Despite the fact that many psychoactive substances have been made illegal, the international attention focuses almost exclusively on opium derivatives, coca and cannabis. This depends chiefly on the fact that the few sources of systematic information available on the production and trade - all of U.S. origin - take into account only the three substances mentioned.

In any case, both in Europe and in the United States, there is a rapid growth in the consumption of a synthetic substance, methylene dioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), better know as Ecstasy, which is sold in the form of tablets. In Great Britain, for example, Ecstasy consumers are presumably already double the number of cocaine consumers. The retail price of a dose of this substance - between 30,000 and 80,000 lira, versus 200,000 for a gram of cocaine - seems such as to guarantee a wide margin of profit, even if the exact costs of its production are unknown. The main producers of the Ecstasy sold in Europe are supposedly in The Netherlands (75-80%) and in Poland (12).

Chart N.1 summarizes the estimates of the government of the United States on the major international producers of opium, coca leaf, marijuana and hashish. While not listed here, it is important to notice that the yearly production of marijuana in the United States is estimated to account for 1/3 of the total global production (13). Moreover, a series of facts should be considered when using these data: the persons who developed them declare to be reasonably certain only of the cultivated surface; much less certain as regards the productive potential of the relative crops, the results of the harvests (which may vary according to the atmospheric conditions and the techniques used) and the refinement processes. Summarizing, the data "represent an estimate of the potential production, whose quantity the government of the United States believes to have been produced if, and only if, all the available harvest were converted into finished drugs with an ordinary productive efficiency. Because the losses are not calc

ulated, the actual production cannot be accurately estimated; it could be greater or smaller than these estimates" (14). For example, the Bureau of International Narcotics Matters calculates that if Colombia, Bolivia and Peru had transformed all the coca leaf into cocaine in 1990 (deducing the seizures and the local consumption) between 700 and 890 tons of this drug would have been available for export (15).

Nonetheless, the estimates give a relatively accurate idea at least of the productive trend which, with the exception of hashish, seems to be on the rise. In particular, the availability of opium supposedly increased more than 50% between 1987 and 1990, thanks namely to the rise in production in Burma, which almost trebled over the same period.

As you can see, a total of 16 countries are mentioned. With the exception of Lebanon and Morocco - which nonetheless produce slightly more than 8% of hashish - there are three major productive areas in geographic terms: South-East Asia (Burma, Laos and Thailand), in an area otherwise known as the Golden Triangle; South-Western Asia (Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan), in an area also know as Golden Crescent; Latin America.

From the point of view of the crops, it is rather clear that opium is concentrated in Asia and coca leaf in Latin America. Cannabis is produced and processed in Latin America, in South-West Asia and in the Middle East. Exceptions to this model are Lebanon and Mexico, which together produce almost 3% of the total opium.

Another recent exception is Colombia: according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Colombian organizations that process coca leaf and trade heroin were diversifying their activity in January 1992, by producing opium and refining heroin (16). Five months later, in June, Melvin Levitsky, in charge of drug problems for the U.S. State Department, testified at a Congress hearing that Colombia had become the third global producer of opium, with approximately 20,000 cultivated hectares, versus 29,000 in Laos and 161,000 in Burma (17). The rapid inclusion in the drug economy of the Andine areas of the Southern part of the country where opium is now grown, has triggered the usual vicious circle of violence and corruption, even if it has drastically increased the profits for the farmers involved (18).

More uncertain, but of increasing intensity, are the data concerning the increase of the poppy crops in the former Soviet Asian republics. More generally, it is estimated that the entire ex-communist world has rapidly become a new land of conquest for the drug traffickers, who presumably use it for the transit of drugs and for money-laundering purposes (19).

At any rate, the countries examined in this paper are Afghanistan, Burma, Bolivia, Colombia, Iran, Laos, Lebanon, Pakistan, Peru and Thailand.

As far as the remaining countries are concerned (Belize, Ecuador, Guatemala, Jamaica, Morocco and Mexico), the following applies.

Firstly, it has been decided to privilege the production and trade of heroin and cocaine, because of their higher economic profile. Following this type of logic, priority has been given to the greatest producers. As you can see, Mexico and Guatemala for heroin, Ecuador for cocaine, produce very limited quantities considering the total global production of the relative substances. Also, some of the main producers of hashish and marijuana are at the same time producers of hard drugs. They are Colombia, Pakistan and Afghanistan. For their part, Belize and Jamaica combined produced about 0.5% of the total production of marijuana.

Second point: we have taken into account the position of the various countries in the commercial chain: Thailand, Pakistan and Colombia have a leading role in refining and exporting heroin (the first two) and cocaine (Colombia), despite the fact that they are not chief producers of opium and coca leaf.

Third point: we have taken into account the global size of the various economies where the drug phenomenon is most evident: thus, the production and the marketing of cannabis and opium derivatives have a far greater role in Lebanon (2,7 million inhabitants, $3,3 billion GNP for 1987) than in Mexico (84 million inhabitants, $200 billion GNP for 1989).

As you see, the countries analysed are divided according to the following geographical areas: South-Western Asia (Golden Crescent), South-East Asia (Golden Triangle), Middle East, Latin America. A separate section is devoted to Burma, world leader in the production of opium, and to its scarcely known political and economic affairs.

Before carrying out an in-depth analysis of the politics and economy of these ten countries that produce drugs, it is possible to advance a few general remarks, by referring to charts 2 and 3. First of all, we are confronted with a situation of extreme poverty. Three countries (Afghanistan, Laos and Pakistan) are listed in the last quarter of the UNDP classification in terms of human development (a combination of income, education and life expectancy at birth); four are listed in the third quarter (Burma, Bolivia, Iran and Lebanon).

Apart from the considerable differences in terms of available wealth, all countries for which there are available data have a strong foreign debt: expressed as a percentage of the GNP, this ranges from a minimum of 34 for Thailand, to a maximum of 152 for Laos. Clearly, the reality behind these raw data is extremely different: unlike the others, Colombia and Thailand serve their debt with considerable ease, both have a fast-moving economy and a fairly high per capita income. It is true, nonetheless, that they all have impelling reasons to resort to any source of hard currency which becomes available.

The separation of the paper among countries, on the other hand, closely reflects the aforementioned economic differences. Colombia and Thailand, both with a fast-moving economy, strongly export-oriented, have the necessary resources to market the drugs as a finished product - respectively cocaine and heroin - including the fact that a sizeable amount of the commercial exchanges with foreign countries makes the material and financial cover-up easier. Similar remarks can apply to the role carried out by Pakistan in the marketing of heroin coming from the golden crescent - a role which takes advantage of the closed nature of Iran's economy and society on the one hand, and of the disastrous conditions of the Afghan economy and society on the other.

The leading producers of raw materials instead - opium and coca leaf - have to face social, economic and political situations which it is no exaggeration to label as desperate.

The economy of Peru has in practice been stagnating over the last decade, whereas the Bolivian one has suffered a contraction. Lebanon and Afghanistan have been upset by endless civil wars, the economic and social effects of which can easily be imagined, even in the absence of data. Large areas of the national territory of Burma and Peru, leading producer of opium the former and of coca leaf the latter, are controlled by armed political and/or ethnic revolutionary movements. In such areas, the drugs are produced and refined, activities which represent the chief economic and political support of these insurrectional movements.

Lastly, in all of these ten countries, democracy either does not exist or is strongly threatened. There is no democracy in Afghanistan and in Lebanon, as in the popular republic of Laos and in the Islamic republic of Iran; it has been suspended by the military or with their support in Burma (1990), in Thailand (1991) and in Peru (1992); it appears very fragile in Bolivia, Colombia and Pakistan. Obviously, it is not just a problem of form of government; none of these countries can boast an acceptable degree of respect of human rights, with forms of abuse which range from the lack of trial guaranties to torture.

------------

(12) Cf. Alison Jamieson, "Il Traffico di droga dopo il 1992", report delivered at the meeting on "Drugs, the new Empire of Evil - A global and planetary war", Rome 12 May 1992; Amelia Castilla, "Ir de `éxtasis'", El Pais, 23 February 1992.

(13) Cf. Iban de Rementeria, "Production: panorama mondial des cultures de drogue", in Guy Delbrel (edited by), op. cit. De Rementeira is a former director of UNFDAC. According to Ethan A. Nadelmann, "the United States is currently the leading producer of marijuana in the world"; Cf. "Légalisation: la fin du narco-trafic?", cit. These works do not take into account the rising use of greenhouse crops, mentioned also in INCB 1991 Report, p. 36.

(14) United States Department of State, Bureau of International Narcotics Matters, International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Washington, March 1991, p. 9 (emphasis in the original version).

(15) Ibidem, p. 10, where reference is also made to an improvement in the efficiency of the refinement techniques over the last two years.

(16) Cf. Joseph B. Treaster, "Colombia Drug Lords Branching Out Into Heroin", International Herald Tribune [from now on IHT], 15 January 1992. Opium crops in Colombia are mentioned at least of the mid eighties. Cf. Bruce M. Bagley, "Colombia and the War on Drugs", Foreign Affairs, Autumn 1988.

(17) Cf. Norma Romano-Brenner, "Heroin Growth Concerns Bush Administration", United States Information Agency (USIA) Wireless File, 6 June 1992.

(18) Cf. Jorge Gomez Lizarazo, "Colombia Drug War: Too Many Innocents Are Dying", IHT, 31 January 1992; "A Pact With the Devil", Newsweek, 10 February 1992.

(19) Cf. e.g. Mino Vignolo, "The opium of the people is reigning in the East", Il Corriere della Sera, 6 September 1992.