War on Drugs - Research Paper Example

?Introduction The war on drugs has been ongoing for about half a century in United s and the largest producers and suppliers of narcotics aroundthe world. During the period, the operation has achieved mixed results, but the increasing incidents of drug use and supply has drastically undermined the credibility of the campaign. On the positive side, the war on drug campaign has increased awareness concerning the adverse effects of narcotics use in the society. However, the punitive enforcement approach used to control drug use and supply particularly in the United States and other countries has resulted to severe and adverse consequences, which have drastically undermined the success of the war on drugs. This paper is a critical examination of the war on drugs in the United States and its effects in the country. Narcotics are a wide range of illegal drugs that are primarily used to influence and change the behavior or mood of the user. Chemically, narcotics are opium derivatives and they include drugs such morphine, heroin, cocaine, codeine among others (Roy, 41). Opiates and cocaine are the most valuable and profitable narcotics in the underworld economy. Narcotics are highly addictive, and they mainly function on the brain and the central nervous system where they reduce the intensity of unpleasant feelings such as pain and could produce euphoric sensations. In medicine, morphine, which is narcotic drug, is widely used to reduce chronic pain. Others narcotics applied in medicine include codeine and oxycodone for relieving pain in patients. Due to the addictive nature of these medically applied narcotics, the abuse of the prescription drugs is a growing concern in the United States (Acker, 57-69). History of Narcotics in United States Narcotics have an ancient history that dates back to the earliest civilization in Greece, Sumeria, Egypt and India among others. According to Roy, opium, which is obtained from the poppy plant, played a major role in prehistoric medicine and pharmacy. The drug was mainly used for inducing sleep and as a general painkiller. In addition, the addictive and euphoric properties of opium encouraged people to use it as a recreational drug. The potent properties of opium increased its demand in the world and by 17th century, commercial production and trade in the drug was already established in the European continent. By eighteenth century, trade in opium was a very profitable venture because an increasing number of people had become addicted to the drug (72-96). The use of opium was no longer restricted to the rich and it soon became a commodity for mass consumption. Consequently, opium became an important source of revenue for various countries especially in Asia and Atlantic region. The main source of opium in United States in 20th century was China (Zabludoff, 49). Currently the main producers and suppliers of opiate drugs are Colombia, Mexico, Afghanistan and Pakistan (Chepesiuk, 68). Acker classifies the history of narcotics use in the United States in three distinct periods, from 1860 to 1910, 1910 to 1950 and from 1950 to the present (63). In the United States, the period from 1860 to 1910 was characterized by the outbreak of the civil war, which started in 1861 and ended in 1865. During the war, large-scale use of narcotics was noted among the combatants (Acker, 105). The medicinal and addictive properties of the drug elicited intensive research from pharmaceutical companies such as the giant pharmaceutical company Bayer. In 1874, chemists from Bayer successfully isolated heroin from morphine. During the period, addiction to morphine had become a major concern in Europe and United States. A growing number of people had become dependant on the drug, resulting to low productivity and increasing level of crime (Roy, 38). Therefore, the medical fraternity hoped that heroin, would cure morphine addiction. The successful synthesis of heroin from morphine well received in the market and the narcotic was promoted as “a wonder drug” (Musto, 55). The commercial promotion and increased accessibility of the drug in pharmacies and medical institutions exacerbated its abuse in the American society. By 1900, Musto estimated that over 300, 000 American citizens were dependent on the opiate drugs (59). From 1910 to 1950, United States recorded unexpected increase in the number of people addicted to opiates drugs, because of raising number of immigrants and widespread abuse of drugs by young people (Acker, 42). During this period, the number of people using heroin for recreation purposes exceeded those who became dependent by using opium-derived prescriptions from hospitals. The minority groups and economically deprived people in the United States also recorded a dramatic increase in the level of addiction to heroin. Other factors that increased the rate of abusing narcotics in the United States during this period include urbanization and increase in trade between the country and other narcotic producing countries in Asia and South America (Fowler, 236). The Second World War also played a major role in enhancing use of narcotics in the United States. After the end of the war in 1945, use of intravenous injections to take heroin increased dramatically. By the mid 1960, abuse of opiate drugs had reached endemic levels in United States, especially in cities and urban areas (Cooper, 118). Use of opiate drugs has been on an increasing trend from 1950 to the present. A research conducted by GCDP in 2003 established that about 3.7 million Americans had used heroin in their lifetime, while the over 300,000 confessed to have used the substance in the previous year. Cocaine, another popular narcotic is produced from the leaves of coca plant, which is mainly grown in South and Central American countries, such as Colombia, Bolivia and Peru. Colombia is one of the leading cocaine producers in the world. Cocaine is one of the most powerful narcotic drugs. Just like opium, cocaine was used in the ancient history by Andean community as a medication for relieving fatigue. In 1862, a German chemist isolated cocaine hydrochloride the active chemical compound of the narcotic from the coca leaves, and discovered its medicinal properties (Zabludoff, 68). Cocaine hydrochloride is a potent anesthesia and was applied in minor surgeries in the late 19th century. However, physicians soon discovered that it affected the mood and behavior of patients after operation. Consequently, its application in surgery stopped and was instead used to treat mood disorders such anxiety, depression and treating morphine addiction (Brownstein, and Susan, 75). The purported medicinal properties of cocaine enhanced its popularity in the American society in the early 20th century. This led to its wide application in consumer products such as drinks and a wide range of medicines. Aggressive marketing and promotion of consumer products such as soft drinks containing cocaine increased the widespread use of the narcotic. By the mid 20th century, the health and social effects of cocaine addiction became apparent in United States. This was demonstrated by increase in psychiatric and medical disorders in addition to social problems that arose from overuse of cocaine in the American society. These medical and social concerns prompted the enactment of Harrisons Narcotic act of 1914 in American congress (Cooper, 57-80). The War on Drugs The severe punitive and reinforcement measures provided in the Harrisons Narcotic Act restricted the use and supply of narcotics in the United States up to the mid 1950’s. Consequently, use of cocaine and opium reduced during the period, because of its inaccessibility, which drastically increased the price of the drug that reached the American black markets (Reuter, 39). However, from 1960’s the use of narcotics in United States began increasing drastically. Musto attributed the increase to widespread discontent of young people to the prevailing government policies, such as war in Vietnam, social injustice in the American society and the oppressive government regulations (115). This trend led to the enactment of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 in the United States that declared formal war on drugs. In 1973, President Richard Nixon established Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the clearest indicator of the US government commitment of waging total war on drugs (GCDP). The war on drugs was informed by the increased smuggling of the narcotics from southern American states and Asian producing countries into the United States. Cocaine produced from Colombia, Peru and Bolivia was wrecking havoc in the United States, which provided a high demand due to the growing number of narcotic addicts. To control and eliminate the volume of narcotics entering the United States, the government implemented stringent measures within its borders and in the drug producing countries. The major approaches applied in the war on drugs include use of diplomacy, providing economic assistance to the narcotic producers and criminalizing drug use and supply in the country. In addition, military force is used to depose regimes that support production and trade of narcotic drugs (Cooper, 127) Effects of War on Drugs in the United States and Narcotics Producing Countries War on drugs has various impacts on the United States and narcotic producing countries. In the United States, the initiative has resulted to an increase in the volume of narcotics intercepted while on transit to the country. In addition, an increasing number of narcotic suppliers, traffickers and users have been arrested in the United States. The efforts to reduce and cut the supply of narcotic drugs entering the country have received overwhelming support from the American public (GCDP). According to Chepesiuk, Americans support the initiative because they have become cognizant of the adverse effects that the use of narcotic drugs has on the society, including raise in crime, transmission of diseases such as HIV/AIDS declining productivity among the users and other negative social -economic effects (83). In spite of implementation of the stringent measures in the war on drugs, the consumption of narcotic drugs has been increasing in the United States and the world at large. A comparative study conducted by Common Sense for Drug Policy from 1998 to 2008 established a gradual increase in consumption of narcotic drugs. During the period, cocaine and opiate consumption increased by 34.5 and 27 percent respectively during the period. This trend is attributed to the punitive and criminalizing measures of the war on drug policies (Common Sense for Drug Policy). In United States, the punitive measures imposed by the war on drugs policy have inadvertently placed the drug trade into the control of organized criminal groups and gangs (GCDP). The attempts to cut the supply of the narcotic drugs increases the demand of the prohibited substance, resulting to rapid development of balk market that is controlled by the criminal cartels. Consequently, various adverse effects have emerged in United States and countries that produce the narcotics. Firstly, organized criminal gangs undermine national and international security by triggering incessant conflicts with law enforcers and the members of public. Due to insecurity, areas under control of organized criminals are underdeveloped and marginalized. In United States, criminal gangs that supply and abuse narcotic drugs are on the increase particularly in California. Areas dominated by these gangs have consistently recorded underdevelopment and low investments because of insecurity (GCDP). The resources that could have been used for constructing infrastructure and development are diverted to security enforcement. In countries such as Mexico and Colombia which are major narcotic producers and transit points, crackdown on drug cartels have resulted to heavy loss of human lives and suffering to the poor and marginalized people in the society. In Colombia, armed groups particularly FARC are major causes of civilian deaths during military crackdowns on the cartels (Zabludoff, 109). Since 2006, over 30,000 people have died during military operations aimed at destroying the narcotics criminal organizations (Common Sense for Drug Policy). However, these operations, normally supported by the United States, have been unsuccessful because the cartels resort to bribing the law enforcers, leading to widespread corruption and perpetuation of the drug trafficking and usage. The second adverse effect of war on drugs is violation of human rights especially in the United States. According to GCDP, war on drugs in United States and narcotics producing countries has resulted to violations of human rights through torture and inhumane treatment by law enforcers, mass arrests of suspected drug traffickers, executions, extrajudicial assassinations, and denying the involved persons access to health and other important necessities. In United States jails, people arrested for drug related offenses are growing at the highest rate compared to those charged for other crimes (Common Sense for Drug Policy). Because of criminalization of drug related offenses, law enforcers target people from minority groups more in their operations compared to other groups. In 2004, Common Sense for Drug Policy conducted a study in United States jails and established that African Americans represented 53 percent of the total number of offenders arrested for drug related crimes while 26 percent were white. Hispanic drug offenders represented 20 percent of the total number of prisoners. In America, enforcement of drug related laws are thus biased, which limit the effectiveness of the war on drugs campaign. Besides racial biasness, young people are the major victims of human rights violations perpetrated by law enforcers in United States and other countries experiencing narcotic problem. Thailand, which is a major narcotic producer in the world, recorded over 2800 extrajudicial executions perpetrated by the government’s war on drugs between February and April 2003 (Chepesiuk, 135). GCDP estimates that over 1000 people are executed annually during the war on terror operations in United States annually. War on drugs has promoted discrimination and stigma in the society. Just like in other conflicts, women, children, the elderly and other marginalized people bear the heaviest burden of the war on drugs operations. In countries that produce narcotics especially in South America, children and women are compelled to become laborers or drug pushers of the drug cartels. Consequently, these vulnerable groups suffer heavy casualties during military operations and human rights abuses by law enforcement agencies (Musto, 86-99). Children are orphaned at young age when their parents are jailed for long periods or killed, maimed during military operations. In United States, the war on drugs has become a mechanism of perpetuating racial discrimination. Roy noted that certain traditional rituals that were practiced by the native cultures have been criminalized, leading to unnecessary persecutions under the guise of fighting narcotics. The criminalization of the practices and racial prejudices exposes the minority communities to disproportionate arrests by law enforcement agents (163). War on drugs has exacerbated the level of corruption among the law enforcement agencies. A study conducted by Common Sense for Drug Policy in United States established that the law enforcers engaged in serious crimes, such as undertaking illegal searches and seizures, stealing money and drugs salvaged from suspected drug dealers and selling them to the public. In addition, the study established that the law enforcers colluded with the drug traffickers and offered protection in return for monetary rewards. Other unethical practices include falsifying testimonies in courts of law and forwarding bogus crime reports to their seniors (Common Sense for Drug Policy). War on drugs in south and Central America especially in Colombia has promoted environmental degradation. Aerial spraying of narcotic farms using toxic chemicals is a major threat to the rich biological diversity in the Amazon basin and Andes ecosystem (GCDP). War on drugs costs American taxpayers colossal sums of money annually. These resources could be applied in more worthy projects of promoting the wellbeing of American citizens. Countries spend huge amounts of money for law enforcement and other indirect costs in order to reduce the supply of narcotics into the market. Conclusion The war on drugs has failed miserably in attempts to eradicate supply and use of narcotics in United States. The supply and demand of the narcotics continue increasing in the world in spite of the heavy investments and punitive measures. There are various reasons why the war on drugs has failed in the United States and major narcotic producing countries. First, the war on drugs is politicized and the two different political systems in the country take contradictory stance of the issue. Enforcing tough and punitive measures has been the policy of most democrats, a situation that has led to criminalization, marginalization and discrimination of narcotic dealers and users (Reuter, 115-121). These punitive measures have exacerbated the supply and use of narcotics. Secondly, the war on drugs is a failure because it promotes violation of human rights in United States and the main narcotic producing countries. This undermines peoples’ right to self-determination, making them vulnerable to abusing narcotics and engaging in other narcotic related activities. In particular, the government has failed to address the needs of drug addicts, by regarding them as patients rather than criminals. The government should instead offer effective treatment to the addicts in order to reduce the demand for the narcotics in the country. Other countries such as Canada have tried different approaches of dealing with narcotics and have recorded encouraging outcomes. Therefore, the United States’ government should experiment with these proven models to address the problem within and outside its borders (Brownstein and Susan, 73). Work Cited Acker, Charles. Creating the American Junkie: Addiction Research in the Classic Era of Narcotic Control. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2002. Brownstein, Henry and Susan, Crimmins. “Conceptual Framework for Operationalizing the Relationship between Violence and Drug Market Stability”. Contemporary Drug Problems, 27(2000):867-890. Chepesiuk, Ron. Hard Target: The United States War against International Drug Trafficking. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company, 2006. Common Sense for Drug Policy. “Drug war facts”. November 2007. 14 June 2012. http://www.drugwarfacts.org/factbook.pdf Cooper, Mary. The Business of Drugs. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1989. Fowler, Thomas. “The International Narcotics Trade: Can It Be Stopped By Interdiction?” Journal of Policy Modeling, 18.3(1996): 230-270. GCDP. “War on drugs”. June 2011. June 14, 2012. www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/wp-content/themes/gcdp_v1/pdf/Global_Commission_Report_English.pdf Musto, David. The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Reuter, Peter. The Organization of Illegal Markets: An Economic Analysis. Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, 1985. Roy, Porter. Drugs and Narcotics in History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Zabludoff, Sidney. “Colombian Narcotics Organization as Business Enterprises”. Transnational Organized Crime, 3.2(1998): 20-49. Read More