Right-to-Reply results

Dear Editor,

happened to spot your ID21 commentaries.I am a SE Asia based
journalist who has published number of stories for international media
including The Economist on the failure of opium eradication in Laos.

1)success or failure should not be judged by bumped up and dubious statistics provided by UN drug control body without careful corroboration in the field.

2) secondly even if Laos is almost "opium-free" that does not demonstrate success, when more than tens of thousands of people have lossed their main livelihood leaving them destitute. See reports byFrench NGO, Action Against Hunger Laos.

3) crop-substitution widely seen as the solution only covers a minority of those adversely affected by eradication campaigns.

4) while eradication is promoted under the banner of reducing poverty, a UNDP report in Laos (2004), indicated that increased poverty was directly
linked to opium eradication.

5) we need to clearly distinguish between totally harmful drugs - ie
amphets which are spreading fast - and opium that has provided many benefits to the hilltribe population and when used intelligently under social constraints, and if possible based on medical advice, may do more good than harm.

Look forward to your response and better debate on controversial policies of narcotics suppression.

regards,

Tom Fawthrop

8 February 2007

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DFID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Copyright remains with the original authors but (unless stated otherwise) any article may be copied or quoted without restriction, provided both source (id21, insights) and authors are properly acknowledged and informed. Copyright © 2006 id21. All rights reserved.