Nicholas Murphy Blog Post
The article I chose to review is from La Prensa Libre and is called “Ministro dice que se disena estrategia contra el narcotrafico.” The author, Carlos Arazola, outlines how the Guatemalan government will next week be drawing up the constitution of a new body that will tackle drug trafficking in Guatemala. This initiative is to be undertaken with the aid of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, which will provide financial support for the institution and training for its members. The new agency will have powers across all levels of government and will be involved with (and have investigative powers over) the ministries of commerce, property, justice, and defense. This should allow for comprehensive multi-front battle against drug trafficking. Government minister Carlos Menocal hopes this new effort will be a leap forward in Guatemala’s fight against drugs, which has so far been largely one-sided.
According to la Prensa Libre, there are 7 major drug trafficking organizations in Guatemala, all extensions of Colombian and Mexican cartels. The largest of these, las Zetas, holds much of the country under its control, with many officials and law enforcement officers under its sway. One of the problems is that the salaries offered to these individuals pales in comparison to the hefty bribes on offer from the gangs, and of course the threat of violence if co-operation is not forthcoming is another incentive to let the cartels have free-reign. Without a serious effort to combat the scourge Guatemala could end up like Mexico, where wars between rival cartels have produced casualties on a large scale.
Before discussing the prospects for this new organization, I’ll quickly note that Guatemala/U.S. co-operation is nothing new. Michael Massin, in his The New Enemy in Guatemala speaks of a long-term coalition between the two nations that dates back to the 1940s. After the Guatemalan civil war had abated in intensity in the late eighties, the U.S. focused its attention on Guatemalan poppy growers, who at the time made the country the 4th or 5th largest producer of this base ingredient for heroin in the world. It has always been in the interest of the U.S. to fight latin-american drug trafficking; even today more than 4 tonnes of cocaine is shipped through Guatemala every month, much of which makes its way to the Texas.
Reading over some of the comments made by (I can only assume) Guatemalan readers, it seems public optimism for the new agency is seriously lacking. Confidence in the integrity of the individuals that comprise current institutions is nil, consequently the perceived prospects for this one are very low. All the same, I think there is no choice but to try something. And the kind of sweeping powers proposed by the government does indicate to me that this is a new kind of agency. It remains to be seen whether corruption will weaken the institution, but I think that the supervision of the U.S. – which has a real, pressing interest in fighting drug cartels – will offer strong encouragement to keep it ‘clean’. And if the U.S. pumps enough money into the country maybe the power of the cartels will diminish. For the moment all we can do is hope. Guatemala simply cannot afford the kind of havoc being wrought in Mexico by drug wars; its stage of development is too fragile, growth too unsure. So the institution has a big job ahead of it, maybe it will surprise Guatemalan citizens with its efficiency.
I think it's a positive sign that this initiative seems to be focused on looking at the incentives that have corrupted political officials and law enforcement in Guatemala. This sounds more convincing than establishing quota numbers of people to be arrested or drugs to be seized, a method I have read about in the context of the war on drugs in Mexico. It also seems positive that the USA is looking to support the development of domestic capacity in dealing with the issue instead of placing US police or military forces in Guatemala. Hopefully this initiative will strengthen citizen confidence in their own government/ law enforcement by decreasing corruption and improving the public opinion about the abilities and accountability. It will be challenging to move away from something that provides so much funding for gangs if, as we have learned,gangs are quite prominent and presumably provide employment,social networks etc for a significant amount of the population. I have one clarification question though: In the quote saying that the war on drugs has been one sided, do you think it means that it's been ineffective? or that only the government has been participating?
ReplyDelete