Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Cartagena Beyond the Secret Service Scandal (Chomsky)
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Dan Clore
May 2, 2012, 2:47:56 PM5/2/12
to
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
http://inthesetimes.com/article/13136/cartagena_beyond_the_secret_service_scandal/
May 2, 2012
Cartagena Beyond the Secret Service Scandal
The United States is isolated from Latin American leaders calling for
drug reform.
BY Noam Chomsky
When policies are pursued for many years with unremitting dedication
though they are known to fail, questions naturally arise about motives.
Though sidelined by the Secret Service scandal, last month’s Summit of
the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, was an event of considerable
significance. There are three major reasons: Cuba, the drug war and the
isolation of the United States.
A headline in the Jamaica Observer read, “Summit shows how much Yanqui
influence had waned.” The story reports that “the big items on the
agenda were the lucrative and destructive drug trade and how the
countries of the entire region could meet while excluding one country–Cuba.”
The meetings ended with no agreement because of U.S. opposition on those
items–a drug-decriminalization policy and the Cuba ban. Continued U.S.
obstructionism may well lead to the displacement of the Organization of
American States by the newly-formed Community of Latin American and
Caribbean States, from which the United States and Canada are excluded.
Cuba had agreed not to attend the summit because otherwise Washington
would have boycotted it. But the meetings made clear that U.S.
intransigence would not be long tolerated. The U.S. and Canada were
alone in barring Cuban participation, on grounds of Cuba’s violations of
democratic principles and human rights.
Latin Americans can evaluate these charges from ample experience. They
are familiar with the U.S. record on human rights. Cuba especially has
suffered from U.S. terrorist attacks and economic strangulation as
punishment for its independence – its “successful defiance” of U.S.
policies tracing back to the Monroe Doctrine.
Latin Americans don’t have to read U.S. scholarship to recognize that
Washington supports democracy if, and only if, it conforms to strategic
and economic objectives, and even when it does, favors “limited,
top-down forms of democratic change that did not risk upsetting the
traditional structures of power with which the United States has long
been allied–[in] quite undemocratic societies,” as neo-Reaganite scholar
Thomas Carothers points out.
At the Cartagena summit, the drug war became a key issue at the
initiative of newly-elected Guatemalan President Gen. Perez Molina, whom
no one would mistake for a soft-hearted liberal. He was joined by the
summit host, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, and by others.
The concern is nothing new. Three years ago the Latin American
Commission on Drugs and Democracy published a report on the drug war by
ex-Presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso of Brazil, Ernesto Zedillo of
Mexico, and Cesar Gaviria of Colombia calling for decriminalizing
marijuana and treating drug use as a public-health problem.
Much research, including a widely quoted Rand Corporation study of 1994,
has shown that prevention and treatment are considerably more
cost-effective than the coercive measures that receive the bulk of
funding. Such nonpunitive measures are also of course far more humane.
Experience conforms to these conclusions. By far the most lethal
substance is tobacco, which also kills nonusers at a high rate (passive
smoking). Usage has sharply declined among more educated sectors, not by
criminalization but as a result of lifestyle changes.
One country, Portugal, decriminalized all drugs in 2001–meaning that
they remain technically illegal but are considered administrative
violations, removed from the criminal domain. A Cato Institute study by
Glenn Greenwald found the results to be “a resounding success. Within
this success lie self-evident lessons that should guide drug policy
debates around the world.”
In dramatic contrast, the coercive procedures of the 40-year U.S. drug
war have had virtually no effect on use or price of drugs in the United
States, while creating havoc through the continent. The problem is
primarily in the United States: both demand (for drugs) and supply (of
arms). Latin Americans are the immediate victims, suffering appalling
levels of violence and corruption, with addiction spreading through the
transit routes.
When policies are pursued for many years with unremitting dedication
though they are known to fail in terms of proclaimed objectives, and
alternatives that are likely to be far more effective are systematically
ignored, questions naturally arise about motives. One rational procedure
is to explore predictable consequences. These have never been obscure.
In Colombia, the drug war has been a thin cover for counterinsurgency.
Fumigation–a form of chemical warfare–has destroyed crops and rich
biodiversity, and contributes to driving millions of poor peasants into
urban slums, opening vast territories for mining, agribusiness, ranches
and other benefits to the powerful.
Other drug-war beneficiaries are banks laundering massive amounts of
money. In Mexico, the major drug cartels are involved in 80 percent of
the productive sectors of the economy, according to academic
researchers. Similar developments are occurring elsewhere.
In the U.S., the primary victims have been African-American males,
increasingly also women and Hispanics–in short, those rendered
superfluous by the economic changes instituted in the 1970s, shifting
the economy toward financialization and offshoring of production.
Thanks largely to the highly selective drug war, minorities are
dispatched to prison – the major factor in the radical rise of
incarceration since the 1980s that has become an international scandal.
The process resembles “social cleansing” in U.S. client states in Latin
America, which gets rid of “undesirables.”
The isolation of the U.S. at Cartagena carries forward other
turning-point developments of the past decade, as Latin America has at
last begun to extricate itself from the control of the great powers, and
even to address its shocking internal problems.
Latin America has long had a tradition of liberal jurisprudence and
rebellion against imposed authority. The New Deal drew from that
tradition. Latin Americans may yet again inspire progress in human
rights in the United States.
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor & Professor of Linguistics
(Emeritus) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the author
of dozens of books on U.S. foreign policy. He writes a monthly column
for The New York Times News Service/Syndicate.
--
Dan Clore
New book: _Weird Words: A Lovecraftian Lexicon_:
http://tinyurl.com/yd3bxkw
My collected fiction: _The Unspeakable and Others_
http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-unspeakable-and-others/6124911
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
All laws are good, to those who draw a salary for
their enforcement.
-- Clark Ashton Smith
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
http://inthesetimes.com/article/13136/cartagena_beyond_the_secret_service_scandal/
May 2, 2012
Cartagena Beyond the Secret Service Scandal
The United States is isolated from Latin American leaders calling for
drug reform.
BY Noam Chomsky
When policies are pursued for many years with unremitting dedication
though they are known to fail, questions naturally arise about motives.
Though sidelined by the Secret Service scandal, last month’s Summit of
the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, was an event of considerable
significance. There are three major reasons: Cuba, the drug war and the
isolation of the United States.
A headline in the Jamaica Observer read, “Summit shows how much Yanqui
influence had waned.” The story reports that “the big items on the
agenda were the lucrative and destructive drug trade and how the
countries of the entire region could meet while excluding one country–Cuba.”
The meetings ended with no agreement because of U.S. opposition on those
items–a drug-decriminalization policy and the Cuba ban. Continued U.S.
obstructionism may well lead to the displacement of the Organization of
American States by the newly-formed Community of Latin American and
Caribbean States, from which the United States and Canada are excluded.
Cuba had agreed not to attend the summit because otherwise Washington
would have boycotted it. But the meetings made clear that U.S.
intransigence would not be long tolerated. The U.S. and Canada were
alone in barring Cuban participation, on grounds of Cuba’s violations of
democratic principles and human rights.
Latin Americans can evaluate these charges from ample experience. They
are familiar with the U.S. record on human rights. Cuba especially has
suffered from U.S. terrorist attacks and economic strangulation as
punishment for its independence – its “successful defiance” of U.S.
policies tracing back to the Monroe Doctrine.
Latin Americans don’t have to read U.S. scholarship to recognize that
Washington supports democracy if, and only if, it conforms to strategic
and economic objectives, and even when it does, favors “limited,
top-down forms of democratic change that did not risk upsetting the
traditional structures of power with which the United States has long
been allied–[in] quite undemocratic societies,” as neo-Reaganite scholar
Thomas Carothers points out.
