printable banner

U.S. Department of State - Great Seal

U.S. Department of State

Diplomacy in Action

2012 INCSR: Policy and Program Developments


Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Report
March 7, 2012

Share

Overview

The 2012 U.S. Department of State International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) underscores that political will and human determination are essential to countering the wide range of threats posed by illegal drugs and transnational organized crime.

As President Barack Obama stated in his October 2011 National Substance Abuse Proclamation, “The damage done by drugs is felt far beyond the millions of Americans with diagnosable substance abuse or dependence problems – countless families and communities also live with the pain and heartbreak it causes. Relationships are destroyed; crime and violence blight communities and dreams are shattered. Substance abuse touches every sector of society, straining our health care and criminal justice systems.”

The international community has come to accept that citizen security, guided by the rule of law, is the core prerequisite to addressing the threat of illegal drugs and transnational organized crime.

The United States remains steadfast in its commitment to combat illegal drugs and transnational organized crime in partnership with willing nations around the world. U.S. policy support for drug related treaties and agreements – whether bilateral, regional or multilateral – is backed up by substantial human and financial resources; we know that worldwide commitment against transnational organized crime in all its forms ultimately lessens drug use and its consequences in our communities.

International agreements – especially the main U.N. drug, crime and corruption conventions – continue to serve as the policy framework to thwart the criminal fringes of society and sophisticated organized criminal enterprises. U.S. drug and crime control policy is integrated with – and supportive of – the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States.

Drug Demand Reduction: Individual country reports in this volume demonstrate that we have collectively deepened our understanding of how to prevent drug use and how to help those who succumb to drug abuse and dependence. Public officials and experts know, based on years of scientific study, that drug addiction is a chronic disease that is both preventable and treatable. In the United States, as in other countries worldwide, reducing drug consumption improves overall public health and safety and deprives violent international criminal organizations of income. In 2011, the U.S. Administration dedicated some $10 billion in federal funds to support drug demand reduction.

Recent studies in the United States reveal that, with the exception of marijuana, use of most illegal drugs – due in large measure to the effectiveness of drug awareness and treatment programs – has dropped dramatically. Overall, current illicit drug use in the United States has fallen by approximately one-third since the 1970s.

The Obama Administration has expanded the use of drug courts for non-violent offenders, collaborating with community coalitions, as an effective means of preventing drug use at the local level. Canada, Mexico, Argentina, Jamaica, and the United States, among others, are sharing with other countries their national drug court experiences as model alternatives to criminal incarceration for drug-involved offenders. Both the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission (CICAD) of the Organization of American States (OAS) are supporting such international and regional collaboration for alternatives to incarceration, especially in the Caribbean and Central America.

Effectively confronting drug use is only possible with a strong understanding of each country’s drug use trends. Throughout the world, unilaterally and with international support, countries are carrying out such studies, but they remain insufficient in terms of numbers, frequency and coverage. A methodical and strategic approach is necessary to address this complex issue.

Brazil, for example, has been proactive in identifying emerging drug threats. Anecdotal evidence about the alarming use of crack cocaine – even among very young children – had abounded for years, but was supported by little in the way of hard facts. Through a comprehensive national drug use survey, Brazil determined that crack cocaine use was prevalent throughout the entire country and launched a massive multi-billion dollar campaign to combat its trafficking and use. Now, other countries with crack cocaine use problems are adapting Brazil’s National Plan to Combat Crack to their own national situations. Brazil’s experience demonstrates the overriding importance of each country’s ability to properly assess national drug use trends so that they may be addressed in timely way. To support these efforts, OAS/CICAD is helping to update old drug use studies and fostering the institution of new drug awareness programs in the western hemisphere.

Despite the absence of a definitive national drug survey for Afghanistan, the Afghan government and the international community assess that Afghanistan has one of the world’s highest addiction rates. The problem is complicated by unprecedented addiction among women and children, and by the fact that Afghanistan is still in the early stages of developing a national treatment system where none previously existed.

Even so, the Afghan government is making progress on drug awareness, demand reduction and treatment. The 40 residential and outpatient drug treatment centers that have been established, with Colombo Plan technical assistance, are serving over 10,000 patients. The country has also developed numerous mosque-based outreach and aftercare centers and a pilot methadone clinic. Moreover, in six specialized clinics, Afghanistan has undertaken the world’s first pilot programs to establish appropriate treatment programs for drug addicted youth, from birth to age 12. The Afghan government and the international community expect that continuing expansion of drug awareness initiatives and treatment facilities will help to reduce drug use and addiction problems in the country.

In addition to the traditional illicit drugs – cocaine, opium and heroin, and marijuana, many experts are concerned about a new drug use trend – the increasing use of synthetic drugs, especially methamphetamine and an array of heretofore unknown designer drugs. Many of these substances are manufactured using uncontrolled chemicals, giving them the veneer of legality. In November 2011, for example, the European Union (EU) reported the appearance of 38 new non-controlled psychoactive synthetic drugs and the growing popularity of poly-drug use – the habit of mixing different illegal mind-altering substances. Meanwhile, INCSR country chapters report that amphetamine-type stimulants are increasingly the drug of choice in many Asian countries. Some manufacturing occurs in the region, including in India, Iran, Burma and China, among others. However, India and China are increasingly important as sources of ephedrine and pseudo ephedrine, precursor chemicals used by drug traffickers elsewhere to produce methamphetamine.

The Americas: For decades, a central component of U.S. drug policy and foreign assistance has involved collaboration with international partners to disrupt trafficking organizations as well as the production and movement of drugs. Colombia, which successfully broke up powerful cartels bent on undermining the state itself, is an outstanding example. Colombia’s National Consolidation Plan – the successor to Plan Colombia – is now focused beyond the bounds of traditional drug eradication, interdiction, demand reduction and alternative development to foster robust law enforcement capacity and effective economic development. These efforts are concentrated in regions threatened by drugs, crime and terrorism due to their isolation from established infrastructures. Today, Colombia is sharing its lessons learned and training expertise with many other countries that are facing similar problems.

Mexico, with support from the United States under the Merida Initiative, has demonstrated its resolve to thwart brutal drug criminal enterprises operating within its borders. While the country is suffering from drug-related violence, Mexico in 2011 apprehended 22 high-profile drug traffickers. Mexico’s federal law enforcement has demonstrated a commitment and increasing capacity to strike all levels of sophisticated criminal entities to break down their ability to operate. Mexican bilateral law enforcement cooperation with the United States continues to strengthen – in 2011 some 93 criminals were extradited from Mexico for prosecution in the United States, 31 were for narcotics-related offenses. In the same year, Mexico also arrested more than 11,000 Mexican nationals and 218 foreigners for drug-related charges.

In testimony before the U.S. Congress in 2011, William R. Brownfield, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), explained that “the courageous parallel efforts by President Calderon to reform Mexico’s justice sector are absolutely necessary…the drug trafficking organizations today are battling one another for operational space once relatively uncontested and being squeezed by the Government of Mexico and U.S. assistance.”

Both Colombia and Mexico are playing a pivotal leadership role in the seven- nation Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI). Drug trafficking in these Central American countries resulted in their inclusion on the annual U.S. Determination of Major Drug Trafficking and Producing Countries (“Majors List”). U. S. support for CARSI and the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) is aimed at supporting regional approaches to help these nations further cooperation on a range of transnational challenges.

Elsewhere in the region, the failure of Venezuela and Bolivia to comply fully with their international drug control obligations prompted President Obama to keep these countries on the U.S. drug Majors List with the notation that each failed to meet their international narcotics control obligations. Venezuela’s uneven international drug control record is also plagued by documented official corruption. Meanwhile, Bolivia’s government has withdrawn from the 1961 U.N. Drug Convention. In a precedent setting move, Bolivia in January 2012 informed the United Nations that it wants to re-accede to the 1961 Convention with a reservation on coca leaf. President Morales has stated Bolivia’s goal of removing coca leaf from the Schedule I list of the 1988 UN Convention. State parties have twelve months to respond to the UN regarding Bolivia’s proposal.

Southwest and Central Asia: Although there has been progress in combating the drug problem in Afghanistan, the country remains the number one producer and supplier worldwide of opium poppy for heroin production. UNODC reported a 7 percent increase in opium poppy cultivation in its 2011 report. U.S. Government figures showed a 3 percent decrease in opium poppy cultivation for the same period. Both sources reported a substantial increase in potential opium production. At the same time, a record 20 of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces qualified for payments for alternative livelihoods through the U.S.-supported “Good Performers Initiative Fund” where opium poppy cultivation decreased by at least 10 percent. In 2011, Afghanistan successfully prosecuted hundreds of criminal cases through the UK-supported Criminal Justice Task Force project, including 39 cases that involved official corruption. However, drug-related corruption remains a significant problem.

In neighboring Pakistan, also a grower of opium poppy and a processing site for heroin production, the country’s drug control results have been mixed. Despite generally strained bilateral relations in 2011, both Pakistan and the United States proclaimed steady bilateral drug control cooperation. One of Pakistan’s most difficult challenges is exerting law enforcement authority in the difficult-to-reach tribal areas of the Northwest Frontier Province.

The most important trade routes for illegal drug products coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan are neighboring countries such as Iran, Azerbaijan, Russia and the Central Asian Republics. These drug products are primarily destined for European markets, but have been discovered all over the world by law enforcement.

The Central Asia Counternarcotics Initiative (CACI), fostered by the United States, promotes counternarcotics cooperation and intelligence sharing among countries in the region. Working with UNODC, the Central Asian Regional Information Coordination Center (CARICC), the NATO-Russian Council and the EU and in close partnership with Afghan counternarcotics authorities, CACI aims to target the criminal networks that produce and transport illegal drugs through Central Asia.

Asia: Burma is still the world’s second largest cultivator of opium poppy for heroin and international authorities have documented expanding production of amphetamines in the country. Experts say that drug-related corruption in Burma remains a serious problem. In the 2011 Majors List Determination, Burma was found to have taken insufficient steps to fulfill its international narcotics control obligations. However, Burma made important political progress in late 2011 and its government expressed the desire to increase counternarcotics cooperation with the United States.

Malaysia, Indonesia, The Philippines and Cambodia are important markets for synthetic drugs, which are increasingly being produced in all of these countries. International law enforcement assessments show that India and China are primary sources for diversion of chemicals used to make synthetic drugs. China is also a source for precursor chemicals, such as acetic anhydride, used in the production of heroin. Seizures of acetic anhydride in Mexico in 2011 were traced back to China.

As China becomes more integrated into worldwide economic relationships, the INCSR China country chapter notes that there are signs that it is also becoming a transit point for Southwest Asian heroin. Diverted chemicals produced in China, which are not regulated by the 1988 UN Convention but are on the UN agreed upon surveillance list, have been discovered in countries as far away as Central America. Central American authorities have discovered that these chemicals shipped from China are being used as alternatives to U.N.-controlled chemicals for the production of illegal drugs, mostly synthetic substances. International diplomatic initiatives are underway to establish international control mechanisms to address this practice of using such chemicals for narcotics production.

West Africa: West African countries are increasingly recognizing that their region is vulnerable as a primary transshipment point for cocaine from South America destined for European markets. The transit of Afghan heroin through West Africa to the Americas is also a growing problem.

Recent analyses by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) show that Mexican criminal organizations, such as the Sinaloa Cartel, are using dynamic methods to smuggle drugs to and through West Africa. Their trafficking routes for illegal drugs include multiple points in Central America, through the Caribbean and across the Atlantic before delivery to West Africa countries.

Law enforcement resources in many African countries to counter the threat of illegal drugs and crime are inadequate. Indeed, most of these nations are still working to create basic institutions to provide fundamental services to their citizens, and the increasing criminal threat complicates those efforts.

Nascent drug and crime control programs for West Africa supported by the United States, the European Union, Interpol and UNODC work at the national level and through regional multilateral groups such as the African Union and the Economic Community of West Africa States (ECOWAS). Conferences such as the High Level Policy Committee of the West African Coast Initiative in Senegal and a meeting supported by the U.N. Economic Community in 2011 also aimed to help West African countries develop the means to stem criminal influences. The United States is working to garner donor support for its recently launched West African Citizen Security Initiative (WACSI).

The Future: This year the INCSR notes significant advances to counter illegal drugs and crime. Yet the international community is fully aware that even when plans are sound and resources are available, the challenges against criminal enterprises remain daunting.

In the United States, the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Director Gil Kerlikowske has stressed that the truth about fighting destabilizing criminal influences has never been an “all-or-nothing, either-or- choice and has always involved the combination of tools at our disposal.” President Obama has often reiterated that “equal partnerships” and not just United States foreign assistance hold the key to “bringing the criminal world to its knees.”

In 2011, President Obama used the economic tool of the U.S. International Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) to freeze the financial assets of four major criminal targets (Los Zetas based in Mexico, the Yakuza of Japan, the Camorra of Italy, and the Brothers Circle of Eastern Europe). Striking at the financial heart of these groups is one of the central elements of the Obama Administration’s 2011 Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime.

The importance of effective judicial and law enforcement systems to undermine criminal enterprise has prompted concrete action on the part of many donor countries. The training of effective, community-based civilian police – that also contributes to the establishment of law-abiding civilian societies in emerging democracies – is a centerpiece of U.S. foreign assistance programs. Supported by the U.S. Congress, civilian police training around the world – whether Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia or elsewhere – is a key component of U.S. foreign drug and crime control programs.

The United States works vigorously with the international community via multilateral groups such as the European Union, the G8 and the Financial Action Task Force and its regional off-springs, and other regional bodies, to amplify our efforts to combat transnational criminal activity. Moreover, just as the United States works closely with Mexico, bilateral cooperation with Canada is equally important. The new U.S. National Northern Border Strategy, developed in consultation with Canada, is a major initiative to address a broad range of criminal concerns.

Only through concerted international cooperation will we achieve the essential citizen safety and security we desire – the fundamental objective of international policies and programs aimed at achieving the common cause of like-minded nations. This is the underlying message of the 2012 INCSR.


Demand Reduction

Demand reduction has evolved as a key foreign policy tool for addressing the inter-connected threats of drugs, crime, and terrorism. More recently, it has become a critical component in efforts to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS, particularly in countries with high numbers of intravenous drug users.

Drug use and addiction have a devastating impact on individual lives, families, and communities. Drug abuse is also inextricably linked with the spread of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, other Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD), tuberculosis, hepatitis C, and other bloodborne pathogens. Drug use is also associated with family disintegration, loss of employment or income, school failure, domestic violence, child abuse, and other social problems and criminal acts.

In recognition that drug use is a major public health threat, and that drug addiction is a preventable and treatable disease, many foreign countries request INL-sponsored technical assistance to enhance the development of effective policies and programs to combat drug threats. Therefore, INL continues to provide guidance to international partners on a coordinated approach in areas of drug prevention and treatment. In addition, INL promotes the sharing of critical information and evidence-based studies, in order to promote and preserve the stability of societies that are threatened by narcotics trafficking.

Our demand reduction strategy includes a wide range of initiatives to address the needs and national security threats posed by the illicit drug trade. These efforts cover strategies to prevent the onset of drug use, to intervene with drug abusers, and to improve treatment delivery. In achieving these goals, INL supports the following:

• Training and technical assistance to educate governments and public organizations on science-based best practices in drug prevention and treatment;

• Development and support of regional and international coalitions for drug-free communities, involving private/public social institutions and law enforcement;

• Research and evaluation efforts to measure the effectiveness of intended prevention and treatment programs; and

• Dissemination of science-based information and knowledge transfer through multilateral and regional organizations.

Taking into account the unique needs of women with substance use disorders, INL supports treatment, training and technical assistance that addresses gender-related drug abuse and related violence.

Significant completed and on-going INL-funded demand reduction projects for Fiscal Year 2011 included:

• Women Drug Treatment Initiatives: INL supports research-based prevention and treatment programs in key drug producing/using countries that improve services for addicted women and their children, a chronically under-served and stigmatized population. The program supports a model residential drug treatment program for high-risk female youth in Brazil. INL also supports the development of a training curriculum that addresses the unique needs of female addicts worldwide.

• Child Addiction: INL is supporting the development of the world’s first protocols to treat crack-addicted children. Recent information on crack addiction in Brazil and neighboring Southern Cone countries reports that inexpensive crack is readily available resulting in a significant increase in child addicts and lowering the age range of crack use to 5-8 years of age. This project will bring together treatment professionals from the region and leading international universities in addictions medicine to develop the world’s first protocols to treat crack-addicted children.

• Africa Rapid Assessment: There are disturbing anecdotal reports that smoked cocaine (e.g., crack and coca paste) is now being consumed by children in West Africa (like the Southern Cone countries). Given the grave nature of smoked cocaine addiction and related health problems, INL is supporting the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to conduct a rapid assessment survey to confirm these reports and, if confirmed, plan appropriate interventions to avert a public health crisis in ECOWAS countries.

• UNODC: INL supports the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) global TREATNET project that provides comprehensive treatment provider training and technical assistance to improve treatment delivery systems in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The primary emphasis of the initiative is to share drug treatment best practices with the aim to assist service providers to improve the quality of services and to guide policy makers in programming.

• Mexico/Merida: INL is supporting the OAS/CICAD in the Mexico/Merida initiative to establish a national-level counselor certification system for drug addiction counselors, aimed at improving the delivery of drug treatment services in Mexico. During 2011, the National Commission against Addiction (CONADIC) of Mexico and its program component, the National Center for Prevention and Control for addictions (CENADIC) developed a National Directory of 1543 federal residential drug treatment centers; and a National Assessment of Directors, Counselors, and Users of treatment centers. In addition, CENADIC have selected 600 Counselors from six federal entities: Baja California, Campeche, Chihuahua, Jalisco, Mexico State and the Federal District of Mexico for capacity training.

• Drug-Free Communities: INL is supporting the drug-free communities program which assists community groups in forming and sustaining effective community and anti-drug coalitions that fight illegal drugs. The goal of the coalitions is to bring citizens together to prevent and reduce drug use among youth. Membership includes youth, parents, businesses, the media, schools, youth organizations, law enforcement, religious and fraternal organizations, civic groups and local government. As a result of INL-funded training, active coalitions have been developed in several communities in Peru, Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala and Mexico. For 2012, coalition will be expanded in South Africa, several West African and Central Asian countries and in Southeast Asia (Philippines).

• Colombo Plan: The USG and the Colombo Plan Drug Advisory Program (DAP) established a training arm for treatment experts to prepare the process of professional certification of addiction professionals in Asia and Africa.

• Afghanistan: INL currently supports 30 residential treatment centers in Afghanistan. This initiative includes training female addictions counselors in counseling techniques for women, family therapy, and support for home-based treatment. Of the 30 centers, six programs provide residential treatment for women with adjacent facilities for their children, and three centers provide residential treatment services for adolescents – two for males and one for females.

• Afghanistan: INL supports a comprehensive national urban drug abuse survey to assess the nature and extent of drug abuse in Afghanistan by testing hair, urine, and saliva samples from 2,000 households in 11 provinces. The survey will also include a snap shot of drug abuse in rural areas of Afghanistan. When completed, this survey will provide the first scientifically-controlled assessment of drug addiction in Afghanistan, reaching populations (women and children) that were not adequately captured by previous surveys in Afghanistan. Once completed, this survey will represent the largest substance abuse survey of its kind ever conducted in Afghanistan.


Methodology for USG Estimates of Illegal Drug Production

Introduction

Illegal narcotics are grown, refined, trafficked, and sold on the street by criminal enterprises that attempt to conceal every step of the process. Accurate estimates of such criminal activity are difficult to produce. The estimates on illicit drug production presented in the INCSR represent the United States Government’s best effort to sketch the current dimensions of the international drug problem. They are based on agricultural surveys conducted with satellite imagery and scientific studies of crop yields and the likely efficiency of typical illicit refining labs. As we do every year, we publish these estimates with an important caveat: they are estimates. While we must express our estimates as numbers, these numbers should not be seen as precise figures. Rather, they represent the midpoint of a band of statistical probability that gets wider as additional variables are introduced and as we move from cultivation to harvest to final refined drug. Although these estimates can be useful for determining trends, even the best USG estimates are ultimately only approximations.

As needed, we revise our estimate process-and occasionally the estimates themselves-in the light of field research. The clandestine, violent nature of the illegal drug trade makes such field research difficult. Geography is also an impediment, as the harsh terrain on which many drugs are cultivated is not always easily accessible. This is particularly relevant given the tremendous geographic areas that must be covered, and the difficulty of collecting reliable information over diverse and treacherous terrain. Weather also impacts our ability to gather data, particularly in the Andes, where cloud-cover can be a major problem.

Improved technologies and analysis techniques may also produce revisions to United States Government estimates of potential drug production. This is typical of annualized figures for most other areas of statistical tracking that must be revised year to year, whether the subject of analysis is the size of the U.S. wheat crop, population figures, or the reports of the unemployment rate. When possible, we apply these new techniques to previous years’ data and adjust appropriately, but often, especially in the case of new technologies, we can only apply them prospectively. For the present, these illicit drug statistics represent the state of the art. As new information becomes available and as the art and science improve, so will the accuracy of the estimates.

Cultivation Estimates

With limited personnel and technical resources, we cannot look at an entire country for any hint of illicit cultivation. Analysts must, therefore concentrate their efforts on those areas that are most likely to have cultivation. Each year they review eradication data, seizure data, law enforcement investigations information, the previous year’s imagery, and other information to determine the areas likely to have cultivation, and revise and update the search area if possible. They then estimate cultivation in the new survey area using proven statistical techniques.

The resultant estimates meet the USG need for an annual estimate of cultivation for each country. They also help with eradication, interdiction and other law enforcement operations. As part of the effort to provide a better and more comprehensive assessment, the areas surveyed are often expanded and changed, so direct comparison with previous year estimates may not be possible.

Production Estimates

Illicit crop productivity depends upon a number of factors. Changes in weather, farming techniques, soil fertility, and disease prevalence can produce widely varying results from year to year and place to place. Although most illicit drug crop areas are not easily accessible to the United States Government, making scientific information difficult to obtain, we continually strive to improve our production estimates. The relative productivity of poppy crops can be estimated using imagery, and our confidence in coca leaf yield estimates has improved in the past few years, based upon the results of field studies conducted in Latin America. Such studies led to a reduction in our estimates of average productivity for fields that had been sprayed with herbicide, but not completely destroyed. In such fields, some, but not all of the coca bushes survive. The farmers of the illicit crop either plant new bushes among the surviving plants or let what is left grow until harvest. In either case, the average yield of such plots is considerably less than if it had not been sprayed. Multiple studies in the same growing area over several years have helped us understand the effects of eradication and have helped us to measure the changes in average yield over time.

Coca fields which are less than a year old (“new fields”) produce much less leaf than mature fields. In Colombia, for example, fields might get their first small harvest at six months of age; in Bolivia fields are usually not harvested in their first year. The USG estimates include estimates for the proportion of new fields each year and adjust the estimated leaf production accordingly.

Processing Estimates

The wide variation in processing efficiency achieved by traffickers complicates the task of estimating the quantity of cocaine or heroin that could be refined from a crop. Differences in the origin and quality of the raw material used, the technical processing method employed, the size and sophistication of laboratories, the skill and experience of local workers and chemists, and decisions made in response to enforcement pressures all affect production.

The USG estimates for coca leaf, cocaine, marijuana, opium, and heroin production are potential estimates; that is, it is assumed that all of the coca, marijuana, and poppy grown is harvested and processed into illicit drugs. This is a reasonable assumption for coca leaf in Colombia. In Bolivia and Peru, however, the USG potential cocaine production estimates are overestimated to some unknown extent since significant amounts of coca leaf are locally chewed and used in products such as coca tea. In Southwest and Southeast Asia, it is not unrealistic to assume that virtually all poppy is harvested for opium gum, but substantial amounts of the opium are consumed as opium rather than being processed into heroin. (The proportion of opium ultimately processed into heroin is unknown.)

Other International Estimates

The USG helps fund estimates done by the United Nations in some countries. These estimates use slightly different methodologies, but also use a mix of imagery and ground-based observations. The UN estimates are often used to help determine the response of the international donor community to specific countries or regions.

There have been some efforts, for Colombia in particular, for the USG and the UN to understand each other’s methodologies in the hope of improving both sets of estimates. These efforts are ongoing.

This report also includes data on drug production, trafficking, seizures, and consumption that come from host governments or NGOs. Such data is attributed to the source organization, especially when we cannot independently verify it. 


Worldwide Illicit Drug Cultivation

2005-2010 (all figures in hectares)

 

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Poppy

           

Afghanistan

107400

172600

202000

157000

131000

119000

Burma

40000

21000

21700

22500

17000

in process

Colombia

 

2300

1000

 

1100

in process

Guatemala

100

         

Laos

5600

1700

1100

1900

1000

in process

Mexico

3300

5000

6900

15000

19500

in process

Pakistan

SEE NOTE BELOW

         

Total Poppy

156400

202600

232700

196400

169600

 

Coca

           

Bolivia

26500

25800

29500

32000

35000

in process

Colombia

144000

157000

167000

119000

116000

in process

Peru

34000

42000

36000

41000

40000

in process

Total Coca

204500

224800

232500

192000

191000

 

Cannabis

           

Mexico

5600

8600

8900

12000

17500

in process

Total Cannabis

5600

8600

8900

12000

17500

 

Notes on Colombia poppy cultivation: The 2008 and 2005 surveys could not be conducted due to cloud cover. Partial survey in 2007 due to cloud cover.

Note on Laos poppy cultivation: A partial survey of only the Phongsali growing area was conducted in 2009.

Notes on Pakistan poppy cultivation: There are no USG countrywide numbers for Pakistan. Please see the Pakistan Country Chapter for government of Pakistan estimates.

Notes on Colombia coca cultivation: Survey areas were expanded greatly in 2005 and to a lesser extent in 2006 and 2007.

Notes on Peru cultivation: In the 2006 survey, the Cusco growing area could not be completed; the value for that area is an average of the 2005 and 2007 estimates The 2005 cultivation estimate was revised in 2007. 


Worldwide Potential Illicit Drug Production

Worldwide Illicit Drug Cultivation 2005-2010 (all figures in hectares)

 

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Poppy

           

Afghanistan

107400

172600

202000

157000

131000

119000

Burma

40000

21000

21700

22500

17000

in process

Colombia

 

2300

1000

 

1100

 

Guatemala

100

         

Laos

5600

1700

1100

1900

1000

in process

Mexico

3300

5100

6900

15000

19500

14000

Pakistan

SEE NOTE BELOW

         

Total Poppy

156400

202700

232700

196400

169600

 

Coca

           

Bolivia

26500

25800

29500

32000

35000

34500

Colombia

144000

157000

167000

119000

116000

100000

Peru

34000

42000

36000

41000

40000

53000

Total Coca

204500

224800

232500

192000

191000

187500

Cannabis

           

Mexico

5600

8600

8900

12000

17500

16500

Total Cannabis

5600

8600

8900

12000

17500

16500

Notes on Colombia poppy cultivation: The 2008 and 2005 surveys could not be conducted due to cloud cover. Partial survey in 2007 due to cloud cover.

Note on Laos poppy cultivation: A partial survey of only the Phongsali growing area was conducted in 2009.

Notes on Pakistan poppy cultivation: There are no USG countrywide numbers for Pakistan. Please see the Pakistan Country Chapter for government of Pakistan estimates.

Notes on Colombia coca cultivation: Survey areas were expanded greatly in 2005 and to a lesser extent in 2006 and 2007.

Notes on Peru cultivation: In the 2006 survey, the Cusco growing area could not be completed; the value for that area is an average of the 2005 and 2007 estimates. The 2005 cultivation estimate was revised in 2007. Survey areas were expanded in 2005.


