Drugs, Law and Conflict

Cocaine capsules are prepared for human smugglers who will ingest them and transport them to Europe. Photo courtesy Marco Vernaschi.

Hat tip to my friend Alexis for finding this haunting photoessay of the damage caused by drugs and violence in Guinea Bissau, courtesy of über-talented photographer Marco Vernaschi. The full set of photos is available here, and is very much worth seeing, even if hard to stomach.

The UNODC reported on West Africa’s increasing importance in the global drug trade last month in a 102-page report entitled “Transnational Trafficking and the Rule of Law in West Africa: A Threat Assessment.” The pdf is available here.

This new book on the lives of homeless drug addicts in San Francisco, “Righteous Dopefiend,” looks just spectacular. I’m disappointed, but also pleased, that every copy in the county library is checked out, with holds already placed!

A few resources on the intersection between drug policy and human rights…

• The Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network (ADPAN), Human Rights Watch and the International Harm Reduction Association recently came together to call for an end to the death penalty for drug offenses in Asia–perhaps one of the most serious violations of human rights related to the global drug war. See their statement here.

• A Human Rights Watch Fact Sheet: “Ten Ways Drug Policy Affects Human Rights”. Also, a wonderful overview of Human Rights Watch’s work on drug policy around the world is available here.

• Early in 2009, the International Harm Reduction Association released a report entitled “Harm Reduction and Human Rights: The Global Response to Drug-Related HIV Epidemics.” You can read the report here, and follow the work of the Harm Reduction and Human Rights program on their blog.

It’s World Drug Day! Or, officially as per the UNODC website devoted to this day (seemingly designed in 1995…?), the International Day against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking.

In honor of this day, the UNODC has released the World Drug Report 2009, available as a pdf here. See also the report highlights and executive summary in English. While the UNODC itself highlights the better side of global coverage, reformers have a slightly different perspective. Briefly…

• Transform Drug Policy Foundation notes the discrepancy between the UNODC’s critical analysis of the situation and acknowledgment of problems caused by punitive measures, and the status quo prescription they offer.

• Drug Policy Alliance, along with some 40 international groups and drug policy experts, has released a “call to action” for more humane and effective global policies (full text here).

• In the New York Times, the United Nations special rapporteurs on health and torture remind us that governments around the world abuse human rights in the name of the drug war, and that their failure to “ensure access to controlled medicines for pain relief or to treat drug dependence may violate international conventions proscribing cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” They conclude, “This is not only a human rights problem: It is bad public policy.”

The Strategic Studies Institute of the US Army War College has released a report on US policy toward Mexico’s “narco-insurgency.” Author Hal Brands argues that the Mérida Initiative “is unlikely to have a meaningful, long-term impact in restraining the drug trade and drug-related violence.” In line with the criticisms of many NGOs, Brands claims that the Initiative focuses too heavily on the “most visible” aspects of the drug trade, and not enough on structural, institutional change. He writes,

The Merida Initiative is not silent on these issues (it contains a small amount of aid for judicial reform, several million dollars for police vetting purposes, and restrictions to ensure that U.S. officials do not interact with military units implicated in human rights violations), and Mexico is included in stand-alone U.S. human rights and anti-corruption programs. Still, the current American commitment to anti-corruption and the rule of law in Mexico is insufficient. Resources devoted to these issues pale in comparison to those spent on helicopters and inspection equipment, despite the fact that these tools will prove useful only if Mexico’s institutions of internal order actually function in an honest, professional manner.

Download the 67-page PDF here.

Part 3 of a 4-part weeklong series

**Peruvian children walk on dried coca leaves spread over a soccer field in the Vizcatán region of Peru. Photo courtesy of Moises Saman for the NYTimes.

• A resurgence of the Shining Path in Peru? Thank the cocaine trade. The revival of what was considered a basically defunct guerrilla group, however limited, highlights the essential issue of rural poverty in the Andes and the need for viable alternative crops. The New York Times reports,

The front lines lie in the drizzle-shrouded jungle of Vizcatán, a 250-square-mile region in the Apurímac and Ene River Valley. The region is Peru’s largest producer of coca, the raw ingredient for cocaine…

“There are those who say, ‘Why worry about a few hundred fighters in the jungle?’ ” said Alberto Bolívar, a counterinsurgency expert. “But they easily forget the Shining Path began their armed struggle in 1980 with just a few hundred guys. Two decades later, 70,000 people were dead.”

But the Shining Path appears to have learned lessons, too. Coca farmers here describe today’s Maoists as a disciplined, well-armed force, entering villages in groups of 20 in crisp black uniforms. Little is known about their leaders, aside from the belief that two brothers, Victor Quispe Palomino, known as José, and Jorge Quispe Palomino, alias Raúl, are at the helm.

The photo slide show by Peruvian photographer Moises Saman is beautifully mind-blowing, and an absolute must-see.

• Mexican government claims drug-related violence down 26% in the first quarter of 2009. Milenio cites President Calderón saying that narco-executions have decreased in two of the country’s most violent cities–Tijuana and Ciudad Juárez–by a dramatic 78% and 82% respectively since October-December 2008. See the graph provided:

The Washington Post points out that claims of human rights abuses by the military in these entities have increased, with the exceptional nature of Calderón’s strategy:

The military occupation of Juarez, an industrial city of 1.3 million across the Rio Grande from El Paso, is the most extreme example of Calderón’s high-risk strategy of using the army to confront Mexico’s powerful drug cartels. Besieged city officials signed an agreement surrendering responsibility for civilian law enforcement to the military.

The Juarez police department is now under the command of a retired three-star general and a dozen top military officers handpicked by Mexico’s defense secretary. Soldiers are the cops — they write traffic tickets, investigate domestic disputes, arrest drunks and run every department, including the jail, the training academy and the emergency call center.

More than 10,000 soldiers and federal agents patrol Juarez’s gritty streets. Dressed in green camouflage and carrying automatic weapons, they stage raids, detain suspects, and search travelers at the airport and border crossings, assuming unprecedented law enforcement duties.

• Obama in Mexico last week. The White House released a press release citing advances in the bilateral relationship following Obama’s visit to Mexico City. Most interesting, perhaps, is the designation of the Sinaloa Cartel, Los Zetas (not the Gulf Cartel), and La Familia Michoacana as “Significant Foreign Narcotics Traffickers,” thereby “exposing them and their associates to financial sanctions under the U.S. Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act.” The LA Times explains that Alan Bersin, an “aggressive former federal prosecutor credited with taming a once-lawless area of the region,” is to be named Obama’s border czar. Also, the Mexican government has approved Carlos Pascual as the new US ambassador; he now awaits Senate confirmation.

• El Chapo Guzmán: the world’s most controversial billionaire? Forbes named Mexico’s most wanted drug trafficker on its annual billionaires list, to much chagrin. (A Slate blogger questions how much money El Chapo and other traffickers could actually be raking in.) In what has become a major scandal, Durango-based Roman Catholic Archbishop Hector Gonzalez claimed over the weekend that “everyone knows” where El Chapo lives in this state and yet the government does nothing. (Does this lend power to the claims of La Reina del Pacífico?)

• The capture of Don Mario: “One capo goes down, another takes his place.” TIME reports on the potentially violent fall-out from the Colombian government’s successful capture of Medellín-based narco-paramilitary Don Mario. The Center for International Policy’s Plan Colombia and Beyond blog has links to media coverage and a profile of Don Mario.

• Building walls around Rio’s favelas: protecting the environment, or defending against narcos? El Pais reports (in Spanish) on the security wall constructed around the favela of Morro Dona Marta, which appears to serve a dual purpose. Dona Marta is one of the favelas occupied by the military police last year as part of the government’s aggressive new clear-and-hold strategy. The Guardian featured an interesting op-ed on the wall issue a few months back, clearly pointing out the rights issues involved.

• A decade of the drug war in numbers. From Adam Isacson at the Center for International Policy, “a compendium of drug war statistics.”

• New resources: The Citizens’ Institute for the Study of Crime (ICESI; Instituto Ciudadano de Estudios sobre la Inseguridad) has released its 5th annual victimization survey, a well-respected project which serves to help understand the incidence of crime in Mexico and its reporting. Also, Brookings’ Vanda Felbab-Brown published last month a fascinating paper entitled “The Violent Drug Market in Mexico and Lessons from Colombia”–a recommended read.

Part 2 of a 4-part weeklong series

• Fox News picks apart the oft-stated claim that 90% of weapons found in Mexico come from the US. According to the article,

In 2007-2008, according to ATF Special Agent William Newell, Mexico submitted 11,000 guns to the ATF for tracing. Close to 6,000 were successfully traced — and of those, 90 percent — 5,114 to be exact, according to testimony in Congress by William Hoover — were found to have come from the U.S.

But in those same two years, according to the Mexican government, 29,000 guns were recovered at crime scenes. In other words, 68 percent of the guns that were recovered were never submitted for tracing. And when you weed out the roughly 6,000 guns that could not be traced from the remaining 32 percent, it means 83 percent of the guns found at crime scenes in Mexico could not be traced to the U.S.

Before the US can start congratulating itself on supplying “only” 5,000 deadly weapons to Mexican cartels last year, we have to ask two questions:

1) Why were 18,000 recovered guns not submitted for tracing? The author argues that for these guns, “it is obvious from their markings that they do not come from the U.S.” Yet the ICE agent quoted in article states, “Not every weapon seized in Mexico has a serial number on it that would make it traceable.” This doesn’t necessarily mean they don’t come from the U.S. The reasons for not submitting recovered weapons could range from corrupt cops keeping the more powerful and expensive guns for themselves, to insufficient access to e-Trace, the US tracing database.
2) Why were nearly 50% of the submitted guns not able to be successfully traced? Guns sold on the secondary market in the U.S. are more difficult, if not impossible, to trace. Is this part of the problem?

• Obama backtracks on assault weapons ban, citing political opposition. According to the Washington Times, while in Mexico City last week, “Obama indicated that while he favors reinstating the U.S. ban on assault weapons, which Congress allowed to expire five years ago, the move would face too much political opposition to happen soon.” Which is to say he won’t push it in Congress?

• The NRA: “Good Riddance to the Clinton Gun Ban.” Obama’s statements in Mexico should please the NRA, who’ve been releasing plenty of information opposing a reinstatement of the assault weapons ban. Calling the expired prohibition the “Clinton Gun Ban,” their argument includes a few central points:

1) “Assault weapon” is an artificial and useless legal definition, which affects some commonly-used target rifles.
2) “More Guns, Less Crime.” Between 1991-2002, violent crime has decreased while private gun ownership has increased.
3) Assault weapons are infrequently used in crime in the U.S. and pro-regulation pundits misuse information to suggest otherwise. (There is no mention of Mexico in the fact sheet.) Citing a 1997 Urban Institute study which noted that “the banned guns and magazines were never used in more than a fraction of all gun murders,” the NRA ignores the issue of the fraction of all assault weapons used for criminal versus legal activity. That is, what other incentives exist for purchasing or owning a semiautomatic assault rifle?
4) Ownership of these guns is a constitutional right. According to the fact sheet, “‘Who needs an assault weapon,’ the anti-gun lobby asks. The premise of that question is, however, at odds with basic American principles.” This is fundamental to the NRA’s argument, and goes hand-in-hand with the widely held belief among their supporters that, in the words of a wise YouTube commenter, “Any ban is just the first step in a total ban.” [expletives omitted]

• 3 page article + slide show + video + interactive graphic = now that’s coverage! Not to be left out of the ever-increasing US media coverage of the drug war in Mexico, the New York Times recently published a comprehensive article discussing the challenges posed by the illegal gun trade. They wisely point out that this is not just a problem of the laws on the books, but also, centrally, of enforcement.

• New State Department fact sheets on the e-Trace system, here and here.

**Photo courtesy of Raul Arboleda/AFP/Getty Images.

Part 1 of a 4-part weeklong series

• What’s going on with the California marijuana legalization proposal? The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Rep. Ammiano has yet to find a single co-sponsor. Nevertheless, the always cheeky Ammiano warns, “Oh, don’t underestimate me, pal.” A hearing is planned for late fall or early winter 2009.

