AVOIDING DRUG WAR FACTS

It's an indictment of our fact-averse political culture that a
statement of the blindingly obvious could sound so revolutionary.
"Our insatiable demand for illegal drugs fuels the drug trade,"
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told reporters Wednesday as she
flew to Mexico for an official visit. "Our inability to prevent
weapons from being illegally smuggled across the border . . . causes
the deaths of police, of soldiers and civilians."

Amazingly, U.S. officials have avoided facing these facts for
decades. This is a moral failure that has had horrific consequences
for Mexico, Colombia, Peru and other Latin American and Caribbean nations.

Our long-running "war on drugs," focusing on the supply side of the
equation, has been an utter disaster. According to a 2007 University
of Michigan study, 84 percent of high school seniors nationwide said
they could obtain marijuana "fairly easily" or "very easily." The
figure for amphetamines was 50 percent; for cocaine, 47 percent; for
heroin, 30 percent.

At the same time, we've persisted in a Sisyphean attempt to cut off
the drug supply at or near the source. I once visited a U.S.-funded
military base in the Upper Huallaga Valley of Peru, where most of the
country's coca -- the plant from which cocaine is processed -- was
being grown. Eventually, the coca business was eliminated in the
Upper Huallaga. But now it's flourishing in other parts of Peru.

And now Mexico has become the focal point of the drug trade, with its
cartels blasting their way to dominance in the business of bringing
marijuana, methamphetamine, cocaine and other drugs to the American
market. Violence among drug gangs has reached crisis levels. The
government's strategy is to break up the big cartels, as the
Colombians did. But even if authorities succeed, the industry will live on.

In the case of Mexico, there's a complicating factor: This is a
two-way problem. While drugs are being moved north across the border,
powerful assault weapons purchased in the United States are being
moved south to arm the cartels' foot soldiers. Clinton's statement
about "shared responsibility" recognizes that if we expect Mexico to
do something about the flow of drugs, we're obliged to do something
about the counterflow of guns.

First, though, let's be honest with ourselves. This whole disruptive,
destabilizing enterprise has one purpose, which is to supply the U.S.
market with illegal drugs. As long as the demand exists,
entrepreneurs will find a way to meet it. The obvious demand-side
solution -- legalization -- would do more harm than good with some
drugs, but maybe not with others. It's time to put everything on the
table, because all we've accomplished so far is to bring the terrible
violence of the drug trade ever closer to home.