Trump (and Hegseth too), Narco terrorism, and Dealing with Drugs and Drug Use
"Either this nation shall kill racism, or racism shall kill this nation." (S. Jonas, August 2018)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"How do you spell ICE in German? GESTAPO."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a socialist.
"Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
"Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
"Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak for me." Pastor Martin Niemoller (c. 1946)
I have been studying, and writing upon, the Drug Problem in the United States since the early 1970s, when the first War on Drugs was declared by the Nixon Administration. It was focused primarily on marijuana, heroin, and cocaine. (Of course, there was an earlier War on Drugs, known as Prohibition, 1920-1933. It ended ignominiously, recognized as a complete failure.) That is, the term the "drug problem" as it is known today, and has been known it since Nixon-Haldeman-Ehrlichman first declared war on it, applies only to certain of what I define globally as the Recreational Mood-Altering Drugs (RMADs).
In society, these drugs range from nicotine in tobacco products, through ethyl alcohol in alcoholic beverages to, indeed, marijuana, heroin, and cocaine, and more recently fentanyl (a prescription pain-relieving opioid which, when used in doses well beyond that prescribed for pain relief, can be addictive and potentially fatal). My book on this subject, Ending the "Drug War"; Solving the Drug Problem: The Public Health Approach, was originally published by Scholars Press, and is still available on Amazon in a Kindle edition). Note that it does not deal with fentanyl which was not indeed an RMAD of use at the time the book was published (2016).
As it happens, the two most potentially fatal RMADs are not the subject of any war of any kind. In fact one of them is regularly advertised on television and in the print media (that would be, of course, alcoholic beverages containing ethyl alcohol), while advertising of the other one, nicotine-containing products is still done, but is limited. As for deaths, currently tobacco products are currently related to approximately 480,000 deaths per year. (Yes, you read that right). Alcoholic beverages are related to approximately 178,000 deaths per year. Fentanyl overdose deaths amounted to about 73,000 per year (in 2024-25) and the number (while still quite large) is declining. Currently, the approximate number of cocaine-use-related deaths is in the 30,000 range. One can draw ones own conclusion as to which addicting RMADs are, and should be, of the most concern.
Trump, never much good at arithmetic, gave has his own estimated number of deaths from cocaine: Citing a decrease in illegal narcotics entering the U.S. by sea, Trump said the U.S."is going to start that same process on land. We know every route, we know every house, we know where they live," the president continued. "We know everything about them. They kill 300,000 people this year, and that's like a war." On the number of cocaine-use related deaths, Trump is actually off by one zero, but what the hey. Give the man a break. As I said, he is not known for his strength on numbers.
Two additional points to make here. First, if big recreational drug-use deaths are the target, why not go after the, by-far-and-away, biggest killers, alcohol, and tobacco products? (Well, oops. That has always been the principal question that no one, except the occasional academic over here in this corner, wants to tackle.) But beyond that, second, and it is a very important point in dealing with the current U.S. policy towards small boats in the Caribbean --- which may or may not be carrying cocaine, which if they are, may or may not be headed to the United States directly or indirectly, and again knowing that with the RMADs demand creates supply, not the other way round --- whether cocaine-use is responsible for 300,000 deaths in the U.S. or 30,000, where is the provision in International Law that gives the Trump Administration the right to go after that source with the use of force, on the open ocean, absent some formal Declaration of War?
Against whom such a declaration might be made is surely a matter for another discussion, which I shall not go into here. But in any case, the Trump Administration has made none. And, absent such a Declaration, under Admiralty Law (that is the law governing actions by vessels that take place on the High Seas), what they are engaging in, falls under definition of Piracy:
Piracy (within the context of maritime law) is when non-state actors commit war-like acts against ships, such as hijacking a ship,taking hostages, etc. In the United States, piracy is governed by A dmiralty Law. Piracy is prohibited by both United States and international law. (And I have said elsewhere, the aircraft which are making the attacks really should be trailing black banners with the Skull and Crossbones [or crossed swords] on them. Any questions, please see one or more of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" [of which Trump is now one, although not nearly as good as Johnny Depp] movies.)
The only difference in definition in what the Trump Administration is doing is that it is committing war-like acts against non-state actors, without a Declaration of War against any state actor. But this discussion deals only with the fact that the policy has no legal basis in the Law of the Sea, and it is the seas on which the attacks are taking place.
Now, turning to the matter of addictive/recreational-mood-altering drug use and attempting to control or interfere with that use by the use of the criminal law, going back to the 19th century when cigarette smoking was illegal in certain states, there have been attempts to deal with the use of various of the RMADs by illegalization of supply, and/or sale, or both. They have all been based on the notion that, with the RMADs, supply creates demand. However, repeatedly, over time, which has been shown not to be the case for the use of any of the RMADs.
First, if, during Prohibition, were that to be the case why would so many risks have been taken, from importation through sales, to provide the product. Why would one risk imprisonment (and in the case of gang-fighting, death) if the demand were not there, and providers would just hope to create it by making the products available. Second, in our era, if simple supply created demand, why would the alcoholic beverage companies spend so much money on advertising? Third, why, in the 20th century, would the tobacco companies have fought so hard against limitations on advertising of their various products, if supply had simply created demand, and not the other way round. Fourth, why would the tobacco companies make sure that, even though in a store the purchaser has to specify that he/she wants to buy a particular tobacco product, and that product is most often displayed on a rack behind the sales counter, those racks are indeed there, in plain sight, and not located in an non-visible site in the store.
It should be noted that in terms of the relationship between cigarette smoking and disease-risk, it was first determined to be the case by German scientists, publishing in 1935. Hitler immediately declared a national anti-cigarette-smoking campaign aimed at every member of the society, except for the members of the armed forces. It should also be noted that when the U.S. tobacco company files on the possible relationship between tobacco use and disease were finally opened by Court order in 1998, it was revealed that one or more of the companies knew of the risk, as determined by their own research, as early as 1957.
Third, as for marijuana, currently legal in some states but not in others, there seems to be little evidence that simply making it legally available has increased use. And in any case, the potential for pathology arising from marijuana use pales in comparison to that arising from the use of tobacco products and alcoholic beverages.
Now, as it happens, currently virtually all attention is being paid, very importantly to be sure, to exactly what happened in that attack on the wreckage of one speed-boat to which two men were clinging, the tape of which attack the Trump Administration is clinging to which almost as much determination as they are clinging to the Epstein Files*.
And so, in this context, let us in summary turn our attention to Trumps current War on Narco-terrorism. It is based first on the concept that if a particular RMAD is put out there that demand will be created, automatically, as it were. Well with over a century of experience with various RMADs this proposition has been proven to be totally counter-factual. Again, except when a new one is bring introduced to the market, the use of any RMAD is created by demand, not supply. Second, Trump is threatening the use of force against Venezuela to deal with a problem that does not actually begin in Venezuela.
It begins with, as I have said, demand in the United States. Third, there are all the proof-of-what-is-or-is-not-on-the-boats issues. E.g., it has been pointed out that on at least some of the boats the noted drum-like containers are actually for fuel supply, not for any cargo-being-carried. Fourth, once again is the issue of piracy, and does what the Trump Admin. is doing come under that definition, since there is no other legal one --- law of the land or sea --- that it can come under.
Finally, if the drug boat files were not utterly damning, in one way or another, why is the Trump Admin. fighting so hard to keep them from public view.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* As for the Epstein Files, there are, or will be, at least three sets. First is the real, unredacted set, which apparently have Trump's name in them at least 1600 times (without any specification as yet about the contexts in which his name appears). Hopefully, some one/organization(s) has a certified copy of them spirited away where the Trumpists could not find them, awaiting their release at an appropriate time.
Second will be the set that the DOJ will release, in response to the Joint Congressional Resolution on the matter. Almost certainly, they with have been well-edited/Trump-redacted by the well-known "FBI review."
Third will be a set with Trump named, and released, but in non-compromising situations. Hopefully the victims have a very well-planned campaign of drip-drip-release of totally damning information, regardless of what happens publicly with the Files (dealing not only with Trump but with other sexual predators operating in the Epstein orbit, some of whom could be prominent people).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, my book on The Drug War and the use of the Recreational Mood-Altering Drugs, End the Drug War; Solve the Drug Problem: The Public Health Approach, can be found on Amazon at: amazon.com/End-Drug-War-Solve-Problem/dp/3659843733.