WAR ON DRUGS IS MOSTLY LOST

LAST week the United Nations General Assembly promised a fresh assault in.
the war on drugs with a coordinated global campaign lasting 10 years.

More than 150 delegates ended a three-day drug summit in New York by
endorsing a 3 1 1- page-plan for governments to cooperate against
traffickers, curb demand, improve judicial cooperation, combat money
laundering and reduce the illegal cultivation of narcotic crops by 2008.

The document was carefully worded to strike a balance between
drug-consuming nations such as the United States and drug-producing
countries in Latin America and Asia. But it did not stop their perennial
argument about who is to blame for the worldwide drug epidemic.

Nor did it mask serious disagreements on tactics. Producer nations wanted
more money for crop substitution programs, while consumer nations expressed
little enthusiasin for what U.S. drug czar Barry McCaffrey called "just
funding alternative economic development."

Countries with strict drug laws, such as Singapore and Malaysia, advocate
stiff sentences - including mandatory execution for drug traffickers.
Liberal European nations such as the Netherlands prefer needle exchanges
and even prescribe heroin to addicts to keep it out of criminal hands.

At face value, the 10-year plan approved in New York is as noble - and as
unattainable - as the one approved at the

signing of the 1988 U.N. Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. In other words, so much hot air,

Despite billions of dollars spent on trying to curb both supply and demand,
the supply of illicit drugs has increased and there are 200 million addicts
worldwide. Most experts say the drug war is lost. And nearly all the
delegates at the summit acknowledged increasing drug use in their
societies, especially by the young.

The Clinton administration was one of the few exceptions, claiming a 49
percent drop in U.S. drug use since 1979 and a 70 percent decrease since
1985. These optimistic assessments appeared to be based on an estimate by
(lie White House Office of National Drug Control Policy that Americans
spent $57.3 billion on illegal drugs in 1995 compared to $91.4 billion in
1988,

But the International Narcotics Control Board disputes those findings,
saying increasing numbers of young Americans are using cocaine, marijuana
and LSD. And even McCaffrey says the money wasted on drugs could have
bought college educations for a million Americans or 22 billion gallons of
milk to feed undernourished babies.

President Clinton has promised that one-third of the $17 billion to be
spent on U.S. antidrug efforts next year will be devoted to reduction of
demand. But the bulk of the money is still spent on reducing supply - in
Colombia, Bolivia, Peru and Mexico - and trying to interdict smugglers.

Despite growing U.S. miltary involvement in producer countries tries, their
supply of illicit drugs has not abated. Latin America produces more than
1,000 tons of cocaine a year and is beginning to compete with Asia in opium
production to satisfy the American craving for heroin.

Anti-smuggling efforts are equally unsuccessful. Francis Kinney, director
of strategic planning for the Office of National Drug Control Policy,
admitted last October that "our current interdiction efforts almost
completely fail to achieve our purpose of reducing the flow of cocaine,
heroin and me methamphetamines across the (Mexican) border.

MORE than 500 prominent personalities such as former Secretary of State
George Shultz, news anchor Walter Cronkite, Latin American politicians and
many law enforcenient types sent a. letter to the New York summit charging
that the drug way causes more harm than drug abuse itself.

The "exaggerated emphasis on interdiction and criminalization," it said.
"makes it impossible to protect public health." That may be debatable, but
it is hard in argue with former San Jose police chief Joe McNamara, who
points out that "all' the police in the world cannot stop trafficking when
there Is a 17,000 percent markup on illegal drugs."

Checked-by: Richard Lake