Friday, October 28, 2011

 

Getting chewed up over a cultural symbol


From The Hindu

Picture this: from posh city restaurants to tree-shaded charpoys in the villages of India, people are blissfully chewing paan, or betel nut, as they have done for centuries. Suddenly, United Nations narcotics agents arrive, and either arrest the chewers or confiscate all stocks of the culturally-important product.

While this may never ever be a nightmare scenario for India, a similar situation has been giving a headache to one head of State — President Evo Morales of Bolivia.

With his country pushed into a diplomatic corner owing to the obstinacy of the U.N. system, on June 29 Bolivia's first-ever Aymara Indian President was left with no option but to announce it would exit from one of the most important global conventions on narcotic drugs.

The convention

The temporal provenance of his troubles goes back to 1976 when, under the “brutal dictatorship” of Hugo Banzer, Bolivia signed up to the 1961 U.N. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs (UNSCND). The Convention had on its list of banned substances Bolivia's cultural equivalent of paan — the coca leaf.

Mr. Morales described the chewing of coca leaf as “an important symbol of the history and identity of the indigenous cultures of the Andes.” The report that sought its inclusion in the list was criticised for its “poor methodology, racist connotations, and cultural insensitivity.”

A study by the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) cited shoddy work by the U.N. inquiry into the coca leaf's properties, which sought to link coca chewing to “a lack of productivity in the work environment because indigenous coca chewing communities... had a poorer job performance when compared with non-coca chewing regions.” But it did not specify how performance was measured, or whether there was any direct causal connection between coca-chewing and productivity.

Coca leaf composition

Writing about the biochemical composition of the coca leaf in The New York Times, Mr. Morales argued that, similar to many other plants, coca leaf had small quantities of chemical compounds called alkaloids. In other plants these include caffeine and nicotine, which have addictive properties, and quinine, which has medicinal properties. While the coca leaf has alkaloids, “the one that concerns anti-drug officials is the cocaine alkaloid, which amounts to less than one-tenth of a percent of the leaf.” To be made into a narcotic, the alkaloid needs to be extracted, concentrated and subjected to extensive chemical processing.

Mr. Morales wrote: “What is absurd about the 1961 convention is that it considers the coca leaf in its natural, unaltered state to be a narcotic. The paste or the concentrate that is extracted from the coca leaf, commonly known as cocaine, is indeed a narcotic, but the plant itself is not.”

The fact that a plant, leaf or flower contains a fractional amount of alkaloids does not automatically imply it is a narcotic – certainly not in the eyes of the U.N. So why discriminate against the coca leaf? A more insidious factor driving this debate came up when in 2009 Mr. Morales wrote to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon seeking the reform of Article 49 of the UNSCND. He affirmed that “coca leaf chewing is a one-thousand-year-old ancestral practice of the Andean indigenous peoples that cannot and should not be prohibited.” But he was rebuffed. “The U.S. publicly opposed the amendment in an attempt to maintain control and stabilise the prolonged international drug war,” according to the COHA analysis.

The questions

So, is this a fallout of the U.S. offshoring its drug wars and targeting developing countries for supplying cocaine to willing consumers within its own borders? If so, should its primary focus not be on securing its own borders from drug inflows or adopting anti-drug policies to curb domestic consumption? Does it even make sense to go after an iconic cultural symbol of Bolivia especially when over 90 per cent of cocaine coming into the U.S. is anyway from Colombia, according to the U.N.'s own Office on Drugs and Crime?

In any case, under its 2009 Constitution, Bolivia had four years to renegotiate the terms of the UNSCND or adherence to it, or withdraw from the Convention. Facing a wall of opposition by advanced economies, led by the U.S., this condition inexorably led Mr. Morales to announce that Bolivia would exit the Convention.

The U.S. is unlikely, however, to allow Bolivia to exit unpunished. When Bolivia proposed expanding legal-licensed coca farming in 2003, U.S. officials warned that Bolivia might lose most of its $50 million in U.S. aid.

Yet it is the U.S. that may find itself at the wrong end of a relationship with a solid ally in the fight against illegal cocaine production. As the U.S. State Department admitted in a 2008 narcotics report, “During 2007, the Government of Bolivia managed to eradicate more than 6,000 hectares of coca, surpassing its eradication goal of 5,000 hectares. Bolivian counternarcotics units were active in interdiction and lab seizures.”

Labels: ,


 

U.S. recovery: Bernanke cautiously optimistic


From The Hindu

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke knows when to respond to market expectations — and when not to. Although speculations were rife this week that he might announce a further round of quantitative easing in a major speech on Friday, Mr. Bernanke disappointed observers did not outline any new expansionary monetary policy measures that the Fed might adopt.

The sober speech at an annual economic conference in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, reflected his cautious optimism on economic growth in the United States, which, Mr. Bernanke however warned, “has been much less robust than we had hoped.” He also expressed concern on the question of stubbornly high unemployment levels, noting that the “extraordinarily high level of long-term unemployment,” had led to a situation where nearly half of the unemployed had been out of work for more than six months.

‘Unusual circumstances'

While Mr. Bernanake noted that such “unusual circumstances” warranted policies that promoted a stronger recovery in the near-term, he shied away from announcing any unconventional policies such as an additional large-scale bond purchase.

Instead the Chairman focused on an area of economic policy that is beyond the Fed itself — fiscal policy — and spoke with surprising candour about the recent debt ceiling battle in the U.S. Congress and the White House. Implicitly criticising lawmakers for allowing a crisis to foment around the debt limit negotiations, which ultimately led to a downgrade of the U.S.' credit rating by S&P earlier this month Mr. Bernanke said, “There seems little doubt that [these developments] have hurt household and business confidence and that they pose ongoing risks to growth.” Mr. Bernanke also sought to underscore the link between the urgent need for fiscal reform and the imperative to steer the U.S. economy back to a high-growth path. Pointing out that the issue of fiscal sustainability had to be quickly addressed he cautioned that fiscal policymakers “should not, as a consequence, disregard the fragility of the current economic recovery.”

Instead, he said, they ought to promote stronger economic performance through the design of tax policies and spending programs, a hint that the Fed preferred to see balanced approach of tax hikes as well as spending cuts in getting the U.S back to fiscal health.

Labels: , ,


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Subscribe to Posts [Atom]