Introduction:

Experts have been laying out options for years and it seems as if drugs still flow all over the world on a consistent and steady pace leading to a national and global security threat. This research paper will focus on the best methods for reducing the effectiveness of transnational criminal organizations and their efforts to traffic narcotics with analysis on how to implement those methods. One option proposed is legalizing these dangerous illicit drugs. We could also engage in international information sharing with regards to financial intelligence in order to thwart threat finance. To reduce the effectiveness of transnational criminal organizations (TCO’s), the United States Government needs to interdict drug transportation routes. This will help prevent drug trafficking organizations from infecting and spreading throughout America and nations abroad. This is the best and most effective long-term solution to drowning out these organizations and preventing them from exploiting the communities they operate and thrive in forever.

Drug trafficking and distribution are two felonious activities that are carried out by organized crime affiliations. Nearly every drug transaction that takes place in the world is the result of drug trafficking and distribution stemming from some type of transnational organized crime organization. Estimated profits from some of these organizations, such as the Colombian Medellin Cartel of the 1980’s and 1990’s, range anywhere from tens of billions to hundreds of billions of dollars per year. According to the FBI (2016), “The vast sums of money and harsh violence involved can compromise legitimate economies and have a direct impact on governments through the corruption of public officials” (para.1). If these organizations can rake in this much money every year, how do we stop them? What’s the best course of action to take?

Background:

I believe the reason this issue has become a topic of conversation again is due to the deadly opioid epidemic plaguing the United States. The number of overdose related deaths has steadily increased since 2012. Now people are starting to question where the drugs are coming from and how they are getting into the hands of Americans. To me, the answer is simple; transnational organized crime is to blame. These crime organizations understand the demand for illicit drugs and make a hefty profit smuggling them around the world and distributing. From the Italian Mob of the 1950’s to Pablo Escobar’s Medellin Cartel in the 1970’s, these crime organizations have been profiting off of selling illegal drugs to people for decades. It is a global business that affects almost every country in the world.

Drug trafficking in the United States creates a huge black market industry. It is estimated that $200-$750 billion per year is spent on these illegal substances, with the current decade seeing the largest per person drug usage per year in American history (Adinolfi, 2013). According to the United States Sentencing Commission (2013), “Over 30 percent of all offenses in 2013 were related to drug trafficking, and 22,215 cases of drug trafficking were reported to the USSC in the 2013 fiscal year” (para. 3). It is believed that most drug traffickers belong to an organized crime enterprise and get their product into the United States along the 2,000 mile border with Mexico.

The
border with Mexico is not the most secure border on Earth and there are
numerous soft spots that allow traffickers to smuggle their product into the
United States illegally. Millions of trucks cross the border into the United
States each and every year from Mexico. It is impossible for the authorities to
thoroughly check each and every one of those trucks. Traffickers also have
marine containers or cargo containers that they use at their disposal. As well
as the sea and land, these organizations also sneak their drugs into the United
States through the air. “Smugglers use a vast number of both air and sea
trafficking routes to transport cocaine from South America to the United
States. The most commonly travelled routes are through the Windward Passage
between Cuba and Haiti, through the Yucatan Channel between Mexico and Cuba,
and through the Mona Passage, bordered by the Dominican Republic and Puerto
Rico” (America’s Habit, 1986). It’s clearly a very sophisticated operation with
financial backing. With all the technology the United States has at its
disposal (X-ray machines, drug sniffing dogs, metal detectors, body scanners,
etc), it seems almost impossible to get anything past our borders we did not
want to cross, but it does happen more frequently than it should.

According
to Quinones (2017) “A lot of heroin
trafficking happens a kilo or two at a time. Other ranchers told me they used
hollow hammers, toothpaste tubes, a woman’s hair, backpacks or the carburetor
of a truck. No wall stops that kind of trafficking” (para. 9). We can’t expect
our customs agents to open toothpaste tubes and dismantle cars on the spot for
every vehicle that tries to cross into the United States. It’s just not a plausible
solution. Granted, the amounts being smuggled in are smaller, they have become
more frequent, which is just as dangerous. There needs to be a solution to stop
this madness from happening, not only in the United States, but across the
world.

Analysis:

It’s
clear to see from the recent trends of drug abuse in the United States that
this problem is not going away any time soon and requires some type of
immediate action to remedy the situation. The problem lies with transnational
organized crime enterprises that continuously and successfully traffic narcotics
around the world for huge profits. There is a strong need to impede these
illegal operations. Three of the top options available that could solve that
problem are legalization of drugs, information sharing with regards to threat
financing by using financial intelligence and finally, enhancing border
security and route interdiction.

