Over the summer, I read Hillary Clinton’s new memoir, Hard Choices, which chronicled her tenure as secretary of state. Her book gives a glimpse of professional diplomacy in practice, but also highlights that, in today’s world, international relations are more than just meetings among professional diplomats. Thanks to globalization and the Internet, ordinary citizens nowadays conduct international relations without even realizing it, and their messages and actions can even be more forceful than formal diplomacy. If not conducted prudently and carefully, however, the actions of ordinary citizens can harm both America and the rest of the world. 

The violence and instability caused by the Mexican drug war, for example, are rooted in the choices of ordinary Americans. For three decades, Mexican drug cartels have fought the Mexican government and one another to smuggle drugs into the United States. They have killed over 120,000 people, including many civilians. 

Although the Mexican government is ultimately responsible for protecting Mexico, America has not made this any easier. 

As Clinton recalls in her book, Mexico’s former President Felipe Calderón once asked how he can fight the cartels if “[America] won’t stop the weapons [the cartels] buy across the border.”

Clinton claims that Mexican drug cartels traffic about 90 percent of the illegal drugs that Americans consume. The cartels draw their power from the decisions and actions of many ordinary Americans, whose thirst for drugs continues to fund the gangs. 

A study by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security estimates that Mexican drug cartels receive $19 to $29 billion of revenue from the United States annually. This is money paid by ordinary Americans who make ordinary bad choices and do not think about the broader consequences; their money is fueling a war that is ruthlessly destroying innocent people. 

Both Mexico’s president and ambassador to the United States blame the expiration of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban in 2004 for the rise of drug violence in Mexico. The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives stated in 2012 that the United States was the source of 70 percent of the 99,000 illegal weapons confiscated in Mexico between 2007 and 2011. 

A lack of strong federal assault weapon and gun trafficking bans, which multiple American gun rights groups oppose, has meant that cartels can more easily buy those weapons and move them over the border. Many weapons are stolen, but many are also legally purchased, often by Americans at gun shows, which then transfer the weapons to the cartels. Americans who oppose weapons bans often do not think about how a lack of regulation affects not just their own country, but the world. 

Stopping America’s drug addiction is difficult, but Americans need to see how satisfying their personal addictions and their unwillingness to address gun reform are fueling a war that is destroying our neighbor and ally. This affects us when instability on the Mexican border pours across into America, taxing our law enforcement and socioeconomic stability.  The drug cartels are directly responsible for most of the destruction, but Americans should not perpetuate it, either. We should not fuel a war that maliciously and indiscriminately destroys innocent people, solely so that we can get a quick buzz. 

A second example of careless behavior having dangerous repercussions is in the anti-Islam acts that many Americans have conducted, ultimately causing loss of life. A number of Americans have burned the Quran, the Islamic holy text, and set off dangerous protests among angry Muslims. One case involved Terry Jones, a Florida pastor who publicly burned a Quran in March 2011. In retaliation, angry protesters gathered outside a UN office in Afghanistan. These peaceful demonstrations eventually turned violent, causing the deaths of seven people. 

Another case occurred in February 2012 when American soldiers at the Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan burned Muslim holy texts and unleashed a protest that killed four Americans. Although this burning was meant to dispose of texts with extremist messages rather than to spite,  it was still careless and led to the same consequences as those of Jones’ Quran burning. Jones’ attack, though, was even more repulsive since he was told of the potential consequences but still chose to act foolishly.    

These attacks show how hateful personal acts can have deadly consequences. With the advent of international and online media, messages and actions from one country are instantaeously received a continent away. Videos of Quran burnings are posted online and quickly seen worldwide, increasing the rapidity and intensity of the protests and violence that follow. 

Interconnectivity between ordinary peoples has linked together formerly separated communities, making international incidents more unpredictable and sudden than they used to be. Ordinary people must now be aware of how other nations may perceive their actions. 

Although some critics may believe that it is not our responsibility to worry about what happens in other countries, we must ultimately be responsible for the consequences resulting from our own actions. In the era of advanced communications, each American who makes a political statement has the world watching him, including audiences he never intended. He needs to understand how his actions can affect the world, and in turn how the world sees America.

Clinton noted in her memoir that everyone has hard choices in life, and in diplomacy, they are inevitable. Undoubtedly, with ordinary citizens playing greater roles worldwide, hard choices will become more common. Of course, choosing to be tactful and considerate of the consequences of our actions worldwide should not be a hard choice.