Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Losing the battle on opium

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 27 August 2007
AFGHANISTAN'S poppy harvest is expected to break all records this year as the country spirals deeper into a vicious circle of drugs, corruption and insecurity.
A United Nations report to be published today will reveal Afghanistan is now producing nearly 95 per cent of the world's opium, up from 92 per cent in 2006.

This marks the sixth straight year of rises since the Taleban was toppled in 2001 - despite hundreds of millions of pounds being pumped into programmes to halt cultivation, processing and trafficking of the drug.

"It is a very bad situation definitely, and the government has not been able to deal with it in the right way, otherwise it should have at least been stabilised or contained," said Christina Oguz, head of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) in Afghanistan. "The same goes for the international community."

Afghanistan's drug money corrupts government and helps fund the Taleban insurgency. That weakens state control over parts of the country, which, in turn, leads to more insecurity and more drug production.

The scale of the problem is huge. Opium and the heroin made from it are estimated to be worth some £1.5 billion to the Afghan economy, about a third of its gross domestic product.

The Taleban managed to drastically reduce the 2001 poppy crop as they held most of the country firmly under their control and implemented strict punishments for offenders. But now, some 70 per cent of opium production comes from provinces in the south, where the Taleban insurgency is strongest.

One of the few bright spots in the UNODC and Afghan counter-narcotics ministry report is the rise in opium-free provinces from six last year to about ten in 2007 - all in the north where security is tightest.

Both traffickers and the Taleban have a common interest in instability and lawlessness. "Traffickers are equipping and providing funds for terrorist organisations that are responsible for many attacks in Kabul, other parts of the country and other parts of the world," Zalmay Afzaly, of the counter-narcotics ministry said.

Insecurity also leads farmers to plant poppies, as fighting may prevent them from getting perishable crops to market. "The great thing about opium is that it lasts for 20 to 30 years - it's money in the bank," a senior western diplomat said. "So if you're not sure you can get your onions or carrots to market as they may go off because it's too insecure to move, then you grow opium and put it under your bed - it's a currency."

Meanwhile, the notoriously corrupt, poorly equipped and badly paid Afghan police are unlikely to be able to do much to stop drug producers and traffickers, let alone the kingpins that run the trade and have so far remained free from prosecution. The Afghan counter-narcotics ministry says it has not had enough evidence to bring corrupt officials to book.

The United States had championed aerial spraying to eradicate poppy crops, but diplomats say that idea has been quietly dropped for another year because of objections from the Afghan government, worried about adverse public reaction.

Instead, Washington unveiled a carrot-and-stick strategy earlier this month, giving greater financial incentives to Afghan provincial governors to combat drugs while stepping up co- ordination between counter-narcotics and counter-insurgency forces.

That should help governors in the north, who have successfully fought poppy cultivation but have missed out on most of the aid, which is spent in the south where drug production has spiralled.

PUSH TO PREVENT AID BECOMING SEED MONEY


THE lush strip of land along the banks of the Helmand River is one of the most fertile farming areas in Afghanistan and was once the country's bread-basket.

This year the United States will spend some £100 million in aid on Helmand. If the region was a country, say diplomats, it would be the fifth biggest recipient of American aid.

But helping farmers bring in better irrigation and agricultural methods can sometimes backfire.

"They use it (aid) for growing opium," said Chistina Oguz, of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in Afghanistan.

It was like telling the country that growing opium would be rewarded by aid, she added.

However, a prolonged campaign of public awareness, including alternative development, crop eradication, tackling traffickers, law enforcement and judicial reform hopes to change that.

"Unless the international community and the government are very determined ... we will not see enough change for a very long time," said Ms Oguz.

The full article contains 756 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 26 August 2007 11:43 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Heroin , Afghanistan
 
1

Scullion,

Canada 27/08/2007 01:02:32

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the U.S. should use its greatest weapon, money, to buy the entire crop at prices the Taleban can't afford to pay. The farmers don't care if you burn it, smoke it, inject it or send it into outer space just as long as they get their money. If so much money is being thrown away, where's the loss?
Legitimate poppy growers in Turkey are well regulated and are a source of pharmaceutical narcotics.

2

howard sutherland,

bahamas 27/08/2007 01:22:10

1. Scullion, Canada

Since it's your idea why not have Canada spend their money to buy it?

3

Suck--McCrunchie.,

http://www.stirlingpark.net for public contracts? 27/08/2007 01:24:47

1. Scullion, Canada

I could not agree more, but sadly life seems cheaper than money on both sides in the middle east.

4

sandy,

USA Pennsylvania 27/08/2007 01:26:44

#1--Scullion--the use of 'pharmaceutical narcotics' has been tossed around before but nothing further mentioned...wonder why?

5

The Fly Fifer,

Fife 27/08/2007 02:26:47

It surprises me that 2 or 3 million cannot come up with a bug or virus (such as TMV) that would devastate the crop.

6

ddmc,

27/08/2007 07:46:46

the taliban had stopped the majority of opium production, but since the fall of the taliban production is higher than ever with the majority of the fields being protected in Helmand.
Now the US/UK govts are blaming the taliban for increased production, to raise funds, hmm the reason they slashed production is due to religous beliefs, but now were expected to believe that these ultra fundamentalists think it's OK to produce opium, i'm sure they can find funds elsewhere without resorting to drugs.
The honest truth is we could napalm any poppy field in Afghanistan so why dont we, what vested interests are we protecting, it's not the afghan farmers, so who does make the most cash from opium & it's derivatives ? the taliban or the afghan drug barons who happen to be helping us fight the taliban ?
looks like the US/UK govt has sold us down the opium river for the sake of war in a country which a large section of both countries oppose, then spin it to blame the taliban for the opium.

7

Toast,

27/08/2007 07:48:26

#7 spot on,decriminalise and control.our politicians have neither the vision or the guts

8

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 27/08/2007 08:53:51

I like Scullions idea and I think the good old US of A is one of the largest, if not THE largest, importers and users of opiium.

Since they seem to have money to burn on various wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and possibly Iran they can funnel some of their largesse to the poppy trade.

I am sure the taxpayers who shop for televisions and computer games at Walmart would heartily agree because they would be spreading "The American Way" by claiming to have eradicated a social evil under the stewardship of a born-again fundamentalist buffoon called Baby Bush.

9

,

27/08/2007 09:57:37
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Help Ma Boab,

Oh No It's Over! 27/08/2007 10:57:47

#7 - well said, but common sense never seems to win in this argument, too much emotion, fear and ignornance. I think it's changing though. People's attitudes are becoming softer to decriminalisation, and are increasingly more informed about drugs and the dabgers involved.

#1 - also a very sensible suggestion.

11

BK,

Cyberspace 27/08/2007 11:00:08

The Taliban kept the drug problem in check. We ousted the Taliban and put the drug barons back in control. We are now suffering from the results of this. meddling by stupid ans corrupt politicians (and they don't come any stupider or more corrupt than B&B), no matter how well intentioned, never works.

12

Colin John Macrae,

West Lothian 27/08/2007 12:00:05

We have lost the drug war in Afganistan because our soldiers are far too spread out, bring them home and fight drugs here ,use the soldiers to gather inteligence, protect our shores rather than somone else's shores, our forces could help both costom's and police instead of trying to fight a war with one hand tied behind thier back's with equipment that's out dated and unserviceable.

13

sandy,

USA....Fred Dalton Thompson/President/09 27/08/2007 12:02:32

#10--Tim---sorry guy, you might want to look at your mother-ship, the UK, for the largest usage & importer of opium.....good try tho.............

14

mwherold,

United States 27/08/2007 12:04:32

Jennifer is absolutely correct. Going about suppressing poppy cultivation in Afghanistan will merely shift the geographic source of supply AND MORE IMPORTANTLY contribute mightily to more Afghans eager to fight the US-UK occupation forces. Many people persist in repeating a completely (as yet) unfounded trope, namely that the Taliban are involved in poppy production and trade. Where's the evidence? BK is on target: we put the drug barons including the mayor of Kabul's (Karzai) brother in power. Wali Karzai is a drug kingpin in Kandahar. Oh la-la, what friends "we" choose.

15

Cool,

27/08/2007 13:22:57

Maybe the United Nations can buy the stuff....good idea friend....

16

Guga II,

Rockall 27/08/2007 13:49:25

#10 TimW1234. Is that my old mate TCW, by any chance?

Regarding some of the above comments, our troops were allegedly sent to Afghanistan to fight terrorism, not to fight opium production.

The Taliban (the terrorists), established and funded by the Americans, stopped the production of opium. The current corrupt and puppet government (the alleged good guys), also established and funded by the Americans, have increased opium production.

So, ignoring other matters such as oil pipelines, there appears to be something wrong with this equation.

Why don't we just leave them all to it, and pull out troops out?

17

Paddi,

27/08/2007 14:01:35

#18 great points.

Maybe we could get the Mudjahadeen freedom fighters that we backed and armed in the 1980's to fight the Taliban............then again are these guys not one and the same???

funny old world.

18

Oliver F,

UK 27/08/2007 14:40:10

Worldwide there is a morphine shortage and prices are often too high for third world countries to afford for thier critically ill patients. We could use the poppy crop to turn into medication to bring the price down so that those terminally ill and chronically ill in the third world wouldnt have to suffer and go without decent pain medication.

Why dont we do it? Less profits for the pharmaceutical industry thats why.

19

Joanna (actually),

27/08/2007 16:11:06

I agree that buying it for morphine is a great idea (though the Turks might differ) but how can the US do it -- imagine the scandal if any of it went missing! Maybe use some tax money, but let the Saudis or the Japanese or someone actually handle the stuff.

Does anyone know what happened to heroine prices when the Taleban *did* cut off production in around 2000? What was the impact on the world?

20

El_Kabooko,

Sacramento 27/08/2007 19:20:29

If we were truly evil, then pay the farmers to poison the opium so it kills off the end users. No end users, no demand, no need for a supply.

But seriously, like so many other illicit activity, it's the easiest and cheapest way for them to make money. Look at other drugs and where they are manufactured or grown.

If you want to end the drug trade, go after those people who consume the illegal drugs. If that means shipping them off to Afghanistan to grow and smoke their own opium, so be it.

Personally, I think we should build a form of “drug speak easy” where individuals can go, get their fix, hang out with other people doing the same thing, and then go home. They won’t be allowed to take the drugs home nor get behind the wheel of a car. Once they walk in the door, all laws dealing with liability are left behind. That means if they OD on the premise or if their heart stops, no one can get sued.

I realize that something similar occurs in Holland; however, the key is the activity only occurs within the confines of the “drug speak easy.” If it occurs outside that given location, then the individual should be dealt with harshly. By removing the incentive to make money from the problem, then you eliminate the problem.

21

Sammy25,

27/08/2007 20:07:45

This marks the sixth straight year of rises since the Taleban was toppled in 2001 -

So at least the terrible Taliban did something right!

8/ You are quite correct. I would be very suprised if any substantial amount of the drugs profits were going to the Taliban anyway ... the CIA more likely!

14/ I agree.

20/ Why do you call the Taliban terrorists? They were the legitimate Government of Afghanistan. A rather brutal unsavoury regime but the legitimate government nevertheless. Please state ONE terrorist act carried out against the west by the Taliban prior to their being removed from power and explain why exactly you thik they were 'terrorists'?

22

Yok Finney,

Ross-shire 27/08/2007 20:41:37

-- The honest truth is we could napalm any poppy field in Afghanistan

..or you could strip off your clothes and dance naked in the street.

The latter, at least, doesn't do collateral damage. Tell me the last war that was won by high altitude bombing. Tell me any war that was. The honest truth is that a bird could shit on your head anywhere in the USA. It could. It really could. Truth come droppin' slow.

23

El_Kabooko,

Sacramento 27/08/2007 21:38:20

#26

You forget that the Taliban clamped down on opium to boost prices.

As for the “legitimate” government comment, “legitimate” is a relative term. How many brutal regimes in the last 100 years were considered “legitimate?” Even right now, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela is taking over the country to become dictator for life using “legitimate” means.

24

,

27/08/2007 21:52:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 911308, Article id was mapped to record!
25

mwherold,

United States 27/08/2007 21:57:33

Language matters. The U.S. and poodle Blair de facto introduced the idea that anyone resisting their joint imperium was a "terrorist." Does anyone read history? Folks, was the Vietnamese NLF terrorist? No. Was the North Vietnames Army terrorist? No. Was the New Jewel Movewment in Grenada, terrorist? No. Was the FMNL in El Salvador terrorist? No. The double B duet (Bush-Blair) decided to alter language, but all for very good reason: to circumvent the Geneva and Hague conventions on war and to give the bood burghers of the First World (in their Reichian "homelands") goosepimples in the post-9/11 era. And now we hear that Iran's Republican Guard is a "terrorist" organization. Isn't this all so blatantly obviuous?

26

Cyril,

New Zealand 27/08/2007 22:37:24

Who buys the drugs. The Americans are the biggest users of drugs.

27

Sammy25,

27/08/2007 23:02:02

30 / Exactly. How by any valid definition can part of a foriegn country's legitimate armed forces be considered a 'Terrorist' organisation ....

it's like saying, for example, the RAF is a terrorist organisation (but, apparantly, not the army or navy or marines ...???). Absolute nonsense.

28

Rony,

Fife 27/08/2007 23:09:25

The only thing our government is any good at is getting our soldiers killed for nothing. Meanwhile they cackle the fat at Wesminister safely sitting on their big fat butts.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.