Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

June 27, 2009

'ERADICATION IS A WASTE OF MONEY'.... When the administration talked up the idea of a new U.S. policy in Afghanistan, officials apparently meant it. This includes new restrictions on airstrikes, but just as importantly, it also includes a new approach to Afghanistan's drug problem.

The U.S. has announced a new drug policy for opium-rich Afghanistan, saying it was phasing out funding for eradication efforts and using the money for drug interdiction and alternate crop programs instead.

The U.S. envoy for Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, told The Associated Press on Saturday that eradication programs weren't working and were only driving farmers into the hands of the Taliban.

"Eradication is a waste of money," Holbrooke said on the sidelines of a Group of Eight foreign ministers' meeting on Afghanistan, where he announced the policy shift and said it had been warmly received, particularly by the United Nations.

Afghanistan is the world's leading source of opium, cultivating 93 percent of the world's heroin-producing crop. The United Nations has estimated the Taliban and other Afghan militants made $50 million to $70 million off the opium and heroin trade last year.

Antonio Maria Costa, the head of the U.N. drug office, has been arguing that international efforts are necessary to assist Afghan farmers who are willing to grow valuable crops, while at the same time, targeting drug trafficking and production. Holbrooke told the AP that hasn't been U.S. policy, but it's exactly what the Obama administration intends to do.

"We're essentially phasing out our support for crop eradication and using the money to work on interdiction, rule of law, alternate crops.... That's the big change in our policies."

Holbrooke said the previous U.S. policy to combat Afghan poppy, which focused on eradication programs, hadn't reduced "by one dollar" the amount of money the Taliban earned off cultivation and production.

"It might destroy some acreage," Holbrooke said. "But it just helped the Taliban." [...]

"The farmers are not our enemy, they're just growing a crop to make a living," he said. "It's the drug system. So the U.S. policy was driving people into the hands of the Taliban."

Afghanistan is going to remain a nightmarish challenge, but the chances of U.S. policy succeeding go up considerably with smart policies like these.

Steve Benen 12:20 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (23)
 
Comments

Or they could, you know, legalize it.

Posted by: Boronx on June 27, 2009 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

any details on what that money for the eradication programs actually buys? is it for those dea airplanes and tricked out robocops? gonna be a lot of pissed of bullyboys out there; programs advancing crop alternatives aren't nearly as boner-inducing as terrorizing local farmers.

it's good (and way past time) to see this policy shift.

Posted by: linda on June 27, 2009 at 12:40 PM | PERMALINK

I always thought South American eradication efforts were just a way to funnel money and military equipment into the hands of us-friendly regimes.

We can file this policy chagnge under, 'obvious,' which becoming rather a fat folder for this administration.

Posted by: inkadu on June 27, 2009 at 1:00 PM | PERMALINK

How dare President Obama change America's long held tradition of winning hearts and minds by dropping things on people?

Nothing but nothing gives people that sense of FreedomTM more than planes buzzing over dropping bombs or poison.

Posted by: Capt Kirk on June 27, 2009 at 1:14 PM | PERMALINK

It's funny how the US constantly funds both sides of the wars we fight. The demand for drugs in this country provides money for both terrorist groups and the drug cartels. Then we spend huge amounts of money to stop drugs which increases the price (while having little effect on the supply) thus giving the drug runners and even more money to kill people with thus propmting us to spend more money to stop the drugs and so on and so forth.

What a great system we've set up.

Posted by: Thorin-1 on June 27, 2009 at 1:25 PM | PERMALINK

ironically, there is a shortage of morphine in the less-developed world and many suffering patients whose lives could be improved by buying up this crop and turning it into medical grade morphine. Too logical, I guess.

Posted by: sue on June 27, 2009 at 1:27 PM | PERMALINK

So 93% of the entire world's heroin net the Taliban $50 to $70 million annually? Really? 93% of the global demand for heroin nets the local producers $50 million bucks a year? Wow. I know there are other operators, etc and the Taliban doesn't necessarily control the entire Afghan poppy crop but that dollar amount seems really low.

Posted by: Adso on June 27, 2009 at 1:33 PM | PERMALINK

Legalizing heroin would resove only part of the problem. My best guess is that soy or corn would grow well there. A corn (Ethonol) cash crop would help as a segue for countries still deeply dependant on oil. Once alternates to oil supplant it the Afghans could use solar and wind development, or just continue to feed the world with their soy and corn crops.

Perhaps taming the Taliban would also help. Didn't we already do that once there? Oh, that's right. We shifted to Iraq for better targets. That Rumsfeld. What a brilliant strategist. What a great humanitarian. Can a Medal of Freedom be far behind? Oh, wait. Bushsit is out of power. Oh well. There's alays a chance at the Nobel Peace Prize. No, wait....

Posted by: stevio on June 27, 2009 at 1:36 PM | PERMALINK

It's my understanding that opium is pretty cheap right at the fields (see Adso's comment). It would probably be pretty easy for the U.S. to buy up and burn 90% of it. That might not be popular at home, though.

Posted by: Ben on June 27, 2009 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINK

Afghanistan will be Obama's Q!

Posted by: antiquelt on June 27, 2009 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

Right. Buy it. At twice the price it's still chump change. Keep the fish happy.

Posted by: buddy66 on June 27, 2009 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

It would be cheaper, if the U.S. would should just buy the entire crop, sell what it could to pharmaceutical companies and destroy the rest. The price the farmers sell their crop for is small, compared to the amount the Taliban and other middlemen (and ultimately retail dealers). It would also have the added benefit of establishing a good working relationship with farmers, making it easier to work with them in converting to other crops, hopefully for alternative energy feedstock.

Posted by: DevilDog on June 27, 2009 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

Buying the opium crop and selling for medical purposes is not nearly as much fun as putting on your Ninja costume, or your way-gay green beret, and kicking some ass in the middle of nowhere.

Posted by: red@cted on June 27, 2009 at 2:04 PM | PERMALINK

Now if we ensure that our own farm subsidies don't make it impossible for those new crops in Afghanistan to compete in world or regional markets. . .

I know. Never Mind.

Posted by: Linkmeister on June 27, 2009 at 3:56 PM | PERMALINK

I’m certainly no drug expert (and arguably no economic expert either), but I assume market forces for heroin under current policy operate at equilibrium. Our current attempts at limiting supply have evidently proved ineffective. Why would alternative means to the same end produce different results in this case? Suggesting that the US enter the market as a buyer increases demand making the product more lucrative and drives supply in the wrong direction. Bribing farmers to reduce supply by introducing alternative crops without a corresponding drop in demand will have the same effect. Which leads me to wonder how the discussion went when this new policy was formulated. Is Afghanistan the only place the product can feasibly be produced? What if the Taliban behaved exactly the same way as any drug lord protecting his cash flow? If the alternative crops are to be fruit and nut trees, do you suppose the Taliban might negate years of cultivation with a bag of salt or relieve the crop of its owner with a swing of a sword? What, exactly, is the “problem” the USA is trying to “fix”? Control abuse of an otherwise beneficial drug? Eliminate a source of funding for an enemy? Is the object much different than a decades long “war on drugs”? How is that war going? Maybe a more pragmatic solution would be to flood the market with product and tax the damn stuff like we do with the alcohol and tobacco drugs. I’m of the opinion that people really don’t want the government wasting resources on protecting us from ourselves, and the people seem to be infinitely more creative than governments at implementing THAT policy.

Posted by: Chopin on June 27, 2009 at 4:06 PM | PERMALINK

The figures seem way too low. Also, the Taliban are seen as holy rollers, but they are just another gang of scumbag drug dealers. Looks like they won the PR battle there.

Posted by: Bob M on June 27, 2009 at 6:13 PM | PERMALINK

A waste of money? Since when has lack of money been a deterrent for Obama and his liberal allies? Just put it on the tab and worry about a later generation paying for it. And these are the clowns who chided Bush for spending too much money.

Posted by: mhr on June 27, 2009 at 6:57 PM | PERMALINK

yeah, but, how much money did Knight Sanford take to Argentina?

Posted by: annjell on June 27, 2009 at 7:34 PM | PERMALINK

Let me get this straight. The Taliban eradicated poppy growing in Afghanistan everywhere they could during the time they were in power. The Warlords in Afghanistan promoted the cultivation of poppies and used the money they made from it to fight the Taliban who were trying to eradicate the cultivation of poppies. Now suddenly the Taliban is profiting from the cultivation of poppies?
Something doesn't smell right in this story.

Posted by: thebewilderness on June 27, 2009 at 8:05 PM | PERMALINK

This just continues the war on the poor and middle class. Heroin supply goes up and the price goes down. It is cheaper and of higher quality and doesnt require a needle to use. More young people use and become unemployable, incarcerated or dead.

Posted by: PBRMN on June 28, 2009 at 7:35 AM | PERMALINK

Since attempts to eradicate the opium crops didn't work, I would say this is worth a try. I wonder, though, if the farmers will be paid as well for growing beans and squash, or whatever Afghans eat.

Posted by: CDW on June 28, 2009 at 12:18 PM | PERMALINK

This idea is so old it has whiskers. There is no crop that pays like opium, so we would have to subsidize other crops, and the debt president would make expensive promises we wouldn't keep, and the drug lords would behead uncooperative farmers.

http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=22060

Poppies generate about eight times as much income per hectare than wheat and requires less water and labour, according to the report. And poppies tolerate bad weather and drought better than do food crops.

The higher returns represent a lifeline for smallholders, on many of whom extended families of between 15 and 25 people rely for support.

''I hold just 2.5 hectares of land in Ghani Khel,'' says another farmer. ''The landscape is such that I cannot run modern agricultural machinery as the fields are divided in small portions.

''My 2.5 hectares of land earns me around 8,400 dollars a year if the opium production remains at 14 kilograms per hectare with a price of around 240 dollars per kilo. But production per hectare sometimes reaches 20 kilos. No other crop can really give me that kind of money.''

Posted by: luther on June 29, 2009 at 1:30 AM | PERMALINK

Good Day. Everybody likes a kidder, but nobody lends him money. Help me! Help to find sites on the: Howard miller wall clock. I found only this - pendulum wood wall clock. First, the employees expect about the rich water in a other time, the race of the more own system girl, wall clock. Wall clock, almost why are they tumbling until friday, 18? Thank you very much :-). Lilia from Sri.

Posted by: Lilia on March 12, 2010 at 9:51 AM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?










 

 

Editor/Reporter Search

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM

Contribute to Washington Monthly


View Understanding REDD




buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly


Place Your Link Here

--- Links ---

Loans

Moving Companies

FREE Phone Card

Engagement Rings

Promotional Products

Flowers

Slimming and diet pills

Loans

Personal Loan

Personal Loans

Addiction Treatment

Phone Cards

Less Debt = Financial Freedom

Addiction Treatment Programs

Credit Cards & Debt Consolidation

Vacation Rentals