Dear Editor,
In an atmosphere of ongoing drug-related revelations, many Guyanese politicians, academics and other observers have said that our country is on the way to becoming a narco-state; the idea is alarming, so the merits are worth examining in some detail.
According to the experts, the ideal state is a democracy which serves the interests of the citizens in accordance with fair laws, applicable to all citizens, designed to maintain order, peace and liberty. On the other hand a narco-state is a territory taken over by drug interests where government institutions are controlled by drug money and law enforcement agencies serve the interests of narco-traffickers and the corrupted elite.
According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) such states have existed and do exist. Therefore, we can learn about our own prospects by examining the conditions under which such states formed, to gain insight into the conditions which may give rise to narco-statehood.
We recall that in May 2013, Guatemala’s ex-president Alfonso Portillo was extradited to the USA to face charges of laundering some US$70 million, the proceeds of drug trafficking. It was not easy to catch him. After Portillo lost power in 2004 he fled to Mexico and lived there until October 2008 when he was sent back to Guatemala to face charges of transferring state funds to cronies and private interests. In January 2010 the United States requested his extradition, this is how he ended up facing justice in the US.
According to analysts, Guatemala became a narco-state after drug lords corrupted military commanders and government officials, including President Portillo. Drug lords set their sights on Guatemala because the majority of Guatemalans were poor and could be induced to become drug mules. Guatemala was geographically ideally located to funnel drugs from neighbouring Mexico to the US, and the armed forces were underpaid and could be easily bribed. Similar preconditions for narco-statehood also exist elsewhere.
Guinea-Bissau a West African nation of 1.6 million people became a narco-state following a civil war in the 1990s. At that time there was a shortage of police personnel, widespread poverty and weak government institutions. Officials wanted to get rich quickly and were easily corrupted by Colombian drug lords who wanted control of a West African state to channel cocaine into the US and Europe.
Guinea-Bissau remains a narco-state to this day where poor citizens subsist on US$1 per day while drug lords and their bodyguards visit each other’s mansions in exclusive, gated communities, driving their expensive Prados and tinted BMWs.
Editor, the drug lords are never satisfied; they continue to seek out new territories, new channels through which to traffic their deadly product.
Their former havens are no longer easily accessible; Panama is now well policed, as is Jamaica. Colombia, with massive US assistance, is well on its way to recovering from its narco-state status. So the drug lords are on the hunt for new production and transit points.
As the examples demonstrate, drug traffickers look for certain preconditions in potential target territories, including poverty; weak institutions; corruptable officials and police; weak and understaffed law enforcement agencies; porous, unpoliced borders; and ideal geographic locations. Does Guyana meet any of these criteria?
According to the World Bank, 43% of Guyanese subsist below the poverty line with 29% classified as being extremely poor. These destitute citizens are those whose spending ability fall below that required to purchase a minimum low-cost diet. It is from among these desperate souls that drug mules are recruited. They often risk their lives concealing cocaine inside their bodies, travelling to the US or Europe; many are caught and jailed. The individual drugs mules are a small part of the bigger, ugly picture. We know of the big shipments in logs, coconuts, fruit and fish. We know of the arrest of Guyanese drug lords in foreign lands. We know of alleged Mafia connections. Can there be any doubt about what is going on?
And what about corruption, shortage of police and lack of border control, do these factors apply to Guyana?
The US State Department International Narcotics Control Strategy Report stated: “Guyana is a trans-shipment point for South American cocaine on its way to North America and Europe.” The report also said that there is a lack of political will to fight drug trafficking and cites the ineffectiveness of Guyana’s law enforcement agencies.
Editor, it is evident that a problem exists; a problem driven by money. The drug lords have the resources to pay cash and can gain a foothold in territories where persons are desperate or greedy enough to accept it. Guyanese should be concerned for yet another reason: like Guatemala, Colombia and Guinea-Bissau, Guyana is ideally geographically located to facilitate the transit of narcotics.
If we conclude that Guyana could become a narco-state, what can we do to stop the process? Again, the experts agree: we must strengthen democratic institutions; enforce the laws that we have, and enact relevant, meaningful and enforceable anti-drug legislation; implement relevant systems such as the National Drug Strategy Master Plan which has been gathering dust since 2005. We must increase the capacity of institutions and agencies such as the Guyana Police Force, Guyana Defence Force, CANU and the Guyana Revenue Authority. We must secure our borders, hinterland waterways and airstrips. We must remove political interference in law enforcement so that the rich and the poor; the minister and the cane-cutter, are subject to legal equality, and we must root out corruption.
Finally, most importantly, we must remove any official tainted by drug money.
Editor, if an official has taken a bribe from drug lords, even once, he is forever in their power; he can never serve the interests of the people ever again. I wonder if there are any such officials in Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta
