Experts question global counternarcotics strategies
By Steve Hirsch
International counternarcotics efforts are ineffective or actively counterproductive, according to speakers at a conference on drug production and state stability held at the Centre d'Études et de Recherches Internationales (CERI) in Paris on 6 October.
According to Alfred McCoy from the University of Wisconsin, the problem is the erroneous US and UN presumption that the international illegal drug supply is fixed, meaning that repression of trade in illegal narcotics would be an effective measure to decrease it. However, McCoy explained that it is the demand that is inelastic, which means users will do what they need to maintain access to drugs, while growers will increase their planting, or new producers or areas will enter the market to make up for drugs eliminated by enforcement efforts.
After fighting five drug wars in 30 years at a cost of USD150 billion, McCoy said, "Washington has presided over a six-fold increase" in the world opium supply from 1,000 tonnes in 1970 to between 5,000 and 6,000 tonnes today. Meanwhile, the number of US heroin users has gone from 68,000 to more than one million during the same period and, despite 15 years of US bilateral anti-drugs efforts, Andean coca production doubled to 600,000 tonnes by 2000.
Other speakers pointed to the problems that can arise in states where supply-side eradication policies have achieved local success. Pierre-Arnaud Chouvy, a research fellow from the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, said that rushed eradication efforts in Afghanistan could eliminate one-third of the national economy without developing the legal economy to replace it. In Myanmar, he said, movement towards an opium ban could lead to social and political instability because farmers in the affected regions, who are already among the poorest in the world, have not been given alternatives to opium income.
It's amazing when you think about it that, like the Oil scam, the "we cant stop the drug trade" scam continues. Though I hear not for much longer.
Take this point...
"...rushed eradication efforts in Afghanistan could eliminate one-third of the national economy without developing the legal economy to replace it. In Myanmar, he said, movement towards an opium ban could lead to social and political instability because farmers in the affected regions, who are already among the poorest in the world, have not been given alternatives to opium income."
He's not saying they cant wipe it out. He's just saying that their might be some upset natives. With some of our own logic we can see that the world community can simply give the farmers the meager amount they already get. Say $40 million U.S and you just wiped out 1/3 of the worlds Opium. Not bad eh?
Also note he warns about "rushed eradication efforts". They plan to wipe it out their soon. The Oz SAS are there for this purpose as is a SAS contingent to join them from the U.K. next year.
In fact ALL of Asia is about to cop it.
Only 30 years late.
We dont need "decriminalization". We need law enforcement to do their job. So much of the excuse for the "Police State" will dissapear with the drug trade.