I am sure that the Dutch Embassy will respond to this, probably at the ambassadorial level, given the importance of the CFR. They have had a lot – indeed too much – experience at this sort of thing. This is apt to be embarrassing for the editors.
See
An Official Statement On The Netherlands’ Drug Policy; Published In The Most Improbable Place

The quality of the writing aside, this article is still nothing but a pastiche of prohibitionist cliches, and it has one of the odd characteristics of so much prohibitionist propaganda, its conclusions do not follow from its own data.

I try to confine my remarks to those points concerning marijuana, but often the non sequiturs make this impossible.)

...........

From Foreign Affairs
May/June 1999
Volume: 78 No. 3
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/

By Larry Collins

Note: Larry Collins is the coauthor, with Dominique LaPierre, of numerous books including Is Paris Burning?, O Jerusalem!, and Freedom at Midnight.
(Marijuananews note: I would like to suggest 3 more books for Mr. Collins to write, after he does his homework: Is Washington, DC Burning? O Amsterdam! and Freedom at 4:20.)

HOLLAND’S HALF-BAKED DRUG EXPERIMENT

THE NARCOTICS CAPITAL OF EUROPE

"LOOK AT the Dutch example!" That phrase has become a kind of mantra, chanted whenever the advocates of liberalizing drug laws in Europe or the United States gather. The Dutch, liberalization proponents argue, got it right by legalizing the public sale, under certain restraints, of cannabis products in their now-famous coffee shops and by adopting a much more lenient policy toward all forms of drug use and abuse based on a philosophy of "harm reduction."

But did they? It has been almost a quarter-century since the Dutch Parliament set Holland’s drug policy on a course of its own, one markedly different from that of the rest of Europe. Surely 23 years is enough time to examine the consequences of that policy. How has it affected drug use and addiction in the Netherlands? What impact has it had on Holland’s next-door neighbors, France, Belgium, Germany, and the United Kingdom? Do the results really justify holding the Dutch drug policy up as a model for other nations to follow? Or are they a warning about the risks of following the Dutch example?

The revised Dutch drug policy was based on Parliament’s 1976 acceptance of the recommendation of a commission headed by Pieter A. H. Baan, a psychiatrist and expert in rehabilitating drug addicts who was serving at the time in the Dutch Office of Mental Health. The Baan Commission’s report proposed distinguishing between so-called List One drugs-those that present "an unacceptable risk (heroin, cocaine and LSD)"—and List Two drugs—cannabis products, such as hashish and marijuana—seen as less dangerous and "softer." Essentially, Parliament depenalized the possession of 30 grams of marijuana or hashish—enough, the legislators calculated, to meet an average smoker’s needs for three months. At the same time, the parliamentarians vowed to continue the fight against both domestic and international trafficking in the more dangerous List One drugs.

Shortly after accepting the commission’s primary recommendation, Parliament went a step further by authorizing the commercialization of cannabis products through their open sale in a network of licensed coffee shops. Those shops were subject to a number of legal constraints: they were not allowed to sell more than 30 grams to a customer; no hard drugs were to be sold on their premises; and they were neither to advertise, sell to minors, nor operate within 500 meters of a school. Out of respect for Holland’s international treaty obligations, the import, export, production, or sale of cannabis products outside the coffee shops remained illegal.

At the time the Baan Commission report was adopted, Holland had what was considered a serious heroin addiction problem, albeit one roughly comparable to that of its European neighbors.

(Marijuananews note: This is one of the few points at which he offers any kind of comparison with other countries. This lack of comparative data is very relevant and inexcusable.)

The nation was relatively untroubled by major international drug traffickers, with the exception of a number of Chinese "triads" (gangs) whose trafficking was pretty much confined to the Dutch marketplace.

How has that situation changed today? First and most revealing, Holland (in the words of senior customs and police officers in the United Kingdom, France, and Belgium) has become ‘the drugs capital of western Europe"—and not just of those soft drugs depenalized by the Dutch Parliament but also of hard drugs such as heroin, cocaine, and now ecstasy.

(Marijuananews note: Taking the word of non-Dutch police as gospel is a recurrent feature of the article. They are hardly unbiased. But even if they are correct about Holland being "the drugs capital of western Europe" consider that it is never established that the trafficking in other drugs is a result of the Dutch cannabis policies. That is merely reasserted from time to time.)

Britain’s Customs and Excise Department figures that 80 percent of the heroin seized in the United Kingdom either passed through or was temporarily warehoused in Holland. The Paris police estimate that 80 percent of the heroin consumed in the French capital comes from Holland.

Collins says that "the Paris police estimate that 80 percent of the heroin consumed in the French capital comes from Holland." And yet, in 1994 four times as much heroin was seized in Italy as in Holland. Was that smuggled across the Alps from Holland. That seems unlikely. Was some of it intended for France? That seems more likely.

The forthcoming 1998 figures for France’s Central Office for the Repression of the Illegal Traffic in Drugs will, one of the organizations senior officers says, show "an explosion" of drugs coming into France from the Netherlands.

"Holland has become the place for drug traffickers to work," states a senior officer at Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise. "It’s central. You’ve got guys there who have access to any kind of drug you want, smugglers who can deliver it for you to Liverpool or London. And it’s an environment which is relatively trouble-free from a criminal’s point of view. It’s ideal, and it has become a magnet for our criminal types."
(Marijuananews note: "Relatively trouble-free from a criminal’s point of view"??? And they seized more than a fourth the coke seized in the EU. Whatever.)

As a senior French narcotics officer puts it, "Holland is Europe’s drug supermarket. Drugs of all kinds are freely available there. The price is cheap. Your chances of getting caught with them are minimal, and you can carry them home across our customs-free borders without a care."
(Marijuananews note: The official policy of France is very prohibitionist, and consequently the French police are hardly unbiased. However, they also don’t seem to be very current on their geography or customs policies. France does not have a border with Holland, and at its Belgian border there are still checks. This means that smugglers have to drive around Luxembourg (which has a higher addiction rate than Holland) and enter from Germany, where there are no checks.

