![]() |
| Foto: GOL, Nariño, Colombia |
We already know from his repeated statements on the issue that the president, Gustavo Petro knows nothing about it. Time and again he has said things that are just simply not true, a subject I have dealt with in previous articles.[1] In July 2022, the ELN made a public declaration on drug trafficking and their disassociation from the industry, reproducing a letter sent to the Global Commission on Drugs Policy.[2] This commission argues for a human rights focus and changes in the paradigm preferring regulation over prohibition and it also argues for harm reduction amongst consumers. It is made up of former presidents, including those of Colombia, such as Juan Manuel Santos (2010-2018) and Cesar Gaviria (1990-1994) whose neoliberal policies played a decisive role in the expansion of illicit crops in the country. It is also includes the former president of Brazil Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002) and former diplomats and businessmen like Richard Branson, a topic I will deal with further on.[3] At that time the ELN made various proposal on criminal policy, health and other things without any deep development of them. Recently the ELN once again made its position on drug trafficking public. As was to be expected they disassociated themselves from the issue and once again stated that it was not the position of the ELN to be involved in any of the stages of the production and commercialisation of cocaine. Thus far fine, but the document contains various statements that are problematic in terms of understanding the issue of drug trafficking. It asserts that:
Drug trafficking is one of the main economic activities that guarantees a widespread reproduction of capital, with high rates of profit and is totally controlled by the USA and its three international agencies, DEA, CIA and FBI. Furthermore, the USA has proclaimed itself to be the supreme judge to issue moral verdicts on drug trafficking that allows them to condemn, certify or absolve people or countries according to their economic, political or military interests.[4]
Without doubt illicit drugs are an important industry and play a role in the world economy, but its weight should not be exaggerated. Drug trafficking represents less than 1% of world GDP. As the UN points out in its World Drugs Report“Although the largest illegal incomes from drug trafficking are generated in destination markets, they only represent a small proportion of the national economies of relatively high-income countries.”[5] Less than 0.5% in the case of Europe, and in some cases it even contributes less than interdiction efforts or treatment.
Of course there are regions where it has greater weight. For example in Afghanistan, drug trafficking accounted for 25% of GDP in 2023(Between USD 4.6 and 5.9 billion).[6] The legal drugs market, however, is larger than that of illicit ones. If we are talking about the accumulation of wealth the pharmaceutical sector moves more money globally and the development of its products is subsidised when not wholly financed by the states and they receive a patent on the product that eliminates or substantially reduces competition depending on the pharmaceutical. In 2023, the sales of pharmaceuticals amounted to USD, 1.6 trillion compared to around USD 650 billion from illicit drugs with a profit rate of between 40% and 90% depending on the pharmaceutical.[7] It is worth pointing out that given that it is an illegal industry and clandestine the figures for the illicit drugs are calculations and there are differences between the sources cited, but in general terms they all indicate that the legal industries are many times more larger than the illegal industries.
Another industry that is very profitable and a lot more so than drug trafficking are the arms industries and military expenditure. In 1961, General Eisenhower retired from public life passing the presidency on to Kennedy. In his farewell speech he warned about the rise of what he termed the military industrial complex.[8] But he was no pacifist and he was not opposed to arming nor using weapons, but he looked on with concern at the development of that industry. Nowadays, a modern Eisenhower would have to say that we have reached the point he feared. Global military spending in 2025 was USD 2.63 trillion. Of that the USA represented USD 921 billion, China 531.4 billion, Russia 523.6 billion followed by Germany with 107.3 billion and Great Britain with 94.3 billion. The military GDP is equivalent to the GDP of all the countries of Africa combined. Extreme poverty could be ended with just over 10% of that. It is clear that the war industry is the main one and just like the pharmaceutical one it receives juicy subsidies and state contracts.
