Beyond regime weakening? Lessons from the UNGASS decade

David R. Bewley-Taylor

doi:10.1017/CBO9781139057424.007

6 - Beyond regime weakening? Lessons from the UNGASS decade

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 December 2012

David R. Bewley-Taylor

Show author details

David R. Bewley-Taylor: Affiliation:
Swansea University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Laws evolve to reflect changes in the society that adopts them. International standards will evolve as the international community evolves, but time and effort must go into the process.

Daniel Dupras, Canada’s International Obligations Under the Leading International Conventions on the Control of Narcotic Drugs, 1998

International regimes are not static constructs. Rather, they are dynamic social institutions that evolve over time according to the perceived needs and relative political capabilities of their members. Having thus far explored the processes of transformation and the changes taking place within the GDPR, this chapter shifts the study’s focus to examine debates and mechanisms relating to potential changes of the regime.

The year 2012 is a particularly fitting date to consider moves beyond the processes of regime weakening discussed so far. It marks the one-hundredth anniversary of the first fully-fledged multilateral agreement on drug control held in The Hague. Moreover, and more significantly in terms of the development of a US inspired and sustained global prohibitive norm, it should also be recalled that 2011 marked the fiftieth anniversary of the passage of the legislative bedrock of the modern regime: the Single Convention. The proximity of these significant anniversaries highlights not only its impressive longevity and resilience, but also simultaneously raises questions concerning the continuing relevance of the regime in its entirety for the contemporary era. Mindful of both its age and the increasing tensions within it, this chapter is premised on the belief that, as has been the case in a host of other issue areas, it is now appropriate to consider a process of modernization and the formal alteration of at least some aspects of the UN treaties on which the GDPR is based.

Type: Chapter
Information: International Drug Control
Consensus Fractured
, pp. 279 - 336

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057424.007 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Thoumi, F. E.Drogas y Prohibición: una Vieja Guerra, Un Nuevo DebateBuenos AiresLibros del Zorzal, 2010Google Scholar

Gehring, T.Regime Consequences: Methodological Challenges and Research StrategiesDordrecht, the NetherlandsKluwer Academic Publishers, 2004Google Scholar

United Nations International Drug Control ProgrammeWorld Drug ReportOxford University Press 1997Google Scholar

Room, R.Rosenqvist, P.‘Drugs in a Global Perspective: The International Drug Control System’s Best Foot Forward’Addiction Research 7, 1999 190CrossRef Google Scholar

Young, O. R.International RegimesIthaca, New YorkCornell University Press, 1983Google Scholar

Reuter, P.Chasing Dirty Money: The Fight Against Money LaunderingWashington, DCPearson Institute, 2004Google Scholar

WTOUnderstanding the WTOGenevaWorld Trade Organization, 2010Google Scholar

Horwood, G.TNI Expert Seminar on the Classification of Controlled SubstancesAmsterdamTransnational Institute, 2010Google Scholar

McAllister, W. B.Drug Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century: An International HistoryLondonRoutledge, 2000Google Scholar

Room, R.Cannabis Policy: Moving Beyond StalemateBeckley Foundation Press and Oxford University Press, 2010Google Scholar

Leinwand, M.‘The International Law of Treaties and United States Legalization of Marijuana’Columbia Journal of Transatlantic Law 10, 1971 43Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D.Fifty Years of the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs: A ReinterpretationAmsterdamTransnational Institute, Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies, 12, 2011Google Scholar

Nutt, D.Development of a rational scale to assess the harm of drugs of potential misuse’The Lancet 369, 2007 1047CrossRef Google Scholar

Kleiman, M.Against Excess: Drug Policy for ResultsNew YorkBasic Books, 1992Google Scholar

Shibuya, K.‘WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: Development of an Evidence Based Global Public Health Treaty’British Medical Journal 327 2003 154CrossRef Google Scholar

Bruun, K.The Gentlemen’s Club: International Control of Drugs and AlcoholUniversity of Chicago Press, 1975Google Scholar

Andreas, P.Policing the Globe: Criminalization and Crime Control in International RelationsOxford University Press, 2006Google Scholar

1992

Henman, A.Coca MythsAmsterdamTransnational Institute, Drugs and Conflict Debate Paper, No. 17, 2009Google Scholar

Bertram, E.Drug War Politics: The Price of DenialUniversity of California Press, 1996Google Scholar

UNODC2005 World Drug ReportViennaUnited Nations, 2005Google Scholar

Wood, E.Werb, D.Marshall, B. D. L.Mortimer, J. S. G.Kerr, T.‘The War on Drugs: A Devastating Public Policy Disaster’The Lancet 373 2009 989CrossRef Google Scholar

Barrett, D.‘Security, Development and Human Rights: Normative, Legal and Policy Challenges for the International Drug Control System’International Journal of Drug Policy 21, 2010 141CrossRef Google Scholar

Werb, D.Rowell, G.Guyatt, G.Kerr, T.Montaner, J.Wood, E.Effect of Drug Law Enforcement on Drug Related Violence: Evidence from a Scientific ReviewVancouverInternational Centre for Science in Drug Policy, 2010Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D.At a Crossroads: Drug Trafficking, Violence and the Mexican StateBeckley, Oxon.Washington Office on Latin America and The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, Briefing Paper 13, 2007Google Scholar

Metaal, P.Systems Overload: Drug Laws and Prisons in Latin AmericaAmsterdam and Washington, DCWashington Office on Latin America and Transnational Institute, 2011Google Scholar

