Ian Birrell: Support the failed war on drugs? You must be stoned

Four decades ago, Richard Nixon was casting around for a new enemy to shore up support for his unique brand of uncompassionate conservatism.

Having risen to national prominence as an anti-communist campaigner, then turning his attention to crime, he found a new foe in the 1970s counter-culture.

The media was full of stories of clean-cut young men returning from Vietnam as wrecked junkies, while intellectuals such as Timothy Leary were promoting the use of LSD. So Nixon, elected on a wafer-thin margin and desperate to turn back the tide of permissiveness, declared war on drugs.

"America's public enemy number one is drug abuse," he thundered.

While the Vietnam conflict has faded into history, thousands are dying and millions of lives are still being destroyed in his insane struggle. Fittingly, since it was launched by a president who turned out to be a crook, the biggest beneficiaries have been the most murderous gangsters on the globe as they rip apart country after country. Yet our leaders limp on in this self-defeating, US$100 billion-a-year ($123 billion) war.

The latest salvo in the struggle came when a host of distinguished names gathered under the banner of the Global Commission on Drug Policy to urge a truce. Their thoughtful report pointed out a series of obvious truths underlying how the war has backfired so terribly, and called for policies based on treatment rather than prosecution.

Look at the rise in drug use. In 1998, the United Nations committed member states to achieve a "drug-free world", pledging to eliminate or "significantly reduce" the use of opium, cannabis and cocaine by 2008. Instead, global opiate use rose by more than one-third over that time, with big rises also for cocaine and cannabis. It is estimated that almost 5 per cent of the world's adults take illegal drugs.

Worse is the damage done by gangs fighting over the huge profits created by the illegality of this trade.

The drug trade is so lucrative that in several countries - some which signed up to those sanctimonious UN pledges - gangs have bought or fought their way to power.

There are so many arguments against current policies it is hard to believe anyone who is not stoned still signs up to Nixon's
war.

The vast costs, the crime waves, the racial dimensions, the stigmatisation, the futility. Then there is the dreadful hypocrisy of politicians who use and tax the lethal drug of alcohol, then jail others who enjoy less-damaging relaxants such as marijuana and ecstasy.

The key question is why? After all, we live in a world in which grandparents took acid or smoked pot while listening to the Grateful Dead, and many parents were the people who dropped ecstasy at outdoor raves.

The current occupant of the White House has confessed to taking cocaine, while several British Cabinet ministers have admitted to smoking weed.

Drug use is no longer that big a deal, while it is clear that many of the problems and much of the misery are byproducts of banning them.

The global commission is a valiant effort, but it is noticeable that signatories include 11 former presidents, politicians and diplomats, but just one in office - the Greek Prime Minister, who presumably needs any extra revenue he can find. This is the fundamental problem: serving politicians lack the bottle to take the obvious remedial actions.

As the report rightly states: "Political leaders and public figures should have the courage to articulate publicly what many acknowledge privately: that the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates repressive strategies will not solve the drug problem and the war on drugs cannot be won."

This failure of nerve is particularly acute in Britain. One Cabinet minister who has admitted smoking cannabis in his youth said politicians were scared to act, despite knowing they should, since they would be slaughtered by rivals and the media for every drug-related death following liberalisation.

"You may think it is absurd regulation and it may cost more lives, but deregulation is impossible in our political climate."

Sadly, he is right.

Politicians say they fear drug use will rise if prohibition is lifted. Evidence from abroad shows they are wrong. Look at Scandinavia, where the tough Swedes and more liberal Norwegians have similar addiction rates.

Or Switzerland, where heroin demand and crime fell sharply following new policies based on public health rather than legality. Or Portugal, where heroin use fell by half after decriminalisation.

So here is a suggestion for the three main party leaders in Britain, who are all young enough to know better: why not hoist the white flag and work out a unified way to end a struggle that does so much more harm than good?

The alternative is to carry on fighting like generals in World War I, ignoring the deaths, the devastation and the wastelands created around the world in a battle than can never
be won.

UN GOAL, SET IN 1998

* To eliminate or significantly reduce use of opium, cannabis and cocaine in 10 years.

* Outcome 2008: Global opiate use up by more than 30 per cent, big rises also for cocaine and cannabis.

* Status: Not achieved.

- Observer