• “An Act to regulate and tax the cannabis industry.” Massachusetts legislators have introduced two bills to legalize marijuana in the state: House Bill 2929 and Senate Bill 1801. The initiatives would go beyond the current decriminalization of consumption, to legalize responsible use for adults over 21 years old.

• “The only way to reduce violence, therefore, is to legalize drugs. Fortuitously, legalization is the right policy for a slew of other reasons.” Jeffrey Miron, Director of Undergraduate Studies of the Harvard Economics Department, received a fair bit of press last month for his op-ed promoting drug legalization. His argument extends beyond the marijuana proposals currently sitting in the California and Massachusetts state legislatures. He writes,

Legalization is desirable for all drugs, not just marijuana. The health risks of marijuana are lower than those of many other drugs, but that is not the crucial issue. Much of the traffic from Mexico or Colombia is for cocaine, heroin and other drugs, while marijuana production is increasingly domestic. Legalizing only marijuana would therefore fail to achieve many benefits of broader legalization.

• How much money would legalization really save state governments? Michael Hiltzik of the LA Times investigates the claim that marijuana is California’s largest cash crop, and comes to the conclusion that the math is all fuzzy.

• Is cocaine getting more expensive? The Washington Office on Latin America takes on the official statistics from Washington.

• The Sentencing Project: changes in racial dynamics of drug offenses buck quarter century trend. According to the Christian Science Monitor, from 1999-2005, “the number of African-Americans incarcerated for drug offenses in state prisons has declined more than 20 percent while the number of white imprisoned drug offenders has increased more than 40 percent.” Why? The Sentencing Project, which released the report, points to the growing use of drug courts and alternatives to incarceration at the state level. Nevertheless, this occurs amidst a still-massive growth in the total number of imprisoned drug offenders: from 40,000 in 1980 to more than 500,000 today.

• But racial disparities still obvious and unjust, says Human Rights Watch. In their report “Decades of Disparity: Drug Arrests and Race in the United States,” the leading human rights organization states that that “adult African Americans were arrested on drug charges at rates that were 2.8 to 5.5 times as high as those of white adults in every year from 1980 through 2007.”

• Americans for Safe Access on the right to (valid) information. The advocacy organization Americans for Safe Access (ASA) has appealed a case before the 9th Circuit Court to get the Department of Justice to reconsider its stance on medical marijuana. After requesting the DEA reclassify marijuana several years ago, ASA has now used the Information Quality Act to petition the Department of Health and Human Services to review its statements that marijuana “has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.” See the appellant’s opening brief here and listen to the oral argument here. (via Eric Sterling)

• New links: the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information.

• The real story behind 4/20, from Alternet.

Currently traveling with limited access to internet. No lack of news in the drug war, though! Long posts forthcoming…

For now, though, please check out last week’s Economist, which features several important articles under the leader “How to stop the drug wars.” Their conclusion? “Prohibition has failed; legalisation is the least bad solution.” See leader here, and related articles on the right-hand sidebar.

A number of important reports on international drug control have been released recently.

• Today, the UN released the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) Annual Report. The report highlights new supply routes through the Balkans and West Africa into Europe, and the falling price of cocaine. Check out related articles here and here.

• The South East Asia Opium Survey, issued by the UNODC, “shows that the region, once notorious as heroin’s Golden Triangle, has a limited opium problem that is concentrated in just one region of Myanmar.” According to UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa, “This is a drug control success story.”

• The UNODC’s Opium Winter Assessment finds “a likely reduction in the amount of opium grown in Afghanistan in 2009.”

• The Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, headed by the former presidents of Brazil, Colombia and Mexico, released its main findings in a much talked-about statement entitled, “Drugs and Democracy: Toward a Paradigm Shift.” The report is worth a read in its entirety, but essentially calls for an end to the “failed war” against drugs and a re-framing of international efforts–toward consumption reduction, alternative development, decriminalization of marijuana, and public health, plus a redirection of repressive strategies toward high-level traffickers.