The businesspeople of the world, including drug traffickers and the banks that launder their assets take part in that industry. Not only do the capitalists of the powerful countries do so, but also almost those from nearly all countries in the world. Colombia is not an exception to that. In 2024, Petro’s government allocated USD 7.73 billion for military expenditure and USD 8.09 billion in 2025, representing about 1.9% of GDP, far from the contribution of illicit drugs. It is worth pointing out that despite the existence of the state company Indumil, Colombia buys its most expensive weapons such as planes and boats and does not manufacture them. Though Petro has begun to change that. And this brings us to the role and contribution of drug trafficking in Colombia’s GDP. According to the ELN:
In Colombia due to a policy decision of the state drug trafficking became the main economic activity (bold not in original) and being the main global exporter of cocaine it has fused the main national economic business groups with transnational capital and finances the paramilitaries to carry out the antisubversive war and state terrorism.[9]
Let’s start with the easiest part which is actually true. Yes, it is true that drugs trafficking financed paramilitarism in Colombia. It an historical fact and I would say, a current one that cannot be denied. Though it is not clear what the ELN means by the expression “a decision of state policy” and how it made drug trafficking the main economic activity in the country, nor how it fused national economic groups with international capital, other than criminal groups. The insertion of the Colombian bourgeoisie in the world economy is an historic constant, it is neither new nor recent. Of course, Cesar Gaviria’s economic aperture of 1992 accelerated and strengthened it. But to say that drug trafficking is the main economic activity of the country, makes no sense. It is an important economic activity. But the Colombian economy is more diverse than drug trafficking. The illicit drugs industry represents 4.2% of Colombian GDP. It is very important, but when we compare it to other sectors of the economy, we see that the ELN does not take into account the most basic data on the issue. Its contribution has varied over time. As Portafolio reported.
For Daniel Mejía, professor of the Andes University, the impact of this reality is that the weight of drug trafficking in the Colombian economy is more than 4%, an historic high. “ In 2008 that proportion was equivalent to 2.3% of GDP and five years later it fell to its lowest point, 1.2%.[10]
Moreover, according to the DANE (National Administrative Statistical Department), the information and communications sector contributes 4.22% of real GDP, manufacturing industries 19.03%, and commerce, transport, hotel and food sector 34%. The ELN’s analysis of the role of drug trafficking in the economy is cursory, perhaps because it is just a declaration, but it is completely wrong.
![]() |
| Foto: GOL, Sur de Bolívar, Colombia. |
Amongst the sloganeering statements is the conspiranoic vision that the drugs industry is “totally controlled by the USA and its three main transnational agencies: DEA, CIA and FBI”. It has been more than proven the times these agencies have taken part in the drugs trade such as the Iran-Contra scandal, or the tolerance of opium when the Taliban were the USA’s friends, or the de facto acceptance of the laundering of assets and the lack of punishment for the same when the banks are caught red handed. They go no further than just fining them. The fines are significant but are a minor percentage of all the money laundered. Amongst the banks fined for money laundering are Credit Suisse USD 536 million in 2009; Barclays USD 298 million in 2010; ING USD 619 million in 2012,; Standard Chartered USD 330 million in 2012 and a further USD 1,1 billion in 2019; BNP Paribas USD 8.9 billion in 2014 and Deutsche Bank USD 258 million in 2015.[11] I do not discount the role of the industry and sectors of the US capitalist class or the state itself, but to go from that to declaring that the industry is 100% controlled by the US government is saying a lot. For example, ecstasy, or MDMA as it is technically known, is manufactured in the Netherlands and Belgium , both members of the European Union and also NATO. Does the USA control that production? Furthermore, 86% of seized precursor chemicals used in the manufacture of ecstasy were confiscated in the Netherlands, many of them stolen in Germany according to the European Union Drugs Agency.[12] Almost all the acids used in the manufacture of cocaine in Colombia come from Germany. Does the USA control that also?
One last aspect of the declaration is that “the USA has proclaimed itself as the supreme judge to issue moral verdicts on drug trafficking that allows them to condemn, certify or absolve people or countries according to their economic, political or military interests.” Without a doubt it acts in this manner, it is beyond dispute, except that it does so under the cover of international treaties from the United Nations itself, such as the Single Convention of 1961, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances of 1971, and the Vienna Convention of 1988 i.e. it is the UN which gives the US power to take measures against drug trafficking and although the USA is the most powerful country that exercises that power and it is the largest market for many (though not all) drugs, it is not by far the only country in the world that takes steps, though it is the only one that attacks and kills in the war on drugs. Other countries take measures against individuals, companies etc. Of course the difference is that the US does it as part of its domestic and foreign policy and as a measure to bring pressure to bear on issues not related to drug trafficking, but at all times it does so under the auspices of international treaties and the UN.
The ELN proposals regarding what to do are better, though they are brief. The ELN proposes a break with the prohibitionist model and to treat the problem as a public health issue, just like many organisations around the world call for. They also argue for a non-criminal treatment for other links in the production chain and talk of crop substitution. Some organisations and social-democrat NGOs have questioned the state’s crop substitution model. The peasant did not get the wrong crop and some NGOs acknowledge this and make proposals on the issue. However, they ignore a large part of the problem: neoliberalism. One of the problems with substitution is that it seeks to locate the peasant within the global economy as a supplier of prime materials, i.e. they seek to deepen the process that bankrupted the countryside in the first place and that the country be a pantry of exotic crops for Europe and the US: the cash crops of all the Colombian governments, including Petro’s.
It would seem the ELN is not thinking along those lines as it asks to bring forward “substitution plans with products from each region” whilst Petro seeks to promote cash crops. It would be interesting for the ELN to develop this aspect of their proposal, as after more than 60 years in the mountains, it cannot settle for a brief statement. The FARC with all their arrogance went into negotiate an accord whose point four dealt with the issue of drugs. Its accord was dreadful and negotiated behind closed doors. If the ELN is serious it has to have a serious debate with data and analysis and detailed proposals and to do that they have to choose better interlocutors than that so called Global Commission. Within its ranks are criminals chosen from amongst the governors of the world and high ranking functionaries such as the deceased General Secretary of the UN, Kofi Annan i.e. those who implemented the prohibitionist regime that the ELN criticises. It is not a real commission, but rather a group of former diplomats and politicians seeking relevance in the world. Talking to them is like talking to the states. It would be more interesting to talk to organisations and bodies that have actually criticised the war on drugs. Also one of the current commissioners is the controversial billionaire Richard Branson, a man of no ethics and a privatiser of the health system in Great Britain. He is not exactly a person who argues for treating the drugs issue as a public health issue as his record is to seek to generate private profit from health problems in the world. The sum of the value of his contracts with the health system in Great Britain runs into the billions of pounds.[13]
This NGO is not a valid partner, it is a commission of capitalists that want to influence the debate on drugs in an attempt to define where the debate goes and guarantee the participation of private capital in any proposal for change. They want to ensure that any change to the prohibitionist regime is profitable. It is undignified that the ELN has a relationship with them and not other bodies that are concerned about people’s welfare and not the profits of private companies.
It is a poor proposal , but one that they are in time to make a better one that is serious, rigorous and is worth discussing. How drug trafficking is characterised is important as it influences the proposals for change, who you talk to and on what basis. The participation of civil society cannot include people like Branson nor former Colombian presidents such as Santos and Gaviria.
References
[1] For example, see Ó Loingsigh, G. (23/09/2023) Fentanyl, Coca and Drug Policy.
[2] ELN (2022) Propuesta para una política antidrogas
[3] See.
[4] ELN (2026) Para la superación del narcotráfico.
[5] UN (2025) Key Findings World Drug Report 2025. UN. Vienna. p.82
[6] Ibíd.
[7] Capital Cell (07/04/2025) Big Pharma vs. the Drug Cartels. Daniel Oliver.
[8] See his speech at en
[9] Capital Cell Op. Cit.
[10] Portafolio (02/06/2024) Análisis: ¿cuánto representa el narcotráfico en la economía colombiana en el 2024?. Ricardo Ávila.
[11] Investopedia (12/10/2025) HSBC Money Laundering Scandal: A Case Study in Compliance Failures. Marc L. Ross.





















