Victims of the White War or Rebellions of the Green Revolution? Bolivian Indigenous Women Prisoners' Position in the "War on Drugs" Explored through a Criminological Gaze

Tässä tutkielmassa tarkastellaan Bolivialaisten naisvankien (alkuperäisväestön) ja globaalin huumesodan ("War on Drugs") välistä yhteyttä. Keskustelu sijoitetaan laajemmin kokan viljelyn politiikkaan ja alkuperäisväestön kulttuuriin. Kokaa viljeleviä köyhiä maalaisia, joista huomattava osa on naisia, on vangittu Boliviassa kiihtyvää tahtia viime vuosikymmeninä. Moni naisista on kokan tuotannossa ja kaupassa mukana, sillä se on monesti ainoa keino taloudelliseen selviämiseen. Yleisesti ottaen naisvangit ja naisrikolliset ovat marginaalinen ilmiö. Kansainvälisesti tarkasteltuna naisvankien suhteellinen osuus koko vankilaväestöstä on noin 5,2 % (keskiarvo). Boliviassa osuus on vaihdellut 6,1 %:n ja 17,1 %:n välillä vuosina 2000-2008. Naisvankien määrä yleisesti ottaen on ollut rajussa kasvussa, suurin syy naisten vangitsemiseen on huumausaineisiin liittyvät rikokset. Näyttää myös siltä että vähemmistöt ja etnisen taustan omaavat henkilöt ovat yliedustettuina vankilaväestössä. Bolivia seuraa tätä kansainvälistä trendiä. Tämä tutkielma on rajattu kysymyksiin Bolivian intiaaniperäisten naisten osuudesta maan huumerikollisuudessa, sekä heidän suhteellisen korkeaa vangitsemisastetta selittäviin yhteiskunnallisiin tekijöihin. Kysymykset sukupuolesta, etnisyydestä ja kokan viljelyn politiikasta ovat keskiössä. Yleisiä kriminologisia teorioita peilataan kriittisesti suhteessa aineistoon ja Bolivian kontekstiin. Huumesodan ja Bolivian ankaran huumelainsäädännön seurauksista keskustellaan kriittisesti, sekä pohditaan köyhän alkuperäisväestön massavangitsemisen tarpeellisuutta. Tutkimuskysymykseni ovat: mitkä tekijät selittävät kohtuullisen korkean intiaaniperäisten naisvankien määrän Boliviassa, ja mikä on heidän asemansa globaalissa huumesodassa? Tutkielmassa on analysoitu kvantitatiivista ja kvalitatiivista aineistoa. Päälähteenä on ollut Bolivian tilastokeskuksen tuottamat rikostilastot. Tutkielman tärkeimpänä löydöksenä voidaan pitää havaintoa, että vastoin tiettyjä olettamuksia, intiaaniperäiset naiset ovat hyvinkin aktiivisia perinteisesti miehisiksi käsitetyillä aloilla kuten rikollisuudessa ja politiikassa. Tutkielmassa osoitetaan myös, että pidätysten määrät ovat moninkertaistuneet muutamassa vuosikymmenessä. Koska kokan viljelyssä on kyse pääasiallisesti taloudellisesta toimeentulosta, tämä tutkielma kysyy, onko hengissä pysyminen rikos?

Arguments by definition : Felipe Calderón’s war on drugs and the power to persuade

Les études rhétoriques ont documenté la pertinence de la rhétorique présidentielle et le pouvoir du président de définir les enjeux publics par le discours. Cette recherche porte sur les pratiques rhétoriques par lesquelles l'ancien président mexicain Calderón a défini la lutte contre la drogue qui a caractérisé son administration. Je soutiens que Calderón a avancé une définition du problème de la drogue par des pratiques de définition telles que l'association, la dissociation et les symboles de condensation. Mon analyse 1) identifie les pratiques rhétoriques de définition qui ont caractérisé la lutte à la drogue de Calderón; 2) examine les implications de ces pratiques; et 3) aborde les limites auxquelles les politiciens font face en tentant de modifier des définitions préalablement avancées. En conclusion, j’explique comment les métaphores et les pratiques de définition de Calderón ont ouvert un espace rhétorique où les droits humains pouvaient être révoqués et la violence encouragée.

Different Wars Require Different Strategies: Separating the “War on Drugs” from the “War on Drug [Traffickers]”

Using the securitization framework to highlight the arguments that facilitated the “War on Drugs”, this paper highlights a separate war against drug traffickers. Facilitated by ideology through the rhetoric promoted by the “War on Drugs,” the fear of communist expansion and democratic contraction, the “War on Drug Traffickers” was implemented, requiring its own strategy separate from the “War on Drugs.” This is an important distinction because the play on words changes the perception of the issue from one of drug addiction to one of weak institutions and insurgent/terrorist threat to those institutions. Furthermore, one cannot propose strategy to win, lose, or retreat in a war that one has been unable to identify properly. And while the all-encompassing “War on Drugs” has motivated tremendous discourse on its failure and possible solutions to remedy its failure, the generalizations made as a result of the inability to distinguish between the policies behind drug addiction and the militarized policies behind drug trafficking have discounted the effect of violence perpetrated by the state, the rationale for the state perpetrating that violence, and the dependence that the state has on foreign actors to perpetrate such violence. This makes it impossible to not only propose effective strategy but also to persuade states that participate in the “War on Drug Traffickers” to adopt the proposed strategy.

An Environmental History of the War on Drugs

TBA

State-narco networks and the ‘War on Drugs’ in post-transition Bolivia, with special reference to 1989-1993

This thesis examines the development of state-narco networks in post-transition Bolivia. Mainstream discourses of drugs tend to undertheorise such relationships, holding illicit economies, weak states and violence as synergistic phenomena. Such assumptions fail to capture the nuanced relations that emerge between the state and the drug trade in different contexts, their underlying logics and diverse effects. As an understudied case, Bolivia offers novel insights into these dynamics. Bolivian military authoritarian governments (1964-1982), for example, integrated drug rents into clientelistic systems of governance, helping to establish factional coalitions and reinforce regime authority. Following democratic transition in 1982 and the escalation of US counterdrug efforts, these stable modes of exchange between the state and the coca-cocaine economy fragmented. Bolivia, though, continued to experience lower levels of drug-related violence than its Andean neighbours, and sustained democratisation despite being a major drug producer. Focusing on the introduction of the Andean Initiative (1989-1993), I explore state-narco interactions during this period of flux: from authoritarianism to (formal) democracy, and from Cold War to Drug War. As such, the thesis transcends the conventional analyses of the drugs literature and orthodox readings of Latin American narco-violence, providing insights into the relationship between illicit economies and democratic transition, the regional role of the US, and the (unintended) consequences of drug policy interventions. I utilise a mixed methods approach to offer discrete perspectives on the object of study. Drawing on documentary and secondary sources, I argue that state-narco networks were interwoven with Bolivia’s post-transition political settlement. Uneven democratisation ensured pockets of informalism, as clientelistic and authoritarian practices continued. This included police and military autonomy, and tolerance of drug corruption within both institutions. Non-enforcement of democratic norms of accountability and transparency was linked to the maintenance of fragile political equilibrium. Interviews with key US and Bolivian elite actors also revealed differing interpretations of state-narco interactions. These exposed competing agendas, and were folded into alternative paradigms and narratives of the ‘war on drugs’. The extension of US Drug War goals and the targeting of ‘corrupt’ local power structures, clashed with local ambivalence towards the drug trade, opposition to destabilising, ‘Colombianised’ policies and the claimed ‘democratising mission’ of the Bolivian government. In contrasting these US and Bolivian accounts, the thesis shows how real and perceived state-narco webs were understood and navigated by different actors in distinct ways. ‘Drug corruption’ held significance beyond simple economic transaction or institutional failure. Contestation around state-narco interactions was enmeshed in US-Bolivian relations of power and control.

Trading democracy for security? The effects of the international drug war on the quality of democracy in the Dominican Republic, 1996–2008

The purpose of the research is to study the relationship between international drug interdiction policies and domestic politics in fragile democracies, and to demonstrate how international drug control policies and the use of force fit the rhetoric of war, are legitimized by the principles of a just war, but may also cause collateral damage and negative unintended consequences. The method used is a case study of the Dominican Republic. The research has found that international drug control regimes, primarily led by the U.S. and narrowly focused on interdiction, have influenced an increasingly militarized approach to domestic law enforcement in the Dominican Republic. The collateral damage caused by militarized enforcement comes in the form of negative perceptions of citizen security, loss of respect for the rule of law and due process, and low levels of civil society development. The drug war has exposed the need for significant reform of the institutions charged with carrying out enforcement, the police force and the judicial system in particular. The dissertation concludes that the extent of drug trafficking in the Dominican Republic is beyond the scope of domestic reform efforts alone, but that the programs implemented do show some potential for future success. The dissertation also concludes that the framework of warfare is not the most appropriate for the international problems of drug traffic and abuse. A broader, multipronged approach should be considered by world policy makers in order to address all conditions that allow drugs to flourish without infringing upon democratic and civil rights in the process.

Trading Democracy for Security? The Effects of the International Drug War on the Quality of Democracy in the Dominican Republic, 1996 -2008

The purpose of the research is to study the relationship between international drug interdiction policies and domestic politics in fragile democracies, and to demonstrate how international drug control policies and the use of force fit the rhetoric of war, are legitimized by the principles of a just war, but may also cause collateral damage and negative unintended consequences. The method used is a case study of the Dominican Republic. The research has found that international drug control regimes, primarily led by the U.S. and narrowly focused on interdiction, have influenced an increasingly militarized approach to domestic law enforcement in the Dominican Republic. The collateral damage caused by militarized enforcement comes in the form of negative perceptions of citizen security, loss of respect for the rule of law and due process, and low levels of civil society development. The drug war has exposed the need for significant reform of the institutions charged with carrying out enforcement, the police force and the judicial system in particular. The dissertation concludes that the extent of drug trafficking in the Dominican Republic is beyond the scope of domestic reform efforts alone, but that the programs implemented do show some potential for future success. The dissertation also concludes that the framework of warfare is not the most appropriate for the international problems of drug traffic and abuse. A broader, multipronged approach should be considered by world policy makers in order to address all conditions that allow drugs to flourish without infringing upon democratic and civil rights in the process.

The language of neofeudal corporatism and the war on Iraq

In this paper we argue that the term “capitalism” is no longer useful for understanding the current system of political economic relations in which we live. Rather, we argue that the system can be more usefully characterised as neofeudal corporatism. Using examples drawn from a 300,000 word corpus of public utterances by three political leaders from the “coalition of the willing”— George W. Bush, Tony Blair, and John Howard—we show some defining characteristics of this relatively new system and how they are manifest in political language about the invasion of Iraq.

A discussion of Fashion Victims: Various responses to the report by War on Want, Critical Perspectives on International Business, Vol. 3 Iss: 2, pp.170 - 185

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a selection of responses to the report Fashion Victims, published by War on Want in December 2006. It offers a range of viewpoints presented by members of the Editorial Advisory Board of CPOIB. These are presented in chronological order of submission. There is some cross-reference by contributors to the work of others, but no attempt is made to present a unified argument. Design/methodology/approach – Presents the full contributions of involved participants, without mediation or editorial change. Findings – A number of different perspectives are presented on the central issue that is summarised by the opening heading in War on Want’s report – “How cheap is too cheap?” It is seen that the answer to this question is very much dependent upon the standpoint of the respondent. Originality/value – In presenting this form of commentary, members of the CPOIB Editorial Board seek to stimulate debate about an issue of concern to contemporary society, without resort to the time delay and mediating processes of peer-review normally attached to academic writing. It is hoped that this discussion will provoke further contributions and a widening of the debate. Keywords Corporate social responsibility, Multinational companies, Conditions of employment, Trade unions

Enlightenment out of chaos : power, politics and The Chaser’s War on Everything

This paper focuses on the satirical Australian television show The Chaser’s War on Everything, and uses it to critically explore the potential ramifications of what McNair (2006) has called ‘cultural chaos’. Through an analysis of several examples from this particular program, alongside interviews with its production team and qualitative audience research, this paper argues that this TV show’s engagement with political issues in a creative, entertaining way that departs from the conventions of traditional journalism, allows it to present a perhaps more authentic image of political agents than is often cultivated in the mainstream news media. This paper therefore provides clear evidence that the shift from homogeneity to heterogeneity in the news media presents a significant challenge to those who wish to heavily control public opinion. It also provides further support for an optimistic re-appraisal of entertainment which emphasises its central (not merely periphery) role in political discourse.

Introduction to special issue on what criminology can say about the war on terror

On 20 September 2001, the former US President, George W. Bush, declared what is now widely, and arguably infamously, known as a ‘war on terror’. In response to the fatal 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, DC, President Bush identified the US military response as having far-reaching and long-lasting consequences. It was, he argued, ‘our war on terror’ that began ‘with al Qaeda, but … it will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated’ (CNN 2001). This was to be a war that would, in the words of former British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, seek to eliminate a threat that was ‘aimed at the whole democratic world’ (Blair 2001). Blair claimed that this threat is of such magnitude that unprecedented measures would need to be taken to uphold freedom and security. Blair would later admit that it was a war that ‘divided the country’ and was based on evidence ‘about Saddam having actual biological and chemical weapons, as opposed to the capability to develop them, has turned out to be wrong’ (Blair 2004). The failures of intelligence ushered in new political rhetoric in the form of ‘trust me’ because ‘instinct is no science’ (Blair 2004). The war on terror has been one of the most significant international events in the past three decades, alongside the collapse of the former Soviet Union, the end of apartheid in South Africa, the unification of Europe and the marketization of the People's Republic of China. Yet, unlike the other events, it will not be remembered for advancing democracy or sovereignty, but for the conviction politics of particular politicians who chose to dispense with international law and custom in pursuit of personal instincts that proved fatal. Since the invasions of Afghanistan in October 2001 and …

Too early to proclaim the end of the war on childhood obesity

Parents winning childhood war on obesity, Australian Bureau of Statistics data reveals, screamed the headline. Sounds like a good news story to make every parent breathe a sigh of relief, but is it really true? The article in question quoted obesity expert and University of South Australia Professor Tim Olds, who argued that “the media and public health authorities are getting carried away” about childhood obesity. He pointed to the fact that recent ABS data showed rates of overweight and obesity in children plateaued between 2007/08 and between 2011/12. But that still means one in four Australian children is overweight or obese; it’s clear we still have a lot of work to do. As a nutritionist working with parents every day (both in practical obesity programs and in research into reducing this considerable health risk), I was concerned that the article could be taken at face value. Because there’s more, much more, to this story.