EURAD
Drug Policy
The Third Way against drugs
EURAD advocates a humane restrictive drug policy of prevention and early intervention called The Third Way. The EURAD Third Way drug policy is humane towards mankind, but restrictive towards drugs. EURAD considers all non-medical use of drugs (controlled substances) to be drug abuse.
The EURAD drug policy is called The Third Way because discussions about drugs have tended to concentrate hitherto on two other main standpoints. The Third Way recognises the importance of The First Way to a certain degree but rejects the philosophy that this is the only or the most important way to eradicate drug abuse.
EURAD totally rejects The Second Way.
EURAD requests politicians at all levels to consider a combination of The First Way and The Third Way when dealing with drug abuse problems in their communities and countries.
The First Way
The FIRST of these standpoints is based upon the belief
that the market for drugs can be combated by more or
less unilateral police and military actions against gangs
and syndicates at the supply end of the market.
This FIRST Way is doomed to failure. Not only because it will get more costly
to conduct, it will also be 'overwhelmed' by the force of the market: consumer
demand for drugs. EURAD agrees with Andres Pastrana, Mayor of Bogotá in Columbia
when he stated that if you arrest one trafficker, there are 20 more waiting
to go into the business, and 500 more behind them. The profits are simply so
big in this business that there will always be someone taking the risk to supply
the craving demand.
If one examines the pyramid of drug traffic, it can be quickly seen that the
drug consumer is supporting the suppliers with their constant demand. The drug
users hold up the whole market. Another problem by waging war only against
the suppliers is that one may have to take troops inside the borders of other
nations which is not advisable for obvious reasons.
War against Drug Barons, drug crop eradication and substitution should always be carried out by the nations themselves. At best, we can give support through international organisations like the UN.
There is also very little hope that crop compensation programmes will have any success at all. Even if they were 100% successful, all of the drugs used today could be cultivated or easily manufactured within the consumer countries.
EURAD states that all countries trying to fight their own drug cartels and trying to stop drug production, should be given international support. EURAD shares one of the basic views of The First Way, namely that drugs are harmful and must be stopped.
The Second Way
Never failing to point out the shortcomings of The First
Way, The Second Way thinks the 'solution' is exactly
the opposite to The First Way, namely legalisation of
the illegal drugs. The advocates of legalisation support
anti-prohibition and decriminalisation policies.
The anti-prohibitionists tend to forget that their policy will open the floodgates
of a growing market. We have learnt from history that removing regulations
on a drug, thereby giving the idea that it is OK to use this drug, will most
likely cause an epidemic.
The anti-prohibitionists also tend to forget that the merchandise of this market has the power of creating addiction. This means faithful customers coming back again and again. The anti-prohibitionists claim that legalisation will drive the Drug Barons out of business by making the whole trade legal. They ignore the fact that the Drug Barons, already now having control of the whole chain form cultivation to street dealers, will be able to take over the legalised market overnight. They will have a worldwide monopoly form the start! Does anybody think that the Drug Barons will voluntarily give up their booming source of income, irrespective of whether it is legal or not?
"We conclude that the legalisation of Heroin or Cocaine is out of the question because the increased availability of such drugs is likely to increase the number of addicts." (Page 52, para. 121. Committee of Inquiry into the Drugs problem in the Member States of the Community: European Parliament Report, September 1986).
The Second Way strategy, like The First Way strategy,
will cost incalculable amounts. Society will have to
pour money into dealing with the consequences of increased
drug addiction. Increased costs for care, treatment and
rehabilitation for the drug users. Increased costs for
the victims of drug use in terms of loss of productivity,
road accidents, violence, rape, child abuse and other
crimes and costs for protection of society in terms of
law enforcement and prison costs.
In short; The Second Way policies in all its form of anti-prohibition, decriminalisation
and toleration are dangerous and defeatist policies.
 |
