Jun 21
- Fernando Henrique Cardoso - Brazil
- Cesar Gaviria - Colombia
- Ernesto Zedillo - Mexico
As Caribbean countries struggle to cope with an ever-rising tide of criminal violence connected to international narcotrafficking, a new report, from a commission co-chaired by three former Latin American presidents, has been published with proposals that constitute a major departure from existing policies.
Click here to continue
Click here for the Report of the Latin American Commission on Drugs & Democracy
What the Drugs Problem Needs is a Debate, Not a Disingenuous Battle Plan COHA
A Criminally stupid war on drugs in the US Clive Crook, Financial Times
We tried a war like this once before Mike Gray, Washington Post
Forge a Caricom Position on Drugs and Guns, Norman Girvan
Norman–here Is what I wrote on the subject in my Sunday Guardian column of April 19, 2009
HOW TO STOP DRUG MURDERS, VIOLENCE AND MAYHEM IN THE AMERICAS
The USA is undoubtedly a magnet which attracts people and goods from the rest of the Americas (and world for that matter). One of the most lucrative of such goods comes in the form of illegal or illicit drugs: an industry with billions and billions of US$ in annual income.
The human cost of this illicit drug trade is huge. It can be counted in blood and bodies as well as traumatized relatives, friends, neighbours and communities together with the corrupting and compromising of security and even judicial and political systems. Recall TT drug lord Dole Chadee’s instructions: ”kill all.”
It also can be measured in terms of the large direct cost to taxpayers from fiscal expenditure on security services throughout the Americas (and world) including police, army, judiciary and penal and medical systems. To which we can add the indirect private expenditure of firms and households on securing their property.
For Trinidad and Tobago these direct and indirect costs may be some $4-5 billion annually. In the context of our current and projected economic difficulties it would help if we could reduce this huge, unproductive expenditure by say $2 billion while simultaneously achieving a reduction in murders, violence and human trauma. These savings could then be re-directed to more productive uses.
To get there we need to identify the root causes of the illegal drug problem. First, there are domestic problems of economic justice in terms of substantial inequality as well as mal-performing public services including education, security and judicial systems. This problem is largely of our own making in the rest of the Americas and we therefore need to solve it ourselves.
The US Drug Problem
The second and decisive causal factor, however, is the insatiable demand for drugs: legal and illegal by Americans. Unfortunately, the drug problem is hardly ever cast in these terms. Rather, the focus is on the producing and transshipment countries.
However, economists and business people understand that no one can successfully market anything if no one wants it. Whenever a firm forgets this basic principle it pays the price by either going bankrupt or certainly making an investment loss.
The dominant neo-classical school of economics which justifies free markets (and hence capitalism) also concedes to the possibility of something called ‘market failure’ which is where firms or consumers get others to pick some of the costs of their production or consumption, respectively. These unpaid-for-costs are termed ‘externalities.’ The solution is to create a Regulatory institution to redress this and ensure that such firms and consumers ‘internalise’ all of their costs.
As in the case of all goods there is a cost of producing illegal drugs. The major externalized cost is to the societies where they are either produced or which serve as transshipment ports (particularly Caribbean islands).
In effect, therefore, the USA and other major consumers of illegal drugs are externalizing their costs and we, in the rest of the Americas, are picking these up in blood, tears and money. There are two ways to internalize such costs. First, the USA can pay us for the incurred costs. Second, the USA can take the profits out of the trade by removing its illegality Milton Friedman - the guru of free markets – has actually proposed legalization. (The USA, of course, has the prior experience of the era of ‘prohibition’ when alcohol was banned leading to a massive war between Al Capone et al and the FBI which was lost and conceded to by ending the ban.)
I would not go so far but I advocate decriminalization. Here one accepts that illicit drug use is like legal substance abuse (notice the change of descriptor) such as alcohol or cigarettes or even prescription drugs. Some Western European countries, for example, have such a more benign approach; providing clinics where addicts can get a free ‘fix’: many times of a drug which is simultaneously weaning them off the dependence. Most importantly, such addicts do not have to commit crimes to feed their habits and their former pushers now have no business.
President Obama shows a hint of recognition of the need to address the insatiable US illicit drug need in his recent statement prior to this weekend’s Summit. Obama notes: “ By reducing demand for drugs and curtailing the illegal flow of weapons and bulk cash south across our border we can advance security in the United States and beyond.” This message is obviously targeted at a domestic US citizenry: hence his focus on US security. We of the great ‘beyond’ therefore need to similarly seek to advance our security and central to that is speaking truth to power: “You, Americans, cannot get enough of these drugs. You need to take the profit out of it by decriminalizing while simultaneously addressing demand reduction through education, etc”.
Many thanks for this. I would love Foreign Minister Baugh to see this, as the Jamaican Government thinks that it cannot decriminalise cannabis without incurring the decertifying wrath of the US. The truth is, however, that decertification is a likely possibility if the country is seen as breaching the 1961 Single Convention. But if (and when) we were able to change our constitution to enshrine the basic rights including the right to privacy, then we would not in breach of the Convention by virtue of the Convention’s saving clause, which allows for only actions that do not breach the Constitution. Most people who say our recommendation cannot be done without being decertified, including our colleauge Stephen Vasciannie, have not studied that aspect of our report. So, as soon as the two political parties can agree on the bill of rights, pass it and amend the constitution accordingly, only then can decriminalisation become possible. But at the rate at which they are going, initiatives like that of the three LA former Presidents might overtake them. Which is probably what they want anyway. Have you noticed that Portugal has decriminalised?
Thanks and congratulations for your thoughful op-ed. I hope it has a positive effect in stimulating broader debate.
I and my organization are doing all we can to stimulate debate in the US and around the world, and to move drug policy in a more sensible direction. (I had the honor of testifying before the Jamaican parliament’s ganga commission a few years ago.)
Please let me know if I should arrange for you or any of your readers to be added to our e-list; please take a look at our website; and let me know if I can be of assistance in helping stir up some debate in the Caribbean.
Ethan A. Nadelmann
Executive Director
Drug Policy Alliance
70 West 36th Street, 16th floor
New York, NY 10018
PH: 212 613 8061 FAX: 613 8021
http://www.drugpolicy.org
mailto:enadelmann@drugpolicy.org
Levels of illegal drug use correlate directly with income and wealth
disparity in different countries -US at the top, Japan at the bottom, other
developed nations arrayed in between according to the size of the gap
between their rich and poor. In the US the same is true state by state. The
greater the gap in income between the top 20% and bottom 20% the more
illegal drug use. Narrow the gap and you will dramatically reduce drug use
and drug related deaths.
Peter Bourne