mongolia famine, arsenic water in bangladesh

.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/mongolia/7488202/Death-stalks-the-frozen-land-of-Genghis-Khan.html

Death stalks the frozen land of Genghis Khan

Mongolia is experiencing the worst famine in a generation, as Peter Foster found when he spent time with nomads in the one of the most inhospitable terrains on earth.

Peter Foster in Uliastai
21 Mar 2010

The looming catastrophe is so serious that the United Nations has issued an urgent appeal for assistance for this remote corner of Asia, a region so inhospitable that westerners rarely penetrate it. Photo: ADAM DEAN

The gaunt carcass of the horse lay where it had fallen, the cause of death - a slow, painful starvation - obvious from its near-fleshless, silvery bones that gleamed under an ice-blue Mongolian sky.

In a nearby tree, a murder of glossy crows sat patiently waiting their chance to feast on the latest victim of the white dzud, the name Mongolian herders use to describe a winter of such ferocity that it comes round only once in a generation.

This has been one of those winters; fattening the carrion feeders, the crows, magpies and stooping, black vultures on the carcasses of more than two million farm animals, with another two million expected to perish before the winter ends.

The looming catastrophe is so serious that the United Nations has issued an urgent appeal for assistance for this remote corner of Asia, a region so inhospitable that westerners rarely penetrate it.

A drought last summer meant that the sparse grazing yielded even less nutrition than usual. Now, as The Sunday Telegraph became the first western newspaper to witness at close quarters, Mongolian herdsmen, the ancestors of the warrior clans that conquered most of Asia under Genghis Khan, face a struggle just to keep alive.

The herdsmen are no strangers to hardship, inured to tending their flocks in temperatures below -40C, but even they have been defeated by the savagery of this particular season.

"It died this morning, I skinned it for its coat which is worth a little money," said the owner of the dead horse, retreating into his ger, the traditional round felt-lined dwelling of Eurasian nomads. "On January 20 I had 1080 head of stock. I have lost more than 800 since then."

On that night, recalled 35-year-old Batbayar Zundui, the first big snows of winter came driving down the valleys of the western Mongolian Altai mountains where he lives with his wife and three-month-old daughter.

"The snows were too deep for the animals to reach the pasture. We brought them in, but because of the drought last summer we didn't have enough fodder to feed them. Many starved to death where they stood," he says matter-of-factly.

Batbayar, who had 70 horses last December of which only eight remain, cannot hide his despair as he explains how some mornings he wakes to find two animals dead, other mornings 10.

Recently his three elder daughters returned home from the nearest town where they attend a government boarding school, to discover the rising mound of carcasses behind the family home.

"Some of the animals that died were owned by them and they loved them especially dearly," he says, unable to hold back a tear. "My daughters cried and then they blamed their parents for failing them."

Such stories are told over and over in the mountains outside Uliastai, the capital of Mongolia's western Zavkhan province 620 miles from the capital Ulan Bator, and indeed over swaths of the country which has declared a national disaster in 12 of its 21 provinces.

The United Nations and aid organisations such as Save the Children have issued an urgent appeal for assistance to clear fallen livestock and deliver food, fuel and medical care to the herdsmen and their families who account for more than a third of Mongolia's 2.7m population.

"Mongolia is in the middle of a major emergency," says Anna Ford, Asia specialist with Save the Children. "Tens of thousands of families don't know how they are going to feed their children, heat their homes or keep their animals alive and things are only going to get worse."

The scale of the emergency, and the difficulty of delivering assistance, becomes gruesomely clear as we drive north from Uliastai along unmarked roads, churning across the windblown steppe through mile after mile of drifting snow and sliding wildly across frozen rivers.

In a country three times the size of France, many of the herders remain unreachable, locked in the vastness of some of the most inhospitable inhabited terrain on the planet.

The evidence of Mongolia's animal holocaust lies all around; horses and cows skinned at the roadside where they fell and, in gully after gully, piles of sheep and goat carcasses, frozen by the Siberian winds. Only the camels seem to survive.

But if nature is the principle cause of this disaster, it may not be wholly to blame for its debilitating impact on the herdsmen.

Elders who remember the great dzuds of 1968 and 1944 say the ability of modern Mongolian farmers to cope with the disaster has been diminished by a combination of greed and neglect.

Since Mongolia embraced market reforms and abandoned its Soviet-inspired co-operative agriculture system in the 1990s the numbers of animals on the pastures has doubled to an unsustainable 44 million.

Grazing land has been chronically over-used, particularly by destructive, grubbing goats bred to feed the international demand for cashmere wool.

Up in a narrow crease of a snow-filled valley, a 70-year-old herder called Baavankhon frames Mongolia's problems in more poetic terms.

Like many herders, Baavankhon worships the land that sustains him, making offerings to a sacred mountain but in recent years, he says, people have been cutting firewood from the holy places; just one example of how the ancient compact with nature has been broken in modern Mongolia.

"We have mountains, rivers and sky and the most powerful of these is the sky," he says as outside the snow begins to fall again. "If the sky is in a good mood, it brings us warmth and moderate rains that bring us a good life. But if the sky is angry it sends us cold and snow and then we are ruined."

The dzud poses a huge problem for a country struggling to adapt to the post-Communist era, mired in corruption and unplanned urbanisation.

Allegations of vote rigging in a 2008 parliamentary poll sparked violent protests, but calm returned last May after 46-year-old Tsakhia Elbegdorj was elected President on an anti-corruption ticket.

International investors are now queuing up for the chance to exploit Mongolia's vast mineral reserves - gold, silver, copper, iron and uranium – which are being eyed by neighbouring China.

However with a third of Mongolians living in poverty, it remains unclear whether Mongolia's 180,000 herder families will benefit from their country's massive potential.

For now those development goals are subordinate to the immediate task of delivering help to those in need.

Herders like 25-year-old Bayambajav Choijin, who has already lost more than a third of her flock of 300 sheep and goats, know that April will prove the cruellest month as stores run out.

"Normally when we buy food we don't pay cash, but agree that in the spring, when we sell cashmere from the goats, we'll pay back the shopkeeper, but with the large number of animals dying they won't give us anything now," she says.

The UN reports infant mortality rates are already rising by 40 per cent in worst-affected districts and in Uliastai where the hospital has 42 cases for its 35 beds, doctors predict rising numbers of suicide and neurosis.

Bayambajav says the impacts of the dzud will be felt by her family for years to come and that she will now never be able to provide the college education she dreams of for her son, Batmagnal.

"The animals mean everything for us," she says looking on as the boy plays at her feet, oblivious to his shrinking fortunes.

"They are our food, our store of wealth and on their backs rest all our future plans."

*To donate to Save the Children's Emergency Fund go to www.savethechildren.org.uk/cef

see also: mongolia maps

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/how-the-west-poisoned-bangladesh-1924631.html

How the West poisoned Bangladesh

A UN project aimed to help millions - but it brought them water contaminated with arsenic

By Andrew Buncombe
Sunday, 21 March 2010

Up to 20 million people in Bangladesh are at risk of suffering early deaths because of arsenic poisoning – the legacy of a well-intentioned but ill-planned water project that created a devastating public health catastrophe.

Four decades after an internationally funded move to dig tube wells across the country massively backfired, huge numbers of people still remain at higher risk of contracting cancer and heart disease. The intellectual development of untold numbers of children is also being held back by the contamination of drinking water. Poor diet exacerbates the risk.

Bangladesh's arsenic crisis dates back to the 1970s when, in an effort to improve the quality of drinking water and counter diarrhoea, which was one of the country's biggest killers of children, there was large-scale international investment in building tube wells. It was believed the wells would provide safe supplies for families, otherwise dependent on dirty surface water which was killing up to 250,000 children a year.

Yet the move, spearheaded by the UN and the World Bank, was fatally flawed. Although checks were carried out for certain contaminants in the newly sourced water, it was not tested for arsenic, which occurs naturally in the Ganges and Brahmaputra deltas. By the early 1990s, when it was found that up to half of 10 million tube wells were contaminated with arsenic, Bangladesh was confronting a huge problem. The World Health Organisation called it "the largest mass poisoning of a population in history... The scale of the environmental disaster is greater than any seen before; it is beyond the accidents in Bhopal, India, in 1984, and Chernobyl, Ukraine, in 1986".

Some subsequent studies predicted that, ultimately, one person in 10 who drinks water from the arsenical wells would go on to die from lung, bladder or skin cancer. Even though some of these conditions take decades to develop, by 2004, about 3,000 people a year were dying from arsenic-related cancers.

Since the 1990s, organisations such as Unicef have led the effort to develop and provide alternative sources of water, such as collecting rainwater and filtering surface water. Slowly, the percentage of families exposed to contaminated water has fallen. But a survey conducted by Unicef last year found that 13 per cent of people are still using contaminated water. "That equates to 20 million people," says Yan Zheng, a Unicef arsenic specialist based in Dhaka. "The health impacts vary. The skin lesions that arsenic causes are well recognised by the villagers. But the cancer and cardiovascular diseases are still not fully recognised by the villagers and some health professionals." Ms Zheng says a recent study showed significantly higher death rates for those exposed to arsenic: "It was as you would expect – the higher the exposure, the higher the risk.".

Government and UN officials will publish a new report tomorrow calling for urgent action to tackle what remains a huge problem of contamination, both from drinking water and from crops such as rice that are irrigated with contaminated water. According to the report, being released to coincide with World Water Day, arsenic poses health risks to a significant proportion of the population, though children are particularly vulnerable.

The skin lesions caused by arsenicosis are just the first sign of many possibly fatal health problems. The lesions still attract widespread social stigma in Bangladesh, with many people until recently believing they were the result of a curse.

"Urgent action is needed to refocus the attention of the nation towards an arsenic-safe environment," says Renata Lok Dessallien, the UN chief in Bangladesh. "Concerted efforts by the government and all stakeholders are necessary to reinvigorate arsenic monitoring and mitigation efforts, and to conduct comprehensive research on emerging threats."

The arsenic contaminating so much of Bangladesh's water occurs naturally in the water courses of the rivers that sustain hundreds of millions of people. Many underground sources around the world suffer from arsenic contamination and there have been health issues in countries ranging from Argentina to Taiwan and India. There is also considerable arsenic contamination in parts of the US.

In Bangladesh, a fierce row continues to rage over the responsibility for the massive contamination. While aid groups and the UN insist their testing at the time met international standards, others have argued that there should have been a more thorough awareness of the local geology and topography. Yet more have said that the UN and the World Bank were slow to acknowledge their role in the tragedy.

Dipankar Chakraborti, of the Jadavpur University in West Bengal and a leading expert, says the level of arsenic contamination in Bangladesh is worse than anywhere else globally. He says the international bodies have never fully acknowledged their role in a crisis that will be played out for years to come. "It is a major problem," he says. "We have found that when we went back to people with skin lesions whom we interviewed 15 years ago, about 30 per cent of them had developed some sort of cancer."

Last year scientists concluded that arsenic entered the water in tube wells as a result of thousands of ponds that were dug across Bangladesh to provide soil for flood protection. Disturbing the ground released the organic carbon, which in turn causes arsenic to leach from sediments. The scientists from MIT in Boston concluded that one solution would be to dig "deeper drinking-water wells, below the influence of the ponds".

Meanwhile, educating the public about the dangers of arsenic poisoning, and disabusing them of the widespread idea that its effects are the result of a curse, or infectious, is essential. "Raising awareness among people on the danger of arsenic is essential," says Bangladesh's minister of health, Dr A F M Ruhal Haque. "Health workers can disseminate this message, while the government will continue to invest in screening and treatment of arsenicosis patients in affected districts."

Britain's toxic beer

Arsenic was a pervasive contaminant in Britain and the US in the 19th century. It was used in wallpaper, fabric dyes, and even as a colouring in confectionery.

One of the worst instances of man-made arsenical poisoning came in Lancashire in late 1900. Large numbers of people in the Manchester and Salford areas displayed symptoms of what was thought to be simple over-indulgence. But, as the cases mounted, and people began to turn up with blackened skin and other tell-tale signs, arsenic poisoning was suspected. This was confirmed, and eventually traced to the firm that supplied sugar used in brewing.

Before the poisonings had run their course, more than 6,000 people had been affected, and 80 of these died. The episode was instrumental in securing more rigorous legislation on food safety.

geopolitics: shift of the balance of power (6 texts)

.
http://gsb.stanford.edu/news/headlines/vftt_wolfensohn.html?cmpid=news

Balance of Power Shift Coming Says Wolfensohn, Former World Bank President

In the next 40 years, a global power shift will see today's leading economic countries drop from having 80% of the world's income to 35%, says John Wolfensohn, former World Bank president. By 2030, two-thirds of people in the world's middle class will be Chinese.

January 2010

STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS

James Wolfensohn is all about balance. The former World Bank president introduced himself to a student audience Jan. 11 by talking about how he is grateful at this point in his life to devote time and money to a "balance between business and nonbusiness activities." And in the speech before an overflow crowd, he urged students to "enrich your life as you enrich your business."

"That aspect of duality is the thing that has made my life meaningful" he said.

But the balance of power in the world is what Wolfensohn spent the majority of his hour-long appearance on. A huge power shift will occur in the next 40 years that will reduce the influence of the wealthiest countries, he said. As population and GDP grows in countries such as China and India, they will assume a larger role in relationship to the United States and Europe. The developed countries will drop from having 80% of the world's income to 35%. "There will be a monumental shift of economic power. It's not just a moderation trend, but a fundamental change in the world balance," he said.

By 2030, two-thirds of people in the world's middle class will be Chinese, Wolfensohn said. "These are not trivial changes -- they are tectonic changes in the way the planet works. In my generation we didn't have to think about it. We knew we were a rich country."

But today's students will have to confront a new world in which Africa is no longer an isolated continent but the fastest-growing market for cell phones.

Looking around the auditorium, Wolfensohn noted that many more students from China and India travel to the United States to study, rather than the other way around. In 2007 just 11,200 Americans studied in China. That year more than 110,000 Chinese were studying in the United States.

"It's a tragedy in terms of the potential of young people that they're still being guided to look at European countries," he said.

Wolfensohn was making a repeat appearance at the Stanford Graduate School of Business as a speaker in the Global Management Program's Global Speaker Series. In 2004, while still at the helm of the World Bank, he spoke about how developed countries were delivering on the promise they made to aid developing ones.

He stepped down in 2005 from a decade-long career heading the agency that is in charge of redistributing the world's wealth from the rich to the poor. He now heads an investment banking firm in New York. At 76, he is still advising organizations and governments on economic policy and helps developing countries through his foundation.

Asked about whether humanitarian aid to Africa was a help or a hindrance, Wolfensohn said aid organizations need to be selective. "There are some extremely corrupt countries," he said, adding that the best countries should be rewarded. "I say to the others: it's not acceptable to steal."

He also predicted a shakeup in how the leadership of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund would be appointed. Traditionally, the president of the former was from the United States and the latter from Europe. The bank may be "internationalized" in the future.

The World Bank's stated goal is to reduce poverty. As an international financial institution, it provides loans to developing countries for capital programs. It was created out of World War II with France as the first recipient of world aid. In the late 1960s the emphasis shifted to loans for developing countries.

Wolfensohn is a native of Sydney, Australia, and a naturalized U.S. citizen. In addition to his firm, Wolfensohn & Co., he is an honorary trustee of the Brookings Institution. He was appointed to head the World Bank in 1995 by President Bill Clinton and served two terms.

Joyce Routson

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8531266.stm

2010/02/24

New US-free Americas bloc agreed

Latin American and Caribbean nations have agreed to set up a new regional body without the US and Canada.

The new bloc would be an alternative to the Organisation of American States (OAS), the main forum for regional affairs in the past 50 years.

Mexico has been hosting a regional summit in the beach resort of Cancun.

The OAS has been dogged by rifts between some members and the US over economic policy and trade, and criticised for promoting US interests.

'Regional integration'

The proposed new grouping was one of the main issues on the agenda of the two-day summit, which ended on Tuesday.

It "must as a priority push for regional integration... and promote the regional agenda in global meetings", Mexican President Felipe Calderon told the summit, which includes leaders and representatives from 32 countries.

Cuban President Raul Castro was quick to applaud Mr Calderon's announcement as a historic move toward "the constitution of a purely Latin American and Caribbean regional organisation".

Cuba was suspended from the OAS in 1962 because of its socialist political system. In 2009, the OAS voted to lift Cuba's suspension but the country has declined to rejoin.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez earlier expressed his support for the proposal, citing it as a move away from US "colonising" of the region.

A US State Department official, Arturo Valenzuela, said he did not see the new body as a problem.

"This should not be an effort that would replace the OAS, " he said.

The terms of the new bloc and whether it would replace the Rio Group of Latin American countries has not been clarified.

"It's very important that we don't try to replace the OAS," said Chile's President-elect Sebastian Pinera. "The OAS is a permanent organisation that has its own functions."

On Monday, Bolivian President Evo Morales proposed that it begin operating in July 2011 with a summit hosted by Venezuela.

Falklands row

The Cancun summit has also unanimously backed Argentina's claim over the British-owned Falklands.

Argentina is angered that a UK firm has begun drilling for oil off the Falkland Islands, which lie about 450km (280 miles) off the Argentine coast.

Argentina and Britain went to war over the South Atlantic islands, which Argentina calls the Malvinas, in 1982, after Buenos Aires invaded them.

The leaders at Cancun also discussed whether to recognise Porfirio Lobo as the legitimate president of Honduras after he was elected president under interim authorities following a 28 June coup that ousted Manuel Zelaya.

A long-term plan to help Haiti recover from the devastating January earthquake was also on the agenda.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

updates from The Times:

US refuses to endorse British sovereignty in Falklands oil dispute

Brazil attacks UN over Falklands stand-off

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article7036764.ece

Latin America backs Argentina as Britain begins Falklands oil quest

February 23, 2010

Argentina cemented a Latin American front over the Falklands yesterday as a British oil rig began drilling in the disputed seas around the islands.

Regional leaders at the Rio Group summit in Mexico were expected to sign up for a resolution backing Argentina in its escalating row with Britain after Brazil and Chile pledged their support.

Venezuela’s vociferous President, Hugo Chávez, set the tone of the summit, offering military support. Characterising Britain as an imperialist relic, Mr Chávez demanded the return of "Las Malvinas", as they are known to Argentinians.

“The English are still threatening Argentina. Things have changed. We are no longer in 1982,” he warned. “If conflict breaks out, be sure Argentina will not be alone like it was back then.”

Related Links

Argentina in diplomatic push to reclaim Falklands

Argentina has chosen a good time to rattle the Falklands

Tension in Falklands rises as rig arrives

British control of the archipelago was “anti-historic and irrational”, the former paratrooper continued, asking “why the English speak of democracy but still have a Queen”.

