Some Sanity Creeps into the Drug War
Monday 15 February 2010
by: Jess Hunter-Bowman | Minuteman Media
There’s one thing that Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all agreed on: expanding military aid to Latin America to fight the so-called “Drug War.”
A new phase of the Drug War began in 2000 under President Bill Clinton, with $1.3 billion in “emergency” funding to fight cocaine production in Colombia by destroying the raw material for it—coca plants. President George W. Bush continued the fight, which sent nearly $6 billion in aid to Colombia between 2000 and 2008. When cartel violence began to spiral out of control in Mexico, he shepherded hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Mexican military. President Barack Obama initially followed in his predecessors’ footsteps, but now appears to be headed down a wiser path.
By any measure, the military approach to countering a demand-driven cocaine trade has been a complete failure. When Congress approved spending billions of dollars on military aid to Colombia a decade ago, policymakers insisted that it would slash coca production by half within five years. Instead, the South American country’s coca production is basically unchanged from 1999, the year before Clinton launched Plan Colombia. Today the U.S. government reports Colombia produces 294,000 acres of coca. That’s virtually the same as the 303,000 acres it believed were planted in 1999.
Some Drug War fanatics in Washington have suggested that a 6,000-acre reduction in opium poppy production in Colombia is proof of success. Nothing could be further from the truth. Colombia’s opium production represents approximately 1 percent of the global market. Any reduction in Colombian poppy acreage probably has more to do with increases in Afghanistan’s production, the global leader with 389,000 acres in production in 2008, than eradication operations in Colombia.
Perhaps the most important test of the Drug War’s success is the number of people using cocaine here at home. After all, policymakers justify giving our money to brutal foreign militaries by assuring us that we’ll see a reduced drug supply at home—and therefore fewer drug dealers and addicts.
However, we’ve seen a sharp increase from 1.2 million cocaine users in 2000 to 1.9 million users in 2008, according to the Department of Health and Human Services’ National Survey on Drug Use and Health. So the Drug War is failing by that measure too.
As these military programs have wholly failed to affect drug production and consumption, the collateral damage left in their wake is immense. Just in Colombia, well over 10,000 farmers have filed official complaints that the chemicals wildly sprayed on their fields in the world’s second-most bio-diverse country have destroyed food crops, surrounding forests, and livestock—while damaging their families’ health.
Meanwhile, human rights groups have accused Colombia’s and Mexico’s U.S.-backed militaries of thousands of brutal abuses against innocent civilians.
Obama has started trying to right some of these wrongs. His proposed budget for 2011 would cut the failed counternarcotics funding for Colombia by 11 percent from 2010, which is nearly 50 percent lower than Republican-controlled levels in 2007. He’s calling for approximately 30 percent less military aid to Mexico.
Additionally, the Office of National Drug Control Policy is significantly increasing funding for domestic drug treatment and prevention, aiming to add $341 million to such programs in the next fiscal year. This is a smart strategy. For years, research has indicated that domestic drug control strategies are over 10 times more effective at reducing drug abuse than our ill-advised adventures in Latin America.
Being on the right path doesn’t mean that drug policy is in the right place yet. We need to cut spending on ineffective U.S. counternarcotics assistance for the Colombian and Mexican security forces even more.
But Obama’s new budget conveys a clear message: International military adventures that make Washington’s hawks feel good while failing to make a dent in the drug trade are on their way out. Thankfully, rational decisions seem to have crept into U.S. drug policies. People here at home and across the hemisphere will be grateful.
Jess Hunter-Bowman is the Bogotá-based associate director for Witness for Peace, a nonprofit organization with nearly 30 years of experience monitoring U.S. policy in Latin America. www.witnessforpeace.org
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.
Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
How many less cocaine
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 16:17 — Anonymous (not verified)How many less cocaine addicts, could we hope for if the billions of $ paid to a corrupt colombian government, had been spent in the land of the free?
Weed out morally bankrupt
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 17:23 — Colleen McCool (not verified)Weed out morally bankrupt servants of tyranny, gun control fanatics and racists by taking away the main tool they use these days to extend their agenda, the new prohibition. These folks want you to believe the evils of the drug war are unintended but felony convictions disenfranchise mostly poor and minority Americans.
Stop prohibition triggered violence, official lawlessness, racism, tyranny and ruined lives! Murderers and other violent predators roam free, while we police nonviolent adult social, medicinal and religious drug use. Limited resources can be better-spent catching pedophiles, rapists and killers. More
time could go toward stopping DUI and those selling drugs to minors. Some of the estimated $50 to $70 billion per year local/state/federal budget could go toward true education.
Prisons propagate crime, violence and sexual deviance. Putting nonviolent offenders in this breeding ground is madness. Support for the federal war on drugs is inconsistent with support for individual freedom, constitutional government and the teachings of Jesus, the Prince of Peace.
Many Cops and Clergy have united behind reform to a better, safer for society and the individual, harm reduction policy. Less people will be lost to suicide, overdose and skid row or will stoop to prostitution with policy that offers help and treatment to addicts in place of incarceration.
This article should have
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 19:44 — Anonymous (not verified)This article should have been called "Some Insanity..."...
Really hypocritical...since cocaine is the drug of choice of the wealthy (and some politicians too), and many have their hands in it's illegal trade and distribution. It is also used as an excuse to further arms production and corrupt militia states. As a result many law-enforcement officers now support Drug Legalization as a means of eliminating the control by cartels and the rampant exploding expenditures of the Drug War itself which has been a failure ever since it was initiated. e.g. Viva Iran-Contra!
This is such a sham and a
Sun, 02/21/2010 - 23:13 — Anonymous (not verified)This is such a sham and a farce. If anyone of these Presidents, past and present, were really serious about doing away with the Drug Trade, anyone of them could have done so. It does not take much thought to know that the Poppy Fields in Afghanistan never seem to be disturbed. Are we to believe that it would be an impossible feat to destroy every single Poppy Field with a few dozen sorties..carried out by drones..and not a life lost. All that Slogging around is just for Public Consumption. After all, we must not upset Karzai's Brother from his lucrative drug business...and just think about all the other Politicos , there and here, who would Really be upset. After all, the drug trade is their private means of payoffs to their buddies for favors rendered. Why else, huh ?
And let us not even go into Why we have such a porous border with Mexico.
Our CIA et al use the drug
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 00:09 — Anonymous (not verified)Our CIA et al use the drug money to fund secret projects that don't pass through Congress for an okay. The poppy acres in Afghanistan have increased since we invaded. They've had bumper crops under our care. USA use most of it. If we really wanted to get rid of it, we could burn it..but we don't.
There is no way to win a
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 12:47 — Eric Rogers (not verified)There is no way to win a "war on drugs". People want to get high on other things besides alcohol. We would all be better off if we made all drugs legal and regulated their production and sale much as we do with the alcohol trade. But our politicians want to appear tough. Too bad they don't seem to care about appearing wise.
"Meanwhile, human rights
Mon, 02/22/2010 - 17:05 — Anonymous (not verified)"Meanwhile, human rights groups have accused Colombia’s and Mexico’s U.S.-backed militaries of thousands of brutal abuses against innocent civilians."
Thousands! This guy's got to be kidding. Or working for Obama - who is sending more military aid to Colombian security forces. There are MILLIONS of internally displaced people who are forcefully excluded from returning to their land on pain of death, 'disappearance' etc at the hands of Colombian government-backed paramilitaries. Geesh!
"When cartel violence began to spiral out of control in Mexico, he shepherded hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Mexican military. President Barack Obama initially followed in his predecessors’ footsteps, but now appears to be headed down a wiser path."
Wrong again: Obama didn't follow Bush's lead. He actually demanded MORE u.s. resources to be provided to the unaccountable and brutal Mexican security forces, responsible for thousands of murders as they take a position FOR some cartels and against others. Obama is EXTENDING the Merida Initiative (Plan Mexico). Same direction as Bush but even worse. The new phase of the 'drug war' is being rebranded, with Obama declaring that 'war on drugs' would no longer be mentioned and with 'institutional reform' (i.e. providing the unpopular Calderon, right-wing, neoliberal government which stole 2006 election with more resources to monitor dissidents, political opponents, and consolidate power).
"By any measure, the military approach to countering a demand-driven cocaine trade has been a complete failure."
Yes. A failure. How do we know? Because the GAO measured Plan Colombia against benchmarks of success (or failure) which were included in the original funding package. Unfortunately, the post-partisan, practical (do-what-works) Obama Administration did not insist that benchmarks be included in Plan Mexico funding so there will be no accounting of the failure of the current violence and counter-productive 'drug war' against Latin America.
"Obama has started trying to right some of these wrongs. His proposed budget for 2011 would cut the failed counternarcotics funding for Colombia by 11 percent from 2010, which is nearly 50 percent lower than Republican-controlled levels in 2007. He’s calling for approximately 30 percent less military aid to Mexico."
Weasle-logic alert: Obama is continuing military aid - within and outside of the 'drug war' counter-narcotics funding mechanism. This should be opposed by anyone concerned about human rights. What's up with this guy?
"We need to cut spending on ineffective U.S. counternarcotics assistance for the Colombian and Mexican security forces even more."
No. We need to end military aid to these countries. Period. What kind of human rights organization would call for it to be continued, albeit at a diminished level?! I will never demand military aid be provided to governments abusing their own people. Why is that so difficult for the author to say here?
"But Obama’s new budget conveys a clear message: International military adventures that make Washington’s hawks feel good while failing to make a dent in the drug trade are on their way out. Thankfully, rational decisions seem to have crept into U.S. drug policies. People here at home and across the hemisphere will be grateful."
Yeah, right. People across the hemisphere called for ending military aid. U.S.-based human rights groups - even those cosy with U.S. legislators - should do what's right and join them:
http://americas.irc-online.org/am/5605