Passing Grades: Branding Nations Won't Resolve the U.S. Drug Problem
The U.S. policy of "certifying" whether drug-trade nations are aiding interdiction efforts does little. Reducing domestic demand is better than attacking foreign supply.
Mathea Falco, President of Drug Strategies, a nonprofit policy group in Washington, D.C., was Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics Matters from 1977 to 1981.
In the evolving foreign policy of the post-Cold War world, Americans increasingly demand that U.S. diplomacy advance domestic interests. Nowhere is this more striking than in the most recent development in the U.S. drug war: the assigning of annual pass-fail grades, known as "certifications" or "decertifications," to other countries for their anti-narcotics efforts. The consequences of failure appear severe: the cutoff of U.S. aid, U.S. opposition to World Bank and other multilateral development loans, and the stigma of being branded a drug-trafficking nation.
A CHANCE TO FLEX
Although the annual certification process has attracted little attention in the United States, it is big news overseas, particularly in Latin American and South Asian countries where drug production proliferates. For U.S. officials, certification provides an opportunity for unilateral action and a display of power at a time when many foreign observers are questioning the leadership role of the United States.
Certification was imposed on the executive branch by Congress in 1986, the height of the crack-cocaine epidemic that swept American cities and made drug abuse the public's top concern. The intent was to put teeth into U.S. international drug control efforts by, among other things, requiring the president to determine each year whether the governments of major drug-producing countries have fully cooperated with the United States in curtailing illicit production and trafficking. Countries deemed cooperative are certified, and those that are not are decertified.
However, in cases where a cutoff of U.S. and multilateral aid would jeopardize vital U.S. interests, a "national interest" exception is allowed for countries that would otherwise be decertified. The State Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, which makes the initial certification recommendations to the secretary of state and the president, explains these decisions at length in the International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, published in March of each year.
SUPPRESSING THE SURGE
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Moscow with a Soviet hangover tests the patience even of those who most wish to engage it. As Chechnya festers, privatization lags, and the world contemplates the possibility of a communist president in the Kremlin dreaming of empire, some ridicule the notion of partnership. Russian chauvinists paint America as the enemy, but the interests of the two countries after the Cold War are compatible. The West should focus its attention--and Russia's--on common interests like nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, regional peace, and full participati0n in the world economy. America should deal rationally with irrationalities in a nation finding its way.
Bill Clinton is the first U.S. president since Andrew Johnson to support the Irish strongly against Great Britain--in this case, over Northern Ireland. Born of competition for Irish-American votes, the policy has some declaring the end of the Anglo-American "special relationship."
Wayne Smith got it partly right. Fidel Castro may lead Cuba to democracy and capitalism, but the key to further opening is a strong U.S. embargo.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.