Podcast Transcript

07 August 2007
Why Not Legalize Opium in Afghanistan?

Andrew Meyer and Vanessa Anderson

Hello, I am Andrew Meyer and I am Vanessa Anderson from the US Embassy London. In recent months, we have seen several articles and reports advocating the legalization of opium in Afghanistan. Today Andrew will discuss the pros and I will discuss the cons of legalizing opium in Afghanistan. While advocates of legalizing opium claim it is easy to do and is beneficial for Afghanistan's economy and security, we will show that legalization is neither feasible, nor beneficial for Afghanistan.

A: Vanessa, I believe we need to legalize opium in Afghanistan now. If we legalize it and grant amnesty to those involved in cultivation and the drugs trade it would remove the violent and anti-government aspects of the drug trade - it would be beneficial to the security of Afghanistan.

V: The criminal aspects of the trade will most likely still be there. Insurgent groups like the Taliban would benefit from increased financing. Afghanistan could expect more violence, lawlessness, and corruption. Establishing effective controls in Afghanistan for growing opium would be impossible. The reality in Afghanistan is that a lack of infrastructure combined with wide stretches of barren desert and extensive mountain ranges makes overseeing such a program out of the question.

A:  But Vanessa, if Afghanistan was free of criminal elements, opium production could become a viable economic activity. I believe legalizing opium would be beneficial to Afghanistan's economic development, thus helping poor Afghan farmers.

V: Andrew, I am not convinced that legalizing opium would be beneficial to Afghanistan's economy. There would be over-dependence on opium; up to 60 percent of the GDP could be tied to it. If Afghanistan relied so heavily on one commodity it could be dangerous. This has happened in Latin America and the countries are extremely vulnerable if the price of the commodity fluctuates. Plus, legalization would increase the number of farmers growing opium. Prices of legal opium would decrease and increase the availability of the drug on the black market. Currently there are efforts to diversify the Afghan economy. Those would be compromised if it was legalized.

A:  Okay, but what if the opium grown by farmers was taxed and those revenues could support government services needed to prevent the drugs from going onto the black market. Subsidizing legal cultivation could also provide a large enough financial incentive that Afghan farmers would quit the illegal drug trade in favor of a legal market.

V: It would appear like a good idea, but creating a legal framework will not put traffickers out of business. Some countries have tried this but it didn't work. Pakistan and Bolivia attempted to regulate a legal trade in narcotics in the 1950s. They saw an increase in crops going into the black market over a 30 year period and declared the production illegal thereafter. Likewise, in India, between 20 and 30 percent of its opium crop goes into the black market. These same scenarios would happen in Afghanistan; opium really destined for the black market would be grown legally but sold illegally. Traffickers can pay more for the drugs than the Afghan government system would be able to. The price difference between legal and illegal opium is over $100, no Afghan farmer in his right mind would quit the black market. To make up for the price difference, huge subsidies would have to be offered, which would prove too expensive for the government.

A:  However, if Afghanistan grew a large enough opium crop it would increase the supply of opium, which would then decrease the price of much needed pain medicine. Thousands of people would then have more access to the medicines worldwide - especially in developing countries.

V: Raw materials such as opium make up a relatively small percentage of the cost of pain medications. An increased supply of cheap opium would not make pain medications more affordable for the world. Research and development, marketing, and systems to monitor production and prevent diversion are the major factors in determining the cost of medicines, not the procurement of narcotic raw material.

A: But how can you deny the need for opium based medicines - I mean people in the developing world have limited access to the pain medicine and would benefit from a greater supply of it. The problem could be alleviated if Afghan farmers were licensed to legally produce it.

V: But Andrew, the issue is not so much about supply but distribution. There is a lack of sufficient infrastructure and systems of distribution - the medicine is just not getting to the people who need it. According to the United Nations International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), world demand for opium-based medicines is fully met. Crop that couldn't be sold legally would go straight to the black market. I think it has more to do with how to keep them out - that seems to be the real issue.

V: Both practical and economic reasoning not only argue against legalizing opium, but demonstrate its potential problems. Legalization won't eliminate illegal opium production in Afghanistan. What Afghanistan needs is continued economic development and a stronger campaign to stop the cultivation of opium. In time, Afghanistan will be able to control its drug trade. The governments of Afghanistan, the United Kingdom, and the United States support a mix of deterrence, prevention, and economic development assistance to suppress existing illegal opium cultivation, production, and trafficking in Afghanistan. By employing these steps, Afghanistan will have better paying jobs and a higher standard of living as a result of the economic diversity, which will reduce the need to cultivate poppies.

V: More info on this topic can be found on the link on this webpage.
Thank you.

U.S. Opposes Efforts to Legalize Opium in Afghanistan: The Rationale Against Legalization:

Back to the Podcast index page.

back to top ^