Barrett, D.Recalibrating the Regime: The Need for a Human Rights-Based Approach to International Drug PolicyBeckley, Oxon.The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, in partnership with the International Harm Reduction Association, Human Rights Watch and the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Report 13, 2007Google Scholar

Mena, F.‘Narcophobia: Drugs Prohibition and the Generation of Human Rights Abuses’Trends in Organized Crime 13, 2009 60CrossRef Google Scholar

Donnelly, J.Universal Human Rights in Theory and PracticeIthaca, New YorkCornell University Press 2003Google Scholar

Lemus, M. C. R.Drugs and Democracy in Latin America: The Impact of US PolicyBoulder, ColoradoLynne Reinner Publishers, 2005Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D.The United States and International Drug Control, 1909–1997LondonContinuum, 2001Google Scholar

Braithwaite, J.Global Business RegulationCambridge University Press 2000Google Scholar

Manderson, D.From Mr Sin to Mr Big: A History of Australian Drug LawsOxford University Press, 1993Google Scholar

Fazey, C. J. S.Bewley-Taylor, D.‘Prohibition, Pragmatism and Drug Policy Repatriation’International Journal of Drug Policy 14, 2003 142CrossRef Google Scholar

Blickman, T.Drug Policy Reform in Practice: Experiences with Alternatives in Europe and the USAmsterdamTransnational Institute and Nueva Sociedad, 2009Google Scholar

Wodak, A.‘All Drug Politics is Local’International Journal of Drug Policy 17, 2006 84CrossRef Google Scholar

Young, O. R.International RegimesIthaca, New YorkCornell University Press, 1983Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D. R.‘Harm Reduction and the Global Drug Control Regime: Contemporary Problems and Future Prospects’Drug and Alcohol Review 23, 2004 488CrossRef Google Scholar

Fidler, D. P.‘The Globalization of Public Health: The First 100 Years of International Health Diplomacy’Bulletin of the World Health Organization 79, 2001 844Google Scholar

2009

Bewley-Taylor, D.‘The 2009 Commission on Narcotic Drugs and its High Level Segment: More Cracks in the Vienna Consensus’Drugs and Alcohol Today 9, 2009 10CrossRef Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D. R.‘Challenging the UN Drug Control Conventions: Problems and Possibilities’International Journal of Drug Policy 14, 2003 171CrossRef Google Scholar

Rolles, S.After the War on Drugs: Blueprint for RegulationBristol, UKTransform Drug Policy Foundation, 2009Google Scholar

Helfer, L. R.‘Exiting Treaties’Virginia Law Review 91, 2005 1602Google Scholar

Youngers, Coletta A.The Obama Administration’s Drug Control Policy on Auto-PilotLondonInternational Drug Policy Consortium, Briefing Paper, 2011Google Scholar

Kupchan, C. A.The End of the American Era: US Foreign Policy and the Geopolitics of the Twenty-First CenturyNew YorkVintage Books, 2003Google Scholar

Cooper, R.The Breaking of Nations: Order and Chaos in the Twenty-First CenturyLondonAtlantic Books, 2004Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D.‘Emerging Policy Contradictions between the United Nations Drug Control System and the Core Values of the United Nations’International Journal of Drug Policy 16, 2005 427CrossRef Google Scholar

MacCoun, R.Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times & PlacesCambridge University Press, 2001CrossRef Google Scholar

Snidal, D.‘The Limits of Hegemonic Stability Theory’International Organization 39, 1985 579CrossRef Google Scholar

Buxton, J.The Political Economy of Narcotics: Production, Consumption and Global MarketsLondonZed Books, 2006Google Scholar

Cronin, B.‘The Paradox of Hegemony: America’s Ambiguous Relationship with the United Nations’European Journal of International Relations 7, 2001 103CrossRef Google Scholar

Haseler, S.Super-State: The New Europe and Its Challenge to AmericaLondonI.B. Tauris, 2004Google Scholar

Harries, O.‘The Collapse of the West’Foreign Affairs 72, 1993 41CrossRef Google Scholar

Reinarman, C.‘Geo-political and Cultural Constraints on International Drug Control Treaties’International Journal of Drug Policy 14, 2003 206CrossRef Google Scholar

Thoumi, F.Global Drug Policy: Building a New FrameworkParisThe Senlis Council, 2003Google Scholar

Bewley-Taylor, D.The Funding of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime; An Unfinished JigsawBeckley, Oxon.The Beckley Foundation Drug Policy Programme, Report 11, 2006Google Scholar

Blickman, T.The UNGASS Evaluation Process EvaluatedWitley, SurreyInternational Drug Policy Consortium, Briefing Paper, 2006Google Scholar

Haass, R. N.‘The Age of Nonpolarity: What will Follow US Dominance’Foreign Affairs 87, 2008 44Google Scholar

Mowle, T. S.Allies at Odds? The United States and the European UnionBasingstoke, UKPalgrave Macmillan, 2004CrossRef Google Scholar

Shelly, T.‘Trends in European Drug Policies: A New Beginning or More of the Same?Journal of Drug Issues 34, 2004 481Google Scholar

Zielonka, J.Explaining Euro-Paralysis: Why Europe Is Unable to Act in International PoliticsBasingstoke, UKPalgrave, 1998CrossRef Google Scholar

Smith, K.European Foreign Policy in a Changing WorldCambridge, UKPolity, 2008Google Scholar

Jelsma, M.Lifting the Ban on Coca Chewing: Bolivia’s Proposal to Amend the 1961 Single ConventionAmsterdamTransnational Institute, Series on Legislative Reform of Drug Policies, No. 11, March 2011Google Scholar

Book contents

6 - Beyond regime weakening? Lessons from the UNGASS decade

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive