overrun by army trucks carrying machine gun-toting armored troops.

But most of Mexico's wealthy and powerful families can still find solace in their foreign bank accounts, their well-appointed homes north of the border, their bodyguards and multigenerational business empires.

Perhaps to them, the continuing crackdown on the cartels seems like the most effective way to react to the threats made to legitimate business-owners and affluent families via extortion and kidnapping.

However, the Mexican government, the Mexican ruling class and the United States must also generate legitimate opportunities for Mexican citizens to advance in life, alternatives to achieving financial success without breaking the law.

According to a study by professor Emilio Parrado of the University of Pennsylvania, "Occupational opportunities failed to keep pace with rising human capital in Mexico. ... Instead, entry and mobility into good jobs became more difficult to achieve and downward mobility more prevalent even among highly educated workers."

At the same time, north of the border, politicians have increased pressure to close our borders and squelch illegal immigration since September 11.

Where are hard-working Mexicans with a desire to improve their circumstances supposed to turn? Perhaps both nations should give these folks a little more love and a little less war.

Let's make love, not war, on drugs. Although today's drug lords are beyond reform, this is a long-term endeavor. Our nations should collaborate to ensure that Mexico's youth can find viable, legal alternatives for their own development and advancement, both at home in Mexico and abroad in the United States.

In Mexico, this will involve a cultural shift in which the ruling elite comes to terms with the realization that the nation will never fulfill its potential if broader segments of its population are not empowered to advance socially and economically via legitimate means.

It means accelerated democratization of the educational and economic system and increased opportunities for entrepreneurship, access to capital, sociopolitical progress and upward mobility.

On the United States side, it means further opening trade, stimulating foreign investment in Mexico and reforming immigration to allow for guest workers from Mexico to be legal, productive members of the economy and society.

In the eyes of this border native, that's what "cooperation" should look like. Combined, our countries can channel the energies and talents of future generations away from the destructive and unsustainable allure of drugs and toward the enduring productivity and prosperity of our hemisphere.

I'm not sure yet what we should call that process. All I know is, it takes a little love.

Commentary: War on drugs is over. What's next? - CNN.com


-shake

I lived in Veracruz Mexico for a year, I love Mexico but it has huge problems in many ways the drug problem is one of the least of them. Like you say they have long standing economic and socail inequality built into the system.

It will be odd because those drug dealers have so much money will they now enter the picture, be able to invest in the system, be taxed. I am not sure how this can work, it is such an odd concept to me that the U.S. Would give up on the war on drugs if so it is an amazing step in our own development as a nation. The Rand Corporationâ??s own papers some up the War on drugs "Evidence is typically lost in this debate." That is in their own words. So long we have not listened to the evidence. Several of their papers have said that we have been going about this in the wrong way. Odd seeing how we so often listen to them.

So this is a move in the right direction, but what is our next step? What is Mexico's next step? They have been at war are parties going to talk peace or does this just all fade into the past like this never happened. The Mexican Narco Cartels are into some really messed up stuff one must understand Los Zetaâ??s to understand the depths that they will sink to make money. Does this mean we stop flushing tons of cash down the toilet. And here is an even more odd question what do we do about drug addiction, do we have programs to give drugs to people who are drug sick, or do they still keep getting their product from drugs being pushed up from the border? Many questions but if it does end we have grown a little bit as a nation.

It doesn't sound like the end to me, but more like a change in the title and tactics. They still plan to spend tax dollars on rehab and prevention. It sounds more like a PR move than an actual victory for us. There ultimate goals don't seem to have changed one bit.

There never was a war on drugs.
I know cause a pamphlett from the office of national drug control policy told me so. :yeahright:

Seriously though, since when has america ever needed an actual war to justify violent action at home an abroad?
Remember that vietnam was just a military action. :P

I think that we are witnessing what may be the beginning of the end though.
Public awareness is growing and opinions are changing, were not there yet, but it seems to have started.

every day that teachers in american schools spread outright lies to students about marijuana the war on drugs is still going on

personally i have had to fight for 22 months with an expensive lawyer just to get out of a FELONY for CONSPIRING to sell 7g marijuana! i was never arrested, never busted, never watched. i got a letter in the mail saying i was being charged with the conspiracy to sell a controlled substance and for 22 months i had a felony with 2.5yrs in jail over my head the entire time. i couldnt vote in the last election, i couldnt get ANY jobs, i was looked at as scum for NOTHING. that is a war on drugs

the next war will be a war on freedom, obama has completely changed this country, and by this time next year we will be as good as canada. with 60% income taxes and $12/pack cigarettes. thanks obama!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Esoteric416

I think that we are witnessing what may be the beginning of the end though.

---

just keep on telling yourself that and everything will be all right.:rolleyes:
year after year we've watched the rhetoric change, but little else. the war on drugs becomes a police action on drugs and we all know how little difference there is between the two. government softens its stance only to turn around and declare all out war just a few steps down the road. recently we've gone from "just say no" to "but i didn't inhale" to "i inhaled, but it was the folly of youth and a big mistake". how much difference is there really between those three statements? at least nancy was honest about her intent, unlike the nanny state coddling of brak and his ilk - admitting weed's harmlessness and denying such pleasures to the people all at the same time. the current administration has already shown us how little it values the constitution, so do you really think they have any intention of lifting an unconstitutional prohibition that gives them the control they so crave over their subjects?

We can argue whether the war on drugs is a real war and all that, but I think it's just silly to say it's over regardless of what we call it.

As long as there are Republicans and Democrats in office there will be people who think they know what's best for us and will write laws to make our decisions for us.

Lets just keep it simple.... close the boarders, legalize marijuana with the same laws, rules, regulations, restrictions, and TAXES as alcohol..... institute manditory penalties for manufacture, distribution, sale and possesion of "chemicals"(meth, X, crack, opiates, etc). When arrested for "chemicals" there is no bail, and no release until time is served, *and* fine paid. Time served does not start until found guilty.
1st offense manditory 5 years, and $100,000 fine.
2nd offense manditory 20 years and $500,000 fine.
3rd offense manditory life in prison with no parole.

Sounds harsh..true, but.....
What incentive do dealers have to stop dealing and/or manufacturing, when they get arrested, then they're back on the streets in 24hrs or less, and then the court/trial doesn't come for 6 months to a year??? ...and at that, they get a slap on the wrist, and are turned loose again???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve

Lets just keep it simple.... close the boarders, legalize marijuana with the same laws, rules, regulations, restrictions, and TAXES as alcohol..... institute mandatory penalties for manufacture, distribution, sale and possession of "chemicals"(meth, X, crack, opiates, etc). When arrested for "chemicals" there is no bail, and no release until time is served, *and* fine paid. Time served does not start until found guilty.
1st offense mandatory 5 years, and $100,000 fine.
2nd offense mandatory 20 years and $500,000 fine.
3rd offense mandatory life in prison with no parole.

---

and these harsh penalties for essentially victimless crimes are justifiable because...?

every day thousands (if not millions) of people imbibe in a variety of mind altering chemicals with little or no serious long term effects, but you endorse vilifying them all because of those who are incapable of controlling their own actions? i realize that this is a cannabis site and most of us here understand that weed is a relatively harmless and even beneficial plant that has been demonized by ignorance and avarice, but that is not the foremost reason we should end this nearly unenforceable prohibition. it is a simple matter of self-determination. that any government agency should be able to tell anyone what they can and cannot do to themselves is the epitome of the nanny state mentality and should not be tolerated by anyone who values their individual freedom. mandating harsh fines and imprisonment for pleasurable activities that effect no one but the individual is merely another face of the orwellian nightmare we see ourselves entering into and another step toward the omnipotence of the authoritarian state.

The reason why I made the distinction between marijuana, and "chemicals", is that marijuana is a naturally occuring plant, and for all intent, harmless.

Chemicals, on the other hand are highly addictive, and contrary to popular belief, do have victims... with long term effects, or have you never run across crack, meth, and heroin addicts?? or seen folks OD on crack, meth or heroin??

Have you ever heard of somebody die from weed?? or OD on weed?? or commit crimes to support a weed addiction?? I haven't.

If you really want to take a close look, then look at the death and destruction caused by alcohol.... sure there are untold numbers that just have a drink now and then... social drinkers if you will...

But then you already have your mind made up, and don't have the lifes experiences to draw on. You can believe what you want, but I have seen with my own eyes.

Maybe you should take a step back and take a look at the big picture once in a while. BTW, your nick is very appropriate.

have a nice life.

why do i get the feeling that this thread will be closed at any minute?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mississippi Steve

The reason why I made the distinction between marijuana, and "chemicals", is that marijuana is a naturally occurring plant, and for all intent, harmless.

Chemicals, on the other hand are highly addictive, and contrary to popular belief, do have victims... with long term effects, or have you never run across crack, meth, and heroin addicts?? or seen folks OD on crack, meth or heroin??

Have you ever heard of somebody die from weed?? or OD on weed?? or commit crimes to support a weed addiction?? I haven't.

---

i'm not saying that there are no down sides to chemicals or that weed has only positive effects. there are many naturally occurring substances that are far more deadly than those you named and few of those have been outlawed by the nanny state. we have nearly anthropomorphized these drugs, allowing ourselves to believe that we may become victims of inanimate objects, when we are only victimizing ourselves. we have created an entire culture of victims, blaming a substance or an idea or calling it a disease. it is our own shortcomings that are to blame and it is not government's place to protect the individual from himself.

you aren't the only one who has been affected by addiction, but that is no excuse for government stepping in to baby those who cannot control themselves and penalize the rest of us at the same time. i have known folks that have wasted their lives, living only for another bowl, just as i have met those who have taken pleasure in those deadly chemicals and never crossed the line, never allowed the substance to take control of them. what is a deadly choice to some may be harmless to others and by passing laws based on the worst case scenario we allow an authoritarian society to take shape for the sake of the illusion of safety. self-destruction takes many forms and no amount of legislation can ever dispose of it. such legislation only makes it a bit more difficult and denies the people control over their own fates, handing it over to a self-serving bureaucracy.

I agree. This is the bigger issue. Its none of the governments business what you want to do to your own body. There certainly nothing in the constitution or the bill of rights that gives them this authority.