Russia Announces 'Total War on Drugs'

[Hebrew Hammer]

Russia defies growing consensus with declaration of 'total war on drugs'

Under new laws being drawn up addicts would be forced into treatment or jailed, and dealers 'treated like serial killers'

Drug dealers are to be "treated like serial killers" and could be sent to forced labour camps under harsh laws being drawn up by Russia's Kremlin-controlled parliament.

Boris Gryzlov, the speaker of the state duma, the lower house, said a "total war on drugs" was needed to stem a soaring abuse rate driven by the flow of Afghan heroin through central Asia to Europe.

Russia has as many as 6 million addicts (one in 25 people). Every year 100,000 people die from using drugs, Gryzlov said in a newspaper. The scale of the problem "threatens Russia's gene pool", he said. "We are standing on the edge of a precipice. Either we squash drug addiction or it will destroy us."

This year, President Dmitry Medvedev said drug abuse was cutting up to three percentage points off economic growth.

Injecting drug-use is also accelerating Russia's HIV crisis because – unlike most other European countries – methadone treatment is banned and needle exchange programmes are scarce, meaning the virus spreads quickly from addict to addict via dirty syringes. An estimated one in 100 Russians are HIV positive.

Under legislation promoted by the ruling United Russia party and now being reviewed in parliament, drug addicts will be forced into treatment or jailed, and dealers will be handed heftier custodial sentences. "The barons of narco-business must be put on a par with serial killers with the appropriate punishment in the form of a life sentence," said Gryzlov, who is chairman of the party.

Activists criticised the idea of putting addicts behind bars, pointing to a growing worldwide consensus that treating drug users as criminals has failed as a strategy.

The Global Commission on Drugs Policy said in a report last week that there needed to be a shift away from criminalising drugs and incarcerating those who use them. Gryzlov, however, claimed that "criminal responsibility for the use of narcotics is a powerful preventative measure".

Special punishments should also be considered for dealers, he added: "Sending drug traders to a katorga [forced labour camp], for example. Felling timber, laying rails and constructing mines – that's very different from sitting in a personal cell with a television and a fridge while you keep up your 'business' on the outside."

While it remains unclear how many of the measures will become law, other leading members of United Russia – which is headed by Vladimir Putin, the prime minister, and which dominates the duma – said they supported the initiative.

The plans follow an admission by Medvedev in April that Russia's fight against drug addiction had failed. He called for radical measures such as mandatory drug tests in schools.

Possession of small quantities of psychotropic substances in Russia carries an administrative fine of up to 15,000 roubles (£330), but Gryzlov indicated it would now result in a jail term. The state should offer narkomany (addicts) a stark choice, he said: "Prison or forced treatment."

That could be a bleak prospect. Some of Russia's detox clinics still use "coding", a controversial therapy in which patients are scared into thinking terrible consequences (such as their testicles falling off) will result if they mix drugs with medicines which are actually placebos.

Several activists condemned Gryzlov's suggestion to "isolate" drug users from society.

"Sending more people to prison will not reduce drug addiction or improve public health," said Anya Sarang, president of the Andrey Rylkov Foundation, an advocacy group for people with HIV which works with injecting drug users (IDUs). "Russian prisons are terrible places full of HIV, tuberculosis and other diseases. Drugs are often even more accessible there than anywhere else."

She added: "What we need instead of this harsh drug control rhetoric is greater emphasis on rehabilitation, substitution treatment, case management for drug users and protection from HIV."

HIV prevalence among IDUs in western countries is 1 or 2%, but lack of outreach work and the absence of opiate substitution (methadone) and other "harm reduction" measures mean the figure is 16% in Russia – rising to 60% in hotspots such as St Petersburg.

Denis Broun, the Moscow-based director of UNAids for Europe and central Asia, told the Guardian that Gryzlov's proposals could make matters even worse.

