SILENT SHIFTS IN THE DRUG WAR

There's one thing that Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all
agreed on: expanding military aid to Latin America to fight the
so-called "Drug War."

A new phase of the Drug War began in 2000 under President Bill
Clinton, with $1.3 billion in "emergency" funding to fight cocaine
production in Colombia by destroying the raw material for it -- coca
plants. President George W. Bush continued the fight, which sent
nearly $6 billion in aid to Colombia between 2000 and 2008. When
cartel violence began to spiral out of control in Mexico, he
shepherded hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to the Mexican
military. President Barack Obama initially followed in his
predecessors' footsteps, but now appears to be headed down a wiser
path.

By any measure, the military approach to countering a demand-driven
cocaine trade has been a complete failure. When Congress approved
spending billions of dollars on military aid to Colombia a decade ago,
policymakers insisted that it would slash coca production by half
within five years. Instead, the South American country's coca
production is basically unchanged from 1999, the year before Clinton
launched Plan Colombia. Today the U.S. government reports Colombia
produces 294,000 acres of coca. That's virtually the same as the
303,000 acres it believed were planted in 1999.

Some Drug War fanatics in Washington have suggested that a 6,000-acre
reduction in opium poppy production in Colombia is proof of success.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Colombia's opium production
represents approximately 1 percent of the global market. Any reduction
in Colombian poppy acreage probably has more to do with increases in
Afghanistan's production, the global leader with 389,000 acres in
production in 2008, than eradication operations in Colombia.

Perhaps the most important test of the Drug War's success is the
number of people using cocaine here at home. After all, policymakers
justify giving our money to brutal foreign militaries by assuring us
that we'll see a reduced drug supply at home -- and therefore fewer
drug dealers and addicts.

However, we've seen a sharp increase from 1.2 million cocaine users in
2000 to 1.9 million users in 2008, according to the Department of
Health and Human Services' National Survey on Drug Use and Health. So
the Drug War is failing by that measure too.

As these military programs have wholly failed to affect drug
production and consumption, the collateral damage left in their wake
is immense. Just in Colombia, well over 10,000 farmers have filed
official complaints that the chemicals wildly sprayed on their fields
in the world's second-most bio-diverse country have destroyed food
crops, surrounding forests, and livestock -- while damaging their
families' health.

Meanwhile, human rights groups have accused Colombia's and Mexico's
U.S.-backed militaries of thousands of brutal abuses against innocent
civilians.

Obama has started trying to right some of these wrongs. His proposed
budget for 2011 would cut the failed counternarcotics funding for
Colombia by 11 percent from 2010, which is nearly 50 percent lower
than Republican-controlled levels in 2007. He's calling for
approximately 30 percent less military aid to Mexico.

Additionally, the Office of National Drug Control Policy is
significantly increasing funding for domestic drug treatment and
prevention, aiming to add $341 million to such programs in the next
fiscal year. This is a smart strategy. For years, research has
indicated that domestic drug control strategies are over 10 times more
effective at reducing drug abuse than our ill-advised adventures in
Latin America.

Being on the right path doesn't mean that drug policy is in the right
place yet. We need to cut spending on ineffective U.S.
counternarcotics assistance for the Colombian and Mexican security
forces even more.

But Obama's new budget conveys a clear message: International military
adventures that make Washington's hawks feel good while failing to
make a dent in the drug trade are on their way out. Thankfully,
rational decisions seem to have crept into U.S. drug policies. People
here at home and across the hemisphere will be grateful.