In an attempt to end one of the longest wars in U.S. history, the United States and its NATO allies in Afghanistan view counternarcotics initiatives as vital to counterinsurgency efforts by cutting off revenue to insurgents. A new Center for International Cooperation (CIC) report by Jonathan Caulkins, Mark Kleiman, and Jonathan Kulick challenges this assumption.

The United States and its NATO allies in Afghanistan view counternarcotics initiatives as vital to counterinsurgency efforts by cutting off revenue to insurgents. A new Center for International Cooperation (CIC) report entitled "Drug Production and Trafficking, Counterdrug Policies, and Security and Governance in Afghanistan" challenges this assumption. Instead, the authors argue:

  • Current counternarcotics policy in Afghanistan is financially benefiting – rather than hurting – insurgents;
  • Rural development efforts should be focused on assisting rural populations – aid should not be conditioned on desistance from poppy-growing; and
  • Counternarcotics policy should be refocused to discriminate against illegal armed groups and corrupt officials in enforcement.

The report utilizes microeconomic analysis of the likely consequences of various counternarcotics strategies on both drug market outcomes and the security and governance situation in Afghanistan. It examines the division of drug trafficking revenues among insurgents, “warlords,” and corrupt government officials, the likely impact of drug enforcement policies on different points of the distribution chain, and the effect of these policies on drug consumption, dependency and harm to drug users.

Speakers

  • Jonathan Caulkins, Presenter
    Co-author, "Drug Production and Trafficking, Counterdrug Policies, and Security and Governance in Afghanistan."
  • Mark Kleiman, Presenter
    Co-author, "Drug Production and Trafficking, Counterdrug Policies, and Security and Governance in Afghanistan."
  • Jonathan Kulick, Presenter
    Co-author, "Drug Production and Trafficking, Counterdrug Policies, and Security and Governance in Afghanistan."
  • Philip B. Heymann, Discussant
    Ames Professor of Law at Harvard and former Deputy Attorney General
  • William Taylor, Moderator
    Vice President of Post-Conflict Peace and Stability Operations, U.S. Institute of Peace

 

Related Publications

The Political Deal with Hezb-e Islami

The Political Deal with Hezb-e Islami

Friday, July 6, 2018

By: Casey Garret Johnson

The deal signed with Hezb-e Islami in September 2016 was the Afghanistan government’s first major success at negotiating a peace agreement with an insurgent group. This new report examines how the deal was negotiated, what progress has been made on its implementation, and what lessons can be applied to prospective peace talks with the Taliban.

Peace Processes; Reconciliation; Justice, Security & Rule of Law

War-Weary Afghans March for Peace

War-Weary Afghans March for Peace

Friday, June 29, 2018

By: Maria J. Stephan; Johnny Walsh; USIP Staff

A recent grassroots peace movement in Afghanistan began in late March 2018 as a series of sit-ins and a hunger strike in Helmand province demanding that both the government and Taliban implement a cease-fire. USIP’s Maria Stephan and Johnny Walsh discuss the significance of this nonviolent movement, how its bottom-up approach can strengthen the push for a peace, and what to expect from the movement going forward.

Nonviolent Action

View All Publications