At last year’s 67 session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (CND), the UN’s drug policy decision making body, member states embraced the need for harm reduction in the global response to drugs. The GI-TOC welcomed this development, but noted that the future of global drug policy remained uncertain.

A year later, no one could have predicted how policy uncertainty would tilt into a major threat to the way the CND, and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) itself, operates. After years of momentum slowly building towards viable drug policy reform, changes in American politics and elsewhere have suddenly driven the CND away from its model of consensus-based decision making, the ‘Vienna spirit’. Global drug policy now sits uncomfortably between reform and jeopardy.

In the weeks running up to the 68th CND session, US policy positions were unclear, but as the conference opened, delegations were under no illusion as to their new approach. Whereas, previously, European and US positions had been aligned, this year the EU and other members adopted a strongly opposing stance to various positions taken by US.

Colombian resolution secures review of drug policy

The centrepiece of this year’s session was an ambitious resolution tabled by Colombia, which was adopted by a vote, with only the US, Russia and Argentina opposing. The resolution establishes a high-level UN panel to enhance the implementation of global drug policy. Adopting it is a landmark decision that recognizes the need to take stock of the challenges and failures of the current thinking on drug policy. But the path ahead is less than clear, and it no doubt faces the hurdles of turbulent politics.

One might have expected a certain degree of convergence between Colombia’s goals and the prerogatives of the current disruptive US political thinking. However, the scale of the US challenge to policies and norms could not have been more dramatic. US representatives took new positions throughout negotiations not only on issues related to drug policy, but also the UN’s agendas on sustainable development, gender and human rights.  On various strong new policy positions, they were eagerly supported by Argentina. Delegations across the spectrum were not expecting the speed and virulence of the changes in US policy.

Despite the tension during the negotiations, Colombia was flexible in adapting its proposal, making some concessions and agreeing, as a compromise for those seeking continuity and recognition of the current system, to include, in contrast to Colombia’s original intention, a decisive role of the CND and the Vienna-based institutions. Colombia was able to secure the support of the EU and other like-minded countries in the voting at the end of the session.

France, Brazil and Morocco tabled a novel resolution on drugs and the environment, focusing on the convergence of drug economies, environmental crimes and organized crime. This was the first such resolution adopted by the CND (again by a vote), showing that despite deep political divisions between member states it is still possible to get innovative proposals through.

In the end, all the resolutions at the session were adopted by vote. This abrupt shift away from the traditional Vienna spirit of consensus is a move that will be felt across the broader Vienna-based policymaking bodies.

A funding crisis

The effects of politics in Washington have not limited themselves to policy outcomes – the ability of the UNODC to carry out its mandates has come under immense strain due to recent American funding cuts and reviews. When President Trump took office, US funding accounted for more than a third of the UNODC’s financing. In January, the sudden suspension of funding of all US foreign assistance has plunged the UN in general, and the UNODC (with its heavy reliance on US funding) in particular, into an unprecedented crisis. In terms of the CND’s mandate, this affects everything from enforcement capacity to drug treatment and prevention work. In her opening speech to the CND, UNODC director general Ghada Waly said, ‘It is no secret that UNODC is facing a severe funding problem.  […]  We cannot deliver more with less when the illicit drug market has more and more at its disposal every day […]. And we cannot have the impact that you need, if we do not have the resources […].’

Common purpose in tackling drug trafficking

The fight against drug trafficking and organized crime was high on this year’s agenda, with all eyes on the threat of synthetic opioids. Poland tabled on behalf of the EU a resolution on safety in dismantling synthetic drug laboratories, with a focus on synthetic opioids.

On this issue there were some otherwise rare moments of cooperation and common purpose. In a side event tabled by Mexico and supported by the GI-TOC and Canada, Mexican, US and Canadian representatives discussed the shared challenges of fentanyl markets in the three North American countries. State representatives emphasized the need for cooperation and raising awareness among the global community. Untrammelled by the political divides that otherwise characterized much of the session, this event demonstrated ongoing commitment to cooperation based on common challenges that transcend countries’ individual policy perspectives.

This CND session, with its side events and engagements, may have superficially looked like any other multilateral meeting of the UN system. But this belies the seismic changes happening in the geopolitical sphere, and which were front of mind in corridor conversations and the formal negotiations.

How the breakdown in consensus-based decision making will affect the CND, and how the new high-level panel will operate are unclear, as is the impact of the US funding suspension. But it was starkly evident that the policy and political space on drugs has changed dramatically. The question now is whether the international community can grasp some shared opportunities for progress and cooperation within this state of flux. The adoption of the Colombian resolution shows that progress can be made despite political challenges. It is important that any channels for international cooperation and commonality on drug policy, and organized crime responses in general, are kept open.