The Schengen Treaty implemented in March 1995 is an agreement between all EU member states, with the exception of Denmark, the UK and Ireland, aimed at the opening of their borders. Nonetheless, French President Chirac insisted on keeping the checks at the Belgian border to harass the Belgians into supporting French prohibitionism. It hasn’t worked.)
See
Belgium and Italy Move To Decriminalize Cannabis, Moving Further Toward Dutch Policy

Worse, the greatest drug problem facing European youth today comes from synthetic drugs like ecstasy and amphetamines that have spread across Europe like a virus since they were first introduced in Holland in 1987.
(Marijuananews note: This is just non-sense. First, amphetamines are not widely used in Holland, but they are a world-wide phenomenon.

Second, heroin addiction and overdoses are still the major illicit drug problem in Europe, along with IV drug related AIDS. Ecstasy related deaths are outnumbered almost a hundred to one by heroin deaths. It is just that the victims seem more sympathetic. "People like us," you know.)

British police estimate that a million of these pills are swallowed every weekend in British discos and clubs. Overwhelmingly, these synthetic drugs are coming from and being made in Holland. British customs states that virtually all the pills seized in the United Kingdom last year were manufactured in Holland or Belgium. Ninety-eight percent of the amphetamines seized in France in 1997 came from Holland, as did 73.6 percent of the ecstasy tablets. During an official briefing last summer, a senior Dutch police officer admitted to former General Barry McCaffrey, the U.S. drug-policy czar, that "Holland is to synthetic drugs what Colombia is to cocaine."
(Marijuananews note: The fact that this is the only mention of the Drug Czar’s disgraceful trip to Holland is itself revealing. This was really a worthy topic for Foreign Affairs.)
See
Drug Czar Lies Again About the Dutch, Who Respond With The Facts;
Czar’s Aid Says, "forces at work to legalize drugs are trying to bring
these wonderfully allied governments into conflict."

Holland’s emergence as the drug capital of Europe is not due solely to the decision by the Dutch government to commercialize the sale of cannabis products in the nation’s now-famous coffee shops.

(Marijuananews note: Very clever. He is acknowledging that his argument is a non sequitur, but then he goes on to blame it on an "attitude."

If the Dutch police really need to do more to arrest hard drug traffickers, then criminalizing cannabis would be an enormous drain on their resources and would actually be counterproductive.)

But many Europeans believe it is the consequence of the tolerant attitude toward drugs that grew out of that policy.

(Marijuananews note: Well, at least all of those that Collins saw fit to quote.)
See
German Doctor Says,
"It is not without reason that marihuana can be bought in coffee houses in Holland.
The Dutch people are not really altogether stupid, you know."
and
Austrian And Swiss Papers Look Favorably On Cannabis Reform and Dutch Policies
and
Swiss Proposal To Legalize and Regulate Sale of Cannabis
Driven By Realism, Not Libertarianism
(Marijuananews note: It's a pity that the FA readers are not told about the Swiss policy. They certainly will not have read about it in The Washington Post!)

That attitude, defined by Dutch foes of the policy as the "coffee-shop mentality," now permeates Holland’s criminal justice system.

"If you want to do drugs, Holland is the place to do them," notes one of France’s top drug police officers. "The light sentences they hand out [and] the liberal attitude of their judges has resulted in an explosion in the number of international trafficking groups operating out of Holland."

"As a drug dealer," a senior U.K. customs officer observes, "you are less likely to come to the attention of the police in Holland than you are in any other country in Western Europe. For our Dutch counterparts to get permission to conduct a surveillance operation is unbelievably difficult. It is absolutely impossible to place a bug in a drug dealer’s home or office.

Get arrested with 50 kilos of heroin or cocaine in France or England, and you’ll be sentenced to 20 years to life [and] serve at least 17 of those years in prisons that are less than welcoming. Get arrested with the same amount of either drug in Holland, and the most you’ll get is eight years, of which you’ll serve only four in prisons, where you’ll be in your own cell, with color TV and a stereo, and have the right to a conjugal visit twice a month from a woman who may—or may not—be your wife. Is it any wonder then that the country has become the drug traffickers’ preferred working place?"

(Marijuananews note: The Dutch treat their prisoners humanely! Have they no shame?)

But what about the policy’s consequences for the Dutch themselves?
See
Legalize Marijuana and Improve High-School Academic Performance? Holland Ranks First –
The US Very Low

"Our liberal drug policy has been a failure, but its advocates are so rooted to their convictions they cat t bring themselves to admit it," says Dr. Franz Koopman, director of De Hoop (The Hope) drug rehabilitation center in Dordecht and an open opponent of the Dutch policy.

"First, we banalized cannabis use. We have left our kids with the idea that it’s perfectly all right to smoke it, and from there it was an easy step for them to move to the notion that it’s also okay to use mind-altering substances like ecstasy. It is that mentality that is behind the explosion in the use of these synthetics we’ve seen in the last three years, and [it] is a grave peril to this country just as it is to the rest of Europe."

(Marijuananews note: Quoting Dutch prohibitionists as though they represent the "real" views of the Dutch people is a standard feature of prohibitionist propaganda. But never mind.

If one accepts that the use of other drugs in Holland is the result of having "banalized cannabis use," then how does one explain the even more widespread use of cannabis and other drugs in other countries where the governments spend huge sums on anti-marijuana propaganda? Collins avoids this question, by avoiding comparisons with drug use rates in other countries.)

SEE NO EVIL

DUTCH CRITICS of their nation’s drug policy—and even some of its proponents—admit that it is characterized by at best wishful thinking and at worst hypocrisy. The Dutch even have an expression and a gesture for this: You place the palm of your right hand on the tip of your nose and spread your fingers. You are now "looking through the fingers"—alles door de vingers zien—seeing only what you want to see and blotting out the rest.
(Marijuananews note: This article seems to be an excellent example of that characteristic, which is not exclusively or even particularly, Dutch. This really is anti-Dutch propaganda. Are the Dutch a morally inferior people? Do they not love their children? That is the overall impression of this article.)

A good point to begin evaluating the Dutch policy is with the very drug that, in a sense, inspired it: cannabis. Legalizing the sale of cannabis products through licensed coffee shops at the end of the 1970s confronted the prospective owners of those shops with a problem. Where were they going to get their drugs from? After all, importing them into Holland was still illegal under the nation’s international treaty obligations.
(Marijuananews note: Hashish smuggling has long been the source of cannabis in all of Europe.)

The answer they came up with was simple: grow it. Today, thanks to Dutch agricultural skills and the know-how of a coterie of American hash-lovers, Dutch cannabis growers produce their own homegrown cannabis, Nederwiet. It has a smooth taste, and many aficionados judge it the best marijuana on the market. It is also enormously potent.
(Marijuananews note: Oh, boy! Here we go!)

In 1976, the joints smoked in Holland, like those elsewhere in Europe, were the joints of the 1960s protest generation. They contained three to five percent THC (delta-nine-tetrahydro-cannabinol), the element that gives a joint-smoker a high.

But here Collins becomes completely absurd.)

Consider this from The Trimbos Institute www.trimbos.nl : "The yield and quality of Dutch-grown grass or Nederweed has improved greatly in recent years, due to more sophisticated cultivation techniques, such as climate control, crop improvement, cross-breeding and the cloning of female plants containing the highest percentage of active substance (tetra-hydro-cannabinol or THC). Various studies have shown that the percentages of THC in Nederweed can vary from 1.5% to 13% with peaks of up to 27%. Similar to many kinds of imported cannabis, some variations of Nederweed ('Skunk') may contain high concentrations of THC but this is not standard. In 1997, the Forensic Laboratory found an average THC level of 8.5% in Dutch cannabis and 6% in imported hemp." )

See
The Prohibitionists In Stockholm Reveal The Shocking Truth
About The Potency Of Dutch Marijuana

The consumer who smokes that high-THC Nederwiet joint is going to get a faster, sharper, longer-lasting high then his or her parents would have gotten from their old-fashioned 1970s joints. Scientifically, however, the result is less beguiling.
(Marijuananews note: Except that almost no one in Europe was smoking joints in the 1970s, but never mind.)

"The impact of THC is proportional," notes Heather Ashton, a professor at the University of Newcastle’s School of Neurological Sciences and Britain’s leading expert on the medical effects of cannabis. "High THC-level joints develop a tolerance in the user so that he requires more of the high-level THC cannabis to get the high he’s used to."
(Marijuananews note: The tolerance that one develops for high THC joints and average THC joints should be the same. In fact, most users do not escalate their doses.)

Insoluble in water, THC is absorbed by the fatty tissues of the body and brain and retained for longer than either alcohol or nicotine.

(Marijuananews note: No, the metabolites of THC remain in the system, but not the THC itself. By the way, vitamins A, E, and D are also fat-soluble and stay in the system longer than alcohol. The comparison with alcohol and nicotine implies that marijuana is more dangerous than these drugs. Is that what Collins is saying, or is this just a cheap shot? By the way, vitamins A and D have fatally toxic levels, unlike cannabis.)

Hence its debilitating effects—short-term memory loss, diminished learning capacity, and lessened motor skills—remain with heavy smokers for much longer than they may realize.
See
A Safe High? Claim One: "Critical Skills Related To Attention, Memory And Learning Are Impaired Among Heavy Users Of Marijuana .. ." New Scientist Marijuana Special Report

The consequence, Ashton notes, is that "cannabis, in this new, more potent form, is not the benign product advocates would have us believe. It may not be a hard drug, but ‘soft’ this new stuff most certainly is not. We now see a tendency toward a form of dependency among those who use it regularly."

Bryan Wells, a doctor who is one of London’s leading rehabilitation experts, agrees. "For the first time I am beginning to see something that resembles the withdrawal symptoms produced by hard drugs in heavy cannabis users."
(Marijuananews note: Resembles?)
See
The Relative Addictiveness of Drugs According to NIDA's Own Researcher

Probably 70 percent of the cannabis now puffed in Holland’s 1,500 coffee shops is Nederwiet. The result? "We see more and more people getting into trouble with cannabis," acknowledges Dr. J. A. Wallenberg, the director of the Jellinek Clinic, Holland’s best-known drug abuse rehabilitation center. "We have indulged ourselves in a kind of blind optimism in Holland concerning cannabis. [Use of] this stronger THC cannabis has stabilized at too high a level.
(Marijuananews note: It has "stabilized at too high a level?" How high is too high? There is data on this, but we will not find out from Collins.)

We see young users with psychological problems who use it as a form of self-medication. It can and does produce a chronically passive individual ... someone who is lazy, who doesn’t want to take initiatives, doesn’t want to be active—the kid who’d prefer to lie in bed with a joint in the morning rather than getting up and doing something."
(Marijuananews note: Ah, yes, the old "amotivational syndrome." Okay, but what percentage of users show this?)

Even Dr. Ernest Bunning of the Ministry of Health, the central repository of Holland’s liberal drug philosophy, largely agrees.
(Marijuananews note: Actually, his name is Duning, and the name of the ministry is wrong, too. He has said he was misquoted, and he favors current Dutch policies. It should be quite obvious that no one in Holland has to be afraid to criticize Dutch policies.)

"There are young people who abuse soft drugs," he admits, "Particularly those that have this high THC. The place that cannabis takes in their lives becomes so dominant they don’t have space for the other important things in life. They crawl out of bed in the morning, grab a joint, don’t work, smoke another joint. They don’t know what to do with their lives. I don’t want to call it a drug problem because if I do, then we have to get into a discussion that cannabis is dangerous, that sometimes you can’t use it without doing damage to your health or your psyche. The moment we say, ‘There are people who have problems with soft drugs,’ our critics will jump on us, so it makes it a little bit difficult for us to be objective on this matter."

HENDRIK AND PIETER’S JOINT VENTURE

AS THE coffee shops boomed between 1984 and 1996, marijuana use among Dutch youths aged 18 to 25 leapt by well over 200 percent. In 1997, there was a 25 percent increase in the number of registered cannabis addicts receiving treatment for their habit, as compared to a mere 3 percent rise in cases of alcohol abuse.
(Marijuananews note: This is incredibly dishonest. Statistics 101: It is much easier to get a large percentage increase from a small base than from a large base. There are a lot more alcoholics than people with marijuana dependency.
See
"Tremendous Increase In The Number Of Dutch Cannabis Users Asking For Help"
Swedish Prohibitionists Claim

See
NORML Director Explains To The Dutch
Why Their Drugs Policy Threatens DEAland Prohibitionists – Great Article
or
http://www.frw.uva.nl/cedro/library/craig/califano.html for the full text)

In 1995, public Ministry of Justice studies estimated that 700,000 to 750,000 of Holland’s 15 million people—about 5 percent of the population—were regular cannabis users. A much more recent study just completed by Professor Pieter Cohen of the University of Amsterdam disputes those figures, claiming that only 325,000 to 350,000 Dutch men and women are regular cannabis users. Unfortunately, however, his survey discovered that those smokers are particularly concentrated among the young in densely populated areas of Amsterdam, Utrecht, and Rotterdam.

What he actually said was that "Amsterdam has considerably more ‘singles’ and young adults, i.e., groups with a generally higher prevalence of use. Neither can students be considered representative of the Dutch population."

See
Legalize Marijuana and Reduce Use?
New Survey Puts Estimate of Dutch Marijuana Use Even More Below DEAland
and
New Dutch Drug Use Data Show Success Of Policies of Truth And Tolerance
Full Text of Press Release And Tables With Data On All Drugs

What makes this section especially appalling is that Cohen’s study, which indicates that Dutch marijuana use is even further below DEAland rates decades after it became freely available, is being used to create the impression that marijuana use is a major cause of violent crime, something that even most DEAland police would not claim.)

In the last three to four years, these same areas have witnessed a skyrocketing growth in juvenile crime and the number of youths involved in acts of violence associated by many Dutch law-enforcement officers with the abuse of "soft" drugs.

(Marijuananews note: In the last three to four years? Why would marijuana use suddenly become more associated with violent crime in the last 3 to 4 years?)

With remarkable candor, Amsterdam Police Commissioner Jelle Kuiper declared more than 18 months ago, "As long as our political class tries to pretend that soft drugs do not create dependence, we are going to go on being confronted daily with problems that officially do not exist. We are aware of an enormous number of young people strongly dependent on soft drugs, with all the consequences that has."

(Marijuananews note: Kuiper has denied having said this, and I have not seen any evidence that the Dutch "political class tries to pretend that soft drugs do not create dependence." After all, the Dutch government does have a program for "marijuana addicts." Collins has even – misleadingly—cited the increase in enrollments himself. However, it does not follow that this has anything to do with the supposed crime wave.)

A few months later, his counterpart in The Hague, the de facto Dutch capital, echoed his views:

‘Sixty-five percent of the persistent rise we are seeing in criminality is due to juveniles and above all juvenile drug users."

(Marijuananews note: The problem is that the second statement does not "echo" the first. The first statement describes passivity supposedly related to marijuana use. The second is about criminality. Moreover, dependence does not necessarily lead to criminality. If it did, the local Starbucks would be filled with bodies, as would the local tobacconist.

Moreover, it would be surprising if most of the increase in criminality was not due to juveniles. Most of the crime in all societies is committed by young men. Surely both Collins and the FA editors know this. Or would they expect an increase in crime to come from senior citizens?)

To what extent can that rise be attributed to the impact of Dutch youth’s grass of choice, Nederwiet? The question cannot be easily answered. What is striking, however, is the boom in Nederwiet’s production.

(Marijuananews note: To what extent can unexplained murders in cities visited by Mr. Collins be attributed to him? That is an example of libel by innuendo. There is no evidence that marijuana use is a source of violence; however, he follows with a reference to its increased production, implying that there is a connection, which he has just admitted to be without any evidence. Really sleazy.)

When the coffee shops came into being in 1979, Nederwiet did not, for all practical purposes, exist. Today, according to Holland’s "grass guru," Professor Adrian Jansen of the Economics Faculty of the University of Amsterdam, the annual Nederwiet harvest is a staggering 100 tons a year, almost all grown illegally. And it does not stay in the Netherlands. Perhaps as much as 65 tons of pot is exported—equally illegally—to Holland’s neighbors.
(Marijuananews note: Question: Didn’t this Dutch marijuana just replace hashish from North Africa and the Mid-East?)

Holland now rivals Morocco as the principal source of European marijuana. By the Dutch Ministry of Justice’s own estimates, the Nederwiet industry employs 20,000 people. The overall commercial value of the industry, including not only the growth and sale of the plant itself but the export of high-potency Nederwiet seeds to the rest of Europe and the United States, is 20 billion Dutch guilders, or about $10 billion—virtually all of it illegal and almost none of it subject to any form of Dutch taxation. The illegal export of cannabis today brings in far more money than that other traditional Dutch crop, tulips.

Jansen estimates that this pot crop—a direct outgrowth of Holland’s drug policy—comes from some 25,000 to 30,000 small- to medium-scale producers, most of them growing their grass indoors, in a garage, a basement, or a back room. Under Dutch law, anyone may possess five plants for personal use. Virtually all those growers are raising far more than that because, as an American narcotics officer in The Hague notes, "the profits from growing Nederwiet are tremendous, way out of proportion to any risks the grower runs."

One grower is a smiling man—I’ll call him Hendrik—who lives in the Spangen quarter of Rotterdam. You begin, he explained, with a seedling from a female plant. If you start with seeds, you won’t know until your plants have matured how many of them are going to be male and how many female. Cannabis grows fast; Hendrik gets four crops a year in his garage. The key to his installation is his overhead battery of 1,000-watt Philips high-intensity lamps. He keeps his plants under the lights 18 hours a day and has the bulbs rigged to a pulley so he can raise them as the plants grow.

Hendricks electricity bill? He doesn’t have one. He taps into the Rotterdam power supply illegally, as do most of the hundreds of home cannabis-growers in the city.
(Marijuananews note: Oh, really? How can he know that. Wiring around the meters is both difficult and dangerous for a small grower. Stealing electricity is a more serious crime than growing.)

