The Need for Course Correction: The Risks of Treating Drug Cartels as Terrorist Threats
The Need for Course Correction: The Risks of Treating Drug Cartels as Terrorist Threats by Donell Harvin was published by Just Security on February 12, 2025.
The article presents an analysis of the potential benefits and significant risks associated with this policy approach. The piece explores how the order could provide enhanced legal tools for law enforcement. These legal tools include the ability to freeze cartel assets, improve interagency collaboration, and increase focus on border security. However, the author raises substantial concerns about the broader implications of such a sweeping designation.
The core argument centers on the fundamental difference between profit-driven criminal enterprises and ideologically motivated terrorist groups. While acknowledging the severe threat posed by drug cartels – highlighted by over 100,000 drug overdose fatalities in 2023, with synthetic opioids involved in nearly 70% of deaths – the article warns against an overly broad approach to classification. The potential risks include significant overreach in defining terrorist organizations, legal challenges for sanctuary cities, potential infringements on civil liberties, and the dangerous possibility of diluting critical counterterrorism resources.
The author provides a set of recommendations to mitigate these and other risks, including establishing clear designation criteria, protecting civil liberties, strategically allocating resources, conducting regular organizational reviews, and focusing on prevention and rehabilitation. Perhaps most provocatively, the piece suggests that treating cartels as terrorist organizations could create more problems than it solves, potentially blurring critical distinctions in how we understand and combat different types of criminal threats.
A particularly compelling aspect of the analysis is its exploration of the potential long-term consequences, including the risk of expanding such designations to domestic groups and the constitutional challenges such an approach might present. The survey ultimately invites readers to consider the delicate balance between effective law enforcement and preserving fundamental civil liberties.
