When the one giving advice is the one setting a bad example

Ramón Rodríguez Montero, teleSUR, June 7, 2026 —

It’s no secret that the world faces a colossal fracture in the international order, and this reality presents us with a scenario: the confrontation of two economic, social, and political models—in short, two models of relations between nations. Specifically, the unipolar and multipolar models. To name them, the unipolar model is represented by the United States and all its henchmen or lackeys, while the multipolar model is represented by nations such as Venezuela, Russia, Iran, and China, among others. This rupture represents something far beyond what is commonly imagined. Humanity finds itself facing issues such as the exercise, or lack thereof, of freedom, sovereignty, and self-determination of peoples threatened by the unipolar vision. Faced with the option of living in a multipolar world, the natural course is to change course toward this alternative, which would allow peoples to exist according to their collective ideology, based on their idiosyncrasies, dignity, ethics, morals, principles, and values.

This attempt by peoples to live according to their worldview, in free, sovereign, and independent nations, is constantly attacked and thwarted by the unilateral vision of governments like that of the United States. An example of this can be found in Colombia, where, under the pretext of fighting drugs, a series of measures were implemented, such as Plan Colombia, which included the establishment of US military bases. These bases, beyond being located in Colombia, are in reality US hubs in South America, from which military forces can be deployed within the country and to other nations in the region. But it doesn’t stop there. Thanks to US influence, Plan Colombia gave rise to paramilitarism, and governments not only endorsed it but protected it and, unofficially, transformed it into state policy. This policy was further sustained by crimes such as drug production and trafficking, cattle rustling, homicides, and displacements that facilitated land theft, among many other violations of the rights of the people. This resulted in exiles, which, unfortunately, must be recognized as the best of the cases because at least the people are alive and if anyone has doubts I can cite the El Aro massacre that occurred in 1997 as a reference.

The argument for installing US bases in Colombia was the fight against the guerrillas and drug trafficking, but the latter is hardly relevant; it is well known that the United States holds the unbeatable record for drug consumption in the world, and not only is it the largest consumer of drugs, but it is also the largest consumer in terms of the variety of all types of drugs that exist. This is compounded by the extremely high levels of drugs that travel across the Pacific Ocean to the United States in submarines, for example, which are manufactured by drug cartels. As an example, it is enough to remember that on February 9th of this year, 2026, one of these vessels was intercepted transporting 10 tons of cocaine, to cite just one case; But we can also talk about the manufacture, distribution, and consumption of fentanyl within the United States. In this case, we’re talking about a drug that is 50 times more potent than heroin and 100 times more potent than morphine, which explains why so many cities have streets filled with zombies, such as Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Portland. In Philadelphia, I’ll only talk about the Kensington neighborhood, which is considered the epicenter of this epidemic. This undoubtedly represents a true public health emergency in the United States, and this raises a crucial question: what is the government doing to solve this? Because the problem persists, and fentanyl continues to be produced in the United States as if nothing were happening.

The United States and its ambition to correct its internal problems outside its borders is a very delicate matter. This military power possesses the nuclear capability to end life on this planet, yet it resorts to this resource to blame other nations for internal problems. To do so, it accuses governments that are not compliant, labeling them dictatorial or narco-states. In short, it then attacks them through economic, financial, and commercial blockades—something they euphemistically call sanctions, which are nothing more than unilateral coercive measures to force the hand of nations they dislike. Of course, this is one scenario, but there are others, such as direct military action against free and independent sovereign nations, accusing them of the same thing.

For the United States, it has become a habit—a very bad one, certainly, but a habit nonetheless—to see the speck in someone else’s eye while ignoring the log in its own. This is where it’s worthwhile to analyze cases like the complaint made in late March by Uruguayan Senator Daniel Caggiani of the Broad Front, when he stated on the program “Legitimate Defense” that his country is under pressure from the United States. This situation has intensified after Uruguay, along with Brazil, Mexico, and Chile, spoke out against the unilateral action by the United States government to remove President Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela. Furthermore, he maintains that this expression of independence, sovereignty, and self-determination, guaranteed by current international law, is being violated. As proof, he points out that after this demonstration of respect for international law, Uruguay received new sanctions from the United States government. The Uruguayan senator affirms that the vision and motivation for his nation’s participation in these international forums for dialogue between nations is to promote solidarity and… Integration through the means that allow the application of diplomatic formulas, the use of dialogue between the parties to reach agreements, respecting freedom, sovereignty, the inalienable right to self-determination of peoples and in peace, and it is for this reason that it considers that the implementation of the so-called Shield of the Americas, an initiative undertaken by the US government, is nothing more than an attempt to impose the agenda of the Northern power under the pretext of a fight against drug trafficking and narcoterrorism, which to date has been unable to prevent the arrival of drugs to the United States, let alone the production, trafficking and consumption within the United States, as occurs with the production, distribution and consumption of fentanyl; it is worth highlighting that in this supposed fight against drug trafficking and narcoterrorism, the only thing that has been exposed to international public opinion is the bombing of fishing boats and innocent people, in which it has already been demonstrated, for example, that elements such as the fuel they carried was insufficient to cover a quarter of the journey to reach the United States; This is where the question that has not yet been answered gains increasing traction: How is it that with all the technology at its disposal, the United States is completely inefficient in detecting and ending the production and trafficking of drugs within its territory?