Why would anyone be against the idea of complete eradication of the opium trade?
Opium Wars
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
"[Eradication works] in areas where there is security and government control, so they can deliver programs and invest in other crops and market goods. That cannot work in insecure areas. What people in insecure areas do to manage the risk brought by eradication is not plant other crops—they join the Taliban and keep the government out of their area," says Barnett Rubin, a director at New York University's Center on International Cooperation, who released a report in early February slamming the eradication policy.
In addition, critics say development projects are underfunded and poorly managed, with most of the allocated funds going toward consulting firms and war damage repairs, not alternative livelihood projects. Tangible evidence of the fatter budget and increased focus on development aid this year has yet to reach those on the ground.
"The impression is still that the rich, well-connected landowners are spared and poor farmers are targeted," says one USAID subcontractor, who wished to remain anonymous because of employment concerns. "[Well-connected] Afghans have been dealing with the international community in all sorts of ways for the last three decades and are well versed in how to direct international funds and efforts to fulfill their own personal agendas."
Given the recent U.S. push for additional NATO troops, the debate over muscle versus development will likely spill into a broader divide among the coalition over how to right the crumbling reconstruction effort in Afghanistan. Dissatisfied with the focus and inertia of the war, most European allies have been reluctant to volunteer additional troops, despite public requests by Defense Secretary Robert Gates. Splits are expected to come to a head at a NATO summit in early April, when President George W. Bush has said he will ratchet up pressure for U.S. supporters to cough up military support for the embattled southern regions.
"Dozens of districts in the south are currently no-go zones, not only for international forces but for Afghan government forces. President Karzai can't even make the trip to his home province of Kandahar," says John Sifton, a former Human Rights Watch lawyer who researches Afghan security. "In a situation where the government can hardly put a footprint down enough to really even be a government in remote areas, it's hard to imagine it bringing the enforcement measures needed to reduce opium. So you have to say, 'Well, is this really high on our list of priorities right now?'"
© 2008









Discuss