The following is from cooperativeresearch.org: 1982-1991: Afghan Opium Production Skyrockets which refers to articles in Star-Tribune (Minneapolis) and Atlantic Monthly. Make your own judgements on why the situation is the way it is.
Afghan opium production rises from 250 tons in 1982 to 2,000 tons in 1991, coinciding with CIA support and funding of the mujahedeen. Alfred McCoy, a professor of Southeast Asian history at the University of Wisconsin, says US and Pakistani intelligence officials sanctioned the rebels’ drug trafficking because of their fierce opposition to the Soviets: “If their local allies were involved in narcotics trafficking, it didn’t trouble [the] CIA. They were willing to keep working with people who were heavily involved in narcotics.” For instance, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a rebel leader who received about half of all the CIA’s covert weapons, was known to be a major heroin trafficker. Charles Cogan, who directs the CIA’s operation in Afghanistan, later claims he was unaware of the drug trade: “We found out about it later on.” [Star-Tribune (Minneapolis), 9/30/2001; Atlantic Monthly, 5/1996]
Also, scroll down a bit and we see, Mid-1980s: Pakistani ISI and CIA Gain from Drug Production.
I hate to keep saying it again and again , I really do, but the truth is, we have our grubby little hands in every pie. That’s what Empires do I guess.
Onward Christian soldiers. Morality of force, amoral realism. Jus in bello, and all that…

Recent signals from President Bush suggest a willingness to expand the Iraq War into Iran. The movement of aircraft carrier groups and Patriot missiles suggest both air attacks and the protection of American allies from possible Iranian retaliation. Walter B. Jones (R, NC), suspicious about a drift toward pre-emptive attack on Iran, introduced House Joint Resolution 14 on January 12, stipulating that there was no prior authorization for it and that any such action would only be justified in the event of an “attack” or a “demonstrably imminent attack by Iran.” Other sponsors from both parties quickly joined him. While it is easy to focus on the president-of-the-moment, official scrutiny is also warranted by a tradition of public permissiveness toward American presidents who manipulate situations and information to launch new wars or to expand old ones.
Consider James Polk’s Mexican War, William McKinley’s Spanish American War, and LBJ’s use of the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. In each of these episodes, crusading features of what we call the “Captain America Complex” were factors. Threatening circumstances were viewed as conspiracies centered in enemy nations stereotyped as evil. An opposing stereotype of America’s perfect innocence led to visions of “unprovoked attacks” that justified violent responses. And in contrast to the illegitimate violence of others, American violence was considered redemptive, making the world “safe for democracy.” Victory was to be assured because our motivations were allegedly pure and, of course, because God was supposedly on our side.

From the authors of Captain America and the Crusade Against Evil by Robert Jewett and John Shelton Lawrence A Brief History of Wars-by-Pretext

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Mar 2 2007 19:14 utc | 4

Opium is the only cash crop that Afghanis can grow. For no other agri. or cultivation can they borrow from a bank, buy seeds, make a budget, till, grow, harvest, sell.
The poppy trickle down is tremendous: drivers, fixers, pple with contacts, bribers, middlemen, guards against the guards, minor sellers, gun men, tribal chiefs, transporters, prostitutes with contacts, etc. etc.
Some of the refined product comes back onto the streets of Kabul – school girls shoot up and whore. Aids. All of it. Selling to the Westerners. Yes. Party. Yes. High jinks behind the walls of the rich villas in Kabul…
Neither Karzai, nor the USuk (the troops withdrawn by the uk from Iraq were sent to Afgh), nor the Taliban, nor the local businessmen, war- or land-lords (much the same thing, local control of territory..), can ever put a stop to this.
They all live off it, eat everyday from the revenue. The high income is also spread about, to labs across the border, thus ensuing friendly relations. (And beyond.) All that is dependent on the illegality of opium and its derivatives, and thus high price of the product.
Without it, Afgh, would expire entirely. The desperate and terminally hungry tend to be bothersome; Better to let it go.
Western hypocrisy to the Nth degree. Photo ops of destruction of opium crops: it lasts two hours, with 100s of po-lice, oh all that security stuff, they stand tall, have a lot of armor, look menacing. Helicopters menace and hover. One field is destroyed, pictures are taken, the fields next door are not touched, care is taken not to freak anyone out; as soon as the authorities and their photogs. leave, the farmers rush into the field and re-plant, one estimation I read was that 50% of plants re-grow; the destroyers make a big dramatic show of ripping plants out of the ground, then all you have to do is to tip them back in an give them a little of TLC (tender loving care.) Some are cut off above the roots, just in case there might be some agri. experts or amateur gardeners watching or keeping track. (There aren’t any.)
Well this is just from my reading.
The US always blames the fringes and outsiders – neighboring countries, traffikers, insurgents from far off, Al Quaida, Iranians, Pakistanis (sometimes) etc. whatever suits on the moment, to confuse the issue and avoid speaking about the situation on the ground.
Why shouldn’t Afgh. be the first producer of opium derivatives? They are used all over the world legally in hospitals. Better than apricots or scrap metal…But that would take concerted caring effort, an International community that prefers reasonable oversight, and refuses to bow down to the US, chooses to help constructively rather than shake their heads at all that disorder, all those deaths, all those weirdos.

Posted by: Noirette | Mar 3 2007 20:15 utc | 6

venezuelanalysis: U.S. Drug Report Criticizes Venezuela and Bolivia

Interestingly, the report finds fault with Washington’s two biggest opponents in the region, Venezuela and Bolivia, while praising the efforts of its two closest allies, Colombia and Mexico.
Colombia, the largest producer of cocaine in the world, was commended for attacking the “drug trade and the terrorist organizations which profit from it.” This statement comes in the wake of a huge political scandal in Colombia which led to the implication of various government officials for their connections to paramilitaries, forces known for their involvement in drug trafficking.
The recent resignation of Colombian Foreign Minister María Consuelo Araújo shed light on the high levels of penetration into the political and state apparatus that the paramilitary forces have in the country. The recent revelation of a computer of one of the paramilitary leaders showed a complex network that connects businessmen, drug traffickers, political leaders, and paramilitaries in almost every department of the country.
The Assistant Secretary also insisted that Mexico was “confronting the drug trade head on,” although she admits that Mexico is still the “primary corridor for drugs entering the United States.” The report also states that Mexico has seen an increase in methamphetamine production, drug related violence, and homicides in the last year. However, the report commends the work of the Calderon administration who just assumed the presidency in December.
The Venezuelan government, on the other hand, assures that it has continued to fight against the traffic of drugs in the country. In 2006, Venezuela ended its program of cooperation with the Drug Enforcement Agency of the United States, the DEA. In a climate of increased tensions between Washington and Caracas, Venezuela President Hugo Chávez terminated the program, accusing the DEA of carrying out acts of espionage in Venezuela in order to destabilize his government.
Nevertheless, Venezuelan authorities affirm that they have increased the capture of drug shipments and the detention of drug traffickers since breaking relations with the DEA. According to Venezuela’s National Anti-Drug office, drug interdictions increased from 43.2 tons in 2004, to 77 tons in 2005. For 2006 Venezuelan authorities captured 60.3 tons.
Venezuela’s Minister of the Interior and of Justice, Pedro Carreño, said on Friday that the Chavez government has no interest in cooperating with the DEA because it suspects it to be involved in drug smuggling itself. “We no longer continue to work directly with the DEA, since we have determined that via this organization a large quantity of drugs left our country by way of the delivery of confiscations, of which we were never informed,” said Carreño.

Posted by: b real | Mar 5 2007 19:38 utc | 8