Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T22:10:47.214Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Miami Summit and Drugs: A Placid, Innocuous Conference?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Juan G. Tokatlián*
Affiliation:
Centro de Estudios Internacionales of the Universidad de los Andes, in Santafé de Bogotá, Colombia

Extract

The Western Hemisphere summit, which has been called by President Bill Clinton and is scheduled to be held in Miami (FL) in December 1994, will no doubt prove to be yet another major milestone along the evolving path of inter-American relations. Nevertheless, the significance of this meeting has been muted by the scanty information and limited signals given out by the host country regarding the meeting's purpose and agenda. In some ways, the upcoming summit projects a double image: of an event that is both transcendental and superficial at one and the same time. At least two elements point in this direction. On the one hand, much like similar previous conferences in history, not all members of the Hemisphere will attend, since some nations - like Cuba - have not been invited, an aspect that will affect the nature, spirit, and scope of this long-awaited assemblage of the Americas.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bagley, B. and Tokatlian, J. (1992) “Dope and Dogma: Explaining the Failure of US-Latin American Drug Policies,” in Hartlyn, Jonathan, Schoultz, Lars, and Varas, Augusto (eds.) The United States and Latin America in the 1990s: Beyond the Cold War. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Bufalino, G. (1993) Quid Pro Quo. Santafé de Bogotá, Colombia: Editorial Norma.Google Scholar
Chambliss, W. (1992) “The Consequences of Prohibition: Crime, Corruption, and International Drug Control,” pp. 1532 in Traver, Harold H. and Gaylord, Mark S. (eds.) Drugs, Law and the State. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Cioran, E. (1991) Desgarradura. Santafé de Bogotá, Colombia: Tercer Mundo Editores/Montesinos.Google Scholar
Klelman, M. (1992) “Neither Prohibition nor Legalization: Grudging Toleration in Drug Control Policy.” Daedalus 121, 3 (Summer): 5383.Google Scholar
Luke, T. (1992) “From the Flows of Power to the Power of the Flows: Teaching World Politics in an Informationalizing World System,” in Gonick, Lev. S. and Weisband, Edward (eds.) Teaching World Politics; Contending Pedagogies for a New World. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Lyotard, J.F. (1989) La condición posmoderna. Madrid, Spain: Editorial Cátedra.Google Scholar
Perl, R. (1992) “United States Andean Drug Policy: Background and Issues for Decisionmakers.” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 34, 3 (Fall): 1333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reuter, P. (1992) “Hawks Ascendant: The Punitive Trend of American Drug Policy.” Daedalus 121, 3, (Summer): 1552.Google Scholar
Reuter, P. (1991) “On the Consequences of Thoroughness.” RAND-Note (N-3447-DPRC). Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
United States. Office of Management and Budget (US-OMB) (1993) US Federal Drug Control Funding (April). Washington, DC: US-OMB.Google Scholar
United States. Office of National Drug Control Policy (US-ONDCP) (1992) National Drug Control Strategy. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
University of Michigan. (1994) “Monitoring the Future” (27 January). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Bureau of Social Research.Google Scholar