Legalizing Marijuana as a National Security Strategy: Are you on drugs or thinking outside the box?
While federal law continues to classify marijuana (cannabis) as a Schedule I drug under the Control Substances Act of 1970, making its possession, use, distribution, and cultivation illegal, approximately half (23) of the states in the U.S. have legalized or decriminalized its use in one way or another over the past decade. Further, a Pew Research Center poll, released in April 2013, found that 52 percent of American’s surveyed now support legalizing the drug, while only 45 percent oppose such legalization. With support for the legalization of marijuana growing rapidly, several other states are likely to follow suit in the coming years, soon making states allowing the use of marijuana the majority.
Supporters of such legislation have contended that legalization is appropriate, even necessary, as marijuana use is no more, or even less, dangerous than alcohol and legalizing marijuana, with appropriate regulation and taxing structures, will bring in much-needed revenue to state coffers. They have a point as far more deaths in the U.S. are attributed to alcohol use each year than cannabis. Additionally, the State of Colorado, the latest state to make the recreational use of marijuana legal, recently released data which estimates that the sales tax revenue from marijuana will generate in excess of $130 million for the State in the first year. Still, opinions on the subject of legalization differ greatly and the great debate continues to rage.
A recently released Huffington Post article by H.A. Goodman may, however, provide an additional, albeit unexpected, boost to the pro-legalization camp from those wanting to increase national security. You see, according to Goodman, the legalization of marijuana also has the potential to reduce terrorism. In his article, Goodman points out that Afghanistan is now the world’s top producer of cannabis, growing an estimated 24,000 hectares of cannabis every year. Since the product cannot be sold legally, however, farmers must place it on the market illegally, inviting in an unsavory mix of characters, including members of various anti-coalition groups and terrorist organizations looking for a way to finance their operations.
Goodman may also have a point. In fact, according to the World Drug Report, which was recently produced by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, “Drug trafficking… is fueling a global criminal enterprise valued in the hundreds of billions of dollars that poses a growing challenge to stability and security” and there are “more and more acts of violence, conflicts and terrorist activities fueled by drug trafficking and organized crime” occurring throughout the world. U.N Secretary General Ban Ki-moon also verified recently that one of the places where the illegal drug trade has become intrinsically linked with terrorism is Afghanistan, making it clear that it is the illegal drug trade that is “funding insurgency, international terrorism and wider destabilization” in Afghanistan and other third-world countries.
Goodman further reasons that, since there are currently few legal means to make a living in countries like Afghanistan, providing a legitimate market for such cash crops could mitigate instability, by depriving the country’s war-lords and criminal groups of the illegal narcotic profits they frequently use to undermine our national security and counterterrorism objectives involving these countries. Considering that some 23 million Americans are reported to spend an estimated $42 billion on marijuana every year, there is little doubt that the Afghan economy could benefit if Afghanis were able to legally supply their agricultural products to legitimate private markets in the U.S. The question is though, why we would think providing a legal market for marijuana in Afghanistan would somehow remove the unsavory element from the country’s drug trade.
Warlords and their personal armies have a lengthy history in Afghanistan. They are part of the Afghan DNA. Today there are more than 200 key warlords controlling various territories in Afghanistan, with as many as 250,000 heavily armed, and often militarily experienced, militiamen at their disposal. The formally established Afghan government, even with the assistance of the U.S., has been unable to unarm or dismantle these groups. Why would these warlords give up the hold they currently have on the drug trade, a trade that represents their primary source of income, power and existence. Legal or illegal, these warlords and the unsavory characters that surround them are going to continue to control the drug trade in Afghanistan and, if so disposed, will continue to use the proceeds from such to finance terrorist activity and other operations creating continued instability within the region. The only thing creating a “legal” market for Afghan’s bumper cannabis crop will do is substantially increase the profits flowing to these groups, thereby enhancing the means they have available to them as they remain equally as committed to fighting the West.
Goodman’s reasoning is further flawed in that it fails to consider that, while perhaps providing an economic boost to Afghans, legalizing marijuana in the U.S. may harm Americans. The enhanced availability of drugs in the U.S. would likely create a whole new group of consumers. Legalization would not serve simply to allow existing users to continue doing what they are doing without fear of legal ramifications, but rather increase the amount of people engaging in an activity that is known to be harmful to both the individual user and society at large. Drugs, including marijuana, are highly addictive and study after study has shown that marijuana use can permanently damage one’s health. Further, drug use harms not only the user, but others through increase health care costs and the violence often associated with drug use and perpetrated by those impaired by drugs. All of these problems would undoubtedly be exasperated by widespread legalization.
In short, there exists strong arguments for and against the legalization of marijuana. Proponents argue that the drug is no different than alcohol and has the potential to correct many of our nation’s fiscal ails, while opponents point to the great harm legalization would do to society. Determining whether legalizing marijuana is a good idea or not is a difficult call at best, with pros and cons on both sides. Calling for the legalization of the drug in order to improve national security, however, appears to have little merit and should not be part of this important debate.
