The war on (certain) drugs
Noam Chomsky in What Uncle Sam Really Wants
One substitute for the disappearing Evil Empire has been the threat of drug traffickers from Latin America. In early September 1989, a major government-media blitz was launched by the President. That month the AP wires carried more stories about drugs than about Latin America,
Asia, the Middle East and Africa combined. If you looked at television, every news program had a
big section on how drugs were destroying our society, becoming the greatest threat to our
existence, etc.
The effect on public opinion was immediate. When Bush won the 1988 election, people said
the budget deficit was the biggest problem facing the country. Only about 3%
named drugs. After the media blitz, concern over the budget was way down and drugs had soared
to about 40% to 45%, which is highly unusual for an open question (where no
specific answers are suggested).
Now, when some client state complains that the US government isn't sending it enough money, they
no longer say, "we need it to stop the Russians" - rather, "we need it to stop drug
trafficking." Like the Soviet threat, this enemy provides a good excuse for a US military
presence where there's rebel activity or other unrest.
So internationally, "the war on drugs" provides a cover for intervention. Domestically, it has
little to do with drugs but a lot to do with distracting the population, increasing repression
in the inner cities, and building support for the attack on civil liberties.
That's not to say that "substance abuse" isn't a serious problem. At the time the drug war was
launched, deaths from tobacco were estimated at about 300,000 a year, with perhaps another
100,000 from alcohol. But these aren't the drugs the Bush administration targeted. It went after
illegal drugs, which had caused many fewer deaths - over 3500 a year - according to official
figures. One reason for going after these drugs was that their use had been declining for some
years, so the Bush administration could safely predict that its drug war would "succeed" in
lowering drug use.
The Administration also targeted marijuana, which hadn't caused any known deaths among some 60
million users. In fact, the crackdown has exacerbated the drug problem - many marijuana users
have turned from this relatively harmless drug to more dangerous drugs like cocaine, which are
easier to conceal.
Just as the drug war was launched with great fanfare in September 1989, the US Trade
Representative (USTR) panel held a hearing in Washington to consider a tobacco industry request
that the US impose sanctions on Thailand in retaliation for its efforts to restrict US tobacco
imports and advertising. Such US government actions had already rammed this lethal addictive
narcotic down the throats of consumers in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, with human costs of the
kind already indicated.
The US Surgeon General, Everett Koop, testified at the USTR panel that "when we are pleading
with foreign governments to stop the flow of cocaine, it is the height of hypocrisy for the
United States to export tobacco." He added, "years from now, our nation will look back on
this application of free trade policy and find it scandalous."
Thai witnesses also protested, predicting that the consequence of US sanctions would be to
reverse a decline in smoking achieved by their government's campaign against tobacco use.
Responding to the US tobacco companies' claim that their product is the best in the world, a
Thai witness said, "Certainly in the Golden Triangle we have some of the best products, but we
never ask the principle of free trade to govern such products. In fact we suppressed [them]."
Critics recalled the Opium War 150 years earlier, when the British government compelled China to
open its doors to opium from British India, sanctimoniously pleading the virtues of free trade
as they forcefully imposed large-scale drug addiction on China.
Here we have the biggest drug story of the day. Imagine the screaming headlines:
"U.S. Government The World's Leading Drug Peddler." It would surely sell papers. But the story passed virtually unreported, and with not a hint of the obvious conclusions.
Another aspect of the drug problem, which also received little attention, is the leading role of
the US government in stimulating drug trafficking since World War II. This happened in part when
the US began its postwar task of undermining the anti-fascist resistance and the labor movement
became an important target.
In France, the threat of political power and influence of the labor movement was enhanced by its
steps to impede the flow of arms to French forces seeking to reconquer their former colony of
Vietnam with US aid. So the CIA undertook to weaken and split the French labor movement - with
the aid of top American labor leaders, who were quite proud of their role.
The task required strikebreakers and goons. There was an obvious supplier: the Mafia. Of course,
they didn't take on this work just for the fun of it. They wanted a return for their efforts.
And it was given to them: they were authorized to reestablish the heroin racket that had been
suppressed by the fascist governments - the famous "French connection" that dominated the drug
trade until the 1960s.
By then, the center of the drug trade shifted to Indochina, particularly Laos and Thailand. The
shift was again a by-product of a CIA operation - the "secret war" fought in those countries
during the Vietnam War by a CIA mercenary army. They also wanted a payoff for their
contributions. Later, as the CIA shifted its activities to Pakistan and Afghanistan, the drug
racket boomed there.
The clandestine war against Nicaragua also provided a shot in the arm to drug traffickers in the
region, as illegal CIA arms flights to the US mercenary forces offered an easy way to ship drugs
back to the US, sometimes through US Air Force bases, traffickers report.
The close correlation between the drug racket and international terrorism (sometimes called
"counterinsurgency," "low intensity conflict" or some other euphemism) is not surprising.
Clandestine operations need plenty of money, which should be undetectable. And they need
criminal operatives as well. The rest follows.
Political Corrections
E=±mc²=Thé
Ðëòxÿríßøñµçlëìç
HÿÞêrdïmèñsîøñ
