Tuesday 03 March 2009
by: Jean-Pierre Langellier and Joëlle Stolz | Visit article original @ Le Monde
Mexican President Felipe Calderon says it would be "absurd" for Mexico to consider legalizing some drugs as long as its neighbor to the north does not change its legislation. (Photo: Larry Downing / Reuters)
Before Nicolas Sarkozy's state visit to Mexico on Monday, March 9, the Mexican president granted an interview to Le Monde.
Le Monde: Concerning the battle against drug trafficking, you said:
"It's them or us!" One minister mentioned the possibility that the next Mexican president could be a "Narco." Has the government lost control over a part of the country?
Mexican President Felipe Calderon: Of course not. Our efforts are specifically targeted to preserve the government's authority, that is, its monopoly on the use of force, and also the authority of the law in the face of a phenomenon, which, it is true, had begun to spread to different regions. But there is not a single spot of national territory that eludes the government's complete control. And we've preserved that control because we've acted in time and with great resolve.
Organized crime exerts pressure on the political authorities by cooptation, corruption and intimidation. There was a certain influence at the local and municipal level. Intervening now has allowed us to avoid having criminal action affect a higher echelon.
Who's Responsible?
Rather than pointing out who's to blame, it's better to assume one's responsibilities. Let's talk about the causes. The first is the American consumer. If the United States were not the biggest drug market in the world, we wouldn't have this problem.
And there's also the arms trade. In two years, we've seized 33,000 weapons, 18,000 of them high caliber, rocket launchers, thousands of grenades, devices able to pierce armor plating. Now the overwhelming majority of this materiel had been purchased in the United States, including materiel which is the exclusive property of the American Army. In 2004, (the Bush administration) lifted the prohibition that had previously been in place against the sale of these very dangerous weapons.
There is another factor: the cartels' modus operandi has changed. Before, they only transported drugs to the United States. Today, and this is a substantial change, they are trying to develop a domestic market and so need to control the territory and the life of entire communities.
Has organized crime extended its activities beyond drugs?
Yes, it's also associated with extortion, kidnapping and threats. Every level of the government must act to contain the harmful, destructive effects of organized crime. This is not just a personal obsession of the President of the Republic. In the regions where we intervene, 95 percent of the people approve our action.
Some people would like to return to negotiation with the cartels to reduce the violence, as was the case under the Institutional Revolutionary Party's (PRI) rule until the end of 2000.
That's an incredibly naive, and I would even say, stupid, idea. In the old political culture, that's what people thought. But coming to terms with crime doesn't resolve anything. On the contrary, that allowed it to propagate like a cancer, an enormous infection, because it benefited from the complicity of many authorities. It amounts to opening the door to crime.
And the decriminalization of the use of some drugs, as former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo proposes?
Some people think that we could reduce the profits of the illegal market this way. Personally, I share the idea that legalization amounts to resigning ourselves to the loss of several generations of Mexicans, for drugs are the slavery of the twenty-first century. Moreover, as long as the United States does not change its own legislation in that respect, it would be absurd. We would make our country a paradise for drugs and crime.
The economic crisis is hitting Mexico hard through its principal trading partner, the United States. What do you expect from President Barack Obama?
I expect him to go to the heart of the problem very quickly: the banking and financial crisis. The flow of credit - which is the lifeblood of the economy - must be reestablished. My worry is that the American government may delay curing the heart attack for too long. But Mexico has several assets. Government finances are healthy. The public pension system has been reformed. The banks are solid. The exchange rate favors tourism and makes up for the reduction in emigrants' currency transfers. The 1995 crisis affected us much more seriously.
Mr. Obama had criticized the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which unites Mexico, the United States and Canada. Would you agree to a partial reform of this treaty?
Neo-protectionism would be a regression for the NAFTA region. I was clear with the American president. He acknowledged that both our countries have benefited from the growth created by the opening up of trade: we're the world's second buyer of American products. If the United States were to take protectionist measures, it would lose still more in competitiveness. That was the big mistake of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal.
What do you expect from Mr. Sarkozy's visit?
I admire President Sarkozy very much. His leadership has reinvigorated not only European politics, but also global policy. He will be very warmly received, as our two countries can be the bridges between Latin America and Europe.
--------
Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.
No comments:
Post a Comment