Dictators and corruption in drug war politics

Approximately $1 billion in annual U.S. foreign aid is provided for domestic drug enforcement operations in foreign countries. The money is allocated through multiple U.S. federal agencies. An exact number for the total funding is obtained only by adding up each agency’s share of the amount.

Every year the Caribbean region receives $50-100 million to aid in drug enforcement. Mexico, Central America, and the Andean region each get $100-150 million; Colombia gets $150-200 million; and global-multi-regional programs are awarded $200-300 million.

Foreign governments are free to use the drug enforcement money as they choose. There is no escrow account or anything similar itemizing how the money is spent. Systemic corruption is inevitable. Many dictators apply foreign aid to lining their own pockets and that of their political coalition members instead of wasting it on unwinnable drug wars.

It’s not as if the U.S. government is unaware of the diverted funds. Bribing puppet dictators is a standard operating procedure. The details of the process and its popularity is described in The Dictator’s Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics, written by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alistair Smith. The book’s theme is that a dictator’s primary concern will always be to do whatever is possible to retain power. Nothing else matters to them.

Retaining power requires a lot of money, especially in Central and South America. From the perspective of the dictator, if the foreign aid were enough to eliminate drug cartels then funding for future drug enforcement might be curtailed or eliminated. Dictators are encouraged by these circumstances to prefer a thriving and robust illegal drug economy as it ensures more foreign aid will be forthcoming in the future.

In addition to propping up dictators, drug wars provide politicians and American citizens with a false sense of assurance that progress is being made in controlling drug trafficking. Most North American taxpayers would be surprised if they knew their money was being gifted to dictators using the drug war as a cover. It’s worse for people living in Central and South America who are forced to suffer the repression and impoverishment of their homelands brought on by dictatorial leaders.

A full disclosure of drug war corruption is overdue. A successful disclosure would require at least two steps. In the first step Congress would need to remove or repeal the section from the Title VII Office National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 1998: H11225 which states:

Responsibilities. –The Director – […]

(12) shall ensure that no Federal funds appropriated to the Office of National Drug Control Policy shall be expended for any study or contract relating to the legalization (for a medical use or any other use) of a substance listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812) and take such actions as necessary to oppose any attempt to legalize the use of a substance (in any form) that – (1) is listed in schedule I of section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812); and (2) has not been approved for use for medical purposes by the Food and Drug Administration;…

Opposing attempts to fund Schedule I drugs to investigate potential medical use encourages the ONDCP and DEA to ignore the accuracy or legitimacy of any statements they make opposing illicit drugs and their legalization. False pronouncements about certain Schedule I drugs and a refusal to recognize their possible benefits adds to the toxic disinformation already in place. It aids and abets those who distort information to simulate democratic procedures in ways that undermine democracy and engineer support for tyrants.

Step two would require the government to clarify the intent of drug enforcement foreign aid by recognizing its true purpose. This can be achieved by giving it a more descriptive name, such as the False Flag Funding Subsidy (FFFS), the Drug War Deception Grant (DWDG), or the Petty Dictator Slush Fund (PDSF). Taxpayers will appreciate knowing how their money is spent.

Any country that relies heavily on false propaganda about drugs, the drug war, or anything else, risks endangering itself. Misinformation and disinformation corrode the information environment that governments and citizens depend upon to make rational decisions. Once that environment collapses everything it rests upon begins to decay. In its self-inflicted strategic blindness the propaganda driven state eventually deceives itself, not just its population. The results include bad decisions, weakened institutions, and long-term instability.

The United Nations notes that disinformation can undermine public policy, amplify tensions, and harm human rights. It can accelerate political polarization and social fragmentation. Responses to crises like those encountered with the COVID-19 pandemic are hindered by public health messages that misinform. Short-term gains are outweighed by long-term costs. Long term economic and scientific stagnation occurs. Regimes become brittle and oppressive.

Stopping the drug war’s assault on humanity is complicated. Drug war corruption strengthens many other types of corruption. When someone gets arrested for drugs, killed in an inner-city battle over drug territories, or blown to bits in a fishing boat off Venezuela’s coast, it severely affects the lives of that person’s siblings, parents, and other family members. Survivors’ lives need to be considered. Opposition to drug wars emerges as a battle aimed at combating disinformation, dictators, and professional prohibitionists whose lives hinge on nothing more than remaining in power.

This entry was posted in Servetus. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Dictators and corruption in drug war politics

  1. Servetus says:

    Defunding syringe service programs could lead to an additional 39,600 deaths worldwide:

    18-Jun-2026 — A new study … projects that reductions in federal funding for syringe service programs (SSPs) could lead to substantial increases in mortality among people who inject drugs in the United States.

    Researchers from the University of Colorado Anschutz examined the potential long-term effects of federal funding cuts to SSPs using a microsimulation model representing people who inject drugs nationwide in a variety of funding reduction scenarios over a five-year period. SSPs provide evidence-based harm reduction services, including sterile syringe access, naloxone distribution and wound care as well as provide access to medications for opioid use disorder and connections to health and social services.

    “Our findings suggest that disruptions to SSP funding like the ones currently proposed are likely to have serious and measurable consequences for public health,” says Kirk Fetters, MD. […]

    Researchers modeled scenarios in which total SSP funding was cut by 11% and 80%, lower and upper estimates of how much funding comes to SSPs from federal sources across the US. Across all scenarios, all-cause mortality increased 0.1-5%, and overdose mortality increased 0.2-6.9% over five years. In the worst-case scenario, at 80% sustained reduction in federal funding, the model projected 39,600 additional deaths overall among people who inject drugs nationwide, 15,600 of which would be due to overdose.