Legalizing
drugs in the United States is a solution that people believe will solve
America’s drug problem. From a neutral point of view, it has its benefits and
its drawbacks. Marijuana has essentially become “legal” in the United States in
the sense that it has been decriminalized in many states and approved for
recreational use. Each state has separate rules and statutes for marijuana
offenses, but the way things are heading it looks as if marijuana is on its way
to becoming a legalized drug in the United States. There are even medical
marijuana cards that allow people to smoke marijuana for medical purposes, such
as to help with the effects of chemotherapy or radiation treatments for cancer.
Of course, there are still rules and laws that prevent operating vehicles while
under the influence of marijuana, just like alcohol, because it is still a
mind-altering substance that can impair your ability to operate a vehicle or
heavy machinery in a safe manner. By having the same restrictions or laws on
marijuana that we have on alcohol, experts believe that the United States could
profit from the taxes put on legalizing marijuana, thus taking away money from
some of these organized crime enterprises that traffic and distribute marijuana
in the United States. There have been studies that show an overdose from
marijuana is extremely unlikely and has not ever been documented in the
academic world. According to Blaszczak-Boxe (2014), “The risk of a
person suffering a fatal overdose from marijuana is “extremely
small,” and there are no reports of fatal overdoses in the scientific
literature, according to the review” (para.6). The United States could control
the distribution and sale of marijuana which would essentially take the money
away from illegal drug trafficking organizations.

The negative aspect of
legalizing marijuana is that it is considered a gateway drug and more often
than not, young kids start out smoking marijuana at a young age and move on to
other more harsh drugs (heroin, cocaine, prescription pills, etc.). A study
found that “regular cannabis users also double their risk of experiencing
psychotic symptoms and disorders such as disordered thinking, hallucinations
and delusions” (Blaszczak-Boxe, 2014,
para.9). That seems like a significant problem that could be detrimental to the
youth of the country if it were to be fully legalized.

Some of these other drugs such as heroin, cocaine or prescription pills pose a little bit of a tougher problem compared to marijuana. Let’s start with some positives of legalizing these other types of drugs. Some people make the argument that if we legalize all of these drugs it will cripple the organized crime stranglehold on the drug trafficking market. If TCO’s can’t traffic drugs, because drugs are legal, and make money, then they will fall apart and disappear. Other sources believe the United States can make money from the legalization and taxation of these types of drugs. If the United States were to control and regulate these classes of drugs, then there would be no “black market” for them, which would take business and money away from transnational organized crime enterprises. Some researchers also argue that some of these people currently incarcerated need medical and psychiatric care and should not be incarcerated. The costs of keeping people incarcerated is exorbitant and it comes out of the taxpayers’ pockets. According to Adinolfi (2013), “About 330,000 of the U.S.’s 1.6 million prison inmates in 2012 were doing time for drug offenses, at an average annual cost of $25,000 per inmate — a total of $8.2 billion” (para.5). So, $8.2 billion dollars per year is being spent to house inmates for drug related offenses. The argument is that $8.2 billion dollars could be going back into the economy as opposed to housing people for these types of drug related offenses. Building even further off of that, some experts believe the estimated yearly tax receipts from legalizing drugs could amount to about $8.7 billion (Adinolfi, 2013). Roughly, a total of $17 billion dollars could be generated from legalization and cutting down on incarceration costs as a result of this legalization process. That does sound awfully nice on paper, but when there are pros there are also cons to every argument.

Heroin, cocaine (crack and powdered), methamphetamine and prescription
pills (Oxycodone, OxyContin) account for five of the top six trafficked drugs
into the United States. That means that organized crime makes a lot of money
from these drugs. When governments try to get in the way of them making money,
they get angry and retaliate. The problem not only lies with
the dangers of drug trafficking and drug use, but rather with the violence
associated with these drugs and crime organizations. For example, “in 1975, the
Colombian police seized 600 kilos of cocaine from a plane destined for the
United States. Colombian drug traffickers retaliated by killing 40 people
during one weekend in what became known as the Medellin Massacre. The event
triggered years of violence that led to assassinations, kidnappings and raids
all over Colombia” (History.com, 2017, para. 9). According to Felbab-Brown
(2012), “Organized crime groups who stand to be
displaced from the drug trade by legalization can hardly be expected to take
the change lying down. Rather, they may intensify their violent power struggles
over remaining illegal economies, such as the smuggling of other contraband or
migrants, prostitution, extortion, and kidnapping” (para. 12). This is a major
drawback experts bring up when legalization talks arise. By affecting organized
crime revenue streams with legalization they could react by being more violent
and cause bigger problems by getting involved with other violent illegal
activities previously mentioned.

