Combating the Spread of Illicit Drugs

Combating the Spread of Illicit Drugs

Thomas Schweich, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Opening Statement of the Government of the United States of America Before the 50th UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs
Washington, DC
March 12, 2007

Thank you, Mr. Chairperson. As this is the first opportunity for my delegation to take the floor, I would like to congratulate you on behalf of the Government of the United States of America on your election as chairperson of this 50th UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND). We look forward to a valuable and productive meeting, working together under your able leadership. We also continue to look to the UN Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to play a critical role in leveraging international support for counternarcotics issues.

This year marks an important milestone. We celebrate the fiftieth occasion of the international community coming together under the banner of the United Nations, and this Commission, for the purpose of combating the spread of illicit drugs across the globe. During this 50-year period, three groundbreaking drug control conventions guided our efforts. In the words of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), these legally-binding instruments "ensure a delicate balance between making narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances available for medical and scientific purposes, and preventing their abuse or non-medical use." It is our obligation--we, the Member States of the CND--to work together to ensure that we maintain this balance. In particular, we believe that an effort to legalize the massive Afghan opium crop, or expand the already excessive areas of licit coca cultivation in South America, would result in unprecedented levels of diversion, with seriously negative consequences for all of us.

The international community took decisive action in 1998 by coming together at the UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS). As a result, countless positive actions to address directly the drug problem have been undertaken. More people around the world have access to effective drug treatment and prevention programs. In addition, more intravenous drug users today have improved access to prevention, treatment and care. Specifically, the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for HIV/AIDS Relief has contributed $15 billion over five years to global HIV/AIDS efforts. However, the United States remains concerned that too many nations rely on needle distribution for managing intravenous drug use related problems, rather than a comprehensive approach, including drug treatment, HIV/AIDS treatment and care.

We have also made progress in dismantling drug trafficking organizations and eliminating illicit crops. We are on the right path. In this regard, we are pleased to report that drug consumption is considerably down amongst youth in our country--by 23 percent. Of course, much work remains to be done at home, particularly with regard to the growing threat of synthetic drugs.

Controlling synthetic drug chemicals in a cooperative, responsible manner will be a central focus our thematic debate this week. This topic is highly appropriate because consumption of synthetic drugs continues to spread, with an estimated 35 million people using amphetamine-type stimulants globally.

Ephedrine and pseudophedrine are integral chemical components for legitimate pharmaceutical respiratory medicines. As we all know, however, they are also integral chemical components in the production of two of the most prevalent and abused synthetic drugs--amphetamine and methamphetamine. The same can be said about many of the other Table 1 chemicals--they have valuable licit uses producing positive results, but also adverse illicit uses producing destructive results. Our challenge, therefore, is threefold:

* We need to ensure that legitimate pharmaceutical manufacturers obtain the chemicals they need;

* We must stop traffickers from diverting these chemicals through international commerce; and

* We must prevent pharmaceutical preparations produced from these chemicals from being misused to obtain precursors.

This difficult challenge of meeting legitimate needs while eliminating synthetic drug production warrants a strong system of both international cooperation and national regulation for effective precursor chemical control. The United States Government, through the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005, is implementing controls on domestic over- the-counter sales of pharmaceutical preparations, thereby dramatically reducing their availability and subsequent diversion to illicit drug manufacture, while still ensuring their availability for legitimate medical purposes. Many other countries have similar controls in place.

More importantly, in the international context, last year this Commission passed resolution 49/3--"Strengthening systems for the control of precursors used in the manufacture of synthetic drugs." This resolution recognizes an essential fact: it is very difficult to prevent diversion of precursor chemicals for illicit uses if you do not know what your legitimate requirements are. As a result of resolution 49/3, eighty-two countries and territories have voluntarily provided the INCB with estimates of their domestic, legitimate requirements for chemical precursors used in the manufacture of synthetic drugs. This baseline for authorities in importing and exporting countries facilitates quick "reality checks" on the chemicals and the quantities proposed in commercial transactions for key synthetic drug chemicals. Such checks enable authorities to determine whether importation is warranted, and many nations are already taking strong actions. We commend the Government of Mexico, which is using estimates of its legitimate requirements of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine to cut its imports significantly.

In another instance, the INCB reports that some governments cancelled shipments of precursor chemicals because the proposed importation amount was hundreds of times greater than that particular country's declared licit needs. The United States Government applauds these efforts and those of other countries to tighten domestic controls of precursors.

The CND resolution also provided enhanced authority for the sharing of information within law enforcement channels. Under the banner of the INCB's Project Prism task force, national law enforcement authorities, including those from the United States, have participated in operational initiatives that have deepened cooperation and capabilities, especially in regions susceptible to chemical diversion. Over the past year, we have seen the Project Prism task force increase its effectiveness and the INCB become more able to identify and prevent the diversion of controlled chemicals. Last year, the INCB indicated that Project Prism monitored 2,295 individual shipments of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, resulting in the seizure of 113,133 kilograms of these chemicals, which otherwise would have made their way into the market for illicit use and consumption.

As traffickers respond by turning to countries that do not normally trade in precursor chemicals, the international community must be increasingly vigilant in providing legitimate estimates to the INCB to serve as a first warning for suspicious transactions. The United States urges those governments that have not yet done so to provide data on legitimate needs for synthetic drug precursor chemicals, and their pharmaceutical preparations, to the INCB as soon as possible.

Resolution 49/3 also requested Member States to provide--to the extent possible--estimated requirements for imports of preparations containing the chemicals that can be easily used or recovered by readily applicable means. These estimates may be difficult to make and the 1988 Convention excludes pharmaceutical preparations from its chemical control provisions. Nevertheless, we must recognize that traffickers will increasingly turn to these preparations for the chemicals they must have, as we become increasingly successful in preventing diversion of bulk chemicals. Therefore, we urge all Member States to make every effort to provide estimates of these requirements to the INCB, and we thank those that have done so already.

This year the Commission will have before it another issue that will require us to ensure a delicate balance between making narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances available for medical and scientific purposes, and preventing their abuse or non-medical use. The World Health Organization has made recommendations to schedule orapavine in Schedule I of the 1961 Convention on Narcotic drugs, and to move dronabinol from Schedule II to the less restrictive Schedule III of the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

The WHO is to be commended for the scientific and medical assessment accompanying its recommendation regarding orapavine. The 1961 Convention requires that orapavine, a substance that is easily convertible into thebaine and other substances currently controlled in Schedule I of the 1961 convention, be scheduled accordingly. The United States Government fully supports this recommendation.

By contrast, the recommendation on dronabinol is less clear, and fundamentally troubling. It is based on several questionable assumptions. First, it assumes that the current scheduling unduly restricts the availability of dronabinol for medical and scientific purposes. Moreover, it prematurely assumes that the rescheduling will not increase the risk of abuse or non-medical use. Unfortunately, the supporting research and material presented by the WHO on dronabinol do not address these issues even though they are central to any decisions on rescheduling. Moreover, all of the WHO analysis regarding abuse focuses narrowly on the use and potential abuse of one product that contains dronabinol. That product is Marinol.

There is no mention of data on the medical usefulness of dronabinol. The United States is one of the largest users of Marinol, which helps relieve the suffering of those battling cancer and AIDS, and we support the availability of Marinol for this purpose. However, we find that this is easily accomplished within the current scheduling structure. Moreover, our experience in the United States indicates no problems with availability for scientific or medical purposes. We are concerned, however, that rescheduling may in fact lead to an increase in abuse. While the WHO has indicated that abuse of Marinol has been low, this narrowly focuses on only one product and does not address new dronabinol products in the research phases, which may deliver the drug more rapidly to the brain and have greater abuse potential.

There are too many key questions on the proposed rescheduling that need to be addressed before we can make an informed decision about rescheduling. We therefore urge this Commission to proceed prudently and cautiously. Rather than vote on the re-scheduling recommendation, we recommend seeking further information from the World Health Organization, as allowed for under Article II, paragraph 5 of the 1971 Convention. We are requesting that the WHO re-examine the issue, particularly once more scientific and medical research becomes available. The Commission has taken similar action in the past on rescheduling recommendations, when additional information was necessary to make a decision, and should do so now.

Fifty years ago, the international community recognized that international trade in narcotics requires an international response. We need each other to fight organizations that are adaptable, ruthless, and determined. Problems of the future have to be on the table today: will the Internet increasingly become an avenue for trafficking? How can we stay on top of regulating newly-created chemical substances? We have all progressed in our understanding of the problem and our approach to tackling counter-drug issues since the first Commission on Narcotic Drugs. We can all take pride in the accomplishments of the Commission--it has demonstrated throughout its history a commitment to substantive achievements. The United States is committed to doing its part, and we are grateful for the guidance and support of the very capable staff of international civil servants in the UNODC and INCB. We look forward to collaborating with UNODC, the INCB, and our fellow Member States during this 50 th Session to find cooperative solutions. Thank you.

ENDS

© Scoop Media