Cocaine is a dirty drug that causes a horrific amount of misery (and although Western users are complicit in continuing the trade, it’s the prohibitionists who are most to blame for refusing to imagine a more ethical alternative). Read journalist Toby Muse’s new book, Kilo: Inside the Deadliest Cocaine Cartels — from the Jungles to the Streets, for brilliant and rare insights into the trade.
Nations have choices to make when deciding drug policies during a pandemic. Do they maintain the default “war on drugs” rhetoric and implementation or try something more humane and sensible? Argentina is using seized assets from drug traffickers and sending those resources to federal police. Such an idea is open to abuse — corrupt police and officials can use the assets for political influence — but in theory the initiative is a good one if the resources are redirected cleverly and morally.
In the UK, drug dealers are finding innovative ways to deliver drugs, including dressing up as nurses, delivery drivers and joggers to get heroin to those who want it. Dealers are born to be ingenious. One drug worker from Sussex told Vice: “A mini-cab driver told me he would normally be ferrying kids around on school runs, but now he’s staying busy by driving all the dealers around town.” In Berlin, dealers are still selling their goods as normal while wearing face masks and gloves.
One UK dealer told Vice that although prices for many products have increased, “markets have to innovate and diversify in response to change. So, I’m importing and selling concentrates and vape pens, called Shatterpens. They contain pure cannabis oil, extracted with C02, no solvents.” He said that domestically-grown hash and cannabis were far more in demand while the lockdown continued. Police are still targeting drug importers and yet the smell of futility hangs over these efforts.
Covid-19 is forcing enterprising drug cartels to adapt to radically shifting circumstances (though traffickers are likely to re-emerge with vigour once trade routes re-open and dealers and users spend more time outside their homes). Take the ingredients for fentanyl, for example, up to 50 times more powerful than heroin and a key cause of US deaths during the opioid crisis. Although Mexican cartels produced fentanyl for the US market, they used to rely on precursor ingredients including from one state-backed factory in Wuhan (the Chinese city where Covid-19 reportedly originated).
This factory has now shut down and traffickers are increasingly forced to raise the prices of whatever stocks they still have. It’s unsustainable in the long run, and fentanyl users in the US will inevitably find alternative ways to source the drug, but Mexican cartels are no less affected by the coronavirus than other profitable businesses. Some Mexican entrepreneurs are shunning cartels entirely and growing blood-free cannabis (an initiative that pre-dates the pandemic but will hopefully increase after it passes).
Covid-19 is likely to be a massive, temporary inconvenience for the global drug trade and little more. Why? Because Western demand for illicit substances has never been higher and will continue to be so (and yes, some people are still attending drug-fuelled parties during the pandemic).
One of the main takeaways from my years investigating the drug trade has been the staggering hypocrisy of those pushing a brutal “war on drugs”. There are no statistics that support its success: arrest one drug kingpin and 20 more will emerge in his place, and yet year after year governments and many in the media push for no softening of prohibition.
Although the full legalisation and regulation of all drugs is now on the agenda in the nations most directly affected by the violent status quo, there are dangers of legalising drugs without considering all the ramifications (look at California and its failure to support the African-American community after cannabis legalisation). Covid-19 has highlighted the existing racial, social and political fault-lines around drugs, and those who use and produce them; but too often the most marginalised in the West and around the world are forgotten in the rush to judgment.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeWould anyone trust a doctor who had killed every patient who sought treatment for over half a century of medical practice? The answer is somewhat obvious. Yet in terms of drug policy, we are trusting that very same doctor.
It is a fact that our present approach is failing. There is no reductions in drug use or the crime associated with it for all the posturing and initiatives. If this was a medical treatment, it would be banned and those who sought to continue it would be prosecuted. At the very least those who advocate a dangerous medicine would be recognised as snake oil salesmen.
Drugs are only criminal because someone decided they should be criminal. Perhaps the time is at last coming when we should think again about what is really criminal.
The ‘war on theft’ will never be won, therefore we should make theft legal. Nobody would say it because it is a silly argument and the same is true when applied to the war on drugs.
We do not fight crime because we hope to defeat it, but fighting it limits its negative effects.
Understanding whether legalizing some drugs will be beneficial on the whole it is a much more complicated affair than simply saying “it’s really hard to make them illegal”. This should be even more obvious now, when we are hurting the economy to save lives. We do that because we believe that saving lives is better in the long-term, even when it comes to economical well-being.
Has anyone ever fallen for your comparison of theft to the drug war? Or did you just make that up as you were typing? In case you need it rebutted, the obvious difference when police target theft is it never makes theft worse. Indeed most traditional crimes are like that (murder etc). But in the case of drugs (incl alcohol) there is clear evidence that prohibition makes it worse. Since they can’t remove the demand for drugs, all they can do is staunch the supply. Like plugging holes in a damn with your fingers, it’s a futile effort that only drives up prices and incentives for the criminals, including prioritising the hardest forms of the drug for ease of transport. The escalating levels of violence as one gang takes over from another in an endless Hobbesian trap are well documented in many books, including Chasing the Scream.
Your are correct, we can never countenance theft, or for that matter murder and fraud.
However drugs are not venal, but recreational. If idiots wish to kill themselves by using them, let them. It is Darwinian Self Selection (DSS).
The ‘war’ on drugs can never be won, and the collateral damage is huge. So let’s legalise them and let DSS take it’s course.
Actually we have been here before, back in the 1920’s when the US idiotically enforced Prohibition. This lunatic decision spawned the greatest Crime Empire known to man and eventually, after much squealing and gnashing of teeth, lead to Repeal after 10 years of madness.
Let us recognise our mistake and move on.
I was not arguing in favor of the war on drugs. The issue is too complicated to debate it in a comment. I was pointing out the sillyness of the original subtitle, that said “we will never win the war on drugs”.
The case you mentioned of the proibition is a good example of the complexity of such issues. First, it actually worked until the depression it. See Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation.
More importantly, it was part of the empowering of women, which were the ones most affected by the abuses of alcohol. It did also permanently change the benevolent attitude toward alcoholism. Before the proibition it was socially acceptable, even after its repeal that was not true anymore.
What you have so succinctly described is that dreadful phenomena when one section of society (invariably religious loonies) feels it has a ‘God’ given right to tell the rest how live their lives.
Winston Churchill pronounced that Prohibition was “an affront to the whole history of mankind “. Who can gainsay him?
As to violence against woman, surely unemployment was as great a factor as alcoholism in working class America?
Well, yes, but we have known this for at least 30 years.
However, the following is interesting:
‘Although Mexican cartels produced fentanyl for the US market, they used to rely on precursor ingredients including from one state-backed factory in Wuhan (the Chinese city where Covid-19 reportedly originated).’
I have known this for some time, but many people will have been unaware. Essentially, for almost 30 years both Republican and Democrat administrations outsourced US jobs to China and Mexico, then allowed those two countries to openly ship into the US the very drugs that killed hundreds of thousands of the US citizens who had lost their jobs and purpose in life. And then they wonder why Trump came to power.