Pubdate: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 Source: Emory Wheel, The (Emory U, GA Edu) Copyright: 2009 The Emory Wheel Contact: http://www.emorywheel.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2781 Author: Salvador Rizzo ON MEXICO'S DRUG WAR, VAN DER HORST DISPLAYS A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING To the editor: In addressing Mexico's war on drug cartels, Benjamin van der Horst makes a slew of mistakes that hamper our understanding of the problem - - in fact, the column ("Mexico's Drug War Hits Home," March 27) raises concerns on account of its omissions, snap judgments and, yes, its prejudice. First and foremost, van der Horst fails to acknowledge that the primary reason Mexico has to deal with these powerful and well-established cartels is an outsize demand for drugs in the United States. If demand were to vanish, so would supply lines - as well as most if not all of the related violence. Second, he bristles at Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's remarks that the United States has to crack down on weapons suppliers inside American borders. Van der Horst would like the government to let the suppliers carry on and for Mexicans to do a better job of thwarting arms trafficking, as is their responsibility. Well, that might be fair under normal circumstances, but not when, as the Economist notes, "out of 107,000 gunshops in the United States, 12,000 are close to the Mexican border and their sales are much higher than the average." Third, he dismisses the Mexican government's say on the drug issue because he contends that Mexico has not improved its economy, thus forcing laborers into the United States (an absurd association). Here, van der Horst's argument conveniently elides that the United States is (still) the most powerful economy in the world, and that its standard of living and minimum wage are therefore much higher than those in Mexico, and would likely remain so no matter how much economic progress Mexico made during Vicente Fox's six-year term. On top of that, the migration issue is not so much a matter of simple economics as it is a deeply rooted cultural phenomenon fed by myriad factors. I also wonder with what authority van der Horst proclaims the Mexican government "woefully unable to beat the drug cartels." He cites nothing and pompously implies that the U.S. would be stepping in to clean up President Felipe Calderon's mess. In reality, the Mexican government has made unprecedented strides. The Economist points out: "In the past two years the government has seized huge quantities of drugs (some 70 tonnes of cocaine, including 26 tonnes in a trawler, a world record for a single haul), money (some $260m) and arms (31,000 weapons, including 17,000 of high calibre). It has also made more than 58,000 arrests." The U.S. Congress has committed only $1.4 billion over three years to help fight drug cartels; van der Horst can rest assured that Mexico is still footing the lion's share of the bill - $9 billion a year. (Both governments should spend more: the New York Times yesterday reported that cartels outspend anti-drug efforts.) Most appalling, by far, is van der Horst's crude and exploitative conclusion: "Most importantly, the administration needs to keep Mexico's drug wars in Mexico, not Atlanta." It is not only misguided, it is downright cruel to suggest that the United States should wash its hands of this conflict; that it should sit back and bolt its borders while Mexico roots out America's drug suppliers. Van der Horst despicably goes further by suggesting that the American response should be to drive violence back into Mexico, where Mexicans already have died by the thousands. Surely he can recognize that by increasing its efforts to fight drug cartels, the United States is working toward a future in which neither country has to live in fear of drug violence. It is admirable that he seeks increased protection for Americans, but his proposed solution runs the risk of exposing the United States even more, and in any case it is naive to think that this country could be home to such a large population of drug consumers without the occasional brush with violence. To be sure, Mexico has many improvements to make if it wants to be rid of drug cartels, but like it or not, this is an international problem with steps to be taken individually and jointly by both countries. I, for one, am grateful that the Obama administration has dutifully recognized this reality. Salvador Rizzo Class of 2009. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Seguin