Successful illicit opium production suppression interventions: a comparative analysis of China, Iran, Turkey, Thailand, Pakistan, Viet Nam and Laos

This study departs from existing scholarship by analysing and documenting nine cases of national ‘success’ to inform three primary objectives: (1) To catalogue cases of success for future reference; (2) To producing ‘lessons’ that may improve the effectiveness of interventions whilst reducing inadvertent negative outcomes; (3) To reconcile the discrepancy between national and international effects of interventions at the source.

A comparison of the nine cases of national success found: (1) All governments perceived suppression as in its best interest; (2) All possessed authority throughout opium producing areas; (3) In all but two cases the state offered incentives from which farmers perceived some benefit to the cessation of opium production; (4) All governments possessed the capability to monitor opium farmers; (5) All interventions administered law enforcement. As these five factors presented across all or most cases they can be considered necessary for a successful outcome. Additional factors, which crossed more than one case, were deemed facilitative of the five necessary factors, and included: development-orientated approaches; community punishments; negotiated eradication; and conflict resolution/limitation. The findings suggest that the primary objective when planning a national intervention must be the establishment or maintenance of the five necessary factors. As such, premature eradication - which often deviates from the establishment/maintenance of the five necessary factors - represents an erroneous path, which can be costly in terms of time and resources. The case of Afghanistan is used to further clarify and explore the cross-case findings in a practical context.