Advertisement

The International Drug Prohibition Regime as Security Regulation: Stability and Change in an Increasingly Less Prohibitionist World

  • Ondrej DitrychEmail author
  • Constanza Sanchéz-Avilés
Chapter

Abstract

In this chapter, we introduce the international drug control regime (IDCR) and trace its emergence and later evolution by drawing on three successive waves of the international regime theory. We confirm the assumption that the prohibition in the IDCR as well as other features of the system have been the result of a series of political decisions taken by a specific group of powerful states at the centre of global capitalist economy, and the USA as the system hegemon above all. The regime, we argue, however also betrays powerful inertia factors associated with institutional, structural and productive types of power that pose an obstacle to its transformation even when, in some respects, there exists convincing evidence that suggests other approaches would be more effective and less costly. In view of the current challenge to the IDCR’s core prohibitionist rationality which we align with an evolutionary change in the operation of compulsory power, in the conclusion we discuss how a change to the status quo may be steered to avoid the regime’s gradual obliteration.

Keywords

Illicit drugs International drug control regime United Nations International narcotics control board Commission on narcotic drugs Power Hegemony Sovereignty Biopolitics Dispositif 

References

  1. Andreas, P., & Nadelmann, E. (2006). Policing the Globe: Criminalization and Crime Control in International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barnett, M., & Duvall, R. (2005). Power in International Politics. International Organization, 59(1), 39–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bewley-Taylor, D. (1999). The United States and International Drug Control. London: Printer.Google Scholar
  4. Bewley-Taylor, D. (2003). Challenging the UN Drug Control Conventions: Problems and Possibilities. International Journal on Drug Policy, 14(2), 171–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bewley-Taylor, D. (2012). International Drug Control: Consensus Fractured. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bewley-Taylor, D., & Jelsma, M. (2012). Regime Change: Re-visiting the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. International Journal on Drug Policy, 23(1), 72–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bewley-Taylor, D., & Trace, M. (2006). The International Narcotics Control Board: Watchdog or Guardian of the UN Drug Control Conventions? Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, Report 7. Oxford: The Beckley Foundation. http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/pdf/Report_07.pdf.
  8. Björnehed, E. (2004). Narco-Terrorism: The Merger of the War on Drugs and the War on Terror. Global Crime, 6(3), 305–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boletín del Secretario General. (2004). Organización de la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas contra la Droga y el Delito. 15 March 2004 (Ref. ST/SGB/2004/6).Google Scholar
  10. Borda, S. (2002). Una aproximación constructivista a la guerra estadounidense en contra de las drogas. Colombia Internacional, 54, 73–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buxton, J. (2006). The Political Economy of Narcotics: Production, Consumption and Global Markets. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  12. Buxton, J. (2010). The Historical Foundations of the Narcotic Drug Control Regime. In P. Keefer & N. Loayza (Eds.), Innocents Bystanders: Developing Countries and the War on Drugs. Washington, DC and New York: World Bank and Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  13. Buzan, B., Waever, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. London: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  14. Carstairs, C. (2005). The Stages of the International Drug Control System. Drug and Alcohol Review, 24, 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. CND (Commission on Narcotic Drugs). (2009, March). Declaración Política y Plan de Acción sobre cooperación internacional en favor de una estrategia integral y equilibrada para contrarrestar el problema mundial de las drogas. Serie de sesiones de alto nivel de 2009 de la Comisión de Estupefacientes de las Naciones Unidas (Ref. E/2009/28 -E/CN.7/2009/12).Google Scholar
  16. CND. (2016). Preparations for the Special Session of the General Assembly on the World Drug Problem to Be Held in 2016 (Ref. E/CN.7/2016/L.12/Rev.1*). http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=E/CN.7/2016/L.12/Rev.1.
  17. Cotler, J. (1999). Drogas y política en el Perú: la conexión norteamericana. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.Google Scholar
  18. Crick, E. (2012). Drugs as an Existential Threat: An Analysis of the International Securitization of Drugs. International Journal of Drug Policy, 23(5), 407–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Crocket, A. (2010). The Function and Relevance of the Commission in Narcotic Drugs in the Pursuit of Humane Drug Policy (or the Ramblings of a Bewildered Diplomat). International Journal on Human Rights and Drug Policy, 1, 83–90.Google Scholar
  20. Díez Ripollés, J. L. (1999). Los delitos relativos a drogas tóxicas, estupefacientes y sustancias psicotrópicas. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
  21. Donnelly, J. (1992). The United Nations and the Global Drug Control Regime. In P. H. Smith (Ed.), Drug Policy in the Americas (pp. 282–304). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  22. ECOSOC (Econocmic and Social Council). (2007). Estrategia para el período 2008–2011 de la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas contra la Droga y el Delito. 9 February 2007 (Ref. E/CN.7/2007/14–E/CN.15/2007/5).Google Scholar
  23. ECOSOC. (2012). Strategy for the Period 2012–2015 for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 26 July 2012 (Ref. E/RES/2012/12 y E/CN.7/2011/9/Add.2–E/CN.15/2011/9/Add.2).Google Scholar
  24. Escohotado, A. (2004). Historia de las drogas. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.Google Scholar
  25. Fazey, C. (2003). The Commission on Narcotic Drugs and the United Nations International Drug Control Programme: Politics, Policies and Prospect for Change. International Journal of Drug Policy, 14, 155–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fazey, C. (2007). International Policy on Illicit Drug Trafficking: The Formal and Informal Mechanisms. Journal of Drug Issues, 37(4), 755–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Foucault, M. (1975). Surveiller et punir. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  28. Foucault, M. (2010). The Birth of Biopolitics. London: Picador.Google Scholar
  29. Fukumi, S. (2008). Cocaine Trafficking in Latin America: EU and US Policy Responses. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  30. Galen Carpenter, T. (2003). Bad Neighbor Policy: Washington’s Futile War on Drugs in Latin America. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Garcia Segura, C. (2014). La lucha contra la criminalidad transnacional organizada desde las Naciones Unidas. El rol de la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas contra la Droga y el Delito (UNODC): legitimidad e inmovilismo. In J. Ibáñez & C. Sánchez Avilés (Eds.), Mercados ilegales y violencia armada. Los vínculos entre la criminalidad organizada y la conflictividad internacional. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
  32. Ghatan, S. (2010). ‘The Opium Wars’: The Biopolitics of Narcotic Control in the United States 1914–1935. Critical Criminology, 18(1), 41–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hasenclever, A., Mayer, P., & Rittberger, V. (1997). Theories of International Regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Herschinger, E. (2011). Constructing Global Enemies: Hegemony and Identity in International Discourses on Terrorism and Drug Prohibition. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Herschinger, E. (2015). The Drug Dispositif: Ambivalent Materiality and the Addition of the Global Drug Prohibition Regime. Security Dialogue, 46(2), 183–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Huntington, S. (2004). Who Are We? The Challenges to America’s National Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  37. IDPC (International Drug Policy Consortium). (2016). Civil Society Statement—The UNGASS Outcome Document: Diplomacy or Denialism? http://idpc.net/alerts/2016/03/civil-society-statement-on-the-ungass.
  38. Ikenberry, J. (2000). After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of Order After Major Wars. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  39. INCB (International Narcotic Control Board). (Several Years). Annual Report. Vienna: INCB.Google Scholar
  40. Jackson, R. (2005). Writing the War on Terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Jelsma, M. (2003). Drugs in the UN System: The Unwritten History of the 1998 United Nations General Assembly Special Session on Drugs. International Journal of Drug Policy, 14(2), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Jelsma, M. (2013, December 17). La JIFE contra Uruguay: el arte de la diplomacia. Weblog, Transnational Institute. Programa Drogas y Democracia. http://www.druglawreform.info/es/weblog/item/5215-la-jife-contra-uruguay-el-arte-de-la-diplomacia.
  43. Jensema, E., & Thoumi, F. (2003). Drug Policies and the Funding of the United Nations Offices on Drugs and Crime. In (Several Authors), Global Drug Policy: Building a New Framework. London: The Senlis Council.Google Scholar
