Pubdate: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 Source: Edmonton Journal (CN AB) Copyright: 2000 The Edmonton Journal Contact: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/ Forum: http://forums.canada.com/~edmonton THE WAR ON DRUGS HASN'T WORKED What does it tell us that the U.S. has launched a new, $1.3-billion offensive against drugs in Colombia? Well -- it seems to suggest the great War on Drugs isn't going too well. Thank goodness, given American stubbornness and loyalty to unsuccessful tactics, that Colombia is not a war like Vietnam. Yet, anyway. Remember the names Pablo Escobar and Medellin drug cartel? And how in 1993, after four years of terror and counter terror, Medellin was smashed and Escobar finally caught and killed? What a victory it was over the supply side of the drug market. But, then, oops! There was the Cali cartel. Remember it? Members were suspected of helping the government liquidate their Medellin rivals before stepping in to the vacuum caused by voracious overseas demand for drugs. A new offensive was launched; by 1996 victory had again been declared. Except now, four years later, the enemy is so strong again that Colombia is preparing to spend another $7.5 billion over five years. It is a testament to the long failure of the drug wars that most readers are now quite familiar with the basic arguments that can flow from this history. The basic rationale of the War on Drugs is a Prohibition one: to solve the awful social and health consequences of drug use by making cocaine and heroin too expensive and difficult to obtain. Colombia exports fully three-quarters of the world's cocaine, in large measure because the collapse of effective government during a 35-year civil war makes it a good place for drug types to operate and corrupt what remains of legitimate authority. The current initiative makes perfect sense on the surface: to assist the Colombian military in its battle against the drug growers and smugglers, to improve the quality of government (the current low level of which strengthens the hand of Marxist rebels), to pressure the army to distance itself from the country's vicious paramilitaries, to improve the justice system, and to foster an economy more resistant to the poppy's siren call. On the other hand, of course, there is the suspicion that an international market that currently demands $400 billion worth of drugs annually would probably induce criminals to find other sources of supply. And the suspicion that rising prices caused by success in the drug war would make the rewards of drug crime even greater. There's the statistic that a quarter of U.S. jail occupants are drug convicts, and that even in Canada, 12 per cent of federal inmates are products of the drug prohibition. And there is the overall argument that the cost in crime, the cost in damage to individual lives, to communities and to entire countries, and the cost in diversion of untold billions of consumer and tax dollars from more constructive uses, might possibly be higher than the cost of some form of carefully regulated legalization of drugs. A five-year-old study by the U.S. Rand Institute, for example, concluded that a dollar spent on treatment of addiction is 10 times more cost-efficient than fighting smuggling, and 23 times greater than crop eradication. One imagines, to return to Colombia, that if demand for illegal cocaine dried up tomorrow, the loss of revenue for weapons purchases and the possibility of using the Americans' $1.3 billion for other things would do more to boost Colombia's outlook than another anti-drug offensive. True, it's impossible to know for sure what the cost might be of learning to live legally with drugs the way we have done with alcohol and tobacco. It might be unpleasant to lose the moral satisfaction of knowing we are "fighting". The thing is, the primary goal of drug policy is not to give us moral satisfaction, but rather to build a world in which drugs do less harm to their victims -- here in Edmonton, in U.S. inner cities, and in Colombia. Prohibition hasn't worked. The war on drugs hasn't worked. The world must at least try to find a better way. - --- MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens