Suchergebnisse

This special report on the US-inspired "War on Drugs" in Mexico shows the inadequacy of a strategy modeled on the experience of the Andean countries. The author argues that the Mexican situation is signed by a series of particularities that does not fit the Andean model, in particular the fact that the US and Mexico share an extensive border, which possess the risk of a spillover of the drug-generated violence into the US territory. She arguments that the exam of the Iniciativa Mérida provides a series of lessons that may help to redesign the international efforts against drug trafficking. ; Este artículo presenta la situación actual del narcotráfico en México y lo que ha sido la lucha antidrogas adelantada en coordinación con Estados Unidos, así como el papel de los militares mexicanos en la misma. Este trabajo es parte de un proyecto de investigación que desarrollé hace algunos meses, y cuya hipótesis central hacía referencia a la necesaria diferenciación que tendría que existir entre la política antidrogas desarrollada por Estados Unidos en México y la adelantada en otros países –los Andes–, diferenciación que surgiría a partir de la cercanía territorial entre México y Estados Unidos y el consecuente riesgo de desbordamiento de la violencia de Sur a Norte.

After more than six decades since the beginning of the wrongly denominated «war on drugs» against the widespread consumption of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, United Nations Drug Conventions persevere –and this despite their proven ineffectiveness of persecution against a diffused enemy and severe conflicts of interests among the signatory states. A reading of the 1961 Convention (SC ) and the consequent legislation shows that limits of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) itself have been clearly exceeded. Proof of this is the criminalization, and consequent discrimination per se, of small producers and traditional or voluntary consumers of some of the substances prohibited in the Drug Conventions– being as a result de iure direct victims of «hate crimes». A direct result of this international discrimination are the exorbitant sums surrounding the world of drug trafficking, sheltered under the well-known bank secrecy in tax havens, which year after year collaborate in the maintenance and reinforcement of organized crime. All this without forgetting the so-called animus negocialis of the pharmaceutical industry, monopolized by international restriction of production and of voluntary or traditional consumption. With this study, we try to expose how the international communities have fixed some excessive goals, without taking into account the resulting collateral damage and without guaranteeing the respect of their own jus naturale, which can lead to numerous possible interpretations in the different legislations –like in Indochina, where prevention and rehabilitation centers are often understood as livelong imprisonment. ; Tras más de seis décadas del inicio de la mal denominada «war on drugs», las Convenciones Antidrogas (CA) perseveran en la línea trazada pese a su constatada ineficacia y conflictos entre los diferentes Estados signatarios. De la lectura de la Convención Única de 1961 (CU) y de las consecuentes legislaciones internas, comprobaremos que taxativamente se han sobrepasado los límites de la propia Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos (DUDH), mediante la criminalización y consecuente discriminación per se, hacia los pequeños productores y consumidores tradicionales o voluntarios, resultando así estos, de iure, víctimas directas de «delitos de odio». Consecuencia directa de esta discriminación internacional, son las conocidas desorbitadas cifras económicas que rodean el mundo del narcotráfico, refugiadas bajo el conocido secreto bancario que año tras año, colaboran al sostenimiento y fortalecimiento del crimen organizado. Sin obviar el denotado animus negocialis de la industria farmacéutica, monopolizada de lex lata, mediante la restricción internacional a la producción y consumo voluntarios o tradicionales, trataremos de exponer, como la comunidad internacional fijó unos objetivos de imposible cumplimiento, sin respetar su propio ius naturale, dando lugar a disparidad de interpretaciones y contundentes legislaciones, como las de la región Indochina, en las que las medidas de prevención y rehabilitación se confunden con la prisión permanente. After more than six decades since the beginning of the wrongly denominated «war on drugs» against the widespread consumption of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, United Nations Drug Conventions persevere –and this despite their proven ineffectiveness of persecution against a diffused enemy and severe conflicts of interests among the signatory states. A reading of the 1961 Convention (SC ) and the consequent legislation shows that limits of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) itself have been clearly exceeded. Proof of this is the criminalization, and consequent discrimination per se, of small producers and traditional or voluntary consumers of some of the substances prohibited in the Drug Conventions– being as a result de iure direct victims of «hate crimes». A direct result of this international discrimination are the exorbitant sums surrounding the world of drug trafficking, sheltered under the well-known bank secrecy in tax havens, which year after year collaborate in the maintenance and reinforcement of organized crime. All this without forgetting the so-called animus negocialis of the pharmaceutical industry, monopolized by international restriction of production and of voluntary or traditional consumption. With this study, we try to expose how the international communities have fixed some excessive goals, without taking into account the resulting collateral damage and without guaranteeing the respect of their own jus naturale, which can lead to numerous possible interpretations in the different legislations –like in Indochina, where prevention and rehabilitation centers are often understood as livelong imprisonment.

In the United States and Latin America, a series of changes and debates on drug policy are taking place, calling into question the approaches that have dominated this area characterised by prohibitionism and criminalisation of consumption and concentrating on the reduction of supply and the militarisation of the means used to combat it. In this context, we briefly review some instances of this recent defeat, taking into account US domestic policy and Latin American demands for change in the context of inter-American ties. Department of North America. Institute for International Relations ; En Estados Unidos y América Latina están teniendo lugar una serie de cambios y debates relativos a la política de drogas que ponen en cuestión aquellos enfoques que han dominado esta área caracterizados por el prohibicionismo y criminalización del consumo y concentrados en la reducción de la oferta y la militarización de los medios utilizados en su lucha. En este marco, repasamos de forma breve algunas instancias de este reciente derrotero tomando con referencia la política doméstica norteamericana y las demandas latinoamericanas de cambio en el contexto de los vínculos interamericanos. Departamento de América del Norte. Instituto de Relaciones Internacionales

National drug control policies and strategies are heavily dependent on the international legal framework. International standards set by United Nations drug control conventions serve as basic principles for the development and shape of national drug control systems. International drug control system has its own, a very specific history and dynamics of development in which the United States definitely did play a very important role promoting prohibitionist approach based on the abstinence paradigm. According to this paradigm drug use is acceptable only for scientific and medical purposes. Unsurprisingly, recreational or experimental use of drugs is considered as unacceptable and inevitably leading to addiction. This hard-line approach dominated in public discourse during the 20th century and the drug use was seen either as a sin or as a disease. However, it seems that from the beginning of the 21th century, international drug control regime, ideologically based on the abstinence paradigm, is facing big challenges and it is not entirely clear what to expect in the future. Ironically, the United States is the most important player again, but this time in quite the opposite role. Moralising teetotaller Dr. Jeckyll suddenly turned in a pothead Mr. Hyde. So-called "cannabis capitalism" process in several states of USA, when the sale of recreational cannabis was fully legalised, raised serious questions about the perspectives of international drug control system, because such practice is obviously in breach of the international law. Also it is important to note other signs of moving towards the drug policy with a human face, especially raising the popularity of the harm reduction approach to the drug problem and process of "soft deception' related to that. The latter means that some countries are choosing more tolerant approach theoretically not infringing legal boundaries set by the conventions. Considering the context provided above, the main purpose of this study was to make the analysis of the peculiarities of global drug control system and their interrelation with the national drug control policy in the light of personal drug use. In order to fulfil this goal historical analysis of the development of United Nations global drug control system was made, peculiarities and characteristic features of the legal framework of this system as well as legal boundaries set for countries by the conventions were analysed. Particular attention was paid to the international legal framework regarding personal drug use, different national practises in this perspective as well as possible directions of the future development of global drug control system were discussed. Finally, Lithuanian drug control policy in the context of United Nations drug control regime was discussed. Main research methods were: logical-linguistic, systemic, comparative as well as analysis of documents and secondary data. Moreover, relevant scientific literature, national and international legal acts in the area of drug control were studied. The drug control and drug policy primarily were explored from criminological and sociology of law perspectives. In author's point of view these interdisciplinary social sciences enable to achieve deeper understanding of drug control phenomenon than it is possible to attain using only narrow legalistic analysis of laws and legal norms. According to the findings of the study the drug control policy (national, regional or global) is a complex phenomenon influenced by many cultural, social and other factors as well as different interest groups (physicians, law enforcement agencies, etc.) operating in the drug control field. It is important to stress, that usually legal control has a very limited (if has at all) influence to the prevalence of illicit drug use, which is mostly determined by the culture, social policy and social context. On the other hand, the drug control remedies are significant when dealing with the high-risk/problem drug use. The United Nations conventions set legal boundaries to the countries, but there is a certain room of interpretation. United Nations institutions (especially International Drug Control Board) support the narrow interpretation of the treaties and usually criticise countries (as sending "wrong signals") that are leaning towards less strict drug policies. Accordingly, various harm reduction practises are on the edge of violation of international law but this is a matter of interpretation. The United Nations conventions and European Union documents make a clear distinction between drug dealing and activities attributed to personal use. The drug dealing is always a matter of criminal law; accordingly criminal sanctions should be strict enough. As regards to the personal drug use countries have more flexibility and other measures (administrative sanctions, medical treatment, etc.) could be applied. On the other hand, legal market of substances controlled by the Schedule IV (e.g. cannabis) could not be created at the same time not infringing international law. In the 21th century a gradual weakening of international drug control regime could be observed. The main feature of this phenomenon is a soft deception, which is related to the increasing popularity of the harm reduction doctrine. It goes hand in hand with the decriminalisation and/or the depenalisation of activities related to personal drug use shifting from punitive approach to the more health oriented. The main challenge to the existing global drug control system is de jure legalisation of cannabis in several USA states. It is related to the process of cannabis use "normalisation"; then such practice is not regarded as a pathological behaviour anymore. It is important to stress that this approach contradicts the abstinence paradigm, which is an ideological core of the United Nations conventions. It creates a high tension and the future of international drug control system in existing framework becomes uncertain. In order to maintain the stability of the system in particular and the trust in international law in general, the revision of UN drug control conventions seems to be inevitable. Lithuanian drug control policy is oriented to the strict control measures and prevention. As regards to the personal drug use till 2017 the drug gaining and possession were partially decriminalised because such activities were subject of either criminal or administrative liability. From 2017 onwards such activities are subject of criminal law only without any explanation of this change of law. Therefore, the Lithuanian drug control policy is moving to the opposite direction than in the Western world, i.e. to more strict measures regarding personal use of drugs. In this context, it is important to stress, that criminal law is considered as ultima ratio measure which has multiple side effects, thus criminalisation of certain activity or introduction of criminal sanctions must be strongly grounded. Preferably, not only by arguments, but also by hard empirical data supporting those arguments. It could be concluded, that decriminalisation in the sphere of personal drug use has legal and pragmatic assumptions. Such policy does not violate legal boundaries set by the United Nations conventions and reflects the newest tendencies of how modern drug control policy should look like. Last but not least, it is important to stress, that effective drug control policy should be evidence based. That means that drug policy changes should be supported by science innovations, empirical data, cost-benefit analysis, etc.

National drug control policies and strategies are heavily dependent on the international legal framework. International standards set by United Nations drug control conventions serve as basic principles for the development and shape of national drug control systems. International drug control system has its own, a very specific history and dynamics of development in which the United States definitely did play a very important role promoting prohibitionist approach based on the abstinence paradigm. According to this paradigm drug use is acceptable only for scientific and medical purposes. Unsurprisingly, recreational or experimental use of drugs is considered as unacceptable and inevitably leading to addiction. This hard-line approach dominated in public discourse during the 20th century and the drug use was seen either as a sin or as a disease. However, it seems that from the beginning of the 21th century, international drug control regime, ideologically based on the abstinence paradigm, is facing big challenges and it is not entirely clear what to expect in the future. Ironically, the United States is the most important player again, but this time in quite the opposite role. Moralising teetotaller Dr. Jeckyll suddenly turned in a pothead Mr. Hyde. So-called "cannabis capitalism" process in several states of USA, when the sale of recreational cannabis was fully legalised, raised serious questions about the perspectives of international drug control system, because such practice is obviously in breach of the international law. Also it is important to note other signs of moving towards the drug policy with a human face, especially raising the popularity of the harm reduction approach to the drug problem and process of "soft deception' related to that. The latter means that some countries are choosing more tolerant approach theoretically not infringing legal boundaries set by the conventions. Considering the context provided above, the main purpose of this study was to make the analysis of the peculiarities of global drug control system and their interrelation with the national drug control policy in the light of personal drug use. In order to fulfil this goal historical analysis of the development of United Nations global drug control system was made, peculiarities and characteristic features of the legal framework of this system as well as legal boundaries set for countries by the conventions were analysed. Particular attention was paid to the international legal framework regarding personal drug use, different national practises in this perspective as well as possible directions of the future development of global drug control system were discussed. Finally, Lithuanian drug control policy in the context of United Nations drug control regime was discussed. Main research methods were: logical-linguistic, systemic, comparative as well as analysis of documents and secondary data. Moreover, relevant scientific literature, national and international legal acts in the area of drug control were studied. The drug control and drug policy primarily were explored from criminological and sociology of law perspectives. In author's point of view these interdisciplinary social sciences enable to achieve deeper understanding of drug control phenomenon than it is possible to attain using only narrow legalistic analysis of laws and legal norms. According to the findings of the study the drug control policy (national, regional or global) is a complex phenomenon influenced by many cultural, social and other factors as well as different interest groups (physicians, law enforcement agencies, etc.) operating in the drug control field. It is important to stress, that usually legal control has a very limited (if has at all) influence to the prevalence of illicit drug use, which is mostly determined by the culture, social policy and social context. On the other hand, the drug control remedies are significant when dealing with the high-risk/problem drug use. The United Nations conventions set legal boundaries to the countries, but there is a certain room of interpretation. United Nations institutions (especially International Drug Control Board) support the narrow interpretation of the treaties and usually criticise countries (as sending "wrong signals") that are leaning towards less strict drug policies. Accordingly, various harm reduction practises are on the edge of violation of international law but this is a matter of interpretation. The United Nations conventions and European Union documents make a clear distinction between drug dealing and activities attributed to personal use. The drug dealing is always a matter of criminal law; accordingly criminal sanctions should be strict enough. As regards to the personal drug use countries have more flexibility and other measures (administrative sanctions, medical treatment, etc.) could be applied. On the other hand, legal market of substances controlled by the Schedule IV (e.g. cannabis) could not be created at the same time not infringing international law. In the 21th century a gradual weakening of international drug control regime could be observed. The main feature of this phenomenon is a soft deception, which is related to the increasing popularity of the harm reduction doctrine. It goes hand in hand with the decriminalisation and/or the depenalisation of activities related to personal drug use shifting from punitive approach to the more health oriented. The main challenge to the existing global drug control system is de jure legalisation of cannabis in several USA states. It is related to the process of cannabis use "normalisation"; then such practice is not regarded as a pathological behaviour anymore. It is important to stress that this approach contradicts the abstinence paradigm, which is an ideological core of the United Nations conventions. It creates a high tension and the future of international drug control system in existing framework becomes uncertain. In order to maintain the stability of the system in particular and the trust in international law in general, the revision of UN drug control conventions seems to be inevitable. Lithuanian drug control policy is oriented to the strict control measures and prevention. As regards to the personal drug use till 2017 the drug gaining and possession were partially decriminalised because such activities were subject of either criminal or administrative liability. From 2017 onwards such activities are subject of criminal law only without any explanation of this change of law. Therefore, the Lithuanian drug control policy is moving to the opposite direction than in the Western world, i.e. to more strict measures regarding personal use of drugs. In this context, it is important to stress, that criminal law is considered as ultima ratio measure which has multiple side effects, thus criminalisation of certain activity or introduction of criminal sanctions must be strongly grounded. Preferably, not only by arguments, but also by hard empirical data supporting those arguments. It could be concluded, that decriminalisation in the sphere of personal drug use has legal and pragmatic assumptions. Such policy does not violate legal boundaries set by the United Nations conventions and reflects the newest tendencies of how modern drug control policy should look like. Last but not least, it is important to stress, that effective drug control policy should be evidence based. That means that drug policy changes should be supported by science innovations, empirical data, cost-benefit analysis, etc.

Abstract:In the international media, drug-related violence, corruption and militarization have received much attention. While this is understandable in view of the prominence of border area operations of drug cartels, drug trafficking is a pervasive phenomenon in other parts of Mexico as well, not in the least in significant parts of Western Mexico (especially in Guerrero, Colima and Michoacán). The latter state has a long history of drug production and trafficking (poppies and marihuana), and of military campaigns against it, especially in the area known as the 'Tierra Caliente', Michoacán. In recent decades, however, the situation has acquired a new dimension. This paper will examine the socio-economic and political characteristics of the area and analyse the emergence of drug trafficking as part of profound processes of agrarian transformation, especially since the 1980s. What are these transformations and how can the drug economy of the area be understood? In recent years the Tierra Caliente has become the scene of particularly atrocious confrontations between rivalling drug cartels; hence it was also the first target of military intervention after Felipe Calderón assumed power. How is this explained and what are the main consequences for violence, human rights and the drug and peasant economy?Resumen: Historias del narcotráfico en el México rural: Territorios, drogas y cárteles en MichoacánEn los medios masivos internacionales el tema de las drogas y la violencia relacionada con la corrupción y la militarización ha recibido mucha atención. Si bien esto es comprensible en vista de la importancia de las operaciones de los cárteles de la droga en la zona fronteriza, el tráfico de drogas es un fenómeno generalizado en otras partes de México y de manera importante en el occidente de México (especialmente en Guerrero, Colima y Michoacán). Este último estado tiene una larga historia de producción y tráfico de drogas (marihuana y amapola), y de campañas militares en su contra, especialmente en el área conocida como la 'Tierra Caliente', Michoacán. En las últimas décadas, sin embargo, la situación ha adquirido una nueva dimensión. En este documento se examinan las características socio-económicas y políticas de la zona y analiza el surgimiento del narcotráfico como parte de profundos procesos de transformación agraria, sobre todo desde la década de 1980. ¿Cuáles son estas transformaciones y cómo puede comprenderse la economía de la droga en esta zona? En los últimos años la Tierra Caliente se convirtió en el escenario de enfrentamientos particularmente atroces entre cárteles de la droga rivales y por lo tanto también se convirtió en el primer objetivo de la intervención militar desde que Felipe Calderón asumió el poder. ¿Cómo se explica esto y cuáles son las principales consecuencias de la violencia, los derechos humanos y la droga y la economía campesina?

La crisis de seguridad que se desató en México y la consecuente estrategia de seguridad del gobierno de Felipe Calderón (2006-20012), tuvo como detonador el narcotráfico, la prohibición de las drogas, el contrabando y la realidad fronteriza con los Estados Unidos. La explicación estándar de la violencia, reducida a la lucha entre los cárteles, explica poco. El presente artículo reconstruye una parte del contexto en que se produce la crisisde seguridad, colocándolo en perspectiva histórica, como un paso hacia una interpretación más matizada. Argumenta que el narcotráfico, en este caso, el contrabando de drogas entre México y Estados Unidos, es una realidad compleja que admite una densa elaboración simbólica y se despliega en varias direcciones. El narcotráfico es, aparte del movimiento concreto de droga, la relación con los Estados Unidos, un registro para significar la asimetría entre los dos países, un espacio de negociación política y un recurso de la diplomacia global estadounidense cristalizado en un sistema de política exterior clandestina. A su vez, por medio de una revisión desmitificante de la elaboración imaginaria del crimen organizado, se revisa el fenómeno de la corrupción y el contrabando, concibiéndolos como fenómenos que se integran de manera natural en la sociedad fronteriza.

The present paper attempts to shed light on the issues related to the war on drugs in Mexico, and their frequency of coverage in the international press. Agendasetting and domestication are two different approaches used to address them. The information was collected in one national and three international newspapers: The Guardian of England, The New York Times of the United States, El País of Spain, and El Universal of Mexico. A content analysis of news stories in the political transition period of the 2012 in the Mexican government was conducted. The results showed that while there is persistence in the number of news stories from the change of government, there is also a slight difference in the trend of themes that each of the newspapers reported. ; El presente escrito intenta dar luz a las temáticas relacionadas a la guerra contra las drogas en México, y a la frecuencia con la que se cubren en la prensa internacional. Se utilizaron dos enfoques distintos para su abordaje: Agendasetting y la domesticación. La información se recabó en tres periódicos internacionales y uno nacional: The Guardian de Inglaterra, The New York Times de Estados Unidos, El País de España, y El Universal de México. Se realizó un análisis de contenido de las historias periodísticas reportadas alrededor del período de transición política del 2012 en el gobierno Mexicano. Los resultados evidenciaron que si bien hay una persistencia en la cantidad de noticias, también se registra una ligera diferenciación en la tendencia de las historias que cada uno de los periódicos reporta.

Este ensayo muestra cómo la bonanza de marihua-na del Caribe colombiano y la campaña represiva en sucontra, denominada "Las dos penínsulas", dieron a luzuna nueva era en las relaciones inter-estatales, y entreEstados y sociedades entre Colombia y Estados Unidos.La economía exportadora de marihuana surgió y seconsolidó en una de las regiones más pobres y aparta-das de Colombia, la península de la Guajira y su vecinaSierra Nevada de Santa Marta. Esta zona ha sido histó-ricamente reconocida como una tierra "sin dios ni ley",estratégicamente localizada en el corazón de la cuencadel Caribe, pero nunca completamente integrada ni alEstado colonial español ni al Estado-nación colombia-no. Este ensayo analiza la bonanza de la marihuana endos etapas: su ascenso meteórico en la segunda mitadde los setenta, por lo que en su momento Colombiase convirtió en el mayor exportador de marihuana delmundo, y su rápido declive a comienzos de los ochen-ta, años durante los cuales Colombia se transformó enel primer teatro de la "guerra contra las drogas" en LosAndes. Este ensayo explica ambos momentos como elresultado de la confluencia de tendencias locales, na-cionales y mundiales definidas por una lucha por lalegitimidad de ciertas prácticas productivas, comercialesy de consumo, la cual tuvo lugar entre los gobiernos deColombia y Estados Unidos, de un lado, y grupos mar-ginales y comunidades de fronteras de ambos países, delotro. El argumento central sostiene que consideracionesgeopolíticas por parte de Estados Unidos entraron enconsonancia con nuevos imperativos del gobierno co-lombiano respecto a la seguridad nacional, resultando enuna agresiva campaña militar lanzada a finales de 1978en la región productora de marihuana. Esta historia dela emergencia, auge y declive de la economía de la ma-rihuana en el Caribe colombiano nos permite entendercómo la llamada "guerra contra las drogas" operó comoun instrumento de control estatal y vehículo para laconsolidación de un nuevo militarismo que apuntabaa alinear a los Estados sudamericanos con las estrate-gias de la "nueva Guerra Fría" liderada por el gobiernoestadounidense.