WASHINGTON, Aug. 4, 2007

Another Record Poppy Crop In Afghanistan

U.S. Officials Say Debate Over Fighting Heroin Production Stalled

  • Afghan villagers tend to opium poppies in the Nad-e Ali district of Helmand province, in southern Afghanistan, April 12, 2007.

    Afghan villagers tend to opium poppies in the Nad-e Ali district of Helmand province, in southern Afghanistan, April 12, 2007.  (STRINGER/AFP/Getty)

  • Interactive Rebuilding Afghanistan

    Learn about the nation's geography, history and people and find out what is being done to rebuild.

(AP)  Afghanistan will produce another record poppy harvest this year that cements its status as the world's near-sole supplier of the heroin source, yet a furious debate over how to reverse the trend is stalling proposals to cut the crop, U.S. officials say.

As President Bush prepares for weekend talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, divisions within the U.S. administration and among NATO allies have delayed release of a $475 million counternarcotics program for Afghanistan, where intelligence officials see growing links between drugs and the Taliban, the officials said.

U.N. figures to be released in September are expected to show that Afghanistan's poppy production has risen up to 15 percent since 2006 and that the country now accounts for 95 percent of the world's crop, 3 percentage points more than last year, officials familiar with preliminary statistics told The Associated Press.

But counterdrug proposals by some U.S. officials have met fierce resistance, including boosting the amount of forcible poppy field destruction in provinces that grow the most, officials said. The approach also would link millions of dollars in development aid to benchmarks on eradication; arrests and prosecutions of narcotraders, corrupt officials; and on alternative crop production.

Those ideas represent what proponents call an "enhanced carrot-and-stick approach" to supplement existing anti-drug efforts. They are the focus of the new $475 million program outlined in a 995-page report, the release of which has been postponed twice and may be again delayed due to disagreements, officials said.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because parts of the report remain classified.

Counternarcotics agents at the State Department had wanted to release a 123-page summary of the strategy last month and then again last week, but were forced to hold off because of concerns it may not be feasible, the officials said.

Now, even as Bush sees Karzai on Sunday and Monday at the presidential retreat in Camp David, Md., a tentative release date of Aug. 9, timed to follow the meetings, appears in jeopardy. Some in the administration, along with NATO allies Britain and Canada, seek revisions that could delay it until at least Aug. 13, the officials said.

The program represents a 13 percent increase over the $420 million in U.S. counternarcotics aid to Afghanistan last year. It would adopt a bold new approach to "coercive eradication" and set out criteria for local officials to receive development assistance based on their cooperation, the officials said.

Although the existing aid, supplemented mainly by Britain and Canada and supported by the NATO force in Afghanistan, has achieved some results — notably an expected rise in the number of "poppy-free" provinces from six to at least 12 and possibly 16, mainly in the north — production elsewhere has soared, they said.

"Afghanistan is providing close to 95 percent of the world's heroin," the State Department's top counternarcotics official, Tom Schweich, said at a recent conference. "That makes it almost a sole-source supplier" and presents a situation "unique in world history."

Almost all the heroin from Afghanistan makes its way to Europe; most of the heroin in the U.S. comes from Latin America.

Afghanistan last year accounted for 92 percent of global opium production, compared with 70 percent in 2000 and 52 percent a decade earlier. The higher yields in Afghanistan brought world production to a record high of 7,286 tons in 2006, 43 percent more than in 2005.

A State Department inspector general's report released Friday noted that the counternarcotics assistance is dwarfed by the estimated $38 billion "street value" of Afghanistan's poppy crop, if all is converted to heroin, and said eradication goals were "not realistic."

Schweich, an advocate of the now-stalled plan, has argued for more vigorous eradication efforts, particularly in southern Helmand province, responsible for some 80 percent of Afghanistan's poppy production. It is where, he says, growers must be punished for ignoring good-faith appeals to switch to alternative, but less lucrative, crops.

"They need to be dealt with in a more severe way," he said at the conference sponsored by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "There needs to be a coercive element, that's something we're not going to back away from or shy away from."

But, in fact, many question whether this is the right approach with Afghanistan mired in poverty and in the throes of an insurgency run by the Taliban and residual al Qaeda forces.

Along with Britain, whose troops patrol Helmand, elements in the State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development, the Defense Department and White House Office of National Drug Control Policy have expressed concern, saying that more raids will drive farmers with no other income to join extremists.

There is also skepticism about the incentives in the new strategy from those who believe development assistance should not be denied to local communities because of poppy growth, officials said.

Opponents argue that the benefits of such aid, new roads and other infrastructure, schools and hospitals, will themselves be powerful tools to combat the narcotrade once constructed.

One U.S. official said the plan was a good one but might take another year or two before it can be effectively introduced.

© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment See all 65 Comments
by redfiveuk August 6, 2007 9:52 AM EDT
Simple solution make dealing in heroin a minimum 25 year sentence and all users caught must go cold turkey at an army base in solitary confinment for 7 weeks, once/if they survive that they then have a 5 year hard labour sentence with no parol and weekly drug testing, which if they fail will add another year hard labour to their sentence, perhaps they could form road building crews again run by the army then at least they would have some work freindly skills when they get out. Screw them all, they are all wasters and only inflict pain and suffering on those around them.
Reply to this comment
by prinzowhales August 5, 2007 10:59 PM EDT
Posted by speakinup at 06:41 PM : Aug 05, 2007
----
If by "anti-social" you mean an unwillingness to poison people with drugs and support a war against my brother based on lies, lies, lies and more lies then I would be proud to be known as "anti-social".
Reply to this comment
by prinzowhales August 5, 2007 10:14 PM EDT
speakingup--"Thou shall not kill," was...if memory serves, mentioned in the Bible. If you've followed Bush and the War Pig line, marched off to keyboard glory supporting a war based on lies, lies and nothing but lies based on the "false witness" that Bush and the War Pigs bore against our brothers, then certainly you have ignored the commandment and followed Bush rather than God. But, of course, Bush, Messenger of God that he is, has claimed that He was commanded by the Almighty to strike at Afghanistan and then commanded to strike at Iraq...

You are an intellectually squalid individual who tries to worm his way out of his difficulties with empty rhetoric and potty language. You can't even discern the difference between the eradication of a crop and the poisoning of a drug. If you are going to poison a drug, then obviously you are going to kill someone if it can find its way to market...kill them as assuredly as the Texas Tower shooter gunned them down...as assuredly as the Tylenol murderer poisoned them at random... Did the poisoning of alcohol by the Bluenoses in the 1920s stop its use--and sale by criminals? No. It lead to increased incidences of blindness...and death. By poisoning alcohol they didn't stop the unscrupulous...just as cutting with strychnine is not unheard of...Can you poison the entire supply of a drug? Obviously not, or your drug 'warriors' would have already halted the trade by conventional means as they would know where every bit of it was...

Reply to this comment
by radiob-2009 August 5, 2007 10:12 PM EDT
475 million for a crop of opium that is worth billions, that is incentive. Want to trade me your Lamborghini for a Yugo?
Reply to this comment
by speakinup August 5, 2007 9:41 PM EDT
Prinzowhales - a quote from the National Institute on Drug Abuse: "A tolerance to the Cocaine high may develop. Many addicts report that they seek, but fail to achieve, as much pleasure as they did from their first exposure. Some users will increase their doses to intensify and prolong the euphoric effects. Use of cocaine in a binge, during which the drug is taken repeatedly and at increasingly high doses, may lead to a state of increasing irritability, restlessness, and paranoia. This can result in a period of full-blown paranoid psychosis, in which the user loses touch with reality and experiences auditory hallucinations."

Which would be ONE explanation for your anti-social points of view, and use of a pen-name so close to someone's title. Of course, there is always the possibility, you are just naturally an idiot.
Reply to this comment
by speakinup August 5, 2007 9:18 PM EDT
Piece'oshit - So, your juxtaposing Bush & God, saying that anoyone would forsake one for the other, shows your limited abilty to comprehend reality. I believe that you are indeed 'touched', maybe not by what I say, but touched never the less.

The operative words in my plan would be to, "Tell everyone this is the new eradication policy, and that they take the drug at their own risk." YOU are the one that assummed I wanted them dead - just like many other assumptions you make about 'NeoCons'.

