But what exactly is a narco-state? A careful consideration of the attributes that make a state a narco-state is necessary in order to ascertain if the strategy that was adopted was appropriate, or the right one. After all, the cure for a disease rests on its accurate diagnosis.
A narco-state, which is also known as narco-capitalism or narco-economy, is a term that was coined by political economists to describe a country where all legitimate institutions have been effectively penetrated by the power, wealth and influence of the illegal drug trade. It is characterized as having large swathes of territories — which can even cover the entire country — that are in the hands of drug cartels, and where law enforcement is effectively non-existent. Here, government action is directly influenced by the drug trade. In doing so, the government is now seen as serving the interests of the drug cartels, instead of advancing the interests of its citizens.
One of the key elements present in a narco-state is the ability of the drug cartels to dispense political violence as a real threat to a recalcitrant government. This includes kidnapping, murders and assassinations. What cements the power of the cartels, and perfects the existence of a narco-state, is when the bureaucracy, both civilian and military, including local and national officials, becomes integral parts of a system that enables and protects the drug trade. Drug cartels are no longer mere pressure groups bearing illegitimate interests that operate outside state institutions. They are now involved in the establishment and maintenance of political order, and are now represented in policymaking, legislation, law enforcement and judicial decisions. And the core that drives the logic of a narco-state lies in corruption and the amassing of wealth not only to line the pockets of individuals, but even of political parties and state organs. Bribery and kickbacks from drug money are now mainstreamed and regularized.
The claim that the Philippines is already a narco-state is debatable, even if it is arguable that certain elements of it may now be present. There are many allegations, and some documented cases, about the existence of local officials and judges who are not only enablers and beneficiaries, but are even integral and active participants in the drug trade. The prosecution of Sen. Leila de Lima as an alleged coddler, enabler, protector and beneficiary of the illegal drugs trade inside the National Bilibid Prison is exhibit 1 to support such a claim. And the recent revelations by former Philippine National Police-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group chief, now Baguio City Mayor Benjamin Magalong, and by Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency Director Aaron Aquino about the existence of so-called “ninja cops” who actively participate in the drug trade by recycling confiscated shabu during police operations and reselling these in the drug market constitute evidence of what many have suspected to be the involvement of our uniformed personnel.
What is problematic, therefore, is the apparent mismatch of the strategy being adopted by the government in fighting the illegal drugs trade. Much energy is being spent, as evidenced by the preponderance of the optics generated on petty drug peddlers and users. The rogues’ gallery of arrests, as well as the statistics on death of people who allegedly “escaped” and “fought back” are dominated by those involved in the retail end of the drug trade. If the government indeed rests the logic of its war on drugs firmly on the creeping narcotization of the Philippine state, then the focus should be more on those that are responsible for the institutionalization of the drug trade in our political and economic landscape, and not on the petty peddlers and the drug users.
This is not to say that petty peddling and drug use should be ignored. But to focus on them, without an equally vigorous campaign to weed out those in authority who enable, protect, coddle and participate actively in the drug trade will only amount to an optics that can project fear on petty peddlers and users, and can whip up support from the loyal political base, but will not totally solve the problem.
Supporters of the President’s war on drugs will always deploy as a counter-argument the fact that there is unassailable support coming from the people. But this support is all a product of biased opinion, mainly coming from a base that is already supportive of the President, regardless of the merits of his actions. It is easy to deploy statistics of declining incidences of petty crimes as a clear indicator of the positive impact of the drug war. It is also convenient to lay the blame for the increasing murder cases on the drug gangs cleaning up their ranks. But what is effectively hidden in the numbers is the possibility that such may well be due to people with authority but who are deeply involved in the drug trade ordering a hit to silence the weak links in their drug networks.
The Magalong and Aquino revelations may have just painted for us the tip of the iceberg of the creeping narcotization of our country. Lest the claim by critics are true, that only those with slippers die in the streets, while the people with real authority running the drug show just get reassigned and recycled, this government must go beyond Leila de Lima and should refrain from undermining its drug war. It must recalibrate and avoid selective prosecution of its political enemies, and hit harder on the core of the drug trade, its master enablers wearing expensive watches, and not only those wearing slippers.
https://www.manilatimes.net/2019/10/08/opinion/columnists/topanalysis/undermining-the-war-on-drugs/627996/
https://www.manilatimes.net/2019/10/08/opinion/columnists/topanalysis/undermining-the-war-on-drugs/627996/
No comments:
Post a Comment