"It has been widely shown that criminalising people using drugs simply drives them underground and makes them much harder to reach with preventative measures," he said. "This is not an effective strategy for fighting HIV. Purely repressive measures do not work."

link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jun/08/russia-total-war-on-drugs)

[Obs]

I have absolutely nothing against trying to prevent the spread of heroin, but maybe treating desperate, sick people like murderers is not the best way to deal with this.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Why do people in Russia feel the need to abuse drugs? Or alcohol, for that matter? Perhaps Russia should declare a war on vodka instead. (http://www.theworld.org/2010/02/alcoholism-a-national-disaster-in-russia/) Perhaps Russian officials may want to target the reason that Russians feel the need to drink themselves to death or shoot up at such incredibly high rates? No, that would require too much effort. Best to just make grandiose statements about declaring "total war" on drugs. Look at how well it worked in latin america!

This mindset fascinates me. You can still cop some heroin in China or southeast Asia if you look around, despite governments that are very strict when it comes to drugs, and cultures that generally don't have rates of use or addiction as high as the USA or Europe.

[La Comédie Noire]

I never got the whole tough on anything stance that politicians take. Hasn't the drug war in the United States been proven not only a failure, as if that weren't enough, but an expensive and brutal one at that? Of course they need votes because the myth of the tax paying citizen needs to be reinforced, which leads to a spiteful attitude.

"You aren't going to get a hospital bed from my tax money, but I'll sure is shit pay to have you tested, detained, and shot at. That's a worthy investment. Fuckers."

Really people should take a lesson from Portugal, not the freakin United States.

[Glenn Beckunin]

Strange how their 'total war on drugs' doesn't include the one drug causing by far the most societal harm, vodka.

I am reminded of how Terence McKenna explains that alcohol supports the paternalistic, control-based culture, and is thus preferred in those societies over other recreational drugs. Hence the drug war hawks' cop-out over alcohol whenever they're asked why it's the exception to the rule: "Well, our culture has a long tradition of alcohol use, bs, etc."

[Geiseric]

I'll bet that it's going to turn out that the Russian police are smuggling in a bunch of the drugs for some side money. Same thing happened in L.A. with crack and cocaine.

[The_Outernationalist]

Why do people in Russia feel the need to abuse drugs? Or alcohol, for that matter?

Why do people anywhere abuse drugs or alcohol? I don't know why you have to single out the Russians on this, seeing as many other places have higher alcohol and drug abuse rates in Europe.

[The_Outernationalist]

I never got the whole tough on anything stance that politicians take. Hasn't the drug war in the United States been proven not only a failure, as if that weren't enough, but an expensive and brutal one at that? Of course they need votes because the myth of the tax paying citizen needs to be reinforced, which leads to a spiteful attitude.

"You aren't going to get a hospital bed from my tax money, but I'll sure is shit pay to have you tested, detained, and shot at. That's a worthy investment. Fuckers."

Really people should take a lesson from Portugal, not the freakin United States.

You're right, another dangerous substance should be completely legalized and propagated and perpetuated throughout Russia...we know how well that worked with alcohol...

[Os Cangaceiros]

Why do people anywhere abuse drugs or alcohol? I don't know why you have to single out the Russians on this, seeing as many other places have higher alcohol and drug abuse rates in Europe.

I'm not singling Russia out for anything. The OP is about Russia. Hence my comment.


You're right, another dangerous substance should be completely legalized and propagated and perpetuated throughout Russia...we know how well that worked with alcohol...

As long as grinding poverty, inequality, alienation and a general ignorance/lack of education about alcohol/drugs exists, those substances will also exist. It's really as simple as that.

[The_Outernationalist]

As long as grinding poverty, inequality, alienation and a general ignorance/lack of education about alcohol/drugs exists, those substances will also exist. It's really as simple as that.

So you obviously know of their destructive potential, and yet you want to perpetuate them even more? Because rape exists, are you suggesting we legalize sex slavery? I'm not following your logic, if it can be called that.

[Os Cangaceiros]

So you obviously know of their destructive potential, and yet you want to perpetuate them even more?

