Pubdate: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 Source: Chicago Tribune (IL) Copyright: 2002 Chicago Tribune Company Contact: http://www.chicagotribune.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/82 Author: Steve Chapman THE WAR ON DRUGS VS. THE WAR ON TERRORISM We knew terrorists would slaughter innocent people by the thousands, but who could have imagined the full depths of their depravity? We found out last week when John Ashcroft announced that people sympathetic to Al Qaeda have been trying to finance their operations not through bake sales or bingo nights, but by selling illegal drugs. Now, the attorney general said, "the war on terrorism has been joined with the war on illegal drug use." What Ashcroft fails to notice is that the war on illegal drug use doesn't advance the war on terrorism. Just the opposite: It affords a continuing windfall to our enemies. In that respect, Al Qaeda can be grateful to Ashcroft for preserving what he called the "deadly nexus between terrorism and drug trafficking." By his account, the government foiled two plots involving drugs-for-weapons. Two Pakistanis and a naturalized American were arrested for allegedly trying to swap large quantities of heroin and hashish for four Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, which were supposedly going to be shipped to Al Qaeda. In addition, he said, the government grabbed four men who were offering cash and cocaine in exchange for 9,000 assault rifles, 53 million rounds of ammunition, and other instruments of mayhem. These were to be used by a right-wing terrorist group in Colombia. Whether the men arrested had ties to actual terrorists is not clear. But any jihadists who need a continuing stream of income can certainly find no better business than drug trafficking. It offers big profits, and it rewards those skills in criminality that they have worked so hard to acquire. This bust dovetails with the ad campaign mounted by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. You know, the one that introduces Dan, who bought marijuana from a dealer who got it from a cartel that killed an entire family for getting in the way. "Drug money supports terrible things," says the voiceover. "If you buy drugs, you might too." The message we get from the federal government is simple: Drugs are intrinsically evil, so evildoers are involved with them. But Ashcroft and his colleagues never seem to consider the real connection between drug trafficking and violent thuggery and how we might break it. To do so would force them to reconsider everything the government has been doing about drugs for decades. Back in the 1920s, you may recall, organized crime was involved in manufacturing, smuggling and selling a different mind-altering substance: alcohol. But if terrorists today have no interest in peddling bootleg gin, it's not because Islam frowns on drinking. It's because there's no real profit left, because the stuff is legally available. Al Capone and Co. couldn't survive in the liquor trade without Prohibition. Likewise, the war on drugs is the only thing that makes cocaine trafficking commercially enticing to the enemies of civilization. If stuffed animals were banned, they'd sell teddy bears, and they'd make good money doing it. The continuing efforts of governments to eradicate drugs make the business risky. That drives out everyone but hard-core criminals comfortable taking such risks. It also inflates profits to levels never dreamed of in normal markets, stimulating the interest of anyone not constrained by reverence for the law. Police and prosecutors may try to put all the drug dealers in jail, but the strategy defeats itself. The fewer drug sellers, the higher the prices they can charge. The higher the prices, the more attractive it is to sell drugs, and the more people will want to do it. So every time police take one heroin merchant off the streets, another springs up to take his place. The Taliban prospered for years from being the world's chief supplier of opium. Then, a couple of years ago, they decided to stamp out poppy farming--a step that prompted not only praise from the Bush administration but opened the way for millions of dollars in U.S. financial aid to Afghanistan. Is that what Ashcroft would call a joining of the war on terror and the war on drugs? In fact, there's no way to join the two successfully. The way to deprive terrorists and other criminal gangs of sustenance is to legalize and regulate the drugs we have tried to eliminate. Instead, we keep pouring law enforcement dollars into efforts that won't put an end to drug use but will assure profits to traffickers, including people who are trying to kill us. The drug war supports terrible things. When our leaders persist in it, they do too. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth