Report Calls for End to Drug War, Obama Moves Toward Reform

The Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy issued a report today that marks a turning point in drug policy in the hemisphere. Following a year's work, the report concludes that the "war on drugs" is a failure and recommends a "paradigm shift" centered on public health, reducing consumption and focusing resources on organized crime.

The report was drawn up by a prestigious 17-member commission, chaired by former presidents Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico, Cesar Gaviria of Colombia and Fernando Enrique Cardoso of Brazil.

It's well worth it to read the full statement of the commission, "Drugs and Democracy: Toward a Paradigm Shift." Here's a brief run-down.

The report begins with a flat-out denouncement of the war on drugs and its emphasis on criminal enforcement measures.

Prohibitionist policies based on the eradication of production and on the disruption of drug flows as well as on the criminalization of consumption have not yielded the expected results. We are farther than ever from the announced goal of eradicating drugs.

On today's teleconference, members of the commission criticized the "prohibitionist policies" of the past and urged formation of a joint Latin American policy based on harm reduction and collaboration with the United States and European consumer countries to reduce demand.
The report lists three specific actions under the new paradigm: treat addicts as patients in the public health system, evaluate decriminalization of cannabis possession for personal use, and reduce consumption through public education campaigns primarily directed at youth.

The section on the expensive, bloody and largely ineffective U.S.-sponsored drug wars in the Americas is particularly damning:

Colombia, recipient of over $6 billion in U.S. drug war funds, illustrates drug policy failure:

Colombia is a clear example of the shortcomings of the repressive policies promoted at the global level by the United States. For decades, Colombia implemented all conceivable measures to fight the drug trade in a massive effort whose benefits were not proportional to the vast amount of resources invested and the human costs involved. Despite the country's significant achievements in fighting the drug cartels and lowering the levels of violence and crime, the areas of illegal cultivation are again expanding as well as the flow of drugs coming out of Colombia and the Andean region.

Mexico, which has just begun to receive drug war training and equipment from the U.S. government under the Merida Initiative, is seen as a chance to change course before it's too late:

Mexico has quickly become the other epicenter of the violent activities carried out by the criminal groups associated with the narcotics trade. This raises challenges for the Mexican government in its struggle against the drug cartels that have supplanted the Colombian traffickers as the main suppliers of illicit drugs to the United States market. Mexico is thus well positioned to ask the government and institutions of American society to engage in a dialogue about the policies currently pursued by the US as well as to call upon the countries of the European Union to undertake a greater effort aimed at reducing domestic drug consumption. The traumatic Colombian experience is a useful reference for countries not to make the mistake of adopting the US prohibitionist policies and to move forward in the search for innovative alternatives.

Although the report stops short of mentioning the Merida Initiative and Plan Colombia by name, it makes it clear that given the poor results, military/police programs like these that stress enforcement and interdiction should be seriously reevaluated and reoriented. The commission criticizes the high costs in violence, and corruption among police forces and politicians within countries employing the war and drugs strategy.

Referring to another aspect of the drug wars that has sparked controversy in Latin America, the report says this about efforts to eradicate cultivation of illicit drugs:

It is important to speak not only of alternative cultivation but to envision a wide range of options, including the social development of alternative forms of work, democratic education and the search for solutions in a participatory context. Such initiatives must also take into account the legal uses of plants, such as the coca leaf, in countries with a long-standing tradition of ancestral use previous to the phenomenon of their exploitation as an input for drug production. Accordingly measures must be taken to strictly adjust production to this kind of ancestral use.

The mere recognition of the legitimacy of ancestral use is a step forward. This time, the implicit reference is to the Bolivian government where President Evo Morales' "Coca sí, Cocaina no" policies collided with US DEA politicized eradication efforts--to the point where the DEA was barred from operating in the country. Here too the report opens up long-overdue debate on policies whose collateral damage to society and the environment cannot be justified by their poor results.

The goal of the commission report is to build a united Latin American platform on drug policy. When asked if they thought they could accomplish that by the time the Vienna conference is slated to reach an agreement on a new 10-year UN policy, Commission members noted that only the Colombian government has explicitly balked at the proposed paradigm shift.

