More U.N. States Quietly Say No to Drug War

[RainDog]

This link is an update on a post in GD about a document leaked to the Guardian, as the UN prepares for its every-10-years statement on drug policy: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4115236

http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/12/more-un-states-quietly-say-no-to-drug-war/

The document, first publicised by the Guardian and obtained by IPS, contains over 100 specific policy recommendations and proposals from member states, many at odds with the status quo on illicit drug eradication and prohibition.

...Under U.S. law, the Department of State must every year publish a report that includes evaluating whether foreign aid recipients meet the “goals and objectives” of the 1988 agreement.

Most UNODC funding comes from member states, which can attach strings to “special-purpose funds.”

This means countries can maintain both private and public stances on drug policy. Switzerland, which began offering heroin-assisted treatment for addicts in 2008, backtracked this week in a press statement that stressed the leaked document was part of a “brainstorming” session and that it “does in no way support any efforts or attempts of changing the three U.N. Drug Conventions as they are today.”

Interesting read at IPS news.

[tridim]

1. Do the people of the Earth get a say in this matter, or is the UN report final?

[RainDog]

2. Surrender, Earthling!

The UN statement is meant for nations, and I suppose earthlings get a say by the people they elect... of course, we both know this isn't how it's done, either, but theoretically, it's supposed to matter.

iow, this is part of the UN's agreement on drug policy for the world.

Only, with these links, some nations are saying... NO, we don't agree with what the U.S. and the Soviet Union wants, but we'll be forced to say we agree in order to qualify for funds from the same.

Since Uraquay created a legal framework for marijuana in their nation today, you can be sure they will be getting flack for this as this statement is worked out.

[tridim]

3. The U.S. (People) favor legalization!

So these countries do agree with what we want.

[RainDog]

4. Not at the federal level, still

You and I both know politics isn't just about doing what people want, or even doing the right thing. Obama doesn't favor legalization, but he does favor decriminalization.

But drug policy is part of a huge federal bureaucracy, that reaches across more than one such bureaucracy, and any changes have to fight against this entrenched status quo. Within these agencies, defense contractors feed at the trough, legislators bring home the bacon for their districts... money is allocated for the new, militarized U.S. police force...

The U.S. is the biggest impediment to changing world drug policies, iow, because it's such a cash cow to certain people.

Nations should be allowed to experiment, as Uraquay is doing. Their president said that if the use of collectives doesn't help to quash the illegal trade, the law will be rescinded.

Why shouldn't other nations be able to enforce different laws to see if that helps their nation deal with the particulars of the illegal drug trade for them?

Anyway, the U.S. looks more and more like a nation that is not able to lead - on drug policy, climate change issues, etc. We have too many whack-a-doodle end timers - both at the polls and in office.