    “These estimates underscore the critical role that SSPs play in preventing overdose deaths and supporting the health of vulnerable populations,” says Josh Barocas, MD, associate professor at CU Anschutz and study senior author. “Policies that reduce access to these services will have far-reaching consequences that extend well beyond the immediate funding cuts themselves and impede our ability to end the overdose crisis. This is a time we should be doubling down on evidence-based strategies to curtail overdoses, not cutting funding.” […]

    AAAS Public Science News Release: New study projects thousands of preventable deaths if federal support for syringe service programs is reduced–modeling study estimates up to 39,600 additional deaths over five years among people who inject drugs

    JAMA: Projected Outcomes of Reducing Federal Funding for Syringe Service Programs via Executive Order

    Authors: Kirk B. Fetters, MD; Pranav Padmanabhan, MPH; Kristina Yamkovoy, MA; Xiaoyu Guan, MPH; Sarah E. Scott, MD, MSc; Lauren Kerr, MPH; Kathleen Joseph, MD, MPH; Gwenyth L. Day, MD; Marina Plesons, MPH; Tyler S. Bartholomew, PhD; Hansel E. Tookes, MD, MPH; Alia Al-Tayyib, PhD, MSPH; Joshua A. Barocas, MD.

  2. Servetus says:

    Suggestions are offered by researchers on how to make opioid dependence therapy more successful:

    18-Jun-2026 — Amy Bagshaw at Imperial College London, the first author of the paper, said: “In our experience as an addiction research team, many people with opioid dependence do want to come off opioids and their substitutes completely, at some stage. But few people are managing to do this successfully every year. Having reviewed the evidence and the factors involved in successful withdrawal, we believe these steps could really help to improve the present situation.”

    She added: “Staff at addiction services may not be aware of how to adequately support individuals through the detoxification process, or how to approach the initial conversations.”

    Globally, 16 million people have been diagnosed with opioid dependence and there are over 120,000 opioid overdose deaths a year. Patients can be treated with opioid substitution therapy, involving treatments like buprenorphine and methadone, sometimes coupled with psychosocial support. This has resulted in improved wellbeing and long-term stability for many patients. While for many this is sufficient, and complete detoxification is often not recommended for people with addiction problems, many people decide they want to come off the substitute therapies completely. But withdrawal is notoriously challenging.

    The researchers note that the number of individuals leaving their treatment ‘free of opioid dependence’ in England has been falling over the last decade, from around 37% to around 23%.* […]

    The study found that key barriers to success included psychological challenges, such as fear of withdrawal, relapse and instability; low confidence or motivation; and physical challenges including severe withdrawal symptoms during the dose taper. Social environmental and service-related factors strongly influenced outcomes, with unstable housing, negative social networks, and inadequate professional support all hindering detoxification. The researchers also highlight a lack of recommended medicines to alleviate the emergence of opioid withdrawal symptoms. These varied symptoms are currently treated with a mixture of benzodiazepines, antidepressants, antihistamine, and anti-inflammatories. The only drug licensed to support multiple symptoms of opioid withdrawal, Lofexidine, is no longer available in the UK, although it is available in the United States. […]

    AAAS Public Science News Release: Time for better opioid detoxification strategies, researchers say — addiction services must urgently consider the way in which they offer support for opioid substitute withdrawal

    Addiction Journal: Barriers and facilitators to detoxification from opioid substitution treatment: A mixed-methods systematic review

    Authors: Amy Bagshaw, Suleyman Shah, India Olchefske, Louise M. Paterson, Mike J. Crawford, Anne Lingford-Hughes

  3. Servetus says:

    Traumatic brain injuries or concussions have been treated in rats using a single macro-dose of psilocybin that reduces symptoms and targets the biological effects of concussion on the brain:

    15-Jun-2026 – There are few effective therapies for the debilitating long-term effects of mild traumatic brain injury, more commonly known as concussion.

    But researchers now think psilocybin, a psychedelic compound found in some mushrooms, could be the answer.

    A recent preclinical study from Monash University indicate that a single macro-dose of the drug can reduce the symptoms that often show up after brain injury.

    The project will leverage leading-edge capability and track record in neuro-imaging and biomarkers of psychedelics within the Monash Trauma Group, and clinical implementation and assessment within the Clinical Psychedelic Lab. […]

    Lead researcher on the trial, Professor Terence O’Brien, Head of Monash University’s School of Translational Medicine, Program Director Alfred Brain, and Deputy Director of Research at Bayside Health Alfred, said the clinical trial is a huge step forward and will provide hope to many patients. […]

    “In addition to alleviating symptoms, research suggests it can also target the biological effects concussion has on the brain.” […]

    AAAS Public Science News Release: Monash researchers launch new clinical trial testing psychedelic therapy for post-concussion symptoms — Australia’s first clinical trial to test whether the psychedelic drug psilocybin is an effective treatment for persisting post-concussion symptoms

    Cell Reports Medicine: Psilocybin restores behavior and 5-HT2A signaling while reducing microglial density after chronic traumatic brain injury in rats

    Authors: Josh Allen; Bianca Jupp; Tamara L. Baker; Mohammad B. Haskali; Robert Brkljača1; Zoe Plummer; Mujun Sun; Justin Brand; Brian R. Christie; Chantel T. Debert; Stuart J. McDonald; Terence J. O’Brien; Pablo M. Casillas-Espinosa; and Sandy R. Shultz.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *