Please share with us how you came to this conclusion. Do you think our only tool in eradicating the drug trade in Afghanistan is destroying their fields? I hope not. Because it is more complicated than that and is far too long to discuss here.
Now I have no idea how much time you have spent in Afghanistan, but I have spent way to much time there to let this go unchallenged.
Eradicating the drug trade in Afghanistan is an international issue that has brought together both alleys and foes. As such it is a problem that is being dealt with from multiple angles by the international community through multiple agencies.
In simple terms, and as part of our COIN operations, we are better served by teaching them to harvest other crops. But in order for them to do so, they need A) Security; B) A market; C) an economic crop; and D) the infrastructural to get their goods to market.
Yes, we have had success in this area. Especially when we have had enough manpower to sustain the operations.
Here are some key facts:
1. The Taliban only benefit from 2 - 12 percent of the Afghan drug trade (Best estimate).
2. The fact is that the history of drug enforcement is checkered at best. The United States has not won the "war on drugs" after 40 years within our own borders. There is no reason to believe that we could be more successful in a place like Afghanistan.
This is what Richard Holbrooke had to say about our efforts to eradicate the Afghan poppy crop:
“The Western policies against the opium crop, the poppy crop, have been a failure,” the representative, Richard C. Holbrooke, told reporters on the margins of the Group of 8 conference in the northern Italian city of Trieste, Reuters reported. “They did not result in any damage to the Taliban, but they put farmers out of work and they alienated people and drove people into the arms of the Taliban.”
Mr. Holbrooke said the United States would begin phasing out eradication efforts, which generally have involved spraying or plowing under poppy fields, often under fire from Taliban militants or angry farmers. Instead, he said, more emphasis would be placed on helping Afghan farmers make a living through other crops and on seizing both drugs coming out of the country and growing and processing supplies coming in.
…
Mr. Holbrooke said Saturday that the United States had “wasted hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars” on the eradication program. “The poppy farmer is not our enemy. The Taliban are,” he was reported as saying.
…
And Antonio Maria Costa, the head of the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, praised the shift, calling eradication efforts “a sad joke” — sad because so many Afghan security forces had been killed in the efforts, though only “about 3 percent of the volume” had been eradicated, Reuters said.
…
Afghanistan supplies more than 90 percent of the world’s heroin, and the drug trade is estimated to account for about half of Afghanistan’s economy. The United Nations estimates that in 2007, the Taliban made as much as $300 million from the opium trade."
So as to your 4 point COIN Strategy, it is all good stuff. The problem is that the Taliban has benefited from extorting money from international relief projects that are trying to provide security and build infrastructure. It is believed that the Taliban has benefited more from this extortion of international aid than they have from the opium trade. Afghanistan is a unique problem, part of the problem is that Afghanistan is a nation in borders only. The corruption of the government and Afghan society as a whole makes any progress glacial and terribly expensive. More to the point, you stated in an earlier post that a lot of Marines and soldiers are putting their lives on the line to eradicate the opium trade. That is why I think it is important to weigh the benefit of putting your men/women in harms way. It is important to consider tf the goals are important enough to the war effort and even then one needs to ask if the mission is achievable. If upon reflection, the strategy is questionable, then you should consider alternatives and seek to gain the greatest benefit at the most reasonable cost.
While I admit to being trite in suggesting it might be better to buy the stock of poppies than to continue to try and eradicate it. The fact is that the US has already started to move away from that strategy. The idea of exchanging crops is worthwhile and should be pursued, but market dynamics will impact that as well (i.e. a drought impacting wheat production this year). My point was not well articulated, but simply put, we need to give the farmers an economic incentive to stop producing poppies, we would like to keep these drugs off the streets, and we don't want to give the Taliban any allies. As to your final comment that "we have had success in this area. Especially when we have had enough manpower to sustain the operations". Manpower is being drawn down, there will not be more Americans on the ground in future years, so we will need to transition from hard power to soft power and we need the Afghan government to stand up and protect their people.
Nuff Said...
