In recent U.S. news, recreational marijuana use has been
legalized in 2 states, Washington and Colorado. The legislation which was voted
on in early November, passed into effect this week signaling the transition
toward a more progressive stance on marijuana laws for the U.S. This
legislation allows for people to smoke marijuana recreationally for personal
use, overriding the previous law that required citizens to have a prescription
for medical marijuana use. Days after the decision was reached that Washington
and Colorado would in fact have legalized recreational marijuana use; the UN
announced that the states are violating the international treaties on drug
control.
What’s the big fuss about? Raymond Yans, the President of
the International Narcotics Control Board (also known as INCB) stated his
opinion on the matter in a recent press release (Nimmo). Yans expressed his
apparent concern on the matter going so far to say that Washington and Colorado
“are in violation of the international drug control treaties, and pose a great
threat to public health and the well-being of society far beyond those states”
(Nimmo). His viewpoint was justified through several reasons he gave later in
the press release; calling for sanctions that penalized Washington and Colorado
for potentially harming the current welfare of children. Pointing out that
through recreational marijuana use, society sends the wrong signals to the
youth- giving them reasons to find drug use (and abuse) acceptable in our
society. To sum up his apparent dismay with the new marijuana legislation, he
advocated that the U.S. resolve the problems that are being complicated in DC.
Such as the new issue revolving around states’ rights versus the federal
government, Yans called for the U.S. to drop the new legislation and ensure
full compliance with the International Drug Control treaties along with
ensuring the well-being of its citizens.
The repercussions of the newly passed laws that now recreationalize
marijuana use haven’t fully been gauged. Many proponents of marijuana legalization
propose that in doing so; it will help weaken the grip that cartels have within
the drug trade in Central America. Because the U.S. has kept marijuana illegal
(under federal law), we’ve opened up an illicit market for criminal drug
trafficking. This in turn has allowed large gangs such as the cartels to gain monopolies
on the drug trade- a monopoly they achieve through force and violence. This
underground industry is estimated to bring in revenues up to $36 billion a year
(Johnson). And recently, officials are finding out that cartels are finding
themselves more into the business side of criminal activity involving marijuana.
Of all the illegal drugs that cartels are pushing into the United States,
marijuana is the biggest proponent of the mix (Grillo).Sure enough, with
criminal activity and illegal drugs comes violence, and cartels find themselves
using instruments of violence in order to get what they want. The violence has now spread into the U.S.,
border towns are now some of the most unsafe areas in the country and fears
that the cartels could be moving operations closer and into the U.S. are startling.
Through new legislation, as seen with Washington and Colorado, legalizing
marijuana would eliminate the illicit market that we’ve created. It would also
eliminate the violence that is taking place alongside drug deals, as well as
reduce the number of criminals who would go to prison under marijuana-related
offenses.
The problem has two sides that polarize legalization of
marijuana. U.S. administration has to heed the warnings of the UN; in keeping a
good rapport with the INCB and abide by international drug standards. Yet, it
should also be aware of the potential benefits that would come with marijuana
legalization; if a law was passed to legalize marijuana throughout the rest of
the contiguous states, not only would it help end the drug war and eliminate a
market for the cartels, it would also clean up a healthy U.S.-Mexico alliance that
could focus on the drug war. On the economical side of things, the U.S. would
create a whole new industry that would bring in high revenues- creating a new
market for marijuana related items. The economy would flourish, in a time where
the economy and budget are in the minds of all U.S. citizens. So in overview of what policy the U.S. should
take, a game of international relations occurs. Does the U.S. find a way to
appease the UN’s International Narcotics Control Board, and reverse the
legislation keeping marijuana illegal in the states, or does it try to eliminate
a huge drug war that has ravished the border states? In reality, the UN giving
a statement in disapproval of our current marijuana laws doesn’t have much
weight. But it does set the standards for where our country moves forward
socially, and does change the way the kids in the next few years will see
marijuana use. Reasonably the U.S. should pursue a policy that is more
progressive on marijuana use and legalization; it can help pave new paths
toward a (drug) war-torn Mexico and control the extent of how much control
cartels will have in the future.
Works Cited:
Johnson, Gary. "Legalize Marijuana to Stop the Drug
Cartels." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 26 Aug. 2010. Web.
08 Dec. 2012.
Nimmo, Kurt. "United Nations Moves to Impose
International Treaties On States Legalizing Marijuana // Current TV."
United Nations Moves to Impose International Treaties On States Legalizing
Marijuana // Current TV. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2012.
Press, Associated. "Marijuana Legalization in Colo.,
Wash. Complicates Drug-free Work Policies." Washington Post. The
Washington Post, 07 Dec. 2012. Web. 08 Dec. 2012.
Grillo, Ioan. "A New Way to Fight Mexico's Vicious
Cartels: Legalizing Marijuana Read More: Http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2084224,00.html#ixzz2EVVbOC00.
Time, 27 July 2011. Web. 08 Dec. 2012.
"Obama Administration considering Ways to Overturn
Marijuana Legalization in Washington and Colorado â
RT." Obama Administration considering Ways to Overturn Marijuana
Legalization in Washington and Colorado
RT. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2012.
How has the INCB reacted to the legalization and decriminalization of marijuana in places like Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Pakistan. I dont know anything about how the Board runs or what their standards are, but I know that marijuana is decriminalized in quite a few countries around the world.
ReplyDeleteWhat will the US's future decisions on this issue say about its priorities between participating in international institutions vs. Self Interest?
Great post, Drew, about a current issue after the elections. You made a statement "Through new legislation, as seen with Washington and Colorado, legalizing marijuana would eliminate the illicit market that we’ve created." Do you really think that it would eliminate all illicit dealing? Personally, I think that it will be greatly reduced; however, I think that it may still exist. I think that cartels will still try to compete with established sellers and will, often, give better prices untaxed. It may be similar to legalizing the ownership of guns. While it is a regulated trade, many people still participate illegally for money and crime reasons.
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned at the end of your post that the UN's statement doesn't hold much weight, but what do you think the repercussions would be if the US does not address their concerns? Would it in any way change the way that the UN is seen? As Madison points out, several countries have decriminalized marijuana, and that their actions haven't had any large repercussions, but how do you think the US decisions (as she asks) will reflect on the institution itself?
ReplyDeleteMadison and Sean quite effectively asked the two questions that I was wondering about: how the UN has reacted to the decriminalization of marijuana in other countries, and how the reactions of the US and the other states reflect upon the institution. I would also like to know, however, what the implications would be if only the US was chastised for the decriminalization. If the US chooses to ignore the UN on this matter, what would be their justification for doing so? Would they cite the economic and societal benefits, or would they also include political reasons?
ReplyDelete