People take drugs for any number of reasons. There are those who take drugs simply because they're curious, usually as the result of a drug's "mystique" (dutifully cultivated by it's prohibited status). Then there are those who's drug use can be more directly tied to the systems of exploitation that they live under; either drugs used in a "controlled" fashion (it's hardly a suprise that Japan's drug of choice is methamphetamine, given the attitudes towards schooling and work, and it's also not a suprise that so many people take pills for mood and anxiety disorders in the USA) or in an uncontrolled fashion, by people who are just desperately trying to escape their own misery*, such as the moonshine makers (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/why-africans-are-dying-for-a-drink-1973041.html) in some African nations where alcohol is heavily prohibited, resulting in many cases of alcohol poisoning. I think that the root causes of such problems are far more imperative than the terrible symptoms.

*This was actually witnessed outside of the human experience, interestingly enough: it was noted that, in Vietnam during the height of the bombing campaigns, water buffalo began to chew on coca leaves, something they hadn't done before. When the bombing stopped, so did they.


Because rape exists, are you suggesting we legalize sex slavery? I'm not following your logic, if it can be called that.

If you think that the simple act of taking or giving/selling a narcotic or mind-altering substance in-and-of itself is the same as rape, then it's you who has faulty logic. But hey, lets just kill and imprison our way out of a public health crisis! That'll make people stop doing drugs! The true materialist position.

[Le Socialiste]

This year, President Dmitry Medvedev said drug abuse was cutting up to three percentage points off economic growth.


The scale of the problem "threatens Russia's gene pool", he said.

Well, so long as they have their priorities straight. :rolleyes:

[Queercommie Girl]

It's not necessarily drugs in the intrinsic sense that are the problem, but rather the specific socio-economic role drug cartels are playing.

The Opium War comes to mind.

It's not a matter of chemistry as much as it is a matter of socio-economics and political economy.

[Queercommie Girl]

As long as grinding poverty, inequality, alienation and a general ignorance/lack of education about alcohol/drugs exists, those substances will also exist. It's really as simple as that.


True, but in some circumstances, like say in 1840, Lin Zexu was still right to destroy the opium sold to China by British imperialism.

[La Comédie Noire]

You're right, another dangerous substance should be completely legalized and propagated and perpetuated throughout Russia...we know how well that worked with alcohol...... Noo, it should be recognized people are going to be exposed to drugs and punishing them with prison sentences or spending resources on eliminating drugs is a waste of time. Drug addicts should be seen as sick people and treated accordingly, while potential users should be educated about the consequences of drug use.

Portugal has made great headway with this, in fact drug use is down there.

Bottom line, getting "tough" on drugs doesn't work and is merely a rhetorical device of politicians and a state apparatus that would love to have more control over peoples' daily lives.

Edit:

I'd also like to mention, as others already have, that it's important to understand why people do drugs in the first place and how ameliorating those conditions would stop drug use more effectively than criminalizing it.

[Kiev Communard]

I'll bet that it's going to turn out that the Russian police are smuggling in a bunch of the drugs for some side money. Same thing happened in L.A. with crack and cocaine.

Oh, such practices are rather widespread among Russia's and Ukraine's "law and order" services, as they are notoriously corrupt.

[Queercommie Girl]

... Noo, it should be recognized people are going to be exposed to drugs and punishing them with prison sentences or spending resources on eliminating drugs is a waste of time. Drug addicts should be seen as sick people and treated accordingly, while potential users should be educated about the consequences of drug use.

Portugal has made great headway with this, in fact drug use is down there.

Bottom line, getting "tough" on drugs doesn't work and is merely a rhetorical device of politicians and a state apparatus that would love to have more control over peoples' daily lives.

Edit:

I'd also like to mention, as others already have, that it's important to understand why people do drugs in the first place and how ameliorating those conditions would stop drug use more effectively than criminalizing it.

Any reason why drug dealers, especially significant drug cartels, shouldn't be cracked down on? These people are basically lumpen-bourgeois.

Granted, a bourgeois state is clearly not the best institution to suppress the lumpen-bourgeois at all, but hypothetically a worker's state, worker's militias or the Red Army could.

[Sasha]

cracking down on the drugdealers without taking away the materialist reasons for their existence is as viable as socialism in one country ;)

[Queercommie Girl]

cracking down on the drugdealers without taking away the materialist reasons for their existence is as viable as socialism in one country ;)


What is your evaluation of the Opium War in 1840?

Also, you could say the same thing about almost every type of crime we have at the moment, including say rape and murder. Obviously the bourgeois state is objectively incompetent in effectively dealing with crime, but does this mean socialists should just turn a blind eye to criminal activities that damage the interests of working class communities?

Strategically, there are "long-term plans" and there are "short-term plans" as well.

It's easy for someone in a relatively strong and safe position to completely ignore crime (real crime), but not so easy for those in relatively weaker and more vulnerable positions who sometimes require other people to protect them.

Since the "socialist revolution" is still a long way away, in concrete pragmatic terms this implies one is basically supporting a social darwinist law of the jungle type society (an urban jungle made of concrete) where everyone must fend for himself/herself, and those who cannot unfortunately would simply perish.

Personally I prefer to take my chances with the Red Army, thank you very much.

[Kiev Communard]

Any reason why drug dealers, especially significant drug cartels, shouldn't be cracked down on? These people are basically lumpen-bourgeois.

Granted, a bourgeois state is clearly not the best institution to suppress the lumpen-bourgeois at all, but hypothetically a worker's state, worker's militias or the Red Army could.

Well, modern Russian state is intrinsically connected with the various mafias, including the drug cartels (most of which go under state security services protection), so to a certain extent it might be said that the 'lumpen bourgeoisie' you have referred to, are an important part of Russian ruling class, and it would be naive to think that the Putin-Medvediev clique would turn against its best partners in capital accumulation. As for dealing with drug cartels in hypothetical post-revolutionary society, I believe that their rank-and-file members would be treated as other criminals (i.e. sent to some kind of temporary corrective settlements, which would be far cry from modern inhumane labour camp/prison system of Russian state), while the cartels' leadership should be either expelled from the country together with other high-ranking capitalists or killed in case of resistance/attempts to restore their power.

[Lord Testicles]

War on drugs not working? Why not step it up a gear with the new Total war on drugs.

http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/6654/empire510242.jpg

[Queercommie Girl]

so to a certain extent it might be said that the 'lumpen bourgeoisie' you have referred to, are an important part of Russian ruling class,


I agree, which is why as I said, a bourgeois state (especially one like Russia today) is clearly ineffective in dealing with any kind of drug problem. (Or many other criminal problems for that matter)

In fact, I don't even oppose using drugs in principle, I'm pointing out the reactionary nature of capitalist drug cartels in the socio-economic sense. Being a cultural anarchist I'm usually not so interested in making any kind of "intrinsic" analysis.

[Sasha]

What is your evaluation of the Opium War in 1840?

Also, you could say the same thing about almost every type of crime we have at the moment, including say rape and murder. Obviously the bourgeois state is objectively incompetent in effectively dealing with crime, but does this mean socialists should just turn a blind eye to criminal activities that damage the interests of working class communities?

Strategically, there are "long-term plans" and there are "short-term plans" as well.

It's easy for someone in a relatively strong and safe position to completely ignore crime (real crime), but not so easy for those in relatively weaker and more vulnerable positions who sometimes require other people to protect them.

Since the "socialist revolution" is still a long way away, in concrete pragmatic terms this implies one is basically supporting a social darwinist law of the jungle type society (an urban jungle made of concrete) where everyone must fend for himself/herself, and those who cannot unfortunately would simply perish.

Personally I prefer to take my chances with the Red Army, thank you very much.

except that murder and rape have undeniable victims who deserve an short term effort at protection, while the suppression of drugs only creates victims.
from my work i see exactly what happens in the war on drugs; in the party circuit the ban on testing your XTC-pills has led to dangerous harmful pills and pricehikes which lead to people switching to GHB (which you can make yourself in your kitchen but is far, FAR more dangerous than good quality XTC), and in general the attempt to supression of party drugs in the circuit and society has led people to switch also too drugs like speed and cocaine, drugs where the users perceive that they act less obvious intoxicated. as an bouncer i can tell you that i rather have an 1000 customers on XTC than 2 on cocaine as i rather get hugged than shot at.
same goes for escapist drugs: bio-chemically there is not much difference between an doctor with an morphine of fentanyl addiction and an poor schmuck with an heroin problem its the socio-economics that are harmfull, both to the individual and society. since we started supplying the junkies without hope of ever coming clean with free and clean heroin not only their life expectancy went up with decades (so far that we now need to build specialized elderly homes) but typical junky crime as home and car burglary and knivepoint street robbery went down spectacular. it saves society lots of money and grief and since now the junkies are of the street and the trade collapsed there are almost no new junkies starting...

the best way to protect the weak and vulnerable is legalization, quality control, taxation and especially education, education, education.

[Robespierre Richard]

Wow I'm kinda glad I left now, Russia seems to be getting worse even as it gets "better..."

I'm guessing that this is just a way to "chop some money off" for the "rehabilitation" centers of people like Roizman and the Scientologists, and get some new material for the prison complex that is closing the old gulag system in favor of a more "American" one.

I think it's interesting though, the ruling cliques that are former CPSU opportunists, corrupt bureaucrats, and various "businessmen" who are attached to them are basically making the liberal opposition (itself mostly made up of CPSU cadres) pointless by basically doing everything the liberals would do. I say we resurrect Stalin so that he gets purges all this XX Congress filth that Khrushchev begot.

[Dimmu]

Pathetic.. Not only does the "war on drugs" work, but this will just create more corruption in Russia.. Just sad..

[Geiseric]

I think that it's impossible to take away the psycological want for a drug such as weed. Many people smoke just because of boredom or because of hopelessness, pessimism, depression, and those will never be taken away.

A plan of ending poverty = No more drugs, in my opinion, is utopian and unrealistic. The best we can do is make sure that the really bad drugs are in responsible control, meth and heroin, most category 1 drugs would be totally abolished if it was up to me. Not weed though, drugs should be handled on an individual basis. The laws for marijuana shouldn't be the same as meth.

[Queercommie Girl]

I think that it's impossible to take away the psycological want for a drug such as weed. Many people smoke just because of boredom or because of hopelessness, pessimism, depression, and those will never be taken away.

A plan of ending poverty = No more drugs, in my opinion, is utopian and unrealistic. The best we can do is make sure that the really bad drugs are in responsible control, meth and heroin, most category 1 drugs would be totally abolished if it was up to me. Not weed though, drugs should be handled on an individual basis. The laws for marijuana shouldn't be the same as meth.

What we need to do is to destroy every single capitalist drug cartel, big or small, in the whole world. As long as these capitalists are around, drugs will never ever be safe.

The problems with drugs are not primarily intrinsic, but socio-economic.

Drugs aren't safe because they are being sold as commodities on a capitalist market.

Also, why wouldn't severe psychological problems be taken away in a genuine socialist society? I can understand the fact that it will never be "perfect" (whatever that means!), but if there isn't a major qualitative improvement in this area, I'd say the revolution is either incomplete, or it has failed.

In a socialist society, people would only use drugs for recreation, for fun, or maybe for some kind of spiritual experience, but generally not as some kind of "medicine".

[Ocean Seal]

People a statement is a statement. A total war on drugs is merely another statement. The US is plenty happen to negotiate with drug dealers on the dl to ensure their power all the while lying to the public and claiming that there is a war on drugs going on. The Russian state is no different from the American state. Nothing to see here, move along.

[Robespierre Richard]

What we need to do is to destroy every single capitalist drug cartel, big or small, in the whole world. As long as these capitalists are around, drugs will never ever be safe.

The problems with drugs are not primarily intrinsic, but socio-economic.

Drugs aren't safe because they are being sold as commodities on a capitalist market.

Also, why wouldn't severe psychological problems be taken away in a genuine socialist society? I can understand the fact that it will never be "perfect" (whatever that means!), but if there isn't a major qualitative improvement in this area, I'd say the revolution is either incomplete, or it has failed.

In a socialist society, people would only use drugs for recreation, for fun, or maybe for some kind of spiritual experience, but generally not as some kind of "medicine".

Mexico called, crushing the cartels doesn't work out that well.

[Queercommie Girl]

Mexico called, crushing the cartels doesn't work out that well.

It's because Mexico isn't a worker's state, but a bourgeois state.

A bourgeois state will never crush the lumpen-bourgeois, rather it would only breed them further. But a socialist state can. This is because in socialism the market is completely abolished, replaced by the planned economy under democratic mass control.

Also, it's hardly something that Mexico can achieve alone as a single nation, since drug cartels always have international links, and many are actively funded by Western imperialism, just like back in the 19th century. (e.g. the Opium War of 1840 between Britain and China)

[Robespierre Richard]

It's because Mexico isn't a worker's state, but a bourgeois state.

A bourgeois state will never crush the lumpen-bourgeois, but a socialist state can.

Also, it's hardly something that Mexico can achieve alone as a single nation, since drug cartels always have international links, and many are actively funded by Western imperialism, just like back in the 19th century. (e.g. the Opium War of 1840 between Britain and China)

Well obviously communist revolution will fix everything, but that's not something we can currently talk about in the present tense. Currently we can only really categorize things in terms of "helping people," "helping revolutionary activity," both, or other, but simply stating that a socialist state is the solution really doesnt help any person or help the revolution that would establish a state like that.

It's like that article by those trots that was posted here a while ago about how they support proletarian elements in Libya. They could be supporting proletarian elements on the Moon, it still wouldn't help anyone or contribute to the debate.

[Queercommie Girl]

Well obviously communist revolution will fix everything,


This sounds like an utopian statement. Communism never "automatically" fixes anything, it's something that needs to be analysed and discussed.



but that's not something we can currently talk about in the present tense. Currently we can only really categorize things in terms of "helping people," "helping revolutionary activity," both, or other, but simply stating that a socialist state is the solution really doesnt help any person or help the revolution that would establish a state like that.


At the very least, socialist organisations must never collaborate or co-operate with any drug cartels.

[Ocean Seal]

It's because Mexico isn't a worker's state, but a bourgeois state.
Exactly. But even further as a bourgeois state Mexico can't crush the drug trade because it isn't in the interest of the Mexican bourgeoisie to crush the drug dealers. How else are they supposed to keep the workers divided and living in fear?

[Queercommie Girl]

It's like that article by those trots that was posted here a while ago about how they support proletarian elements in Libya. They could be supporting proletarian elements on the Moon, it still wouldn't help anyone or contribute to the debate.


Well, I don't entirely agree. Proletarian elements do exist in Libya, even though they are not as substantial as most Trotskyists would claim.

In any case, that is a completely different debate and issue, and completely irrelevant. There is a difference between making a general theoretical point and making a concrete political point in response to a particular situation.

[Robespierre Richard]

This sounds like an utopian statement. Communism never "automatically" fixes anything, it's something that needs to be analysed and discussed.



At the very least, socialist organisations must never collaborate or co-operate with any drug cartels.

Yeah, I was exaggerating the statement you made to point out its futility. I think it's called sarcasm. The rest of what you said isn't really relevant to any of my points.

[Princess Luna]

Evidence of drug use by humans goes back before even written language was developed, saying they can be gotten rid of (even in a socialist society) is nieve and foolish. Of course politicians don't care about this, they only care about futhering their own careers and one of the best ways of doing this is by focusing the public's fear and hatred.

[Queercommie Girl]

Yeah, I was exaggerating the statement you made to point out its futility. I think it's called sarcasm. The rest of what you said isn't really relevant to any of my points.


Tell me one thing, why should I even be a socialist if a socialist revolution cannot bring about a significant improvement to the human condition in a qualitative sense? You consider that to be "utopian"? That's quite stupid really. It's mere pragmatism. Socialism is good only because it's useful, otherwise it's trash and a waste of effort. I personally have no fetishic attachment to some kind of BS macho revolutionary symbol or aesthetic fashion for its own sake. I'm philosophically an utilitarian.

[Queercommie Girl]

Evidence of drug use by humans goes back before even written language was developed, saying they can be gotten rid of (even in a socialist society) is nieve and foolish. Of course politicians don't care about this, they only care about futhering their own careers and one of the best ways of doing this is by focusing the public's fear and hatred.


The socio-economic context was different. Drugs were mainly used as recreation back then, or maybe for some kind of religious/spiritual purpose.