This is a variation of a talk that I give a few times per year. (It's usually shorter.) I haven't written it up as a publication yet.
The gist: it's perfectly possible to protect people from crime without locking up 3 percent of a country's male population, blowing up civilian boats on the high seas, and dismantling democracy.
Long experience in Latin America shows that short-term fixes, especially anything that conflates organized crime groups with insurgents or "terrorists," are a dead end.
Most people who study crime and governance agree, in broad terms, on the long-term vision for protecting people. There's no substitute for a functioning security sector with a strong justice system and a high probability that anyone who colludes with organized crime will face accountability. That vision includes extensive oversight, transparency, and a laser focus on suffocating organized crime by severing its corrupt ties to government and other power centers.
But that's a long-term solution. People feeling besieged by crime don't have the patience for that. So what can leaders and societies do to make people feel safer in the short term?
The answer isn't as simplistic as "declare a state of emergency and lock up anyone who looks suspicious." Instead, a rights-respecting, democracy-preserving short-term security strategy has many fragments and moving parts. Here is a survey of what it takes. There's no other choice.
Constructive comments and suggestions, especially on the "short term" conundrum, are very welcome. Thanks for listening.
Colombia