But it also targets its message to the U.S. government, which in the past has tried to impose the drug war model on its Latin American allies:

[

The U.S.] policy of massive incarceration of drug users, questionable both in terms of respect for human rights and its efficiency, is hardly applicable to Latin America, given the penal system's overpopulation and material conditions. This repressive policy also facilitates consumer extortion and police corruption. The United States allocates a much larger proportion of resources to eradication and interdiction as well as to maintaining its legal and penal system than to investments in health, prevention, treatment and the rehabilitation of drug users.

The Commission's message coming at this time reflects the hope that the Obama administration will have a more open attitude toward re-evaluating the failed policies.

That hope is not unfounded. It's true that the new administration had a well-publicized false starts on drug policy reform, but these seem to reflect more the built-in inertia of Washington than its own policies. Earlier this month, the U.S. delegation reportedly blocked harm reduction measures at the talks toward a new UN strategy in Vienna. Then, a series of DEA raids on medical marijuana providers in California raised questions about Obama's commitment to respect state laws on the matter.

Those fears have been somewhat allayed over the past few days. On the international front, Obama broke publicly from the "zero-tolerance" line of the Bush administration and announced support for needle exchange, although a spokesperons still called harm reduction "ambiguous".

At home, Obama received criticism for the contradiction between campaign promises and a reality that looked a lot like no change regarding federal government repression of medical marijuana. White House spokesperson Nick Shapiro stated that the raids would not continue.

"The president believes that federal resources should not be used to circumvent state laws, and as he continues to appoint senior leadership to fill out the ranks of the federal government, he expects them to review their policies with that in mind."

Now the Seattle press is speculating that Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske, will be appointed national drug czar. This would be another important sign of a changing tide. Kerlikowske worked in law enforcement in Washington state, a state that permits medical marijuana use and in Seattle, a city that approved a measure to give marijuana "lowest enforcement priority". Drug policy reform groups have celebrated his probable nomination.

Comments

[sophiej]

Too many people are profiting from the war on drugs to support shutting it down, just as in prohibition. They include our law enforcement agencies, pharmaceutical companies, the doctors who prescribe medical marijuana for a fee (renewable annually), and our military/weapons manufacturers.

[cultkicker]

We need to legalize marijuana AND hemp for several reasons. First and foremost it is our constitutional right. Secondly it is immoral to subject pot smokers to felony convictions. Thirdly the medical uses of marijuana are many and varied including the use of marujuana oil (not the same as hemp seed oil) in the treatment of cancer. It has been reported to be curative in some instances. This must be researched. Other uses of pot are well establised in medicine. Fourth, the use of hemp in the food, energy, and textile markets could create millions of new jobs and save the planet from global warming. Hemp is a wonderful biofuel, an incredible source of protein, vitamins and minerals, and a fantastic source of fiber for paper and textiles. Whole new industries could be created and save our economy. Also, the government would make billions off of the sale of pot. Taking the profit motive out of the drug trade will destroy it overnight. I just don't know why we haven't done this already.

[billtheroofer]

The War on Cannabis is an insane unwinnable war against the citizens. Prohibition of Alcohol failed completely,. Albert Einstein quote on insanity: Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

We need to begin crosstraining paramilitary agents into the health care industry where they will be needed when this insane war on cannabis ends.

[itsonlymoney]

The only way to effectively undermine the illegal drug trade is to take the excessive profit out of it. As it stands anyone who wants cocaine or heroin can buy it now even though it is illegal. Criminalization and the resulting black market unrealistically magnifies profit and thus increases availability since the commodities in and of themselves would not ordinarily be in short supply.

Decriminalization enables taxation and regulation. We can maintain the risks for illegal distribution while lowering the rewards. Benefits include reallocation of law enforcement resources towards violent crime, reduced corruption of world legal systems, and more help for addicts. Addiction is a public health nightmare, not an excuse for punishment of the unfortunate. I would include heroin and cocaine in the category for this treatment. Marijuana could simply be legalized for personal use by adults. I would add an amnesty for prisoners incarcerated for marijuana sales as long as they have no other violent criminal records.

This is not to say that the "bad guys" who now traffic in cocaine and heroin will just go away or that the American appetite for the drugs will disappear. It may even increase for a short time. But it is the big money that fuels the trade and a regulated market will lower prices and reduce incentives leading ultimately to lower demand.

[Oldchef]

It seems to me that the situation is much like the 1920s with alcohol prohibition. When Roosevelt's administration repealed Prohibition, the violence surrounding the importation and distribution of alcohol decreased, and, as legal alcohol moved into the system, the violent gangs disappeared from the scene as they sought other avenues for revenue. The violence surrounding illegal drugs is there because of the illegality. People are always going to take drugs, as they were always going to drink alcohol. During prohibition, more people sought out alcohol just because it was illegal. I would expect the demand for drugs to decrease after legalization. Many people have already spoken of the revenue stream for the government in taxing the legal consumption of drugs, not to mention the savings from no longer throwing money down the rathole of the "war on drugs".

[PlaceboStudman]

All of this is just a complex way of stating one of the micro steps to the bigger issue. Narcotics were once legal in this country, and no one blinked an eye. Marijuana is only illegal because of the pressure from oil companies afraid of losing profits from hemp product manufacturers. But, oil production is already in jeopardy now due to the slow-but-sure transformation to a Greener economy. There is no logical or rational reason why drugs are illegal, nor is there any reason why they should not be regulated and taxed the way cigarettes and alcohol are now.

I'm not one of those who are going to blindly spout "Legalize drugs, now!". I know there is a long and arduous road to changing the attitudes about drugs in this country, but the fact of the matter remains, in the places where drugs are tolerated, such as parts of Europe and Canada, the drug related crime is actually lower than it is here, simply because it is illegal, and there is a strong black market for it.

Remove the barriers to access, provide treatment and rehabilitation to those who want it, then stand back and watch our economy rise, and violence decrease as people will no longer need to resort to violence to acquire the drug if they want it

[trigrampictures]

The casual and hard core drug users in this country collectively are the biggest threat to democratic governments from Mexico to South America. The bloodshed, violence, massacres and corruption are due to the billion dollar industry of drug consumption in this country. Without such a lucrative market, these drug cartels would not exist. Its that simple. Arresting one drug cartel leader or breaking a cartel only adds at least half dozen mini-cartels as there is a long line of subordinates ready to take the helm. These new turf wars causes an escalation of violence but never an interruption in the drug flow to eagerly awaiting customers here in America.

Mexican law enforcement is completely out muscled by the enormity of this issue and the more they apply their authority the more they threaten their own existence! Honestly, what will this summer's Merida incentive package of $1.6 billion in aide really do to change the market and consumption here? Nothing. Why not use those funds to educate and clean up this nation? Doing this will bankrupt the cartels - like any business that has no market or incentive.

Mexico's only option at this point is to have open dialog with the drug cartels and find a middle ground of peaceful coexistence. There is no military option at this point - it is too late.

Lets face it, we are a junkie nation and its drug consumption is a bigger threat to democracies than illegal immigration, communism, Al Queda and terrorism combined.

[RoloTomassi]

You are so wrong on so many levels. If you had actually READ the article you'd see the correlation between recent US involvement in Mexican drug intervention efforts and the escalation of violence there.

The drug use in this country is really a minor issue when compared to the many daunting issues we face; the primary problem where drugs are concerned is there criminalized classification and the violence that accompanies illegal trafficing.

The drug war is a far bigger threat to our "democracy" than the use of all illicit drugs combined.

[billtheroofer]

What a foolish comment, Isn't freedom the all important issue. Freedom to do as one chooses. Freedom to put anything in one's body from cannabis to bacon. I suspect bacon is more dangerous. FREEDOM comes 1st. It's why America was created and WHY the 'pursuit of happiness' is written into the Declaration of Independence.

[Scar1]

A friend said to me, until the people themselves say enough is enough and commit to an end to this madness -what good is it for anyone to get involved just to be killed. Well, that is a point well made but, something has to be done. Reading that hospitals have to be shut down, staff killed and things like 21 killed in 24 hrs. makes one think what the hell is going on in the border towns and Mexico.

Then seeing a whole warehouse full with tons of drugs just reeks that those in charge close their eyes and look the other way or the get paid well. So, the back door to the South of us is a War we are losing already due to the demand made by some here in the US.