Abstract The counter narcotics policy debate on Afghanistan continues to be shaped by
numbers. Political commentators, drugs analysts and the media all focus on the
official release of the annual opium poppy survey produced by the United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crime. The number of hectares cultivated and the proportion of
the total crop eradicated, what some refer to as ‘the metrics’, continue to be cited as
the most important benchmarks by which performance can be judged. A reduction in
the amount of land cultivated with opium in a given area or nationally is automatically
seen as a sign of progress. What these various districts and sub districts have in common are well functioning
markets. They produce a range of agricultural crops for sale in the provincial centre or
for regional markets. Some even produce for export to Pakistan. Complex
intercropping patterns are adopted so as to increase productivity and maximise the
returns per unit of land. In these areas vegetable traders are mimicking many of the
practices adopted by opium buyers, including purchasing the crop at the farm gate and
offering advance payments. Consequently the costs of transportation and ‘facilitation
fees’ are being met by traders from Jalalabad and Kabul rather than farmers
themselves. The report highlights that those areas in which access to legal markets is constrained are not necessarily remote but may be only a short distance from the provincial centre, particularly in those provinces where the security situation is acute. Pressure to reduce cultivation in these areas through coercion not to plant and eradication has resulted in opium poppy being replaced by wheat and has not promoted a shift to high value horticulture. Without a viable cash crop and with the loss of local off-farm income opportunities associated with the harvest of opium, households have typically been compelled to send increasing numbers of family members in search of work. They have migrated to find employment in the opium fields of other provinces in which a ban has not been enforced, or in the construction industry in regional centres or across the borders to Pakistan and Iran. Where household dependency ratios are large and employment opportunities limited, or where there are insufficient males within the household to be able leave the women and children unattended, the enforcement of a ban on opium has been found to prompt the sale of long-term productive assets and increasing debts. In the more remote areas where population densities are acute, opium poppy cultivation has been entrenched for some years, and where the support for the government has always been tenuous, resurgence in cultivation can be expected after only one season. In those areas nearer the provincial centre, with better access to assets such as land, water and labour markets, and where tribal structures are less cohesive a prohibition of opium poppy may continue into a second year. The report highlights that where households have not diversified their cropping patterns in response to eradication the destruction of the standing opium crop can exacerbate political tensions. In many of these areas the political support for the government can often be characterised as at best ambivalent given that contact with the state is often fairly limited. However, eradication can provoke a hostile response and the talk of spraying elicits the threat of violence and/or a declaration of intent to actively support Anti Government Elements. The perception that corruption is endemic amongst those conducting eradication (including their involvement in the drugs trade), and reports of bribery and partiality during implementation further weakens the legitimacy of counter narcotics efforts. The report warns that there is a need to tread with caution to ensure that the right balance between security, governance and economic growth are attained and sustainable reductions in opium poppy cultivation are delivered and growing levels of insecurity in rural Afghanistan are not to be further undermined. |