SURPRISE piece'oshit - you pre-judge people.

BTW, the 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it' cliche has been way overworked by liberal philsophers wannabes. Get a new line.

Heroin's high is much more quickly tolerated than the ability to overcome it's chief method of death, respiratory depression. As a result, it ALREADY is a killer drug. It induces users to use more and more to get the same effect, slowly moving the user to the point where they strangle.

Cocaine, while not physically addicting, has powerful psychological addictive properties. Frequent cocaine users typically have a life expectancy of less than five years. Death comes from overstimulation of the heart, violent convultions, or respiratory arrest.

Been doing them long ?

Anyway - I sure do want to protect people. The ones that fall victim to addicts loooking for more cash.




Reply to this comment
by prinzowhales August 5, 2007 3:23 PM EDT
speakinup--Why is it that those who have forsaken God for Bush are constantly desirous to make 'death' a solution for every problem...while I'm sure everyone in the drug war asylum is touched by your brave theoretical willingness to sacrifice your daughter on the 'Just Say No' altar with poisoned dope...it certainly tells the rest of us quite a bit about the mentality of the authoritarian mind...the 'we had to destroy the village in order to save it' insanity welling up in 'burbs...usually the bluenoses argue that outlawing certain drugs is to protect people... you, however, have inadvertantly let the cat out of the bag...You don't want to protect anyone... you just want people dead if they don't live and do like the rest of you and your hellish Stepford-like crowd do.
Reply to this comment
by speakinup August 5, 2007 1:51 PM EDT
All the Bush haters on this site seem to forget, this problem has been around for centuries. Bush didn't start it. And, for how many decades have various Presidents been trying to stop pot in our own country, as well as cocaine production in South America. You would expect that even the total number of troops in Iraq if transplanted to Afghanistan could get rid of opium ? Dream on. The Taliban was able to get it down to 30% only because of their draconian measures. Farmers that don't comply don't plant poppies, they only push up daises. So let's forget trying to demonize the Bush administration on this issue.

Fact is, we could stop this problem in a manner of months for the hard core drugs. Just poison it when you find it, and leave it place. Tell everyone this is the new eradication policy, and that they take the drug at their own risk. Those that were incurable would be gone over a period of time, those were curable would stop for the most part, drug dealers wouldn't get their money, and the industry would dry up.

If my own daughter dropped dead from doing cocaine, it would be grievous, but the way I see it, it also would have been a blessing in disguise. At least it would be over quickly, and she wouldn't be dragged thru the mud to get there. But, she wouldn't die, as I have brought her up with the values needed to resist idiots that would have her to try the stuff.
Reply to this comment
by prinzowhales August 5, 2007 1:41 PM EDT
The only reason that the Washington-London axis would destroy opium plants would be to support the price...rather like the New Deal in the Thirties...when food was destroyed while people starved so as to support the price.

When Bush41, his Columbian allies and the Cali Cartel destroyed the Medellin Cartel. (See some interesting info on CIA money laundering for it at http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1190)Bush declared that the War on Drugs had been won... one of those lies that Bushs are prone to telling when they open their mouths.

Our soldiers are dying to protect the Kabul Narco-Regime while they are instructed to leave the opium poppies alone! Go to: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/
Here you will see British soldiers so instructed.

Now you know the real reason "Why We Fight!" The Stupid Peoples' War is about securing the center for opium production to control the marke; it is about securing the areas where oil can be produced the cheapest so as to control world prices--to void the free market and wasteful competition (even as the ding-a-lings who support the Washington Regime buy the 'free market' lies of its academic mouthpieces).

All the architects of the Stupid Peoples' War need now are stupid people who will pay for it and bleed and die for it--and in America, education and other propaganda systems have created them in droves!
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 August 5, 2007 5:15 AM EDT
"Opponents argue that the benefits of such aid, new roads and other infrastructure, schools and hospitals, will themselves be powerful tools to combat the narcotrade once constructed."

Either such opponents are stupid for believing and money earmarked for roads, etc., will actually make it to the projects, and not be corrupted by government officials, or they are deliberately lying, trying to make others think so.

When the money they propose is gone, and there are still no roads, schools, etc., what do they think the farmers will do, quietly starve while waiting for another set of false promises?
Reply to this comment
by brianbwb-2009 August 5, 2007 5:09 AM EDT
The irony in this is that under the rule of the Taliban, the opium trade in Afghanistan was reduced to only 30% of its amount compared to the previous regime, but now that Bushpuppet Karzai is "the man" it is now again setting records.

The opium money is not going to the Taliban, as some of you wish to posit, but is actually going to the pockets of corrupt officials in the Bush-Karzai government.
Reply to this comment
by cantshutup August 5, 2007 2:44 AM EDT
i mean seriously, who wants to be sober for what's going on in the world right now??? i'm surprised EVERYONE doesn't want to do drugs...when the governments give us terror and we don't fight back, we might as well be high...*** do they want from us???
Reply to this comment
by cantshutup August 5, 2007 2:41 AM EDT
why should they plant other crops when the demand for heroin is so high? why should farmers trying to make a living be punished? what about the users demanding the heroin? maybe governments shouldn't be in a person's personal affairs...especially if someone wants to waste their own life on heroin? why does the government care? have they got something better for addicts to do?
Reply to this comment
by bobgee_1999 August 5, 2007 2:37 AM EDT
Great. This should please the disciples of free enterprise all to hell. Keep those peasants in the fields, cash in the coffers of the Taliban, American pushers in business and junkies tranquil. I bow at last to the Bush administration's wisdom.
Reply to this comment
by formrusmcsgt August 5, 2007 2:23 AM EDT
Thanks for the education, sgt! Regardless, I still dislike Southern Neocons.
Posted by ConDumism at 10:31 PM : Aug 04, 2007

Agreed. But contrary to what the neocons would have you believe, all southerners are not neocons.
Reply to this comment
by radiob-2009 August 5, 2007 1:40 AM EDT
475 million dollars of "incentives" to not grow the majority of poppy plants (opium) How many billions of dollars is the opium worth? Hey Mister I will give you a $100 dollars for your new Lamborghini.
Reply to this comment
by condumism August 5, 2007 1:31 AM EDT
Posted by formrusmcsgt

If you'd rather operate from a factual standpoint than one of hatred, check out:

Where's seven-pesos when I need him most?

Thanks for the education, sgt! Regardless, I still dislike Southern Neocons. NOw I gotta go dancing here in Santa Fe. For our small population, we have the best and foxeyist chicks in the USA! Gotta go get me some........
Reply to this comment
by soldat44 August 5, 2007 1:31 AM EDT
Dust off the Agent Orange and load it up!!
Reply to this comment
by sformoso August 5, 2007 1:31 AM EDT
I could care less. Let the rich kids who can afford drugs become consumed and their arrogant parents watch them suffer and pass on.
Reply to this comment
by tnt1954 August 5, 2007 1:24 AM EDT
american anniversaries of august. the alleged
death of marilyn monroe. actually she's still
alive, is 80 yrs. old. vaughan meader was
the double for jfk in the motorcade in dallas,
the real president was swept away by helicopter
to a nuke sub where marilyn had been kept
for safety. they spend their time circumnavigating the globe. while 'underwater'.
can you prove that hypothesis false?
just try, i double dare ya. triple dare ya.
quadrulple dare ya. hiroshima. complete
annhilation of japanese city opposed to
american rule of the world. nagasaki, complete
annhilation of japanese city opposed to american
rule of the world. by nuclear weapons.
opening the dawning of the age of aquarius.
a time of great peace, love and enlightenment.
of course, ya know what we could have done
ya know? told the rest of the world, surrender
or be annhilated. mull it over dumbos. but
we were kinder and gentler and let many live.

when the korean war was
on, mona stone avis carter, marilyn monroe
and sterling hayden and errol flynn went to
moscow in 1953 as a peace parley to stalin.
inadverently on purpose marilyn stabbed stalin
to death with her fork at the dinner table
in private quarters, and they had to leave
the dinner table and flee rather quickly.
and then the korean war ended abruptly at that
time in 1953. thanks marilyn. and company.
Reply to this comment
See all 65 Comments
Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: