The “decertification” | La “descertificación”

Editorial, Los Tiempos:

The recent US “decertification” of Bolivia in the fight against drug trafficking is not surprising; what is striking are the reactions that this announcement provoked.

That the United States Government has included Bolivia in the list of countries with the greatest production and transit of drugs and accuses the administration of the Plurinational State of failing to comply with its international obligations to combat drug trafficking is not new.

Perhaps it is not the “sixteenth consecutive time”—as the Government Minister says—that this has happened, but there is no doubt about the expansion of cocaine production and trafficking in Bolivia.

This is noticeable, for example, in the cases of seizures of this drug in border and European countries, the murders and kidnappings – more numerous than in other years – linked to drug trafficking and the magnitude of the activities of the organization that he directed, until a few years ago. couple of months from Santa Cruz, the Uruguayan Sebastián Marset who escaped under the noses of the Police who were looking for him at the request of other countries and two international police organizations.

The growing number and greater frequency of operations to destroy cocaine factories carried out by the Special Force to Fight Drug Trafficking (Felcn): 487 between January and August of this year, on average one every 12 hours, are another indicator of the unstoppable expansion of the production and trafficking of that drug in the country, unless until the beginning of this year that police force had not been doing its job well.

That the “decertification” granted by the Government of the United States to that of Bolivia is a “unilateral” act, as the Government Minister describes it, is evident and does not attract much attention.

What does arouse some curiosity is the quality of the reactions to the inclusion of Bolivia in the US “blacklist” of countries linked to drug trafficking, since none makes reference to the consequences that this circumstance would have for the common citizen.

“It is harmful for the country because it reduces the possibilities of receiving international aid not only from the United States, but also from its allies, such as the European Union or the World Bank, which can limit Bolivia’s access to credit,” the media explained a year ago. digital Bolivia Verifies, citing the statements of a former anti-narcotics prosecutor.

In general, this aid that would be limited as a consequence of the “decertification” is intended for the same fight against drugs and there has never been a statement from the Government that attributes the greatest difficulty in facing the problems of its administration to this circumstance.

Thus, the US qualification of the anti-drug fight in Bolivia seems to have more symbolic and domestic political effects than harmful consequences in other areas.

Leave a comment