If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Foreign Policy
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
A while ago we had a debate about the impact of foreign policy, and how it is important to accept that the policies of a country can be detrimental.
Now this is an example of that.
The recent UK/US policy of ousting the Taliban from Afghanistan, whilst laudable, has had an interesting side effect.
In 1999/2000, Afghanistan produced over 3000 tonnes of poppies (heroin). So the Taliban instituted a ban, and of course they were rarely disobeyed.
In 2000/2001, Afghanistan produced approx 180 tonnes. A successful policy by all accounts.
In 2002 following the removal of the Taliban, poppy farming has returned at greater level than in 2000! This is partly due to the inflated price the farmers are paid for the poppies (which went up as supply dropped), as opposed to the minimal amounts they get for wheat...
Nice to see capitalism is now alive and well in the newly free Afghanistan !!!
Now this is an example of that.
The recent UK/US policy of ousting the Taliban from Afghanistan, whilst laudable, has had an interesting side effect.
In 1999/2000, Afghanistan produced over 3000 tonnes of poppies (heroin). So the Taliban instituted a ban, and of course they were rarely disobeyed.
In 2000/2001, Afghanistan produced approx 180 tonnes. A successful policy by all accounts.
In 2002 following the removal of the Taliban, poppy farming has returned at greater level than in 2000! This is partly due to the inflated price the farmers are paid for the poppies (which went up as supply dropped), as opposed to the minimal amounts they get for wheat...
Nice to see capitalism is now alive and well in the newly free Afghanistan !!!
0
Comments
Also interesting that the ban from the Taliban was only done because the US asked them and paid them something like 40 million dollars to 'fight' this trade.
So that means that it will never stop, right?
Or are you suggesting that Afhgan farmers are a different breed from everyone else and will settle for 'just enough money to feed their family' and won't be after the TV, Car, Video (not to mention the power) which a large bank balance will bring.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that the UK/US has done anything wrong. What I am saying is that we have to take responsibilty for the effects which our Foreign Policy has, or at least we must accept that foreign policy can have unfortunate implications, in this case it is an increased prodcution of heroin (which will probably hit the UK markets soon) and in other cases led to the WTC attacks...
Arming Iraq during the Iran/Iraq War, was a good step at the time, but seemed folly in 1991
Arming the Afghan during the Russian occupation was a good idea at the time, but was proved folly when some of them turned on the US.
And giving the Taliban $40m dollars seemed like a good idea, until the terrorists, which the US knew they were hiding, attacked the US...
Get lots of soldiers/modified tanks
Equip those soldiers with flame throwers and pestecides
Send those soldiers to the fields
Tell them to BURN everything.
No more opium.
Even without this logistical impossibility, its a bad idea.
Then nuke the damn place. As far as I'm concerned the initial cost in the short term will be a lot less than the cost of trying to police and find the heroin when it gets to our shores.
I would post a counter-argument, but I think there's little need to argue the question of nuking millions of innocent people; the idiocy speaks for itself.
Im not talking about proper nukes. A few tactical warheads, a few kilotons at most will be all that's needed <IMG SRC="biggrin.gif" border="0" ALT="icon">
The only way to stop the supply, seriously is to destroy the crop, or prevent the crop being harvested.
Face it - nukes aren't the answer. Neither is napalm or Agent Orange-style herbicides.
lol, i'm kidding. I don't know how to solve the problem, i didn't create it in the first place.
All it needs is a little focus. If the current Afghan Govt don't do anything about it, then the market will grow. If they stamp on it now, and if the 'west' gives them the financial support which they gave the Taliban, then perhaps it can be nipped in the buid (so to speak).
If you're a poor Afghan farmer with a choice between starving and growing some poppies, the only thing that's going to stop you growing poppies is violence (or an alternative - name one), so we're stuck with the problem.
Of course, just because the world supply of heroin is about to increase, doesn't mean anymore will be coming our way. And IMO money for customs to stop imports of illegal drugs is money well spent - and the cost (in all senses of the word) of that is less than the cost of the Taliban.
The problem cannot be solved simply by stopping the supply. Addicts need to be treated and rehabilitated.
This isn't your average crop, this is heroin. Who do you think buys the drugs from these farmers? and who sells it on? IRA, Al Qaeda etc perhaps?
This isn;t just about farmers getting money to feed their families, this is an entire industry used to support either criminal gangs like the Mafia (Russian, Sicillian doesn;t make much difference) or it is used by terrorist organisations to purchase the capability to carry out massive attacks...
Still, I guess its just easier to shrug your shoulders.
and a good way of helping them is to stem the supply of the drug. I agree that addicts should be treated, but unless you attack the problem from both ends you will achieve nothing. One addict treated, will just be replaced by another new addict
Do you honsetly believe that easy access to heroin is in any way going to help an addict or help reduce the level of addiction?
Perhaps, for once, it would be a good idea not to suffer from the short-termsism we usually associate with politicians...
Destroy the crops once, return and check - if they are replanted then destroy them again and harsh punishment for the farmer should follow.
I certainly don't advocate sitting around saying that 'well the farmer needs to feed his family', as if that is any kind of solution. The crop is grown because it will give the farmer more than enough money to feed them. After all if food was all, then a crop of wheat would help feed them too...
People in glass houses...
Do you think we have the right to do this? Where does our responsibility in Afghanistan end? There's no way we can turn that country around by destroying the poppy harvest. Think how difficult it has been to find and destroy Al-Qaeda - do you think we can realistically expect to destroy all of the poppy farms. Surely. But you said yourself that the temptation to make a quick buck is as relevant in Afghanistan as it is in the UK. Afghanistan has huge problems and subsistence farming is not a realistic expectation IMHO.
and doing nothing will achieve what exactly?
It's a little like the start of the bombing, do nothing and see drugs on the street, act and at least you put up a fight.
Our fight against drugs ins't just at home, it is about stopping the producing too.
and I haven't said that the US/UK/Un should do this. I said that the Afghan Govt should.
So deny the choice. You either grow crops which will provide food, or your crops will be destroyed and you will be in shit...
[ 01-03-2002: Message edited by: MoK ]
Maybe it would some place that wouldn't listen to the West no matter what incentives or threats are dangled.
Vox populi has a good point in saying that reducing the demand might be more effective in controlling the planting, but I'm still a little skeptical.
What about a little bit of the carrot and the stick? Offer the farmers assistance to plant other cash crops (tobacco, cotton, whatever will grow there) and use stiff fines to discourage those who still do.
Because opium is worth a LOT more to the farmers than tobacco.
We have no right to try and wipe out there Opium crop or even coerce the Afghan govt into doing so
Why would the Afghans WANT to destroy the Opium, they need all the money they can get...
The Afghans will want to destroy the poppies because thats what their new friends want. Im positive that the new Afghan govt would rather have money from the west in the form of aid payments and keep us friendly than earning money from drugs and having the west abandon them.
They wouldnt have the ability to come and stop us dumping by the sure as hell have the right.
We have every right to put political pressure on the Afghan government to stop heroin exports, but most people were suggesting actual destruction of the crop by British troops.