  44. Keane, H. (2013). Categorizing Methadone: Addiction and Analgesia. International Journal of Drug Policy, 24(6), 18–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Keeley, J. (1990). Toward a Foucauldian Analysis of International Regimes. International Organization, 44(1), 83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Keohane, R. (1984). After Hegemony. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Makarenko, T. (2004). The Crime-Terror Continuum: Tracing the Interplay Between Transnational Organised Crime and Terrorism. Global Crime, 6(1), 129–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Manjón-Cabeza, A. (2012). La solución. Barcelona: Debate.Google Scholar
  49. McAllister, W. (1991). Conflicts of Interest in the International Drug Control System. Journal of Policy History, 4(3), 494–517.Google Scholar
  50. McAllister, W. B. (2000). Drug Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Moore, D. (2007). Criminal Artefacts: Governing Drugs and Users. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  52. Musto, D. (1999). The American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Nadelmann, E. (1990). Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization, 44(4), 479–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Paoli, L., Greenfield, V., & Reuter, P. (2012). Change Is Possible: The History of International Drug Control Regime and Implications for Future Policymaking. Substance Use and Misuse, 47, 923–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Pietschmann, T. (2007). Un siglo de fiscalización internacional de drogas. Boletín de Estupefacientes, LIX(1–2). Vienna: UNODC.Google Scholar
  56. Rolles, S. (2016). The Drug Warriors Who Derailed the UN Drug Policy Summit Have Made a Terrible Miscalculation. Transform Blog. http://www.tdpf.org.uk/blog/drug-warriors-who-derailed-un-drug-policy-summit-have-made-terrible-miscalculation.
  57. Rossi, N. (2014). Breaking the Nexus: Conceptualising ‘Illicit Sovereigns’. Global Crime, 15(3), 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sánchez Avilés, C. (2014). El régimen internacional de control de drogas: formación, evolución e interacción con las políticas nacionales. El caso de la política de drogas en España (PhD thesis). Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  59. Sánchez-Avilés, C., & Ditrych, O. (2017). The Global Drug Prohibition Regime: Prospects for Stability and Change in an Increasingly Less Prohibitionist World. International Politics, 55(3–4), 463–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Sinha, J. (2001). The History and Development of the Leading International Drug Control Conventions. Report Prepared for the Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs. Law and Government Division, Library of Parliament, Canada.Google Scholar
  61. Snidal, D. (1985). Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory. International Organization, 39(4), 579–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Stewart, D. (1990). Internationalizing the War on Drugs: The UN Conventions Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, 18(3), 387–404.Google Scholar
  63. Strange, S. (1982). Cave! Hic Dragones: A Critique of Regime Analysis. International Organization, 36(2), 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Taylor, A. H. (1969). American Diplomacy and the Narcotics Traffic (1900–1939): A Study in International Humanitarian Reform. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Thoumi, F. (2010), Debates recientes de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas acerca del Régimen Internacional de Drogas: Fundamentos, Limitaciones e (im)posibles cambios. In J. G. Tokatlian (comp.), Drogas y prohibición. Una vieja guerra, un nuevo debate (pp. 27–56). Buenos Aires: Libros del Zorzal.Google Scholar
  66. Tokatlian, J. G. (2008). Política pública y drogas ilícitas: El caso de América Latina. Washington, DC: Interamerican Development Bank.Google Scholar
  67. United Nations General Assembly. (1993). Carta dirigida al Secretario General por el Representante Permanente de México ante las Naciones Unidas: México y la cooperación internacional contra la producción, demanda y tráfico ilícito de drogas. 20 October 1993 (Ref. A/C.3/48/2).Google Scholar
  68. UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime). (2010). Annual Report 2010. Vienna: UNODC.Google Scholar
  69. UNODC. (2014). Annual Report 2014. Vienna: UNODC.Google Scholar
  70. Uprimny, R. (2013, December 21). ¿Y quién es el pirata de las drogas? El Espectador, Colombia.Google Scholar
  71. Wallerstein, I. (1979). The Capitalist World-Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Weber, M. (1947). The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  73. Youngers, C., & Rosin, E. (Eds.). (2004). Drugs and Democracy in Latin America: The Impact of US Policy. Washington: Lynne Riener.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of International Relations PraguePragueCzech Republic
  2. 2.International Centre for Ethnobotanical Education, Research and Service (ICEERS)BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations