• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Martha Brill Olcott"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Afghanistan",
    "Central Asia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

Afghan Drug Trade: Terror in the Wings

Link Copied
By Martha Brill Olcott
Published on Apr 22, 2002
Program mobile hero image

Program

Russia and Eurasia

The Russia and Eurasia Program continues Carnegie’s long tradition of independent research on major political, societal, and security trends in and U.S. policy toward a region that has been upended by Russia’s war against Ukraine.  Leaders regularly turn to our work for clear-eyed, relevant analyses on the region to inform their policy decisions.

Learn More

Source: Carnegie

This article first appeared in The Christian Science Monitor on April 22, 2002. All rights reserved.

WASHINGTON - The United States is scoring a major victory against terrorism in the war in Afghanistan, but until the US successfully tackles that country's drug-trafficking problem it cannot call the victory permanent.

Drug dealers and arms traders are natural allies; their presence in Afghanistan and throughout Central Asia undermines already-weak states and gives militant Islamic groups the means for self-financing.

Afghanistan has been the world's largest grower of poppies for opium and heroin, largely destined for sale in Europe. Though cultivation was banned briefly by the Taliban, Afghan drug dealers are back in business.

US bombing raids never directly targeted Afghanistan's drug-storage or heroin-producing facilities, and Afghanistan's drug dealers were fast off the mark, distributing seed or cash to purchase it in the fall. They are now primed to buy up the crop, and are inciting local farmers to oppose violently the government's efforts to seize it.

Meanwhile, there is still no US strategy to deal with Afghanistan's return to narco-trafficking and only a trickle of assistance money in the pipeline to counter it. The US timetable for rebuilding Afghanistan must coincide with the way in which risks are generated and not merely be fashioned after Washington's annual budget cycle.

Unless the growing opium and heroin trade from Afghanistan through Central Asia is curbed, anti-state groups will continue to have a ready source of funding, including groups in Russia and Kazakhstan.

Afghan interim leader Hamid Karzai has banned opium-growing, but lacks the money and capacity to enforce his policy successfully. Most local warlords still profit from narco-trafficking by taxing the crop or its transit. Until a national military and police force is trained, Afghanistan must rely on outsiders to enforce the ban, or see it largely ignored.

Current US policy ensures that the latter will be the case, or worse, that the ban will help destabilize the Karzai government, since the Bush administration opposes the creation of a large international security force, whose mandate spans all of Afghanistan.

Tolerating the rebirth of the drug trade transforms the tragedy of Afghanistan's poverty into a problem of regional and eventually global security. One should not minimize how difficult it would be to cut drug protection sharply in Afghanistan. The network of drug dealers is fully intertwined with the traditional local elite. No crop will produce the same income, nor allow a rapacious elite the same easy riches.

Working with the provisional government, the US should work aggressively to halt poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. Crop-substitution projects must gain priority; Afghan farmers should be offered reasonable cash subsidies for destroying the harvest in the field, or for turning it over for destruction. Those who comply should qualify for agricultural reform programs, while those who refuse should lose priority for receiving all forms of development assistance.

Alongside the provisional government, the US should also destroy current stores of opium and then close down heroin factories. Warlords allied with the US's Afghan military effort must pledge to remain "drug free," the US must devote the intelligence resources to monitoring this.

Otherwise, the US may wind up being the inadvertent regulator of the very drug trade that it should be stamping out, as US forces could have to adjudicate between feuding warlords.

Although some funds were recently allocated for eradicating the current crop, the US approach emphasizes interdiction on Central Asia's borders, since more than half of Afghan drugs exit into those states. But current allocations and their promised supplements meet a fraction of these countries' training needs. Tajikistan and Turkmenistan already qualify as "narco-states," as their governments have credibly been accused of sifting profits from the drug trade. And although Tajikistan's new national drug-control agency has sharply improved interdiction rates, funds for this UN-sponsored project run out this year.

Afghanistan's drug trade feeds on Central Asia's poverty. Without concerted action, these fragile states' problems could fester just when the West is planning to tap Caspian oil and gas reserves – reserves whose delivery could be compromised by instability in this land-locked region.

The fight against terrorism cannot hope to succeed unless the US remains as alert to preventing tomorrow's terrorists from consolidating as it is to defeating the current threat. As in the other battlefields of the war on terror, the US must be prepared to deal a blow to the Afghan drug trade, even if Washington must assume a disproportionate share of the financial burden.

About the Author

Martha Brill Olcott

Former Senior Associate, Russia and Eurasia Program and, Co-director, al-Farabi Carnegie Program on Central Asia

Olcott is professor emerita at Colgate University, having taught political science there from 1974 to 2002. Prior to her work at the endowment, Olcott served as a special consultant to former secretary of state Lawrence Eagleburger.

    Recent Work

  • In The Media
    After Crimea: Will Kazakhstan be Next in Putin’s Reintegration Project?

      Martha Brill Olcott

  • Article
    China’s Unmatched Influence in Central Asia

      Martha Brill Olcott

Martha Brill Olcott
Former Senior Associate, Russia and Eurasia Program and, Co-director, al-Farabi Carnegie Program on Central Asia
Martha Brill Olcott
SecurityAfghanistanCentral Asia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • A member of "Timur's Special Forces Unit" of the Defence Intelligence of Ukraine looks on on Snake Island, also known as Zmiinyi Island, located in the Black Sea, on August 14, 2025, amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
    Article
    The Changing Military Balance in the Black Sea: A Ukrainian Perspective

    Ukraine’s asymmetric approach has rendered Russia’s Black Sea Fleet functionally useless. But a long-term commitment will be needed to maintain this balance of power.

      Alina Frolova, Stepan Yakymiak

  • Commentary
    Emissary
    The Iran War Is Uncovering the Weakness in U.S.-Gulf Ties

    Neither the Abraham Accords nor the presence of large U.S. bases are enough to protect Arab Gulf states.

      Marwan Muasher

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Afghanistan–Pakistan War Poses Awkward Questions for Russia

    Not only does the fighting jeopardize regional security, it undermines Russian attempts to promote alternatives to the Western-dominated world order.

      Ruslan Suleymanov

  • U.S. President Donald Trump (C) oversees "Operation Epic Fury" with (L-R) Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles at Mar-a-Lago on February 28, 2026 in Palm Beach, Florida. President Trump announced today that the United States and Israel had launched strikes on Iran targeting political and military leaders, as well as Iran’s ballistic missile and nuclear programs. (Photo by Daniel Torok/White House via Getty Images)
    Paper
    Operation Epic Fury and the International Law on the Use of Force

    Assessing U.S. compliance with the international laws of war is essential at a time when these frameworks are already fraying.

      • Federica D'Alessandra

      Federica D’Alessandra

  • apan's 8,900-ton Maritime Self-Defense Force supply ship Oosumi leaves Muroran port escorted by the 4,550-ton destroyer Murasame bound for Kuwait February 20, 2004 in Muroran, Japan.
    Article
    Japan’s Security Policy Is Still Caught Between the Alliance and Domestic Reality

    Japan’s response to U.S. pressure over Hormuz highlights a broader dilemma: How to preserve the alliance while remaining bound by legal limits, public opinion, and an Asia-centered security agenda. Tokyo gained diplomatic space through an alliance-embracing strategy, but only under conditions that may not endure.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.