Since 2012 there have been steady increases on the amounts of these drugs
entering the country illegally. Not only do these drugs enter the country
illegally, but they are highly addictive and threaten the well-being of our youth.
There has been a steady increase of overdose deaths from these drugs (opioids
and heroin in particular) since 2002. The National Institute on Drug Abuse
(2017) reports that overdose deaths from heroin and illicit opioid-based drugs
increased by six times from 2002 to 2015. The rates at which people are
overdosing and dying is alarming at best. The solution of legalization seems
less and less attractive the more you look at the rising numbers of overdose
deaths, which are disturbing.

Threat finance is a term that is not very well-known to the public.
According to Boyle (2012), “Threat finance encompasses the means and methods
used by organizations to finance illicit operations and activities that pose a
threat to U.S. national security.” These criminal enterprises use a myriad of
illegal methods to fund their operations such as money-laundering (underlying
method of threat finance), extortion, fraud, kidnapping, tax evasion or shell
organizations. Employing these methods is essential for continuing their
operations without detection from governmental authorities. This
process creates the appearance that large amounts of money obtained from
serious crimes, such as drug trafficking or terrorist activity, originated from
a legitimate source, which makes it difficult to track
and thwart (Spiro, 2017). Financing for these transnational organized crime
(TOC) enterprises is required for safe haven, paying bribes, recruitment,
operational expenses (materials and overhead), payment of operatives and good
will contributions (donations) (Boyle, 2012). A perfect example of using threat
finance to enhance his operation is Pablo Escobar. Donations and good will,
provided by Escobar, proved to be useful throughout his reign in Colombia.
Escobar built communities and soccer fields with his own capital in order to
gain the loyalty of the people. The people looked at Escobar as if he was their
family and would even tip him off if raids were coming or any type of police
were around. Escobar successfully used good will in return for information from
people all over Colombia.

The only real way to deter or stop threat finance from jeopardizing
global stability is something called financial intelligence. Basically,
financial intelligence is just the methods used by the U.S. government and
international authorities to discover these financial threats and deter or stop
them permanently. It’s not as easy as it sounds due to the sophistication and
integration of global financial systems. Two methods of financial intelligence
used to disrupt these organizations’ financial operations is the Anti-Money
Laundering (AML) and Counter Threat Finance (CTF) policies and regulations. The
U.S. government has developed many of these policies in order to
enhance transparency and by requiring financial services providers to collect,
maintain and report information that supports law enforcement investigations
and helps to deter illicit financing (Spiro, 2017). These
policies are aimed at permanently disrupting financial operations, which would
interrupt transnational criminal activity as a collateral effect (Boyle, 2012).

These policies are a way to combat threat finance used by these
transnational organized crime enterprises. However, in the world today there is
an increasing integration of the global financial system due to the lower
barriers to trade and movement of capital. Globalization has led to financial
dealings all over the world. International commerce and trade has become a
common occurrence and does not justify an inquiry if a large sum of money is
transferred or received through international means. Technological innovations have
also made it easier to launder money while at the same time increasing the
difficulty of detecting and stopping illicit operations by law enforcement and
federal agencies (Spiro, 2017). The evolution of technology and technological
advancements in combination with a multitude of tactics (money laundering,
shell companies, online gambling, counterfeiting, etc.) makes it increasingly
more difficult for these federal agencies to have a major effect on threat
finance. Preventing drug traffickers from gaining capital or having access to
that capital is a pliable option, but much easier in ideology and theory than
in practice.

Border security is one of the most widely discussed topics going on in
the United States today. It’s also one of the most controversial issues. It is
estimated that 70-90% of illegal drugs enter the United States along the
2000-mile border with Mexico (Snow, 2013, p.348). On the face of it, this may
seem like a domestic security threat, but it does have strong indirect national
security implications. “The deleterious effect of drug usage on Americans, and
thus American society, and the political devastation to other countries
(especially but not limited to Mexico) created by the actions of drug
traffickers” (Snow, 2013, p.348) render this a national security threat. Drugs
entering America from a foreign country or foreign organization (TCO) that have
a direct impact upon United States citizens classifies the issue of border
security as a national security threat.

