EDITORIAL : THE BANGKOK POST, THAILAND

 

 

Drug report misses mark

A group of former public figures called the Global Commission on Drug Policy has published a report. Because of the once-prominent authors, it earned sensational headlines last week for stating, "The global war on drugs has failed". While this is no revelation, the recommendations of the report are unacceptable surrender. The authors recommend legalising recreational drugs, and using less violence in opposing international drug gangs.

The report is a rewrite of the 2009 Latin American Commission on Drugs and Drug Policy. In the two years since former leaders demanded an end to the battle against drug gangs in the Americas, their region _ and particularly Mexico _ has edged towards becoming a narcocracy. More than 36,000 people have died in horrendous violence in Mexico alone, as gangs fight for political control to administer the country. The new Global Commission on Drug Policy implies that legalising drugs will stop such mafia-like actions. It will not, any more than ending the prohibition of alcohol in the United States has ended the Mafia's threat in the US or worldwide.

The global version of the report turned briefly last week into an issue du jour in many circles, along drearily predictable political lines. It is worth asking members of the eminent authoring committee, however, why not one of them came to these same conclusions about ending the war on drugs while in public service. It is ironic if not risible that their report criticises "a built-in vested interest" for the continued, frequently escalating policies against drug lords. That critical phrase includes all the authors.

In the mid-1980s, George Shultz as US secretary of state linked drugs to international terrorism. In one example, he encouraged, praised and helped to fund the Thai struggle to chase heroin warlord Khun Sa out of the country. Then-secretary general Kofi Annan opened the 1998 United Nations General Assembly meeting on drug problems with a strong endorsement of the war on international drug traffickers and a call to escalate it: "We must never give in".

The US drug czar appointed by President Barack Obama announced he wanted to end the entire idea of "a war on drugs". Gil Kerlikowske, head of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, publicly favours treatment over incarceration. In the two years since his appointment, he has managed one minor reform, to shorten the harsher prison sentences given to dealers of so-called crack cocaine than of the less lethal "ordinary" cocaine. Once in office, men and women like Mr Kerlikowske encounter the real world.

The reason that the public and their leaders pursue drug traffickers is simple. Drugs and dealers threaten lives, cause violence and ruin livelihoods. Retired and well-pensioned, the authors of the Global Commission on Drug Policy do not suffer the day-to-day violence and threats to family and community of the real world.

There are serious problems with the anti-drug policies of our government and international organisation. There is too little education, too much emphasis on eliminating supplies while ignoring demand by troubled drug victims.

The Global Commission is wrong. Ending the struggle against drug traffickers would not ease the attempt by organised criminals to attack society. The battle against drug gangs and abuse of illicit drugs needs constant improvement. It would have been helpful if the authors had recommended how to fine-tune the battle against international and local criminals. This report by formerly influential officials would only hand victory to crime bosses and make society an even worse victim.