America's Drug Crisis: Brought to You by the CIA

Next time you see a junkie sprawled at the curb in the downtown of your nearest city, or read about someone who died of a heroin overdose, just imagine a big yellow sign posted next to him or her saying: "Your Federal Tax Dollars at Work."

Kudos to the New York Times, and to reporters Dexter Filkins, Mark Mazzetti and James Risen, for their lead article today reporting that Ahmed Wali Karzai, brother of Afghanistan's stunningly corrupt President Hamid Karzai, a leading drug lord in the world's major opium-producing nation, has for eight years been on the CIA payroll.

Okay, the article was lacking much historical perspective (more on that later), and the dead hand of top editors was evident in the overly cautious tone (I loved the third paragraph, which stated that "The financial ties and close working relationship between the intelligence agency and Mr. Karzai raises significant questions about America's war strategy, which is currently under review at the White House." Well, duh! It should be raising questions about why we are even in Afghanistan, about who should be going to jail at the CIA, and about how the government can explain this to the over 1000 soldiers and Marines who have died supposedly helping to build a new Afghanistan. But that said, the newspaper that helped cheerlead us into the pointless and criminal Iraq invasion in 2003, and that prevented journalist Risen from running his exposé of the Bush/Cheney administration's massive warrantless National Security Agency electronic spying operation until after the 2004 presidential election, this time gave a critically important story full timely play, and even, appropriately, included a teaser in the same front-page story about October being the most deadly month yet for the US in Afghanistan.

What the article didn't mention at all is that there is a clear historical pattern here. During the Vietnam War, the CIA, and its Air America airline front-company, were neck deep in the Southeast Asian heroin trade. At the time, it was Southeast Asia, not Afghanistan, that was the leading producer and exporter of opium, mostly to the US, where there was a resulting heroin epidemic.

A decade later, in the 1980s, during the Reagan administration, as the late investigative journalist Gary Webb so brilliantly documented first in a series titled "Dark Alliance" in the San Jose Mercury newspaper, and later in a book by that same name, the CIA was deeply involved in the development of and smuggling of cocaine into the US, which was soon engulfed in a crack cocaine epidemic -- one that continues to destroy African American and other poor communities across the country. (The Times' role here was sordid -- it and other leading papers, including the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times -- did despicable hit pieces on Webb shamelessly trashing his work and his career, and ultimately driving him to suicide, though his facts have held up. For the whole sordid tale, read Alex Cockburn's and Jeff St. Clair's White Out.) In this case, Webb showed that the Agency was actually using the drugs as a way to fund arms, which it could use its own planes to ferry down to the Contra forces it was backing to subvert the Sandinista government in Nicaragua at a time Congress had barred the US from supporting the Contras.

And now we have Afghanistan, once a sleepy backwater of the world with little connection to drugs (the Taliban, before their overthrow by US forces in 20001, had, according to the UN, virtually eliminated opium production there), but now responsible for as much as 80 percent of the world's opium production -- this at a time that the US effectively finances and runs the place, with an occupying army that, together with Afghan government forces that it controls, outnumbers the Taliban 12-1 according to a recent AP story.

The real story here is that where the US goes, the drug trade soon follows, and the leading role in developing and nurturing that trade appears to be played by the Central Intelligence Agency.

Your tax dollars at work.

The issue at this point should not be how many troops the US should add to its total in Afghanistan. It shouldn't even be over whether the US should up the ante or scale back to a more limited goal of hunting terrorists. It should be about how quickly the US can extricate its forces from Afghanistan, how soon the Congress can start hearings into corruption and drug pushing by the CIA, and how soon the Attorney General's office will begin a grand jury probe into the CIA's drug dealing.

Americans, who for years have supported a stupid, blundering and ineffective "War on Drugs" in this country, and who mindlessly back "zero-tolerance" policies towards drugs in schools and on the job, should demand a "zero-tolerance" policy toward drugs and dealing with drug pushers in government and foreign policy, including the CIA.

For years we have been fed the story that the Taliban are being financed by their taxes on opium farmers. That may be partly true, but recently we've been learning that it's not the real story. Taliban forces in Afghanistan, it turns out, have been heavily subsidized by protection money paid to them by civilian aid organizations, including even American government-funded aid programs, and even, reportedly, by the military forces of some of America's NATO allies (there is currently a scandal in Italy concerning such payments by Italian forces). But beyond that, the opium industry, far from being controlled by the Taliban, has been, to a great extent, controlled by the very warlords with which the US has allied itself, and, as the Times now reports, by Ahmed Wali Karzai, the president's own brother.

Karzai, we are also told by Filkins, Mazzetti and Risen, was a key player in producing hundreds of thousands of fraudulent ballots for his brother's election theft earlier this year. Left unsaid is whether the CIA might have played a role in that scam too. In a country where finding printing presses is sure to be difficult, and where transporting bales of counterfeit ballots is risky, you have to wonder whether an agency like the CIA, which has ready access to printers and to helicopters, might have had a hand in keeping its assets in control in Kabul.

Sure that's idle speculation on my part, but when you learn that America's spook agency has been keeping not just Karzai, but lots of other unsavory Afghani warlords, on its payroll, such speculation is only logical.

The real attitude of the CIA here was best illustrated by an anonymous quote in the Filkins, Mazzetti and Risen piece, where a "former CIA officer with experience in Afghanistan," explaining the agency's backing of Karzai, said, "Virtually every significant Afghan figure has had brushes with the drug trade. If you are looking for Mother Teresa, she doesn't live in Afghanistan."

"The end justifies the means" is America's foreign policy and military motto, clearly.

The Times article exposing the CIA link to Afghanistan's drug-kingpin presidential brother should be the last straw for Americans. President Obama's "necessary" war in Afghanistan is nothing but a sick joke.

The opium, and resulting heroin, that is flooding into Europe and America thanks to the CIA's active support of the industry and its owners in Afghanistan are doing far more grave damage to our societies than any turbaned terrorists armed with suicide bomb vests could hope to inflict.

The Afghanistan War has to be ended now.

Let the prosecution of America's government drug pushers begin.
_______________

DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based investigative reporter. His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net

 

 

Comments

[TRex86]

Hmmm. Orly Taitz gets over 900 comments and this very timely piece has 32. Are we so used to CIA duplicity that this latest revelation is a big yawn? Are we so jaded to the horrific consequences of the War on Drugs that only a few comments get posted, mostly sniping at drug treatment. Friends, our conduct of the War on Drugs is one of the most shameful and corrupting chapters in our history. And BTW it's pertinent to the reform of health care. Our ludicrous approach to providing universal care is ten times worse in the realm of mental illness and substance abuse. Without true parity health reform will still have a huge gap. To wit: in LA six times as many people now get mental health care in jail as in the established mental health system. Makes you proud to be an American.

[TRex86]

America's top ten dumb ideas of the 20th century include the War on Drugs. How is it then that so few are commenting on this topic? Karzai's brother is in the drug trade? I'm shocked, Louis, shocked. We are both naive about the ways of the world and stone blind when it comes to our own socio-political insanity. It's our insatiable appetite for drugs that drives the drug trade. We pass laws that guarantee monumental profits to the drug trade and are surprised at the failure of this policy.
If we lower demand supply will follow. The way to lower demand is to decriminalize drug abuse. Legally provide drugs to addicts and make them patients rather than criminals.
(You have a problem with this Mr. Censor?)

[Thermodynamics]

Thank you very much.

This info should be widely published. It would help people understand what is going on in Afghanistan.

I was around to see all three phases in the news - The Golden Triangle of SE Asia, the Contras, and Afghanistan.

The first two phases were camouflaged with disinformation and derision. I heard rumors but was not sure. There was racism involved too. During the Contra years the disinfo crowd said that allegations about CIA + drugs were just "Black Panther" urban myths.

[scorpio49]

as the father of an adult heroin addict i feel i am well qualified to comment on this subject.the drug policies of the united states seem to have been written by vlad dracul.i got my son on naltrexone which is an "opiate antagonist" it worked for a while but then he went back on heroin;the urge is too hard to resist.i then tried suboxone which is supposed to remove the desire.that worked for a while but then again,relapse.one problem with those two drugs are that there are ridiculously stupid guidelines for their use.first you have to find an m.d. licensed to prescribe them and then,in my case $500 up front.the meds are not cheap either.about $300/mo.but the real kicker is that the doctor is limited to only 30 patients.none of this is covered by the government.what incredible stupidity.as far as i'm concerned the only solution is government subsidation of pure heroin to addicts and heavy emphasis on drug education.my son lives in the us.i live in mexico.

[LiberalFromDenver]

I seem to recall some tinfoil-hat theories during my college days that suggested that the CIA was funding the production of Afghan hashish to get cash in support of the resistance to the soviet invasion, and also some theories about how the CIA was using drug trade to fund various far-flung coups around central America. Never gave these theories much credence, myself, but I see them in a different light after reading about Pres. Karzai's brother.

[FrozenNorthObserver]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking#Vietnam_Era

[TRex86]

Take the world's most backward and barren country. Populate it with illiterates, who don't even know they have a central government. Add the fact that the only export cash crop is the opium poppy. Stir. The result is a repeat of a lesson we are congenitally unable to learn: PROHIBITION DOESN'T WORK!
The risk premium on contraband substances is so huge that it finances the corruption of the entities that try to control them. Iran-Contra: QED. Illegal drugs are the only purely capitalistic economy. So long as we persist in the insane delusion that a stupid law will repeal human nature a nice little slice of the US economy will sustain the manufacture and importation of a variety of illegal drugs.
Heroin is the King of illegal drugs because it's pleasant, easy to produce and has no intrinsic harm to the consumer. All the harm associated with it comes from enforcing pointless laws or IV usage. Why then don't we turn this into a simple medical problem? Give addicts a substitute drug like Methadone in as large a quantity (no sharing) for as long as is necessary to rehabilitate said addict to normal, productive life.
This is the pivotal question of American cultural anthropology: why are we wedded to dumb ideas for decades after they have proven to be failures? If we can't answer that question we will inevitably destroy ourselves.

[LHB58]

If most of the harm from heroin addiction comes from "pointless laws or IV usage" then take away the pointless laws and make IV usage no more dangerous for addicts than for diabetics. The use of Methadone and Suboxone as subsitutes for opiate addicts' drugs of choice is just as stupid as every other area of our drug policy. As most junkies themselves say "Heroin is a way of life, Methadone is a way of death." Both Methadone and Suboxone are very, very difficult to get off of (much moreso than a heavy heroin habit) if taken for more than a few months.

[TRex86]

What's "stupid" about our use of methadone maintenace is the rigid guidelines the feds impose. Getting off of drugs should be a late goal in rehab not a front end requirement. I concede that withdrawal from long term methadone is lengthier than other opioids, but so what. Social rehab must precede sobriety if we are to eliminate the secondary effects of prohibition.
I'm all for needle exchanges and other routes to decriminalize drug abuse. (I didn't know I had to prepare an entire policy paper for my post). Rather than bickering around the margins of what may comprise optimal drug policy the unarguable fact is that our current drug policy is counter-productive. In fact, it perpetuates the problem it allegedly addresses. How about your answer to the question I had to end my post? Why do we adore bad ideas?

[WilliamProc]

First: must you clump all Afghanis into one pile and call them "illiterates"? I don't believe that you know if the whole of the populace is, or if they are unaware of the problems with their government. Afetr all, we are there, making their government make decisions for them. Really; making their "government"

Second: FYI, Methadone is just as addictive as heroin(morphine), and there is this condition from taking a large quantity of a substance called overdosing. Yes, that was snark. You simply can't let people use as much as they want of anything, and not have to pay some cost further down the line. Substitue Big Macs for your drugs and you get the picture. While I agree that prohibition isn't helping matters, not showing any empathy for the Afghan people or addressing what the US is putting them through doesn't help matters either.

[TRex86]

The best expression of empathy for Afghans will be our departure. We have no business there. (BTW, They have the highest rate of illiteracy in the world).
I didn't say that methadone wasn't addictive. A solid understanding of opioid pharmacology demonstrates a wide safety margin with all opioids, however methadone has unusual properties, ie, of course, methadone administration should be supervised, but not rigidly controlled as is now the case. The overwhelming evidence from methadone maintenance programs shows that giving enough to block the enjoyment of heroin (this varies per individual, hence the more the better) and continuing it long term results in eventual sobriety and immediate societal benefits. This is solid science.

[Scalawag]

I don't think he called them "illiterates" as an insult. It is a generalization based, I think, on real statistics. It is a big part of the reason nation building over there is IMO most likely doomed to fail. I don't know anything about methadone other than a friend of mine told me once, "dude, don't ever do methadone."

[RobinLandseadel]

You can OD on smack, so I wouldn't exactly call it benign.

Marijuana, well that's another kettle of borscht altogether. Truly insane to make cannabis MORE illegal than opiates.

[TRex86]

You can get drunk on water, too...just like on land. (Insert rimshot here).
Here's the truth about drugs: The annual death rate from tobacco is about 500,000; alcohol (excluding MVA's) is about 100,000. The death toll attributable to all illegal drugs via OD's or whatever is in the 10-20,000 range. The differences have nothing to do with law enforcement. Rather it's about the pharmacology of the drugs in question. In the family of pain relievers the opioids are by far the safest. The OTC drugs (aspirin, tylenol, NSAID's) are by far the most dangerous. It's time for science not folklore to show up in our drug policy. Nothing about opioids makes people anti-social or violent. The criminal consequences of opioid use are strictly a result of their being illegal. In other words, they're illegal because they're illegal.

[audadvnc]

And of course you can OD on vodka, as seems to happen about once a year at some frat house party.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

This started with The Company, the moniker for the East India Company long before it was adopted by the CIA.

The Company in the early 1800's transported opium from India to China in exchange for tea and manufactured goods.
http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~dee/CHING/OPIUM.HTM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars

[missouriwatcher]

Exactly so! But you failed to mention the we (the U.S.) supported the drug kingpins (the Brisith and the EIC) during the Opium Wars. --but I'm sure that anyone following your links would discover this grim truth.

[Pillar-of-Autumn]

"It is the function of the CIA to keep the world unstable, and to propagandize and teach the American people to hate and fear, so we will let the Establishment spend any amount of money on arms."

-John Stockwell, 13 year veteran of the CIA

[karela]

Every time an American uses an illegal drug that comes from an opium poppy, they are financing the Taliban and Al Quaida and they are insuring that other people will die. We're the biggest consumers of illegal drugs in the world and every hit is the nail in the coffin of innocent people. There is no act that could be a greater evil against Americans and all people who suffer from the effects of terrorists than to use the product that supplies the money to finance terrorism. It is useless to be outraged with the deaths brought about by suicide bombers if this evening you plan to party with the product that finances them. Most of the opium products in the world are produced in Afghanistan. We shouldn't need anything as useless as a "War on Drugs". All we should need is enough Americans with a heart and some patriotism still burning in their hearts. If we just stopped using their product, they wouldn't have the money to do what they do. Most of their money comes from us. So, if you choose to use, remember that the next innocent child who gets blown up owes it all to you.

If you really need a buzz, do the American thing. Drink Tequila!

[COPerez]

"...if you choose to use..."

That only works (maybe) the first time. After that, it's an addiction. One that the CIA seems not to care that it fosters.

As in all other things, follow the money.

Much like Colin Powell warned about the Terrorist - Industrial Complex, echoing Eisenhower's warning of the Military - Industrial Complex, the War on Drugs is dependent on an "enemy" to fight. If there were no (or fewer) drugs available for people to get hooked on, who would the whole industry fight? Who would they jail?

Follow the MONEY.

[LiberalFromDenver]

Oh, please. Get off your high horse. Someone with a chemical dependence problem isn't in that position because they want to support terrorists. An addict doesn't wake up in the morning and think "Gee, I'd like to get high AND support terrorism, what drug best supports my goals?" Nor do they wonder "I'd like to kick my habit, but I don't have enough patriotism burning in my heart to do it. Can my hatred of terrorists help me win my battle with addiction?" If you've really got your knickers in a twist over this connection between heroin and terrorism, why don't you support domestic US decriminalization of poppy farming? Why don't you rail against east asian poppy farmers who also sell into the US?

[LHB58]

If you really care about definancing terrorism, you could either naively hope that people will "just say no" to narcotics and say "yes" to tequila (are you for real??), or take the money out of illegal drug sales by repealing criminal penalties. The fact that you're not willing to do the latter suggest that you don't really care about anything but punishing people for failing to agree with you on your drug of choice.

[dtlewis]

didn't read the article then you abuse the privilege to comment by spreading untruths. please get real or go away.

[missouriwatcher]

Not really true. Opium poppy (Papaver Sominferum) is raised in many parts of the world, and probably in most cases is raised and harvested legally. Poppy products include seed (for food items such as breads, bagels, cakes, etc.; and for its oil) as well as opium, much of which is used by Big Pharm industries to produce pain killers such as morphine and codeine.

On the subject of illegal drugs in general, the illegality of these substances actually creates the "crime". Illegality often exacerbates drug problems, not only by creating a legal "problem" for those who chose to use, but also artificially drives up the price (or value, if you prefer) of these substances, which lends itself to those willing to exploit a black market system and thus creates all sort of crimes. Illegality also makes it more difficult for anyone wishing to get help for a drug problem to get what they want and need, especially without the nasty social stigma of being a "drug addict".

As for your "solution", please remember that alcohol was illegal in the U.S. throughout the 1920s and we failed to learn our lesson--that illegality creates a black market which creates more REAL crime against lives and property. Also, it has been well-documented that alcohol use/abuse leads to far more problems than other drugs, both physically and psychologically. Legal drugs, specifically tobacco and alcohol cause more injuries and deaths than ALL illegal drugs combined.

[angrystan]

Dig deeper.

"where the US goes, the drug trade soon follows"

You have it exactly backwards. What was happening in Afghanistan when the US finally started addressing the Taliban?

[dtlewis]

What was happening in Afganistan when the US finally started addressing the Taliban? According to the author of the article and CIA operative sources with experience in the field, the Taliban had already substantially reduced the volume of opium cultivation there. what does it take to get through to some of you people? WTF?

[valkyrie607]

"Finally"?

Are you talking about before the US started financing them to fight the Soviets, or after?