Border security is a more complex problem than one may assume. To put into perspective, the magnitude of the issue, “According to Stephen Flynn, one of the country’s leading experts in border and port security issues, in 2000, 489 million people, 127 million passenger vehicles, 11 million trucks, 2.2 million railroad cars, 829,000 planes and 211,000 vessels passed through American border inspection systems” (Snow, 2013, p.345). We can’t rationally believe that each person, car, truck, plane or vessel was thoroughly searched for illegal contraband. It’s just not possible given the resources or number of border guards. Illegal drugs are the foundation of much crime and put a strain on the criminal justice and penal system. According to Snow (2013), “the country would be stronger if drug use were sharply curtailed or eliminated” (p.348). The best way to eliminate these drugs is stronger security along the Mexican border through increased route interdiction.

Marguerite Cawley, contributor to insightcrime.org, has a negative
opinion about drug route interdiction. According to Cawley (2014), “interdiction
programs have failed to halt supply in consumer states and instead appear to
have facilitated the migration of organized crime — a phenomenon with important
implications for drug policy.” Cawley also believes “The migration of drug
trafficking operations is often put down to the “balloon effect,” a theory
touted by many academics and proponents of drug policy change that states
anti-narcotics efforts and increased interdiction in one area leads criminals
to shift operations to another, rather than having the intended impact of cutting
profits and increasing costs to drug traffickers” (2014). Ms. Cawley believes
that interrupting one drug route will lead to the opening of another drug
route. That may be true, but is the government supposed to allow known drug
routes to remain open when they can be stopped? Not taking action out of fear
of reaction from TCO’s is a dangerous precedent to set and sends the wrong
message to the American people.

Significant
improvements have been made at the southern border since 2000. There is
currently 700 miles of fencing compared to the 77 miles of fencing in 2000. “The border is patrolled by 107 aircraft and 84 vessels; in
2000, there were 56 aircraft and 2 vessels. Border Patrol also utilizes 8
unmanned aerial systems, compared to zero in 2000 and has 18,000 border patrol
agents compared to 8,600 in 2000” (DeLuca, 2016). It shows that the government
is putting an increased amount of resources at the border and looking for
increased security in return. The benefit of these extra resources is an increased
interdiction of drug transportation routes. According to DeLuca (2016), “In
2012 alone, Border Patrol agents on the southern border seized more than 5,900
pounds of cocaine and more than 2.2 million pounds of marijuana.” This shows
that interdiction efforts have been working with the extra resources. DeLuca
(2016) even claims that TCO’s have shifted operations and are starting to use
the Caribbean corridor to transport and ship drugs because of the increased
security measures at the southern border. Cawley is essentially right that
interdiction leads to other routes opening up, but I contest that these
interdiction results mean it’s working. TCO’s use innovative methods and
various routes to transport drugs, but the US Government needs to try to stay
one step ahead and keep sending resources to the southern border in an attempt
to interdict transportation routes.

Recommendation & Summary:

“In some important ways, the security of national borders is the oldest and most fundamental of all national security issues. Protecting and defending national, sovereign territory is, arguably, the most important and vital priority and task of government” (Snow, 2013). That quote is the basis for my recommendation. Interdicting drug transportation routes is an instrumental part of defending our borders and securing our safety. It won’t be easy, but it should be the focus of the US Government. With the opioid epidemic flourishing, it’s evident that the US Government needs to contain the flow of illegal drugs into the country. The factors that will be critical to successfully implement drug interdiction are finance, resources and intelligence gathering. The government will need to dedicate a significant portion of the budget to the southern border. With strong financial backing, the government can hire an appropriate amount of border agents and increase the resources (thermal imaging, UAV’s) available for them to do their jobs. “Many of these tunnels are extremely intricate. They include ventilation systems, electrical lighting, support beams, and might even include a rail system to transport the contraband” (DeLuca, 2016). These TCO’s use ingenious methods to get their products into the US and we need to use all the resources available to thwart their efforts. The final factor is intelligence gathering. The US needs to emphasize capturing these individuals and retrieving information from them. The threat of long-term imprisonment could force someone to reveal trade secrets or other valuable information for a reduced sentence. Capturing a high ranking member of one of these TCO’s that has vital information could lead to greater interdiction. The value of intelligence is sometimes overlooked, but in this case, gathering intelligence could prove invaluable and give us insight to how these organizations have been so successful in the past. “National security is, at its most elemental level, about protecting the citizenry from hostile others who might breach those borders and do harm to the citizens” (Snow, 2013). TCO’s that traffic drugs into the United States are hostile, breach our borders and intend do harm to our citizens. That is why interdicting transportation routes is the most effective way to reduce the effectiveness of TCO’s in America and abroad.

Bibliography

1. A Brief History of the Drug War. (2017). Retrieved from http://www.drugpolicy.org/facts/new-solutions-drug-policy/brief-history-drug-war-0
2. Abuse, N. I. (2017, January 6). Overdose Death Rates. Retrieved from https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/overdose-death-rates
3. Adinolfi, J. (2013, October). Six Things You Need To Know About America’s Illegal Drug Trade: Who’s Using What Where And At What Cost — ConvergEx Study. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.com/six-things-you-need-know-about-americas-illegal-drug-trade-whos-using-what-where-what-1444242
4. Albanese, J. S. (2015). Organized crime: from the mob to transnational organized crime (7th ed.). London: Routledge.
5. America’s Habit. (1986). Retrieved from http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/govpubs/amhab/amhabc3.htm
6. BEST. (2018). Border Enforcement Security Task Force (BEST). Retrieved from https://www.ice.gov/best
7. Blaszczak-Boxe, A. (2014, October 06). Marijuana and Your Health: What 20 Years of Research Reveals. Retrieved from https://www.livescience.com/48171-marijuana-research-health-effects-review.html
8. Boyle, A. S. (2012, December). Threat Finance and Financial Intelligence Fact Sheet. Retrieved from: https://www.scribd.com/document/115050071/Threat-Finance-and-Financial-Intelligence-Fact-Sheet
9. Cawley, M. (2014, May 21). Why Increased Interdiction Does Not Lead to Less Drug Trafficking. Retrieved from https://www.insightcrime.org/news/analysis/why-increased-interdiction-not-lead-less-drug-trafficking/
10. DeLuca, D. (2016, April 12). Border Security and the War on Drugs. Retrieved from https://www.hstoday.us/channels/federal-state-local/border-security-and-the-war-on-drugs/
11. FBI. (2016, May 03). Organized Crime. Retrieved from https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/organized-crime
12. Felbab-Brown, V. (2016, July 28). Organized Criminals Won’t Fade Away. Retrieved from: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/organized-criminals-wont-fade-away/
13. History.com (2017). History of Drug Trafficking. Retrieved from http://www.history.com/topics/history-of-drug-trafficking
14. Miroff, N. (Jan. 2015). “Losing Marijuana Business, Mexican Cartels Push Heroin and Meth.” Washington Post. Retrieved from https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/world/southwest-border-drug-seizures/1543/
15. Morell, M. (2017, September 3). The Opioid Crisis Becomes a National Security Threat. Retrieved from: https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column/expert-view/opioid-crisis-becomes-national-security-threat
16. Quinones, S. (2017, February 16). Why Trump’s Wall Won’t Keep Out Heroin. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/opinion/sunday/why-trumps-wall-wont-keep-out-heroin.html
17. Snow, D. M. (2013). National Security for a New Era. Boston, MA: Pearson.
18. Spiro, J. (2017, July 07). Threat finance has become big business. Retrieved from https://blogs.thomsonreuters.com/answerson/threat-finance-fight-to-stop-it/
19. United States Sentencing Commission (2013). Quick Facts: Drug Trafficking Offenses Retrieved from https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Quick_Facts_Drug_Trafficking_2013.pdf
20. United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (2016). Border security, 2015 : Hearing before the committee on homeland security and governmental affairs, United States Senate, one hundred fourteenth Congress, first session. Washington: U.S. Government Publishing Office. Retrieved from: https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=767502
21. United States. Executive Office of the President. (2011). Strategy to combat transnational organized crime : Addressing converging threats to national security. Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President. Retrieved from: https://www-hsdl-org.ezproxy.neu.edu/?view&did=682263
22. Village, T. R. (2017, June 17). Drug Trafficking by the Numbers. Retrieved from https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/drug-addiction/drug-trafficking-by-the-numbers/#gref
23. Voronin, Y. A. (2000). Measures to Control Transnational Organized Crime.        National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), 184773. Retrieved from: https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=478278