The only real danger in his operation is the smell, which can alert a passing cop or disturb the neighbors. To deal with that, he’s installed a pair of carbon air-filtering devices.

When his seeds are ready to harvest, Hendrik seals them into plastic sandwich bags and lets them dry in a dark closet. Then he sells them to his dealer, whom I’ll call Pieter, for between 4,000 and 5,000 guilders a kilo. Hendrik reckons that his 40-square-meter "garden" yields 35 kilos of grass a year, earning him about 120,000 guilders (about $6o,ooo) after his expenses-not bad for a part—time activity.

Where does his harvest go? Straight to the United Kingdom. Pieter used to specialize in smuggling Moroccan hash to Holland and Britain, but not anymore. The Dutch do not smoke much Moroccan hash in their coffeehouses these days. The market is swamped with "product," so to get real money, Pieter trades in England. Three years ago, Pieter says, if someone had asked him, "Can you handle 3,000 kilos of Nederwiet?" he would have laughed. Today, it is routine. To ship his "product," he vacuum-packs it and slips it into chemical container trucks. No dog can smell it, and British customs officers, he says, "don’t like to mess with chemicals. You have a 99 percent chance you don’t get caught."

For Pieter and Hendrik, the risks of their operation are minimal. Jaap Deleeuw, Rotterdam’s able assistant police commissioner, says the police bust a home grower like Hendrik every two or three days. Those arrests are almost always made because a neighbor has complained of the smell of cannabis, not because of any aggressive police work. How much time do growers like Hendrik serve? He shrugs. The answer is practically none. As for Pieter the dealer, the absolute maximum he could get for smuggling cannabis out of the country is four years; two years-of which he would serve one-would be much more likely.

The Dutch police do try to go after major growers, but here too, the sentences are feeble deterrents. One recent raid in Hulst, a town near the Dutch-Belgian border, netted 30,000 marijuana plants in three beautifully equipped greenhouses. If they are unlucky, the three Dutchmen and the Belgian arrested there will get the maximum four-year sentence for a cannabis offense and that for an enterprise that was earning them well over a million dollars a year.

One area left untouched by Dutch law enforcement is the booming "home grow" industry—shops whose sole function is to help their customers set themselves up as cannabis growers. That’s because they are legal—provided, of course, they do not sell to foreigners, which, in fact, virtually all of them do. There are approximately 200 such shops, with names like Mellow Yellow, Plant 2000, Greenpoint, and Home Grow. Walk into one, and the helpful staff will give you a full rundown on how to grow pot in your garage or backyard—instruction manuals, fertilizers, insecticides, the right high-density lamp, and so on. Then they will recommend which seeds—K-2, B-52, White Widow, Black Domina—are the best, guaranteed to produce cannabis with a THC content that will knock your ears off. The shops are not cheap, but as a final gesture, the friendly proprietor will probably throw in a marker pen with a hollow butt in which you can slip your seeds past the best customs officer in the world.
(Marijuananews note: This same equipment is legal in DEAland.)

THE AGONY AND THE ECSTASY

IN THE 1970s, advocates of Holland’s coffee-shop policy argued that providing soft-drug users with a shopping outlet in which to buy their drugs would keep them from falling prey to drug-peddling criminals. At the same time, they would be corralled off from hard-drug users into a congenial environment of their own. Petty criminality would fall, and hard-drug consumption would be cut by offering young people an attractive alternative.

That was the theory. Unfortunately, it did not work. A 1997 report on hard-drug use in the Netherlands by the government-financed Trimbos Institute acknowledged that "drug use is considered to be the primary motivation behind crimes against property"--23 years after the Dutch policy was supposed to put the brake on that.

(Marijuananews note: This is a total non sequitur. It is quite possible for the Dutch policy of separating the markets to be successful, and for "drug use is considered to be the primary motivation behind crimes against property." Both could be true. Collins is trying to give the impression that the Dutch thought that by not arresting cannabis users they would solve all their problems. In that way he can then claim that the policy was a failure. It also did not cure cancer, and half the country is still below sea level.)

Furthermore, the Trimbos report put the number of heroin addicts in Holland at 25,000, a figure so low that critics of the government say it "Promotes a policy, not a reality." That statistic is based, the skeptics note, on the number of heroin addicts who actually come into contact one way or another with the nation’s social or justice departments. The real figure, they maintain, is far closer to 35,000.

But even if one accepts the Trimbos figures as correct, they represent almost a tripling of the number of Dutch addicts since the country liberalized its drug policies. They also mean that Holland has twice as many heroin addicts per capita as Britain, which is known for having one of the most serious heroin problems in Europe.

(Marijuananews note: Oh, really? According to the London based Institute for the Study of Drug Dependence, http://www.isdd.co.uk , which calls itself "the UK link with the European Monitoring Centre on Drugs and Drug Addiction" in Lisbon (EMCDDA): "Since the mid 1980s the number of users in the UK has continued to rise and there are now probably between 100,000 and 200,000 dependent users."

Funny, but Collins must not have been told this by his French police sources.)

Furthermore, the number of heroin addicts being treated in the methadone-maintenance programs run by the Ministry of Public Health went from 6,511 in 1988 to 9,838 in 1997, an increase of just over 50 percent—hardly an indication that heroin use has declined since the introduction of the coffee-shop law.

Dutch supporters of their lenient soft-drug policy argue that cannabis does not inevitably thrust the heavy smoker across a threshold into hard drug use. They are right. There is no compelling physiological link between cannabis smoking and heroin use, and by no means do all heavy pot smokers move on to hard drugs.

See
The Wall Street Journal Responds To The IOM Report
By Having Califano Defend The "Gateway Theory"

But in France, for example, 80 percent of heroin addicts also are heavy consumers of marijuana or hashish. Koopman of the Hope rehab center says more than 90 percent of the heroin addicts that his institute has treated developed their habit after first becoming habitual grass smokers.
(Marijuananews note: Only 80% to 90%? I am always amazed that anyone would try heroin without trying cannabis first. I understand that it has begun to happen because in some areas heroin is cheaper and easier to get than cannabis. But not in Holland.)

The sale of hard drugs at the coffee shops was strictly forbidden by the law that created them. That was an edict honored for years more in the breach than in the observance. Michel Bouchet, now an officer of the French Ministry of the Interior but for many years the head of the Paris narcotics squad, regularly sent his officers to Holland undercover to see if hard drugs were being sold in the coffee shops. Almost inevitably, they discovered that they were.

(Marijuananews note: Leaving aside the fact that a French narc is not the most unbiased source, does this mean one or all of the shops. This is not a very good sampling technique.)

Recognizing the problem, a 1995 joint policy document of the Dutch Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Health, Welfare and Sport, Justice, and the Interior instituted a "drastic" reduction in the number of coffee shops and cut the quantity of cannabis products that they could sell to an individual consumer from 30 grams to 5. The move was welcomed by many police officers like Rotterdam’s Deleeuw, who acknowledges that he can now keep a much closer eye on the city’s 65 coffee shops than he could on the 100-plus that existed in the city three years ago. But he and some of his fellow officers do recognize that there are "good" and ‘bad’ coffee shops—the latter now frequently in the hands not of Dutch but of Moroccan or East European owners, who are often less inclined to strictly follow the coffee-shop legislation.

(Marijuananews note: As he acknowledges, the Dutch have closed a large number of coffeeshops. They despise racial discrimination and were reluctant to crack down on the North Africans, but it became necessary.)

Does it really matter? Getting hard drugs in Holland is a cinch.

(Marijuananews note: Getting hard drugs is "a cinch" in most places. In an affluent North Dallas suburb there have been dozens of heroin overdose deaths.)

Walk out of Rotterdam’s modern and refreshingly clean Marconiplein subway station. Cross the Europoint tramlines and walk down the muddy incline, past a set of rusting children’s swings and slides—no children there—toward a line of dilapidated brick buildings, half of them with their windows boarded up. This is Rhijnvis Feithstraat in Spangen. Years ago, it was a struggling but respectable lower-middle-class neighborhood. Today, most of the residents along this street are drug dealers, handling crack, cocaine, heroin, and ecstasy. The dealer peers at you from behind a lace curtain. His scout on the doorstep checks you out before you can get in.

The police estimate that there are 200 such houses operating in Rotterdam at any given time, working out of semi-abandoned buildings like these. The dealers sublet them from a sublessee who has probably gotten his lease from a chain of other sublessees, all of whom screen the identity of the building’s ultimate owner. They rent by the room for about 200 guilders a day, payable in cash. You can buy first-class heroin in such rooms for 8o guilders a gram, a third of what you would pay anywhere else in Europe. Cocaine will run a little more.

The police know those houses are there and have adopted a policy of quasi-tolerance toward them. They will do something about them—if the neighbors complain. The dealers have figured that out, so their golden rule is, "Don’t bother the neighbors, and the police won’t bother you." If the neighbors need help moving a heavy piece of furniture, the dealers lend a hand. Someone’s having a birthday? Send them flowers.

Most of the dealers’ clients are local addicts. On the highways coming into Holland from Belgium, however, there are an estimated 500 "drug runners" whose job it is to lead likely prospects with foreign license plates to the drug houses to make their buys. A finger pressed to a nostril signals, "I have coke." A hand held over the mouth means, "I have ecstasy."

Rotterdam hosts another unique phenomenon: half a dozen abandoned tenements in which 30 to 40 addicts dwell. Each house is assigned a drug dealer who can come into the house daily and sell its inhabitants their fix. The houses were set up by a middle-aged woman named Nora Storm, the president of the city’s junkies’ trade union, the Junkiebund. Her apartment-dwellers don yellow rubber work clothes each morning and clean the city streets for 50 guilders (about $25) a day—just enough money to keep them in their habit. Storm hopes that by settling in a "regular" environment and adhering to a normal working routine, some of those addicts may eventually try to kick the habit. The police know which houses have her Good Housekeeping seal of approval and close their eyes to the drug sales being made on their premises. Have any of her boarders kicked their habit? Well, Storm admits, not many. But some.

In Amsterdam, wander out behind the back of the Central Station, the stairways going down to the subway, or the back alleys behind the red-light district, where girls decorate the windows. You won’t have to look for drug dealers. They’ll find you. Five hundred, say, or a thousand ecstasy tablets? No problem. Can you do ten guilders a pill? Cash? Here? In an hour? Too much? How about eight guilders?

As in Rotterdam, the maximum sentence that those street dealers are going to get—and this only after a couple of prior convictions and evidence that they were selling to half a dozen clients or so—is two years. It is simply not Dutch policing policy to shut down those small street dealers. People like New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani may argue—with some convincing statistics to back themselves up—that to stop drug use, you have to go after the street dealers who fuel addicts’ habits.

But if the police were encouraged to do that, Holland’s liberalizers argue, where would the addicts get their drugs?

Rotterdam’s police have another justification for closing their eyes to the city’s drug houses as long as the neighbors don’t complain. Five years ago, dealers and their clients hung out in the city center, creating a nuisance and giving Rotterdam a bad image in the eyes of the thousands of foreigners who came to do business in the world’s most important container port. Better to push the dealers into the city’s poor outskirts, where the only foreigners likely to run into them have come to buy drugs anyway. Rotterdam’s gambit is a classic example of Dutch "harm reduction"—although, as is often the case, the harm being reduced is not so much the harm done to the addict as it is the harm he is doing to his surroundings.

Some European advocates of liberalizing drug laws, such as Paul Flynn, a Welsh Labour member of the British Parliament, argue that by making cannabis freely available to their youth, the Dutch have turned these kids away from heroin. And it is certainly true that in Holland, as in most other European countries, the heroin-addicted population is growing older. On the other hand, heroin addiction is usually a slow, insidious process; the youth who begins to consume it at 19 will probably take four to five years to reach the level of dependency that will force him or her to seek help.

But Koopman, at Dordecht’s De Hoop rehab center, says that 40 percent of the 250 addicts awaiting treatment at his facility are younger than 25. You get the real answer about what is happening among young people in Holland from talking with young addicts in the Rotterdam headquarters of Storm’s Junkiebund. The picture that emerges is remarkably similar to the youth drug scene elsewhere in Europe today.

"Kids are into everything now," says Dominy, 32, who has been smoking heroin since he was 15. "When I came into the scene, it was just heroin. Now it’s coke, cannabis, ecstasy, speed, a blow of heroin to calm you down when you’re up too far."

"I am very worried about ecstasy," declares Dr. Wallenberg, the director of the Jellinek Clinic. "We must be very wary of a drug that has the potential of causing long-term brain damage, and this one does. With our tolerant attitudes, we just didn’t want to see the danger here until ecstasy had spread everywhere like a virus."

Someone else worried about ecstasy is Dutch Prime Minister Willem Kok, who pounded on a table in 1996 and told his Ministry of Justice to "show our European neighbors we take this ecstasy problem seriously and that we’re going to do something about it." The result was the creation in 1997 of an interregional police task force, the Unit Against Synthetic Drugs (USD), which employs 60 police officers in three divisions—one to collect a database and work with other police forces, one to investigate pill labs, and one to work on the precursor chemicals and stamping machines needed to make the pills.

Theirs is a tough job. An ecstasy "lab" can easily be set up in a farmhouse kitchen equipped with an industrial food mixer, a few tanks of butane gas, and a couple of vats of chemicals. Some of those labs represent an investment of $5,000. Other ecstasy makers have been busted with equipment worth $500,000. The USD’s director, Pieter Reijnders, estimates that the average lab puts out 50,000 tablets a week, at a cost of less than a guilder a pill, or about 50 U.S. cents. Since those tablets—the size of an Advil, stamped with logos like Playboy bunnies, a lightning bolt, or the signs of the zodiac—can sell for as much as $40 in a Manhattan disco, the profit potential in the traffic is enormous. Three years ago there were virtually no seizures of Dutch-made or -purchased ecstasy pills in the United States, but scores of those seizures were made in 1998, from Tampa, Florida, to Austin, Texas, to New York. Most had been bought by youthful American tourists out to finance their summer vacations by smuggling a few hundred tablets back home in their luggage.

During its brief existence, the USD has already taken down close to 20 labs. In what Reijnders laughingly calls "a typical Dutch move," the Ministry of Health, the center of the nation’s pro-drug lobby, has complained to the Ministry of Justice about his unit’s successes.

(Marijuananews note: Now, that is really sleazy. The Dutch Ministry of Health is not "pro-drug." How could the editors of FA let something like that be printed in their magazine?)

The criminals were being pressured to put substandard, low-quality material into the tablets they were making, the Health Ministry said.

Their answer was a highly controversial program to "test" users’ ecstasy and amphetamine pills for impure substances, and then, if they prove clean, pass them back to their owners with a quasi-official endorsement of their use—even though using them is technically illegal and no one yet knows whether they may cause long-term brain damage to their consumers. "Looking through the fingers again," sighs Dr. Karel Gunning of the Dutch Committee to Prevent Drug Abuse. But young Dutch rave party goers are not paying much attention. A survey by the University of Leiden showed that 77 percent of party-goers never or rarely had their pills tested.

In any event, a new Dutch drug phenomenon, the Smart Shop, stands ready to help any young American tourist anxious to smuggle a supply of those ecstasy pills safely back home. More than 150 Smart Shops have popped up in the last two or three years, selling drug paraphernalia and hallucinogenic and psychedelic drugs like peyote and paddestoelen (Dutch mushrooms), which tiptoe up to the edge of legality.
See
Dutch Drugs Policies Illustrated By Two Stories About Coffee Shops
And The New "Smart Shops" Phenomenon
In most of them, like the one at 19 Oudehoogstraat, adjoining Amsterdam’s red-light district, there is a cabinet selling what appear to be cans of Faberge’ shaving gel or deodorant sprays, Campbell’s soup, or Heineken beer. "Want to take 500 ecstasy tabs home, man?" smilingly asks the proprietor, picking up a can of Faberge’ Brut spray deodorant. He unscrews the base: no deodorant in there. It’s hollow. "Easy," he says. "Put ‘em in here. No one will ever find them."
(Marijuananews note: These same gimmicks are for sale all over DEAland.)

"I would not be proud if we were to be seen by our neighbors as a narco-state," says the Public Health Ministry’s Dr. Bunning. (Marijuananews note: That’s Duning.) "We don’t want people to come here just to gawk at the girls in the windows and get stoned. We have a culture and a history of which we are proud."

(Marijuananews note: No, people should come to Washington, D.C., and gawk at hookers standing on the street and then get drunk in a bar. That would be okay.)

He sighs. "With drugs we are in the realm of theory. There is no simple solution to the drug problem. No one nation, not the U.S., not England, has the answer. But our solution in Holland is not ideal either."

Copyright: 1999 Council on Foreign Relations, Inc.

(Marijuananews note: As I said in the beginning, the odd thing about this article is that the conclusions don’t follow even from the specious data. The worst that can be said about the "drug problem" in Holland is that it is no worse than in most other countries, and much better than in many. The real data demonstrates that the Dutch have been relatively successful, by comparison with other Western countries. Of course, one would never know this from reading FA.

Collins seldom offers comparative data, and when he does it is demonstrably wrong.

While the French -- and to a lesser degree the British -- try to blame their "drug problems" on the Dutch, that seems very implausible when one considers that DEAland and Australia have even worse problems than the UK.

And then there is the number that Collins avoids entirely, the arrest statistics. Since the Dutch changed their cannabis policies, DEAland has arrested over 11 million people on marijuana charges alone. Had the Dutch followed the course advocated by Collins they would have arrested around 600,000 people, roughly the population of Rotterdam. What would they have accomplished by this?

So Collins and the editors of Foreign Affairs really should go back to the beginning of the article and "Look at the Dutch example!" Only this time, take an honest look.

From the Dutch Embassy web site August 6, 1998 http://www.netherlands-embassy.org/drug-inf.htm

Press, Public and Cultural Affairs

Per capita spending on drug-related law enforcement:
$27 per capita in the Netherlands;
$81 per capita in the U.S.
(Sources: Netherlands Ministry of Justice; White House Office of National Drug Control Strategy)

About the Council on Foreign Relations:
From www.cfr.org  

The Council on Foreign Relations is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research and national membership organization dedicated to promoting improved understanding of international affairs and to contributing ideas to U.S. foreign policy.

Mission Statement:

The Council on Foreign Relations was founded in 1921 by businessmen, bankers, and lawyers determined to keep the United States engaged in the world. Today, the Council is composed of men and women from all walks of international life and from all parts of America dedicated to the belief that the nation's peace and prosperity are firmly linked to that of the rest of the world. From this flows the Council's mission: to foster America's understanding of other nations, near and far, their peoples, cultures, histories, hopes, quarrels, and ambitions, and thus to serve America's global interests through study and debate, private and public.

The Council is a national membership organization and think tank with headquarters in New York, offices in Washington, D.C., and programs that extend across the country. Its widely respected and recognized research staff--with backgrounds in government and scholarship in almost every international subject--regularly meets with Council members and other leaders and thinkers. These exclusive sessions, known as study groups or roundtables, form the intellectual core of the Council. Their aim is to develop new insights into international affairs and new ideas for U.S. foreign policy, particularly national security and foreign economic policy. Council Fellows produce books, articles, manuscripts, and op-ed pieces, and regularly appear on television for expert commentary.

The Council also publishes Foreign Affairs. This magazine has been host to the most important articles about world affairs in this century.

The Council is host to the widest possible range of views and advocate of none. It cultivates an atmosphere of nonpartisanship and nonideological engagement among members and staff. The views expressed in task force reports, by members of study groups, or in articles in Foreign Affairs are solely the responsibility of the respective authors or groups. This tradition of impartiality enables the Council to gather contending voices for serious and civil debates and discussions. That special convening power is almost unique in American society.

In keeping with its mission, membership, and heritage, the Council now pursues three goals:

1. To add value to the public debate on international affairs, especially in the Council's three major areas of research focus--Asia, international economics, and rethinking national security. The Council does this in many ways. Council Policy Initiatives (CPIs) identify major foreign policy issues and present policy choices for addressing these issues in language Americans can readily understand. Council-sponsored independent task forces are convened to address urgent foreign policy issues with the aim of producing meaningful consensus. Great Debates and Policy Impact Panels (PIPs) bring together experts to debate, discuss, and clarify timely foreign policy issues. And Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international relations, often anticipates future foreign policy problems and educates its international readership.
2. To transform the Council into a truly national organization. More and more Council members now live outside the New York and Washington, D.C., areas. As Council membership continues to grow and diversify, the Council creates new ways to involve these members in its intellectual dialogue. The four principal means of involvement are through a special members' area of the Council's web site; at an annual National Conference; at studies seminars in key cities around the country; and, soon, via a videoconferencing system.
3. To find and nurture the next generation of foreign policy leaders and thinkers. The Council does this primarily through a special term membership program for younger Americans and a "Next Generation Fellows" program that brings outstanding younger scholars onto the Council staff, as well as the International Affairs Fellowships and several other fellowships. The aim is to spark interest and involvement in world affairs and U.S. foreign policy.

….

As much as at any time during its nearly eight decades, the Council on Foreign Relations today serves its members and the nation with ideas for a better and safer world.

Officers

Peter G. Peterson

Chairman of the Board

Maurice R. Greenberg

Vice Chairman of the Board

Leslie H. Gelb

President

Michael P. Peters

Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer, and National Director

Paula J. Dobriansky

Vice President, Washington Program

David Kellogg

Vice President, Corporate Affairs, and Publisher

Lawrence J. Korb

Vice President/Maurice R. Greenberg Chair, Director of Studies

Abraham F. Lowenthal

Vice President

and Deputy National Director

Anne R. Luzzatto

Vice President, Meetings

Janice L. Murray

Vice President and Treasurer

Judith Gustafson

Secretary

Directors
Term Expiring 1999
Carla A. Hills
Robert D. Hormats
William J. McDonough
Theodore C. Sorensen
George Soros
Paul A. Volcker

Term Expiring 2000
Jessica P. Einhorn
Louis V. Gerstner Jr.
Maurice R. Greenberg
George J. Mitchell
Warren B. Rudman

Term Expiring 2001
Lee Cullum
Mario L. Baeza
Thomas R. Donahue
Richard C. Holbrooke
Peter G. Peterson**
Robert B. Zoellick

Term Expiring 2002
Paul A. Allaire
Roone Arledge*
John E. Bryson
Kenneth W. Dam
Frank Savage
Laura D'Andrea Tyson

Term Expiring 2003
Peggy Dulany*
Martin S. Feldstein
Bette Bao Lord
Vincent A. Mai*
Michael H. Moskow*
Garrick Utley

Leslie H. Gelb

ex officio

Honorary Officers
and Directors Emeriti
Douglas Dillon
Caryl P. Haskins
Charles McC. Mathias Jr.

David Rockefeller

Honorary Chairman
Robert A. Scalapino
Cyrus R. Vance
Glenn E. Watts

Our postal address is
58 East 68th Street
New York, NY 10021

We can be reached via e-mail at foraff@cfr.org
Or you can reach us by telephone at (212)434-9400.

James F. Hoge, Jr. -- Editor

Fareed Zakaria -- Managing Editor

David Kellogg -- Publisher
Contact: dkellogg@email.cfr.org

The articles in Foreign Affairs do not represent any consensus of beliefs. We do not expect that readers will sympathize with all the sentiments they read here, for some of our writers will flatly disagree with others; but we hold that while keeping clear of mere vagaries Foreign Affair can do more to inform American public opinion by a broad hospitality to divergent ideas than it can by identifying itself with one school. We do not accept responsibility for the views expressed in any article, signed or unsigned, that appears in these pages. What we do accept is the responsibility for giving them a chance to appear. THE EDITORS

Manuscripts should be sent to: 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021. The Editors will consider all manuscripts received, but assume no responsibility regarding them, and will only return materials accompanied by appropriate postage. Facsimiles will not be accepted as final submissions.