At the Cartagena summit, the drug war became a key issue at the
initiative of newly-elected Guatemalan President Gen. Perez Molina, whom
no one would mistake for a soft-hearted liberal. He was joined by the
summit host, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, and by others.
The concern is nothing new. Three years ago the Latin American
Commission on Drugs and Democracy published a report on the drug war by
ex-Presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso of Brazil, Ernesto Zedillo of
Mexico, and Cesar Gaviria of Colombia calling for decriminalizing
marijuana and treating drug use as a public-health problem.
Much research, including a widely quoted Rand Corporation study of 1994,
has shown that prevention and treatment are considerably more
cost-effective than the coercive measures that receive the bulk of
funding. Such nonpunitive measures are also of course far more humane.
Experience conforms to these conclusions. By far the most lethal
substance is tobacco, which also kills nonusers at a high rate (passive
smoking). Usage has sharply declined among more educated sectors, not by
criminalization but as a result of lifestyle changes.
One country, Portugal, decriminalized all drugs in 2001–meaning that
they remain technically illegal but are considered administrative
violations, removed from the criminal domain. A Cato Institute study by
Glenn Greenwald found the results to be “a resounding success. Within
this success lie self-evident lessons that should guide drug policy
debates around the world.”
In dramatic contrast, the coercive procedures of the 40-year U.S. drug
war have had virtually no effect on use or price of drugs in the United
States, while creating havoc through the continent. The problem is
primarily in the United States: both demand (for drugs) and supply (of
arms). Latin Americans are the immediate victims, suffering appalling
levels of violence and corruption, with addiction spreading through the
transit routes.
When policies are pursued for many years with unremitting dedication
though they are known to fail in terms of proclaimed objectives, and
alternatives that are likely to be far more effective are systematically
ignored, questions naturally arise about motives. One rational procedure
is to explore predictable consequences. These have never been obscure.
In Colombia, the drug war has been a thin cover for counterinsurgency.
Fumigation–a form of chemical warfare–has destroyed crops and rich
biodiversity, and contributes to driving millions of poor peasants into
urban slums, opening vast territories for mining, agribusiness, ranches
and other benefits to the powerful.
Other drug-war beneficiaries are banks laundering massive amounts of
money. In Mexico, the major drug cartels are involved in 80 percent of
the productive sectors of the economy, according to academic
researchers. Similar developments are occurring elsewhere.
In the U.S., the primary victims have been African-American males,
increasingly also women and Hispanics–in short, those rendered
superfluous by the economic changes instituted in the 1970s, shifting
the economy toward financialization and offshoring of production.
Thanks largely to the highly selective drug war, minorities are
dispatched to prison – the major factor in the radical rise of
incarceration since the 1980s that has become an international scandal.
The process resembles “social cleansing” in U.S. client states in Latin
America, which gets rid of “undesirables.”
The isolation of the U.S. at Cartagena carries forward other
turning-point developments of the past decade, as Latin America has at
last begun to extricate itself from the control of the great powers, and
even to address its shocking internal problems.
Latin America has long had a tradition of liberal jurisprudence and
rebellion against imposed authority. The New Deal drew from that
tradition. Latin Americans may yet again inspire progress in human
rights in the United States.
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
Noam Chomsky is Institute Professor & Professor of Linguistics
(Emeritus) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the author
of dozens of books on U.S. foreign policy. He writes a monthly column
for The New York Times News Service/Syndicate.
--
Dan Clore
New book: _Weird Words: A Lovecraftian Lexicon_:
http://tinyurl.com/yd3bxkw
My collected fiction: _The Unspeakable and Others_
http://www.lulu.com/product/paperback/the-unspeakable-and-others/6124911
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://tinyurl.com/292yz9
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
All laws are good, to those who draw a salary for
their enforcement.
-- Clark Ashton Smith
0 new messages