Unlike 1982, when some Latin American nations, notably President Pinochet’s Chile, backed Britain’s campaign to repel Argentina’s brief invasion of the islands, the continent now enjoys strong ties between ideologically aligned governments and could mount a powerful resistance to British oil operations.

Mr Chávez was joined by President Ortega of Nicaragua, who predicted that the Rio Group would throw its weight behind Argentina’s claim. “We will back a resolution demanding that England return Las Malvinas to its rightful owner, that it return the islands to Argentina,” he said.

Brazil, the biggest regional power and traditionally Argentina’s main rival, was similarly supportive. “Las Malvinas must be reintegrated into Argentine sovereignty,” Marco Aurelio García, foreign policy adviser to President Lula da Silva, said, adding: “Unlike in the past, today there is a consensus in Latin America behind Argentina’s claims.”

Almost three decades on from the confict, the defeat of Argentina still stings the national consciousness as an historic injury which must be redressed. President Fernández de Kirchner of Argentina has made the issue a central plank of her presidency, whipping up long-simmering resentments that have only been compounded by the prospect of a black gold bonanza in the isolated, windswept archipelago.

The British Geological Survey estimates that up to 60 billion barrels of oil could be beneath Falklands waters, although Desire Petroleum, the company carrying out the drilling, says that the commericially viable reserves are much smaller.

Desire said that test drilling at the Liz 14/19-A exploration site off the Falklands began at 1415 GMT yesterday. “Drilling operations are expected to take approximately 30 days and a further announcement will be made once drilling is completed.

Tensions between the former adversaries rose last week to their highest level since the war, as Argentina attempted to block ships supplying what it says are “illegal” British activities and Britain hit back with a warning that the islands were much better defended than on the eve of the Argentine invasion in 1982.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/24/world/europe/24nato.html

February 24, 2010

Gates Calls European Mood a Danger to Peace

By BRIAN KNOWLTON

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who has long called European contributions to NATO inadequate, said Tuesday that public and political opposition to the military had grown so great in Europe that it was directly affecting operations in Afghanistan and impeding the alliance’s broader security goals.

“The demilitarization of Europe — where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it — has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21st,” he told NATO officers and officials in a speech at the National Defense University, the Defense Department-financed graduate school for military officers and diplomats.

A perception of European weakness, he warned, could provide a “temptation to miscalculation and aggression” by hostile powers.

The meeting was a prelude to the alliance’s review this year of its basic mission plan for the first time since 1999. “Right now,” Mr. Gates said, “the alliance faces very serious, long-term, systemic problems.”

Mr. Gates’s blunt comments came just three days after the coalition government of the Netherlands collapsed in a dispute over keeping Dutch troops in Afghanistan. It now appears almost certain that most of the 2,000 Dutch troops there will be withdrawn this year. And polls show that the Afghanistan war has grown increasingly unpopular in nearly every European country.

The defense secretary, putting a sharper point on his past criticisms, outlined how NATO shortfalls were exacting a material toll in Afghanistan. The alliance’s failure to finance needed helicopters and cargo aircraft, for example, was “directly impacting operations,” he said.

Mr. Gates said that NATO also needed more aerial refueling tankers and intelligence-gathering equipment “for immediate use on the battlefield.”

Yet alliance members, he noted, were far from reaching their spending commitments, with only 5 of 28 having reached the established target: 2 percent of gross domestic product for defense. By comparison, the United States spends more than 4 percent of its G.D.P. on its military.

Dana Allin, a senior fellow with the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London, called Mr. Gates’s remarks “very striking.”

“Whether this is a conscious statement to sound a real sharp warning, there’s no question that the frustration among the American military establishment is palpable regarding coalition operations in Afghanistan,” he said.

Mr. Gates did soften his message a bit, noting that, not counting United States forces, NATO troops in Afghanistan were to increase to 50,000 this year, from 30,000 last year.

“By any measure,” he said, “that is an extraordinary feat.”

More sobering, he said, was that just two months into the year, NATO was facing shortfalls of hundreds of millions of euros — “a natural consequence of having underinvested in collective defense for over a decade.”

NATO’s problems — greatly magnified by the expansion of its mandate beyond European borders, following 9/11 — called for “serious, far-reaching and immediate reforms,” Mr. Gates said.

Indeed, the secretary general of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, last month turned to an unlikely source — Russia — to request helicopters for use in Afghanistan, arguing that this would help reduce the terrorism threat and drug trade on a border of the former Soviet Union.

Mr. Rasmussen, speaking at the same meeting as Mr. Gates, said that NATO’s members needed to better coordinate their weapons purchases. The European Union and NATO should collaborate on developing capabilities like heavy-lift helicopters, he said, and avoid “spending double money.”

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/afghanistan/article7035719.ece

Dutch confirm Afghan troop pullout sparking fears of domino effect

February 22, 2010

Nato was left in fear of further troop withdrawals from Afghanistan yesterday after the Dutch Prime Minister conceded that he could not prevent his forces being pulled out this year after the collapse of the Government in The Hague.

Jan Peter Balkenende lost the argument over extending the deployment at a 16-hour Cabinet session, in the first big reversal for the recently appointed Nato leader, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who had publicly requested a continued Dutch commitment.

“Our task as the lead nation [in Uruzgan province] ends in August,” Mr Balkenende said. After a three-month draw-down, the Dutch will be completely out of Afghanistan by the end of the year.

There are concerns that other countries where public opinion is turning against the Afghan campaign could follow, notably Canada, which has had the biggest proportional casualty rate and is committed to withdrawing its 2,800 troops by the end of next year. Another concern is the continued presence of 1,000 Australian troops. The Canberra Government has repeatedly refused to take over the lead role in Uruzgan if Holland leaves, demanding that a big Nato power provide the main share of troop numbers.

Just as important is the impression that European countries are struggling to find their share of the 10,000 extra troops requested by US General Stanley McChrystal to join 30,000 extra US troops in Afghanistan, with France ruling out more forces and a fierce debate in Germany.

The Times understands that the Dutch forces in Uruzgan will be replaced by US troops, diverting them from the surge operation against the Taleban.

Asadullah Hamdam, governor of Uruzgan, said that peace and reconstruction efforts would suffer, telling the BBC that the Dutch played a key role in building roads, training Afghan police and providing security for civilians. “If they withdraw and leave these projects incomplete, they will leave a big vacuum,” he said.

A British security source said: “This is a big setback because the Dutch are very highly rated. It is also a psychological blow, because as soon as one country leaves it starts making the public in other countries worried.”

