U.S. experts urge alternative in drug war

By Deborah Zabarenko
WASHINGTON (Reuter) Neither the American war on drugs nor
the push for legalization have worked, according to scientists
who Tuesday called for a ``third way'' to deal with the problem
of drug and alcohol abuse.
``The current drug policy debate is marked by polarization
into two positions stereotyped as 'drug warrior' and
'legalizer','' a panel of experts gathered by the Federation of
American Scientists said in a statement on drug policy.
In this climate, the experts said, ``propositions of dubious
value achieve the status of loyalty oaths'' and the problem of
drug abuse remains unsolved.
Shunning specific positions on such controversial topics as
the medical uses of marijuana and the expansion of methadone
programs to ease addiction to heroin, at least one signer of
the FAS statement questioned the usefulness of the U.S. policy
of certifying foreign countries as allies in the global drug
war.
``Even if you're a drug warrior, the drug certification
process has little to offer,'' said Peter Reuter, a professor of
public affairs and criminology at the University of Maryland, at
a news conference announcing the federation guidelines.
A sciencebased approach designed to minimize overall
damage, including damage caused by drug control measures such as
lengthy prison terms, might work better than the current
polarized methods, the experts said in explaining the ``third
way.''
``Drug policies should be based on the best available
knowledge and analysis and should be judged by the results they
produce rather than by the intentions they embody,'' the experts
said. ``Too often, policies designed for their symbolic value
have unanticipated and unwanted consequences.''
``We're not trying to reach some technocratic solution,''
said Robert MacCoun, a public policy professor who signed the
federation's statement along with 33 other pharmacologists, law
officers, social scientists and other experts.
MacCoun admitted the limits of policy: ``The reality is that
trends in drug use are driven by many factors that policy makers
can't control.''
The experts included legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco in
their guidelines, saying alcohol had some of the same
intoxicating and addictive risks as illicit drugs, while tobacco
carried severe health risks.
Rather than making specific recommendations, the experts
stressed the need to focus on pragmatic approaches to the
problem.
For example, they acknowledged that laws and regulations
were an important element in fighting drug abuse, but noted that
penalties should be tailored to keep harm to a minimum and to
use prison space efficiently, rather than to ``express social
norms.''
They favored prevention over treatment, incremental steps
over sweeping changes and civil discourse on the drug question
instead of heated rhetoric.
The Federation of American Scientists is a civic
organization founded by atomic scientists in 1945 to address
issues of science and society.

^REUTER@