DRUG CERTIFICATION HURTS DRUG WAR

It's that time of year again, when the government decides whether or not
our southern neighbors have done enough to fight the drug trade. South and
Central American countries that are "sufficiently" compliant with U.S.
policies are certified as good guys in the drug war; those that don't come
up to federal snuff lose that certification -- and with it, some portion of
their aid package. This means that once again we are risking a great deal
for little, if any, gain.

Consider what happened when Colombia failed to meet the standard (whatever
that standard may be) and received as punishment a yearlong reduction in
U.S. foreign aid. The country lost money needed for programs that just
might have helped fight drugs. We looked bad pushing around another nation.
And there's no real indication that any positive difference was made either
before, during or after the arbitrary decertification. On the contrary, the
bad feeling it caused only hampered joint drug-fighting efforts.

The certification process only serves to antagonize the very governments
whose help we need to fight drugs. At the same time, it does nothing to
actually fight drugs; recertified nations are not given any special reward
or support. And of course the drug runners themselves are not affected by
this.

Furthermore, the certification process is losing whatever value it might
have had at home. The government likes to use such measures to show the
public that it is "doing something" about the serious problems plaguing us.
Few, after all, would seriously argue against fighting drugs. With the
certification procedure, the feds get to look like they're doing something
concrete towards that goal. As a bonus, the only price that the public pays
is that we have to watch Congress and the president argue over who's in and
who's out every year. Fortunately, not only have most of us become bored
with the drama, we also seem to be realizing why the whole notion was a bad
idea in the first place.

The flow of drugs is an international problem, not something that the
United States can stanch by itself. Both producing and consuming nations
face tremendous violence, corruption, and drastic health problems as a
result of the trade. The only solution to the problem is true cooperative
action. Only when there is understanding and good will between nations can
cooperation function. It is that good will which the certification process
threatens, however. We waste time arguing whether our allies our doing
their share, and risk alienating them in the process.

What is most bizarre about this is that we bear the primary responsibility
for the drug trade. People in the United States are the ones doing the
buying, after all. And do we not believe that in a capitalist free market,
the consumer votes with his wallet? U.S. citizens make the choice to buy
drugs, and it is the responsibility of the United States to curb that
demand. Until we do, we will continue to present the ludicrous image of a
wealthy alcoholic bachelor telling a poor liquor store owner with a family
to feed to clean up his act.

Hammond is a graduate student in history.