INTERPOL’s role in the “war on drugs” is to facilitate global law enforcement cooperation to disrupt international drug trafficking networks and support supply-reduction strategies, while the “war on drugs” itself is a broad term for a long-standing, often debated, global policy approach to drug control

. 

INTERPOL’s Role

INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) does not make arrests itself, as it does not have executive powers. Instead, it supports national law enforcement agencies in their efforts to combat drug trafficking by: 

• Coordinating Global Operations: INTERPOL coordinates international operations like “Operation Lionfish” and “Project Mayag,” which target drug trafficking networks along various routes (air, land, maritime) and have resulted in major seizures and arrests worldwide.
• Intelligence and Analysis: The organization provides a secure platform for member countries to exchange real-time intelligence on drug trafficking routes, criminal modus operandi, and the networks involved. Tools like the RELIEF database help analyze the chemical composition and markings of seized drug packages.
• Capacity Building and Training: INTERPOL offers comprehensive training and technical support to police forces globally, enhancing their capacity to detect and investigate drug trafficking and identify new trends in synthetic drugs and concealment methods.
• Partnerships: It works closely with other international bodies such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the World Customs Organization (WCO) to provide a comprehensive, “whole of justice” approach to the world drug problem. 

The “War on Drugs” Context

The term “war on drugs” refers to the long-standing, aggressive policy aimed at eradicating the production, distribution, and consumption of illicit drugs through strict prohibition and criminalization. 

• Policy Debate: This approach has faced significant criticism, with various experts and global bodies, including UN experts and the Global Commission on Drug Policy, stating that the “war on drugs” has largely failed and calling for policies rooted more in human rights, public health, and regulation.
• Impact on Crime: Despite these efforts, drug trafficking continues to be a major source of funding for transnational organized crime, which often converges with other illicit activities like human trafficking, arms smuggling, and terrorism. The increasing sophistication of synthetic drug production further exacerbates the challenges faced by law enforcement. 

In essence, while INTERPOL provides operational support to its member countries’ efforts to enforce drug laws, the broader policy framework within which it operates is a subject of ongoing international debate and re-evaluation.

Criticisms of the “war on drugs” approach are extensive and have been raised by a wide range of experts and global organizations, including the Global Commission on Drug Policy and the UN Human Rights Chief

. 

Key criticisms include:

• Ineffectiveness: The primary criticism is that the “war on drugs” has largely failed to achieve its main goals of reducing the supply, demand, and use of illicit drugs. Despite decades of effort and trillions of dollars spent, drugs are often cheaper, more potent (e.g., fentanyl), and more accessible than ever, and overdose deaths have reached record highs in some places.
• Mass Incarceration and Racial Disparity: The punitive approach has led to massive increases in prison populations, with millions incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenses. Enforcement has disproportionately targeted marginalized communities, particularly Black and Hispanic individuals in the U.S., despite similar drug usage rates across racial groups.
• Fueling Violence and Organized Crime: By maintaining a black market, drug prohibition has channeled vast profits to violent criminal organizations and international cartels, who battle for territory and power, leading to widespread violence, human rights abuses, and political instability in many parts of the world.
• Public Health Crises: Criminalization drives drug users underground, away from essential health services, which exacerbates public health problems like the spread of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C through shared needles. It also hinders access to effective, evidence-based treatments and harm reduction measures, such as substitution therapy.
• Human Rights Abuses: The approach has been linked to various human rights violations, including the use of forced “drug detention centers,” police brutality, and the erosion of civil liberties.
• High Financial Cost: Billions of dollars are spent annually on enforcement and incarceration, which critics argue could be better used for more cost-effective strategies like treatment, prevention, and harm reduction programs.
• Failure to Address Root Causes: The focus on supply control through law enforcement ignores the underlying socioeconomic, mental health, and trauma-related issues that contribute to drug use and addiction. 

These criticisms have led to increasing calls for reform and a shift towards public health and human rights-based approaches to drug policy, as seen in countries that have experimented with decriminalization like Portugal.