Suchergebnisse

The link between armed conflict and the production and trafficking of illicit drugs has been frequently noted in the popular literature. Recent academic research on the matter has taken place mainly within the framework of studies of the role of natural resources in civil wars. These have tended to lump drugs together with other 'lootable' resources such as diamonds. The results have been mixed, with the main contribution so far being to show that drugs are not linked to the onset of conflict but appear to be linked to the duration of conflict. Yet, the specific dynamics and, in particular, the causal mechanisms of the linkage between narcotics and conflict remain poorly understood. Nevertheless, recent literature on terrorism and its link with organized crime provides important insights that are applicable to the relationship between narcotics and conflict. This review essay combines the economics and conflict literature with the crime–terror nexus, which provides useful insights as to the causal mechanism linking narcotics and conflict. Empirical cases indicate that where a pre-existing drug production exists, the conditions of armed conflict boost narcotics production and enable insurgents to become involved in the drug trade to finance their struggle, thereby increasing their capabilities and the challenge they pose to states. In some cases, involvement in the drug trade also seems to affect the motivational structures of insurgent groups, creating an economic function of war and vested interests in the continuation of armed conflict.

Islamic radicalism stands as a result, not a cause, of Moscow's war in Chechnya. The current Russian assault against the Chechen people, conveniently dubbed an "anti-terrorist" operation, will only breed more chaos & extremism. Adapted from the source document.

American engagement with the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia needs to be clear and predictable. The United States has the potential to play an important stabilizing role in the region, but as long as uncertainty surrounds its commitment, America's role may instead be destabilizing if other powers try to test its determination to remain engaged.