Parties to the 1988 UN Convention

Country

Date Signed

Date Became a Party

1. Afghanistan

20 December 1988

14 February 1992

2. Albania

Accession

27 June 2001

3. Algeria

20 December 1988

9 May 1995

4. Andorra

Accession

23 July 1999

5. Angola

Accession

26 October 2005

6. Antigua and Barbuda

Accession

5 April 1993

7. Argentina

20 December 1988

28 June 1993

8. Armenia

Accession

13 September 1993

9. Australia

14 February 1989

16 November 1992

10. Austria

25 September 1989

11 July 1997

11. Azerbaijan

Accession

22 September 1993

12. Bahamas

20 December 1988

30 January 1989

13. Bahrain

28 September 1989

7 February 1990

14. Bangladesh

14 April 1989

11 October 1990

15. Barbados

Accession

15 October 1992

16. Belarus

27 February 1989

15 October 1990

17. Belgium

22 May 1989

25 October 1995

18. Belize

Accession

24 July 1996

19. Benin

Accession

23 May 1997

20. Bhutan

Accession

27 August 1990

21. Bolivia

20 December 1988

20 August 1990

22. Bosnia and Herzegovina

Succession

1 September 1993

23. Botswana

Accession

13 August 1996

24. Brazil

20 December 1988

17 July 1991

25. Brunei Darussalam

26 October 1989

12 November 1993

26. Bulgaria

19 May 1989

24 September 1992

27. Burkina Faso

Accession

2 June 1992

28. Burundi

Accession

18 February 1993

29. Cambodia

Accession

7 July 2005

30. Cameroon

27 February 1989

28 October 1991

31. Canada

20 December 1988

5 July 1990

32. Cape Verde

Accession

8 May 1995

33. Central African Republic

Accession

15 October 2001

34. Chad

Accession

9 June 1995

35. Chile

20 December 1988

13 March 1990

36. China

20 December 1988

25 October 1989

37. Colombia

20 December 1988

10 June 1994

38. Comoros

Accession

1 March 2000

39. Congo

 

3 March 2004

40. Cook Islands

Accession

22 February 2005

41. Costa Rica

25 April 1989

8 February 1991

42. Cote d'Ivoire

20 December 1988

25 November 1991

43. Croatia

Succession

26 July 1993

44. Cuba

7 April 1989

12 June 1996

45. Cyprus

20 December 1988

25 May 1990

46. Czech Republic

Succession

30 December 1993

47. Democratic People's
Republic of Korea

Accession

19 March 2007

48. Democratic Republic
of the Congo

20 December 1988

28 October 2005

49. Denmark

20 December 1988

19 December 1991

50. Djibouti

Accession

22 February 2001

51. Dominica

Accession

30 June 1993

52. Dominican Republic

Accession

21 September 1993

53. Ecuador

21 June 1989

23 March 1990

54. Egypt

20 December 1988

15 March 1991

55. El Salvador

Accession

21 May 1993

56. Eritrea

Accession

30 January 2002

57. Estonia

Accession

12 July 2000

58. Ethiopia

Accession

11 October 1994

59. European Union

8 June 1989

31 December 1990

60. Fiji

Accession

25 March 1993

61. Finland

8 February 1989

15 February 1994

62. France

13 February 1989

31 December 1990

63. Gabon

20 December 1989

10 July 2006

64. Gambia

Accession

23 April 1996

65. Georgia

Accession

8 January 1998

66. Germany

19 January 1989

30 November 1993

67. Ghana

20 December 1988

10 April 1990

68. Greece

23 February 1989

28 January 1992

69. Grenada

Accession

10 December 1990

70. Guatemala

20 December 1988

28 February 1991

71. Guinea

Accession

27 December 1990

72. Guyana

Accession

19 March 1993

73. Haiti

Accession

18 September 1995

74. Honduras

20 December 1988

11 December 1991

75. Hungary

22 August 1989

15 November 1996

76. Iceland

Accession

2 September 1997

77. India

Accession

27 March 1990

78. Indonesia

27 March 1989

23 February 1999

79. Iran

20 December 1988

7 December 1992

80. Iraq

Accession

22 July 1998

81. Ireland

14 December 1989

3 September 1996

82. Israel

20 December 1988

20 May 2002

83. Italy

20 December 1988

31 December 1990

84. Jamaica

2 October 1989

29 December 1995

85. Japan

19 December 1989

12 June 1992

86. Jordan

20 December 1988

16 April 1990

87. Kazakhstan

Accession

29 April 1997

88. Kenya

Accession

19 October 1992

89. Korea, Republic of

Accession

28 December 1998

90. Kuwait

2 October 1989

3 November 2000

91. Kyrgyz Republic

Accession

7 October 1994

92. Lao Peoples Democratic
Republic

Accession

1 October 2004

93. Latvia

Accession

24 February 1994

94. Lebanon

Accession

11 March 1996

95. Lesotho

Accession

28 March 1995

96. Liberia

Accession

16 September 2005

97. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya

Accession

22 July 1996

98. Liechtenstein

Accession

9 March 2007

99. Lithuania

Accession

8 June 1998

100.Luxembourg

26 September 1989

29 April 1992

101.Macedonia, Former
Yugoslav Rep.

Accession

13 October 1993

102.Madagascar

Accession

12 March 1991

103.Malawi

Accession

12 October 1995

104.Malaysia

20 December 1988

11 May 1993

105.Maldives

5 December 1989

7 September 2000

106.Mali

Accession

31 October 1995

107.Malta

Accession

28 February 1996

108.Marshall Islands

Accession

5 November 2010

109.Mauritania

20 December 1988

1 July 1993

110.Mauritius

20 December 1988

6 March 2001

111. Mexico

16 February 1989

11 April 1990

112.Micronesia, Federal
States of

Accession

6 July 2004

113. Moldova, Republic of

Accession

15 February 1995

114. Monaco

24 February 1989

23 April 1991

115.Mongolia

Accession

25 June 2003

116.Montenegro

 

23 October 2006

117. Morocco

28 December 1988

28 October 1992

118. Mozambique

Accession

8 June 1998

119.Myanmar (Burma)

Accession

11 June 1991

120. Namibia

Accession

6 March 2009

121. Nepal

Accession

24 July 1991

122. Netherlands

18 January 1989

8 September 1993

123. New Zealand

18 December 1989

16 December 1998

124. Nicaragua

20 December 1988

4 May 1990

125. Niger

Accession

10 November 1992

126. Nigeria

1 March 1989

1 November 1989

127. Norway

20 December 1988

14 November 1994

128. Oman

Accession

15 March 1991

129. Pakistan

20 December 1989

25 October 1991

130. Panama

20 December 1988

13 January 1994

131. Paraguay

20 December 1988

23 August 1990

132. Peru

20 December 1988

16 January 1992

133. Philippines

20 December 1988

7 June 1996

134. Poland

6 March 1989

26 May 1994

135. Portugal

13 December 1989

3 December 1991

136. Qatar

Accession

4 May 1990

137. Romania

Accession

21 January 1993

138. Russia

19 January 1989

17 December 1990

139. Rwanda

Accession

13 May 2002

140. St. Kitts and Nevis

Accession

19 April 1995

141. St. Lucia

Accession

21 August 1995

142. St. Vincent and the
Grenadines

Accession

17 May 1994

143.Samoa

Accession

19 August 2005

144. San Marino

Accession

10 October 2000

145. Sao Tome and Principe

Accession

20 June 1996

146. Senegal

20 December 1988

27 November 1989

147. Serbia

 

12 March 2001

148. Seychelles

Accession

27 February 1992

149. Sierra Leone

9 June 1989

6 June 1994

150. Singapore

Accession

23 October 1997

151. Slovakia

Succession

28 May 1993

152. Slovenia

Succession

6 July 1992

153. South Africa

Accession

14 December 1998

154. Spain

20 December 1988

13 August 1990

155. Sri Lanka

Accession

6 June 1991

156. Sudan

30 January 1989

19 November 1993

157. Suriname

20 December 1988

28 October 1992

158. Swaziland

Accession

3 October 1995

159. Sweden

20 December 1988

22 July 1991

160.Switzerland

16 November 1989

14 September 2005

161. Syria

Accession

3 September 1991

162. Tajikistan

Accession

6 May 1996

163. Thailand

Accession

3 May 2002

164. Tanzania

20 December 1988

17 April 1996

165. Togo

3 August 1989

1 August 1990

166. Tonga

Accession

29 April 1996

167. Trinidad and Tobago

7 December 1989

17 February 1995

168. Tunisia

19 December 1989

20 September 1990

169. Turkey

20 December 1988

2 April 1996

170. Turkmenistan

Accession

21 February 1996

171. UAE

Accession

12 April 1990

172. Uganda

Accession

20 August 1990

173. Ukraine

16 March 1989

28 August 1991

174. United Kingdom

20 December 1988

28 June 1991

175. United States

20 December 1988

20 February 1990

176. Uruguay

19 December 1989

10 March 1995

177. Uzbekistan

Accession

24 August 1995

178. Vanuatu

 

26 January 2006

179. Venezuela

20 December 1988

16 July 1991

180. Vietnam

Accession

4 November 1997

181. Yemen

20 December 1988

25 March 1996

182. Zambia

9 February 1989

28 May 1993

183. Zimbabwe

Accession

30 July 1993

Signed but Pending Ratification  

Holy See

20 December 1988

 

Other  

Anguilla

 

Not UN member

Aruba

 

Not UN member

Bermuda

   

BVI

 

Not UN member

Hong Kong

 

Not UN member

Kosovo

   

Papua New Guinea

   

Somalia

   

Taiwan

 

Not UN member

Turks & Caicos

 

Not UN member



Back to Top
Sign-in

Do you already have an account on one of these sites? Click the logo to sign in and create your own customized State Department page. Want to learn more? Check out our FAQ!

OpenID is a service that allows you to sign in to many different websites using a single identity. Find out more about OpenID and how to get an OpenID-enabled account.