Although the Dutch endured some sniping from bigger Nato powers about their perceived lack of aggression after they deployed to Uruzgan in 2006, their “population centric” strategy was a precursor of “The McChrystal Doctrine” adopted by British and American forces.

Mr Balkenende faces a general election in May after his main coalition partners, PvdA, the Labour party, walked out rather than break a promise to withdraw the 1,950 Dutch troops this year. Wouter Bos, the Labour leader, said: “A plan was agreed to when our soldiers went to Afghanistan. Our partners in the government did not want to stick to that plan, and on the basis of their refusal we have decided to resign.”

Mr Balkenende’s Christian Democrats and Labour are forecast to lose seats in the 150-member parliament. The two big gainers are forecast to be the ultra-liberals D66 and the right-wing Party of Freedom of the anti-Islamist MP Geert Wilders. Both oppose the Afghan mission.

A recent poll put support for keeping Dutch troops in Uruzgan at 35 per cent compared with 58 per cent for withdrawal, after 21 Dutch deaths.

The Dutch mission in Afghanistan was due to end in 2008, but the Government extended it until August 2010 — a decision made while the head of Nato was Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, a former Dutch defence minister.

In October Mr Rasmussen said: “I would regret a Dutch withdrawal. We are at a critical juncture, where there should be no doubt about our firm commitment. Any doubts will simply play into the hands of those who want us to fail.” This month he issued a letter to The Hague requesting that Dutch troops stay for another year in a reduced training role, a gesture that may have been designed to be helpful by ending their frontline role, but which ended up dividing the Cabinet

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/02/21/87061/war-game-shows-how-attacking-iran.html

Feb. 21, 2010

War game shows how attacking Iran could backfire

Warren P. Strobel

McClatchy Newspapers

February 21, 2010

WASHINGTON — Here's a war game involving Iran, Israel and the U.S. that shows how unintended consequences can spin out of control:

With diplomacy failing and precious intelligence just received about two new secret Iranian nuclear facilities, Israel launches a pre-emptive strike against Tehran's nuclear complex. The strike is successful, wiping out six of Iran's key sites and setting back its suspected quest for a bomb by years.

But what happens next isn't pretty.

The U.S. president and his National Security Council try to keep the crisis from escalating. That sours U.S.-Israeli relations, already stressed by the fact that Israel didn't inform Washington in advance of the strike. The White House tries to open a channel for talks with Iran, but is rejected.

Instead, Iran attacks Israel, both directly and through its proxies in Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. It misinterprets U.S. actions as weakness and mines the Straits of Hormuz, the world's chief oil artery. That sparks a clash and a massive U.S. military reinforcement in the Persian Gulf.

This recent war game conducted at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy, part of the Washington-based Brookings Institution, a center-left think tank, appears to dampen hopes for a simple solution to Iran's real-world nuclear challenge.

The lesson is "once you start this, it's really hard to stop it," said Kenneth Pollack, a former White House and CIA official who oversaw the simulation.

Pollack and others who participated in the day-long exercise late last year are quick to point out that war games are imperfect mirrors of reality. How Iran's notoriously opaque and fractious leadership would react in a real crisis is particularly hard to divine.

But the outcome underscores what diplomats, military officers and analysts have long said: even a "successful" airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities — setting the program back by two to four years — could come at a tremendous, unpredictable cost.

"It's ... an option that has to be looked at very, very, very carefully," a senior European diplomat said Friday. "Because we know what the results could be, and they could be disastrous." He requested anonymity to speak more frankly on the sensitive issue.

Tensions over Iran's nuclear program rose again this week after the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog reported that the country could be secretly developing a nuclear warhead to be placed atop a ballistic missile. Additionally, Iran has begun enriching uranium closer to the purity level needed for use in a nuclear weapon.

Israel, which sees Iran as a direct threat, has refused to rule out military force, although officials there say they are counting for now on diplomatic pressure. There have even been hints from Sunni Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, that they would look the other way in the event of a strike on Shiite Iran, a historic adversary.

Yet one of the Brookings war game's major conclusions is that Israel could pay dearly for an attack on Iran.

By the end of the simulation, eight days after the fictitious Israeli strike, Israel's prime minister, under heavy domestic pressure, is forced to launch a 48-hour air blitz in southern Lebanon to halt rocket attacks from Hezbollah, the militant group sponsored by Iran. Israeli officials know the blitz is unlikely to achieve its objectives, and prepare a larger, costlier operation in Lebanon, including ground forces.

Israel's relations with the United States, its most important ally, are damaged. To avoid damaging them further, Israel bows to intense U.S. pressure and absorbs occasional missile strikes from Iran without retaliating.

Some members of the "Israeli" team nonetheless felt that setting back Iran's nuclear program "was worth it, even given what was a pretty robust response," said one participant. He asked that his name not be used, because under the game's ground rules, participants are supposed to remain anonymous.

Jonathan Peled, an Israeli embassy spokesman, declined comment on the war game or its outcome.

"All we can say is that Iran constitutes a threat not only to Israel but to the region, to the US and to the world at large, and therefore should be addressed without delay by the international community, first and foremost through effective sanctions," he said.

The Brookings war game was one of three simulations regarding Iran's nuclear program conducted in December. The other two, at Harvard University and Tel Aviv University, reportedly found that neither sanctions nor threats dissuaded Tehran from its suspected nuclear weapons ambitions.

In the Brookings game, three teams of experts, including former senior U.S. officials, played the Israeli, Iranian and American leadership. They assembled in separate rooms at the think tank's Washington headquarters. Israeli and U.S. "officials" communicated with each other, but not with the Iranians.

One of the simulation's major findings was how aggressively the Iranians responded to the attack — more aggressively, some participants felt, than they would in real life — and how Washington and Tehran, lacking direct communication, misunderstood each other.

Iran did not retaliate directly against the United States or U.S. troops in Iraq or Afghanistan. But it struck back at Israel, then attacked Dharan in eastern Saudi Arabia, then began mining the Straits of Hormuz.

"There would be almost no incentive for Iran not to respond" with force, said another participant, a member of the Iranian team. "It was interesting to see how useful it was for Tehran to push the limits."

Without knowing it, Iran's last two actions crossed U.S. "red lines," prompting an American military response.

"No one came out on top — (but) arguably the Iranians," the Iran team member said.

The Tehran regime was also able to crush its domestic political opposition.

cardoso: "the war on drugs has failed!"

.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/06/brazil-cardoso-war-drugs-decriminalisation

Former president of Brazil says hardline war on drugs 'has failed'

Fernando Henrique Cardoso urges global decriminalisation of cannabis use

Gaby Hinsliff, political editor

The Observer, Sunday 6 September 2009


The war on drugs has failed and should make way for a global shift towards decriminalising cannabis use and promoting harm reduction, says the former president of Brazil, writing today in the Observer. Fernando Henrique Cardoso argues that the hardline approach has brought "disastrous" consequences for Latin America, which has been the frontline in the war on drug cultivation for decades, while failing to change the continent's position as the largest exporter of cocaine and marijuana.

His intervention, which will reignite growing debate in Europe about how to tackle drugs, was welcomed yesterday by campaigners for drug law reform who increasingly see the impact on developing countries where drugs are produced as critical to the argument.

"After decades of overflights, interdictions, spraying and raids on jungle drug factories, Latin America remains the world's largest exporter rof cocaine and marijuana," Cardoso writes. "It is producing more and more opium and heroin. It is developing the capacity to mass produce synthetic drugs. Continuing the drugs war with more of the same is ludicrous."

Cardoso, a sociologist, said Argentina, Mexico, Colombia, Bolivia and Ecuador had all now taken steps towards drug law liberalisation and that change was "imminent" in Brazil. The way forward worldwide would involve a "strategy of reaching out, patiently and persistently, to the users and not the continued waging of a misguided and counterproductive war that makes the users, rather than the drug lords, the primary victims," he added.

Danny Kushlick of Transform, which campaigns for drug liberalisation, said Cardoso's intervention illustrated the human cost of efforts to combat the drugs trade on often poor and underdeveloped producer countries: "Until this problem is taken up as a development issue it's not going to move anywhere. The default position is that this is a problem of addiction, but people have completely missed the point of the war on drugs, that the vastly detrimental effects are largely in production and transit. If you look at a nation state like Guinea Bissau, which was a fragile state before and now is a fragile narco-state, that is a prime example of the vulnerability of developing countries to the fact that these drugs are incredibly expensive."

Cardoso's article follows the conclusions published earlier this year of a commission on drugs composed of three former Latin American leaders, who had been lobbying Washington for a change in its conduct of the war on drugs. Barack Obama's election to the White House is viewed as an opportunity for fresh thinking, with Cardoso among guests invited to a discussion on drugs policy with him before he became president.
.........................................................................................................................................................................

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/06/cardoso-war-on-drugs

The war on drugs has failed. Now we need a more humane strategy

Fernando Henrique Cardoso argues the case for a new global policy

Fernando Henrique Cardoso

The Observer, Sunday 6 September 2009

It is time to admit the obvious. The "war on drugs" has failed, at least in the way it has been waged so far. In Latin America, the "unintended" consequences have been disastrous. Thousands of people have lost their lives in drug-associated violence. Drug lords have taken over entire communities. Misery has spread. Corruption is undermining fragile democracies.

And, after decades of over-flights, interdictions, spraying and raids on jungle drug factories, Latin America remains the world's largest exporter of cocaine and marijuana. It is producing more and more opium and heroin. It is developing the capacity to mass-produce synthetic drugs.

Continuing the drugs war with more of the same is ludicrous. What is needed is a serious debate that will lead to the adoption of more humane and more effective strategies to deal with the global drug problem. Earlier this year the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy, which I co-chaired with the former president of Colombia, César Gaviria, and the former president of Mexico, Ernesto Zedillo, released the first high-level statement ever to endorse harm-reduction generally and decriminalisation of marijuana specifically.

The core conclusion of the statement is that a paradigm shift is required away from repression of drug users and towards treatment and prevention. The challenge is to reduce drastically the harm caused by illegal narcotics to people, societies and public institutions.

To move in this direction, it is essential to differentiate between illicit substances according to the harm they inflict. The status of addicts must change from that of drug buyers in the illegal market to that of patients cared for in the public health system. Police activities can then be better focused against the drug lords and organised crime.

The shift towards harm-reduction efforts and decriminalisation has already begun. Recently, a landmark ruling by Argentina's supreme court and a law passed by Mexico's Congress have for all practical purposes removed criminal penalties in those countries for the possession of small amounts of drugs for personal and immediate consumption.

Colombia was the first country to take this step. A decision by its constitutional court in 1994 scrapped penalties for private consumption. Bolivia and Ecuador have liberalised their drug laws. Change is also imminent in Brazil. The chief justice of our highest court made a public appeal for clarification of the differentiation between drug user and drug dealer. A current ambiguity in the law effectively opens opportunities for police corruption and extortion. Brazil's legislature is about to consider a new law to remove penalties for the consumption of small amounts of marijuana.

This is consistent with the broader trend in Europe: the Netherlands decriminalised years ago; Portugal followed in 2001, stressing that criminalisation drove resources away from treatment and deterred people from seeking help for addiction – the number of people using drugs before decriminalisation was higher than afterwards. In the United States, backing for decriminalisation and treatment alternatives to prison is growing, but has still not achieved a critical mass of support and momentum behind traditional – failed – punitive policies remains strong.

There is still a long way to go. The trend towards decriminalisation for possession helps to empower a public health paradigm. It breaks the silence about the drug problem. It enables people to think in terms of approaching drug abuse in a way that is not first and foremost a matter for the criminal justice system. Reducing the harm caused by drugs goes hand in hand with reducing consumption.

Repressive policies towards drug users are firmly rooted in prejudice, fear and ideological visions, rather than in cold and hard assessment of the realities of drug abuse. The approach recommended in the commission's statement does not imply complacency regarding narcotics and their purveyors. Abuse of drugs is harmful to health. Abused drugs undermine a user's decision-making capacity. Needle-sharing spreads HIV/Aids and other diseases. Addiction can lead to financial ruin and abuse of family, especially children.

To be credible and effective, decriminalisation must be combined with robust prevention campaigns. The profound drop in tobacco consumption in recent decades shows how public information and prevention campaigns can be effective when they are based on messages that are consistent with the experience of those they target.

No country has devised a comprehensive solution to the drug abuse challenge. And a solution need not be a stark choice between prohibition and legalisation. Alternative approaches are being tested and must be carefully reviewed. But it is clear that the way forward will involve a strategy of reaching out, patiently and persistently, to the users, and not the continued waging of a misguided and counterproductive war that makes the users, rather than the drug lords, the primary victims.

• Fernando Henrique Cardoso was president of Brazil from 1995-2003
..........................................................................................................................................................................

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2009/sep/06/war-on-drugs-latin-america


Is America ready to admit defeat in its 40-year war on drugs?

A wave of decriminalisation is sweeping through Latin America

Ed Vulliamy in Tijuana

The Observer, Sunday 6 September 2009

Bruno Avangera, a 40-year-old web designer from Tucumán in Argentina, pauses to relight a half-smoked joint of cannabis. Then he speaks approvingly of "progress and the right decision" by the country's seven supreme court judges, who decided last week that prosecuting people for the private consumption of small amounts of narcotics was unconstitutional.

"Last year three of my friends were caught smoking a spliff in a park and were treated like traffickers," he said. "They went to court, which took six months. One went to jail alongside murderers. The others were sent to rehab, where they were treated for an addiction they didn't have, alongside serious heroin and crack users. It was pointless and destroyed their lives."

The court's ruling was based on a case involving several men caught with joints in their pockets. As a result, judges struck down an existing law stipulating a sentence of up to two years in jail for those caught with any amount of narcotics. "Each individual adult is responsible for making decisions freely about their desired lifestyle without state interference," the ruling said. "Private conduct is allowed unless it constitutes a real danger or causes damage to property or the rights of others."

Is the "war on drugs" ending? The Argentinian ruling does not stand alone. Across Latin America and Mexico, there is a wave of drug law reform which constitutes a stark rebuff to the United States as it prepares to mark the 40th anniversary of a conflict officially declared by President Richard Nixon and fronted by his wife, Pat, in 1969.

That "war" has incarcerated an average of a million US citizens a year, as every stratum of American society demonstrates its insatiable need to get high. And it has also engulfed not only America, but the Americas.

At El Paso at the end of the month, experts from the US and Mexico will gather to take stock and thrash out alternatives. El Paso stands cheek by jowl with its twin city, Ciudad Juárez, across the Rio Grande. There, last Wednesday, the day after the Argentinian court ruling, cartel gunmen broke into the El Aliviane drug rehabilitation centre, lined 17 young people against a wall and cut them down with a fusillade of machine-gun fire. Troops last night captured the suspected killer, Jose Rodolfo Escajeda, considered one of the most brutal hitmen in Chihuahua and one of the leaders of the Juárez cartel. The executions, coming shortly after the killing of 40 people over three days in Juárez two weeks ago, take the death toll to about 1,400 this year, making it the most dangerous city in the world.

Never have the war on drugs and its flipside, the drug wars, raged so furiously as on this anniversary. Yet Mexico's is only the latest in a series of murderous conflicts that have scarred the pan-American war on drugs, starting with Operation Condor in the 1970s, whereby the US helped Mexico to obliterate poppy crops, only to give birth to the new cartels and institutionalised corruption.

Meanwhile, there have been catastrophic drug wars and narco-insurgency in Colombia, combining with political struggles to create the biggest internal displacement of people in the western hemisphere. Drug-related violence has blighted Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela and anywhere the Mexican and Colombian cocaine cartels sought their product. Latin America has also become a factory for synthetic drugs, much of it now under Mexican control.

Latin America is seeking a different route to that of outright interdiction as advocated – and for decades directed – by Washington. The new thinking is emblematic of a new era in South American politics and statehood, in which the lexicon demands partnership with the US, not the subjugation that hallmarked the presidencies of Nixon, Reagan, the Bushes and Clinton.

Argentina's president, Cristina Fernández, has openly supported freeing up the courts of cases involving people caught with small amounts of drugs. In 2008, she said she complained that in Argentina "an addict is condemned as if he were a criminal". The government's cabinet chief, Aníbal Fernández, said the decision was a move away from "the repressive politics invented by the Nixon administration" and will offer the opportunity for the state to focus on going after major traffickers.

But a line is drawn between marijuana and hard drugs, the decision being seen as a step towards freeing resources for the battle against "paco" cocaine paste, a cheap but toxic and addictive drug that has swept through Argentina's barrios. Between 2001 and 2005, the use of paco increased by more than 200%.

Brazilian drugs campaigners see decriminalisation as a way of wresting power from heavily armed gangs. Under Brazilian law, possession of any drug is a crime, and any move to relax drug laws is likely to face fierce opposition from the Brazilian right and the Catholic church.

But "for South American countries, the 'harm' from drugs comes less from drug use than the war against producers and traffickers", said Benjamin Lessing, a University of California researcher. "The bloodshed in Mexico is grabbing headlines, but thousands of people die every year in Rio de Janeiro in clashes between police and traffickers."

Eduardo Machado, an activist from the PE Body Count group, which documents homicide levels in Recife, one of Brazil's most violent cities, said the country's war on drugs had sidelined debate over "the huge public health problem" they caused. "As long as we look at the problem of drugs in terms of repression, we will carry on failing," he said. "As long as the debate about drugs revolves around being more or less repressive, we will continue to lose thousands of young lives each year."

Even before conventional wisdom began to turn against the war on drugs, some leftwing leaders in Latin America had their own reasons to shun collaboration with the US. Not only was the policy failing, they said, but it was a pretext for Washington meddling.

Venezuela's president, Hugo Chávez, cut ties with the US Drug Enforcement Administration in 2005, accusing its agents of espionage. In Bolivia, President Evo Morales, a Chávez ally, expelled American counter-narcotic agents, also claiming they were spies. He campaigned to rehabilitate the maligned coca leaf as a sacred Inca symbol with medicinal and ceremonial properties. On one occasion, he brandished a leaf during a speech to the UN general assembly and offered coca tea to visiting dignitaries. When addressing Aymara Indians, the president is known to shout: "Long live the coca leaf, death to the Yankees!"

Bolivia's impoverished highlanders revere Morales as a fellow cocalero – coca grower – and are grateful the era of coca crackdowns and shoot-outs with US-backed drug officials is over. Morales, however, has promised zero tolerance for cocaine, which he considers a malign perversion of the coca leaf.

Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, another leftwinger, has refused to renew the US military's lease on its base at Manta which was used for counter-narcotics operations in the Pacific. Last year the president pardoned 1,500 "mules" who had been sentenced to jail, saying they were impoverished people who had been exploited. Ecuadorean legislators have signalled they will follow Argentina in decriminalising cannabis.

Despite almost a decade of US-backed counter-insurgency operations, Colombia's cocaine output has proved remarkably resilient, a tribute to the ruthlessness and inventiveness of coca growers, guerrillas, paramilitaries and smugglers.

Peru, the second-largest cocaine exporter after Colombia, is the odd country out in South America's shift against the drug war. It has made no move towards decriminalisation and is braced for confrontation. Shining Path guerrillas, a near-extinct movement, have roared back in the past 16 months, killing soldiers and police and seizing control of coca-producing valleys.

Mexico is in a curious position: a battlefield in a drugs war that has claimed some 14,000 lives since December 2006, but also a laboratory for an experiment that goes beyond even Argentina's – opting no longer to prosecute those carrying small quantities of marijuana, cocaine, heroin or synthetic drugs.

Decriminalisation is openly aimed at redirecting stretched resources against the warmongers and opening prison space to accommodate them rather than petty addicts. Few serving Mexican politicians have tried to pretend that, without the war, the legislation would not have been considered.

In Tijuana, addicts cannot believe their luck – those arriving at the Narcóticos Anónimos session are amazed that possession of up to four lines of cocaine or 50mg of heroin will be legal. Juan Morales Magana, 17, a windscreen-washer and registered methamphetamine and heroin addict, was working out how many hits the legal limit of 40mg of meth would get him, though his counsellor, an evangelical pastor, was ambivalent: "I wouldn't want anyone to think that, just because it is legal, one should live like this for fun. Drugs are the scourge of our society. All this can do would limit killing between small-time cholos [gangsters] for street-corner turf, allowing the army to go after kingpins and middle men. The danger is that kingpins will accelerate the domestic market if possession is legal and smuggling into the US more difficult."

In barrios such as this, drugs are sold from tienditas controlled by gangs that operate an outsourced tender system for the battling cartels. "It's unsure how the legislation will affect actions against the tienditas," said police officer Elisio Montes, whose two best friends, his former boss and assistant, were murdered by executioners for the cartels.

"Personally, I sometimes wish drugs would be made legal so that the gringos can get high and we can live in peace. Then I say to myself: no – these drugs are addictive after one single hit. They're terrifying – they destroy lives, they destroy our young people. If they are legal, they will buy more."

A further reason for scepticism is the prospect of mass drugs tourism from the US. This is not what Mexican businessmen in the border town of Nogales, Sonora, had in mind last Tuesday when they discussed how to restore the image of cities that until recently enjoyed thriving trade from Americans looking for cheap pharmaceuticals, dental treatment, souvenirs, alcohol and sex.

The prospect of border towns becoming the equivalent of Amsterdam, only with cocaine and heroin freely on sale, was not discussed. "It's interesting,' said hotelier Jesus Antonio Pujol Irastorza. "I have seen a lot written about this potential problem in the US media, but almost nothing in the Mexican press."

"For a country that has experienced thousands of deaths from warring drug cartels," said San Diego police chief William Lansdowne, "it defies logic why they will pass a law that will clearly increase drug use."

The counter-voices will continue to make themselves heard. But even in the US, the discourse on drugs is changing. The prosecutor general in Baja California, Rommel Moreno, said months ago that he found it "very hard" to talk to his American counterparts "about fighting drugs with any means other than interdiction", but senses "an important shift". Officials in the border states talk about legalising marijuana for personal use, while Professor David Shirk, director of the Trans-Border Institute in San Diego, said: "I think it is inevitable that possession of marijuana will be legal in the US within a decade."

Powerful voices against prohibition will create the underlying theme at the major conference in El Paso this month and there is even a movement of police officers and law enforcement agents urging decriminalisation, unthinkable until recently. "Today, drugs are illegal, they are out of control, and they are everywhere", said Kristin Daley, projects director for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. "If they were managed in the way that alcohol is, they would be under control. Instead of criminals getting richer, violence escalating and drug-related deaths on the rise, we would live under a system of established pricing, peaceful purchase and a regulated labelling system."

But they remain wary in Tijuana. Before the drug war, this border city was a capital of vice tourism, which has now disappeared. Tijuana lies opposite San Diego, from where most of those seeking prostitutes and other distractions came, and where a letter recently appeared in the local Union Tribune newspaper from Omar Firestone, principal cellist in the Orquesta de Baja California. He warned that the last thing the city needs is "offering sanctuary to American druggies" who will "draw the worst of our society to the streets of Tijuana and increase the flight of those seeking a better life. I guess the cartels needed a government bailout."

agentina's supreme court decriminalizes pot use

.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8221599.stm

Argentina rules on marijuana use

The supreme court in Argentina has ruled that it is unconstitutional to punish people for using marijuana for personal consumption.

The decision follows a case of five young men who were arrested with a few marijuana cigarettes in their pockets.

But the court said use must not harm others and made it clear it did not advocate a complete decriminalisation.

Correspondents say there is a growing momentum in Latin America towards decriminalising drugs for personal use.

The Argentine court ruled that: "Each adult is free to make lifestyle decisions without the intervention of the state."

Supreme Court President Ricardo Lorenzetti said private behaviour was legal, "as long as it doesn't constitute clear danger".

"The state cannot establish morality," he said.

The initiative has been supported by the government - Congress is expected to introduce amendments to the current drug laws.

But the court said it was not advocating a complete decriminalisation of the drug - a move possibly aimed at deflecting criticism from the Church and conservatives, says the BBC's Candace Piette in Buenos Aires.

The eight-page statement also called for a comprehensive policy against illegal drug trafficking.

Health fears

The move has been criticised by some campaign groups who say it will encourage damaging behaviour and lead to health problems.

"There will be an increase in the drug trade and the people that fall into addiction will not, unfortunately, access treatment," Claudio Izaguirre, director of the Argentine Anti-drugs Association told Reuters.

"My country doesn't have the necessary health coverage for what will happen," he said.

Argentina's move follows rulings by several other countries across the region, including Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia.

Last week, Mexico enacted a law decriminalising possession of small amounts of drugs, including cocaine and heroin - the country is in the midst of a drugs turf war which has claimed more than 11,000 lives in the last three years.

The aim of such moves is to enable police to focus their efforts on the big criminals in the drugs trade rather than dealing with petty cases, says our correspondent.

But it also marks a shift a dramatic regional shift to the decades-old US-backed policy of running repressive military-style wars on the drug trade, she adds.

Story from BBC NEWS

Published: 2009/08/26 00:05:47 GMT