In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together. |
||
Page Not FoundWe need to be united in the fight against fascism and repression.
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
Experimental medical research on inmates is on the rise.
What Bush should have learned from the Cold War.
Inside Ashcroft's police state.
The AFL-CIO regroups.
Racism on Trial
Affirmative action on the ropes.
Editorial
Creeping Authoritarianism.
Appall-o-Meter
England moves to decriminalize narcotics.
Back in the U.S.S.R?
No, but former Communists are retaking power in Eastern Europe.
Immigrant Exodus
Mexicans head south of the border.
Death threats and plant closings threaten workers rights in Guatemala.
Pearl Watson: A Woman, A Plan, A Canal.
Self Reliance
BOOKS: Vivian Gornick's political struggle.
2G or not 2G?
BOOKS: Stories of The Holocaust Kid.
FILM: The Royal Tenenbaums, Lord of the Rings, Ocean's Eleven.
The clubs were alive with the sound of John's sax ...
|
December 7, 2001
Drug War Retreat
England moves to decriminalize narcotics.
For British Prime Minister Tony Blair, there might never be a more opportune
moment to stand down from a war that has grown increasingly unpopular at home. It may only have been a matter of time, but Britain, which has enthusiastically
assumed a co-leadership role in the “first war of the 21st century,”
the War on Terror, has chosen this moment to quietly but unmistakably begin
a cessation of hostilities in the last and longest war of the 20th: the war
on drugs. In late October, Home Secretary David Blunkett announced that the government
would soon stop arresting or even cautioning people for marijuana possession.
Blunkett also indicated that the Labour Party is ready to discuss expanding
the legal distribution of heroin to addicts and reclassifying the drug ecstasy—thought
to be used by as many as half a million Britons each weekend—as a “soft”
drug, with accompanying reductions in penalties for its manufacture, sale and
possession. “The drug war, in Europe at least, is essentially over,” says Paul
Flynn, a Labour MP from Wales. “Our course is irreversibly moving toward
a more pragmatic approach to substance abuse generally throughout Europe. Aside
from Sweden, the British are the last nation of the European Union to move away
from criminally enforced prohibition as front-line drug abuse prevention.” “After 30 years under some of the harshest drug policies in the European
Union, Britain’s drug problem is among the worst in Europe. And after 25
years of intelligent, pragmatic policies, drugs in the Netherlands seem to cause
the least harm to individuals and society,” notes Flynn, who also sits
on the Health Committee for the Council of Europe, an advisory body that makes
policy recommendations to its 43 member nations. Over the past five years, much of Western Europe has begun to move toward decriminalization
of drugs, at least as far as personal possession and use is concerned. Spain
and Germany are no longer arresting people for possession of soft drugs, such
as cannabis or psychedelic mushrooms, and Portugal essentially has decriminalized
drug possession altogether. Portuguese law now requires those caught with up
to 10 “daily doses” of any substance to appear before a non-punitive
commission, if they are cited at all. Britain’s next step could be to expand its system of legal distribution
of heroin to addicts. Under “opiate maintenance,” registered addicts
receive legal, measured doses of heroin along with other health and social services.
The programs are designed to help users stabilize their lives, reduce crime
and increase their chances of getting clean. After a three-year trial that yielded
impressive results, Switzerland has installed heroin maintenance programs as
part of its overall health policy. The Netherlands has initiated clinical trials
of its own, and Spain, Germany and Denmark are expected to follow suit this
year. But as drug reform pushes forward in Europe, there are limits to how far it
can go. A 1961 U.N. treaty currently mandates global drug prohibition. Although
many believe that some nation, most likely the Swiss, will soon attempt to overtly
legalize their domestic cannabis market, legal, regulated markets probably cannot
be widely instituted while that treaty is in effect. The United States, for its part, has strongly opposed programs like opiate
maintenance, and the presence of three hard-line prohibitionists—John Ashcroft
as attorney general, Asa Hutchinson as DEA chief and John Walters as drug czar—in
the Bush administration means that position is unlikely to change, internationally
or domestically. “At the moment, Europe, at least at the highest political levels, is still
afraid to stand in the way of the United States,” says Joep Oomen, director
of the European NGO Council on Drugs and Development. “It is clear that
Europe will only be able to act independently if it stands together behind what
it has learned. Today, in every major city in Western Europe, municipal authorities
have come to the same pragmatic conclusions about drug policy.” Eric Sterling, president of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation, says that
Americans and Europeans look at the issue differently. “In Europe, the
drug problem is viewed as a collection of consequences—AIDS, crime, addiction—which
must be dealt with,” he says. “Not so here, where we tend to look
at drug use and intoxication as a moral issue. We justify the most destructive
and least effective of our drug policies as somehow sending an important message
to our children. That makes it difficult to import even the most successful
European policy initiatives.” Whatever Congress thinks about the wholesale rejection of drug war orthodoxy
taking place across the Atlantic, it doesn’t seem as if it will be able
to do much about it. Some in Europe still call for “zero tolerance,”
but their numbers and their influence are shrinking. “We have come to the
point,” Flynn says, “where Parliament will either reform Britain’s
drug policy, or the people will do it, and Parliament will be irrelevant. The
assumption inside the country is that the war is over.” Adam J. Smith is former associate director of the Drug Reform Coordination
Network, where he was founding editor of The Week Online. |
|
In These Times is committed to remaining fiercely independent, but we need your help. Donate now to make sure we can continue providing the original reporting, deep investigation, and strategic analysis needed in this moment. We're proud to be in this together.
