For decades, the United States has perfected a familiar political ritual: condemn Latin American governments for the flow of narcotics northward, demand crackdowns, and frame the crisis as something done to America rather than something America helps create.

It is a narrative that travels well in press conferences and campaign rallies. It is also a distortion — one that obscures the central truth of the hemispheric drug trade: the U.S. market exists because Americans keep buying.

Yet Washington continues to treat Latin America as the culprit rather than the supplier responding to a demand created on U.S. soil. The result is a policy posture that is both ineffective and deeply hypocritical.

The U.S. government’s latest wave of criticism comes amid a renewed militarized approach to drug enforcement in the region. President Donald Trump has framed narcotics as “the number-one public enemy” and has escalated operations across the Caribbean and Pacific, including airstrikes on vessels suspected of trafficking drugs.

These actions have been paired with sweeping rhetoric that casts Latin American nations as negligent or complicit — a framing that conveniently ignores the structural forces driving the trade.

But the evidence shows that supply is not the root of the crisis. Demand is.

U.S. consumption patterns have shifted dramatically over the past decade, with Americans turning increasingly to opioids, fentanyl, and methamphetamine.

According to an analysis of the evolving drug trade, the U.S. opioid epidemic has been fueled by unprecedented levels of domestic consumption, with more than 72,000 overdose deaths recorded in 2017 alone. As demand for synthetic drugs surged, Mexican criminal groups adapted to meet the market — not because Mexico “wanted” to poison Americans, but because the U.S. market signaled what it was willing to buy.

This is not a moral absolution of cartels. It is a recognition of basic economics: If Americans were not consuming narcotics at such staggering levels, the trade would not exist at its current scale.

Yet U.S. political leaders continue to focus almost exclusively on supply-side enforcement. The United States has sharply increased military operations targeting alleged traffickers, launching strikes across the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. These actions have been condemned by regional governments and human rights groups, who argue they amount to extrajudicial killings and risk destabilizing already fragile areas.

Meanwhile, the structural drivers of American drug consumption — economic despair, untreated mental health conditions, lack of access to healthcare, and the pharmaceutical industry’s legacy of overprescribing — remain under-addressed. The U.S. government’s own data shows that the crisis is fueled by domestic vulnerabilities, not foreign malice. But acknowledging that would require political courage and policy investment. Blaming Latin America is easier.

This dynamic has played out for decades. Hardline security responses in Latin America have “not pacified the region’s cartels” and have in some cases “exacerbated violence,” according to Oxford Analytica’s assessment of anti-drug strategies. The United States continues to push these same strategies, even though they have repeatedly failed to produce lasting results.

Washington externalizes blame, militarizes the response, and avoids confronting the American demand that sustains the trade.

This approach is ineffective. It strains diplomatic relationships, fuels violence in Latin America, and distracts from the urgent need for domestic solutions. It also reinforces a paternalistic narrative in which the United States positions itself as a victim of foreign dysfunction rather than a co-architect of the crisis.

If the U.S. government is serious about reducing the flow of narcotics, it must start by looking inward. That means investing in addiction treatment, regulating pharmaceutical practices, addressing economic despair, and confronting the social conditions that make narcotics appealing in the first place. It means acknowledging that the drug trade is a hemispheric system — one in which the United States is not merely the endpoint, but the engine.

Until Washington is willing to confront the American appetite for narcotics, its criticism of Latin America will remain what it has long been: a convenient distraction from an uncomfortable truth.

____

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network.

_____

©2026 The Fulcrum. Visit at thefulcrum.us. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.