Moderator: Welcome to our side event on the crucial intersection of drug policy reform and environmental sustainability. Today's discussion explores how reforming drug policies can create more environmentally sustainable approaches.

​

We are delighted to welcome our distinguished speakers:

Dr. Camilo Eduardo Umaña, legal expert in human rights and humanitarian law, will present innovative legal frameworks for environmental restoration in regions impacted by prohibitionist drug policies.

​

Iyari Balderas, indigenous mexican youth activist and climate advocate, will share insights on drug policy impacts on Indigenous territories and sustainable environmental practices.

​

Dr. Gregory Hooks, Professor of Sociology at McMaster University (Canada), studies the environmental impacts of war. His empirical and empirical research has documented the disproportionate environmental exposure faced by Native Americans living in proximity to US military bases, the military’s irresponsible and undocumented carbon intensity, and the environmental calamity caused by the ecologically irresponsible war on drugs in the Andean region.

​

Each expert will present for 7 minutes, followed by an interactive discussion. We welcome your questions and insights both in-person and virtually.

We'll begin with Dr. Gregory.

​

Dr. Gregory Hooks will discuss his research on the "Treadmill of Production and Destruction," examining the frenzied dynamics of war and arms races that lead to deliberate abuse and toxification of the environment

 

Dr. Gregory:

Good afternoon, everyone. It’s an honor to be here today to speak about the profound impacts that militarized policies have had on Colombia—particularly in relation to Indigenous communities and the environment.

In my work, I’ve advanced the ‘treadmill of destruction’ framework to help us understand the relentless dynamics of war and arms races that create a cycle of environmental degradation. What we see in Colombia is a clear example of this destructive cycle—where militarization, fueled by conflict, war, and the fight against illicit drugs, is taking a massive toll on both the land and the people.

Indigenous communities in Colombia have been at the forefront of this devastation. They find themselves caught between armed groups, the government, and the criminal forces involved in the drug trade. While the government has framed the fight against guerrilla movements like the FARC as a necessity for national security, the consequences of this militarized approach are far-reaching. The war on drugs, for instance, has led to the aerial fumigation of coca plants, a practice that not only harms the coca crops but poisons water supplies, contaminates the soil, and damages the surrounding forests. It’s not just the crops that are being destroyed—these toxic chemicals are a direct threat to the very ecosystems that the Indigenous people depend on.

But the destruction doesn’t end there. The battle for territory in Colombia is also deeply tied to environmental degradation. As the military and various armed factions fight for control, they’re taking over lands that Indigenous people have lived on for generations. These communities, who have been stewards of their lands for centuries, are now being displaced from their own territories. This loss of land isn’t just a loss of home; it’s a loss of their cultural connection to the land, their ability to practice sustainable agriculture, and their capacity to protect the biodiversity that’s been central to their way of life.

The militarized capture of territory—often in the name of drug control or military security—also serves to further entrench the power of armed groups and illegal industries. What this leads to is a cycle of violence, forced displacement, and a deepening environmental crisis. Indigenous people, who were never part of the conflict, are paying the highest price.

So, what can be done? I believe that true peace in Colombia cannot come through military might alone. Peace must be built on a foundation of environmental restoration, respect for Indigenous sovereignty, and a genuine commitment to healing both the land and the people. If we continue with militarized strategies that focus solely on conflict resolution without addressing the environmental destruction and the human rights violations, we will never achieve lasting peace.

We need to reconsider how we approach the war on drugs, how we treat Indigenous communities, and how we safeguard the ecosystems that are essential for all of us. I strongly believe that any path forward must integrate ecological restoration alongside peacebuilding efforts. This means giving Indigenous people the tools and the legal backing they need to protect their lands and ensuring that the land itself can recover from the destruction it has endured.

The international community must also rethink its support for policies that continue to fuel violence and environmental destruction. The militarization of drug control has proven disastrous not just for the people of Colombia, but for the natural world that sustains us all. It's time to shift the focus toward policies that prioritize sustainable development, respect for Indigenous rights, and the healing of our ecosystems.

In conclusion, I believe that if we are serious about peace in Colombia, we must recognize the intertwined fate of people and nature. Peace isn't just the absence of conflict; it's the restoration of balance between human societies and the environment. Only through this holistic approach can we hope to see a future where both the people and the land thrive."

Moderator: Next, Iyari Balderas from Libros Prehispanicos, will analyze how drug policies impact Indigenous territories and climate crisis, highlighting how organized crime has driven illegal extractive activities, deforestation, water contamination, and forced displacement of Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities. They will share examples of community-based regulation mechanisms and resistance, including autonomous consultation protocols in Kimbilá, Yucatán, and lessons from Hurricane Otis's impact in Acapulco.

 

Iyari: , thank you. Sorry. Well, nice to meet you everyone. I speak for drug legalization, addressing the climate crisis between organized crime and its impact on the environment and indigenous people. The first role I have is as an indigenous person. My dad, my mom is from Mexico, so it's important for me. First, organized crime has been founded in rural areas where deforestation and population go hand in hand with the production of substances. Indigenous people have been victims of territorial dispossession, violence, and the destruction of ecosystems. According to the UNODC World Drug Report, the production of synthetic drugs generates toxic waste and has already impacted the environmental crisis. So, the climate crisis has become an opportunity for the already existing criminal networks as changing weather patterns have altered the production of illicit crops.

And the impact of drug trafficking on the environment in Mexico: first, it's deforestation. Drug cultivation and the construction of clandestine airstrips destroy forests and jungles in Central America, and the traffic has been responsible for the lack of reforestation. In another example, I saw criminalization and militarization here in Mexico. For example, in many areas of Mexico, the government's response has involved the militarization of territories, which has increased violence and displacement. Militarization has not reduced drug traffic but has increased social and environmental conflicts.

Another point is the cases in territories I work in different parts of Mexico, for example, in Chiapas, Morelia, and San Francisco in a government chosen in Chiapas. In this case, it's a relationship with mining, social environment conflict, and over-extraction in Chiapas, and pollution from many activities, the violence, the organized crime, shootings, and assaults for possibly recruiting, and the fear no longer allows us to continue with projects. Because in these territories, we worked with the people, and the projects are related to the security crisis. But in 2023, the organized crime entered Chiapas, so it's more difficult for the people in the ejidos and farms. So, we needed to stop the projects, and later in these territories, regarding drugs, we observed that the traffic of drugs or the traffic of people incremented in this year.

Another impact is on indigenous people, for example, the different topics of climate crisis and water. And finally, job creation and the environment. Well, in this topic, we observe that militarization here in Mexico is not a solution; it's the contrary. We observe that violence and drug traffic have increased. But the first step to reduce crime is the regulation of drugs. But here in Mexico, there is hospitalization of the police, the community police, local police, and the federal police. And in another point, in these topics, a systemic perspective is necessary. Because this year, welcome to H for the new government, Claudia. But in this government and previous governments, they did not implement solutions in the police and regulation. So, yeah, that's thanks.

 

Moderator: Thank you. Finally, our next speaker is Dr. Umaña. They will talk about evidence-based drug policies, environmental human rights to end the war on drugs. Um, yeah. On to you, Mr. Dr. Umaña. Um, is Dr. Umaña on? Hi everyone. Hope you can hear me. Dr. Umaña said that he would join at 12 because he's in another meeting. So, you can decide if we want to pose questions to the panelists or we want to listen from the participants.

Um, we can go with questions. Does anyone have any questions for Dr. Gregory or Iyari on the presentations they just recently gave? Actually, I can start off to make it a little bit easier.  Dr. Gregory, I really enjoyed your presentation. One of the things that you said was it's for environmental activists—Colombia is one of the most dangerous countries. How do you see reforms when it comes to making it safer for environmental activists? Do you see more police officers taking a role or governmental agencies taking a role in helping them with security?

 

Dr. Gregory: Well, I don't think it's hard to come up with one solution. I mean, one of the reasons in the history of Colombia why cocaine was produced there, one of the explanations is that Colombia is quite fragmented by mountains and not connected by roadways. And so that, and you have a diverse array of indigenous peoples with traditions and so forth. So, there's probably not one masterstroke to solve this problem. But I do think that one of the consequences of the ceasefire, it appears in certain regions there was a vacuum created when FARC, one of the leading guerrilla armies, laid down its arms. The vacuum was filled by criminal networks and paramilitaries, and they have not been disarmed quite effectively in certain regions, and that's where environmental activists are being harmed. So, I do think that the solutions, I would look to the indigenous people who are speaking out and being intimidated or killed as to what they would think would be a solution in their given region. But I think the larger context has to do with the remnants of armed forces that continue to operate and were not effectively disarmed by the ceasefire of 2016. That's the problem to solve. I'm just, your specific recommendation, I'm not sure that it would work everywhere, probably would work in some places but not others. Sorry for not being more precise and definitive in providing an answer.

 

Moderator: That was good insight. Thank you. Is there other questions?

 

Jorge:

Dr. Gregory. Um, thanks for the contributions, and I, , yeah, this, this is really useful to know better about the impacts in the Andean region, which is a focus nowadays for the WHO with the revision of the coca leaf, etc.. And an objective of this panel is to bridge what, what's, , the events going on in Vienna, the commission on alcoholic drugs, and what's happening in New York, for example, the General Assembly, the Security Council. And in previous weeks in New York, there was the third meeting of the state parties on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. And in Agora, we presented a working paper to discuss the role of illegal trafficking in the production of nuclear weapons because we know that several regions in Latin America mainly produce minerals for energy production, like nuclear production, and illegal drug trafficking and the presence of security bodies, the militarization in the region facilitates the illegal trafficking of drugs and weapons, right?. Because we know that the war on drugs is a failed policy that hasn't sufficiently addressed the illegal trafficking during all these years, right?. , so what is, what can you tell about this relationship between the illegal drug trafficking and the trafficking of illegal minerals and the role of the militarized policies in all that?. Because that's an unexplored gap that the UN must be considering, right? Like, what policies facilitate and drive illegal drug trafficking and illegal minerals trafficking for war?. No, what we want is peace. Please go ahead.

Dr. Gregory: Well, so to make sure I understand the question, you're talking about the, that both, that the illegal trafficking of drugs, minerals such as gold, and arms seem to be correlated?. Is that, is that the motivation of the question? Is that correct?

 

Jorge: From my perspective, they seem to be correlated, but I wanted to double-check with the experts.

 

Dr. Gregory: And what I think is we call it a treadmill of destruction. Once you have a militarized competition in place, it's hard. The social organization is there. So, there have been years since 2014 or so, there have been several years where it appears that armed groups in the Andes made more money off gold than they did cocaine. And it, it in many ways, it doesn't matter. I mean, alluvial gold mining that's illegal, once it's melted and gold, it's hard to tell um dirty gold from clean gold, if you will, right?. Once it's, once it's gold, it's gold. And so it's a, and it's, it, it's highly lootable. It's small. It can be, and it's valuable. It could be shipped. And so yes, gold, I think minerals, minerals would be an attractive, if you think of it from the vantage point of a military force, whether it's a kleptocratic or emancipatory. If you can supply the war effort from gold versus cocaine, it doesn't really matter. Or the shipment of drugs in a highly violent place where there's a lot of arms you can buy and sell drugs. And that's a problem. And there's a, there's a tendency in, especially in Colombia, but this is other places around the world and certainly in the Andes. A lot of the illegal drugs and the arms and the minerals, they're located in the borderlands far from the capital cities, oftentimes over very rugged terrain. So, it's very difficult for the central government to impose order. So, yes, it's a pernicious and continuing problem. And one of the responses that's been in place for half a century is to have the central government be more violent and more, , more capable of inflicting violence than these armed groups. And that sets in motion the cycle of again violence and human rights abuses. But again, my comments were specific to the environment. Increasingly, if this becomes a contestation of whose violence is more effective, nature is going to be taken hostage, and there are going to be sacrifice zones that are going to compromise nature. Whether it's minerals that are lootable, drugs, or human trafficking, whatever is being trafficked illegally is going to be highly damaging to the fabric of society, to human rights protections, and to the environment. And thinking, thinking of creative ways that are responsible, are responsive to the local communities that avoid a full militarization, and because when you militarize, you basically citizens of a country become subjects to a military power as opposed to citizens who are capable of exercising voice. And so I think militarizing, militarizing these very difficult challenges, and they're not easy. I'm an organization that's selling drugs that's engaged in alluvial gold mining and polluting waterways, trafficking human beings, selling drugs. They're not really nice and responsible groups. I don't want to minimize how difficult and pernicious the challenge is. But the approach that's been undertaken for half a century has been to just militarize the central government and allies. And that cycle of violence has not produced solutions, and it has caused identifiable damage in my opinion.

 

Moderator: Well, thank you for your insight on that. Um, Jorge, have you heard anything from Dr. Umaña?

 

Jorge: Not yet. And what's interesting about Dr. Umaña is that he, , was in a government position in previous months, , until October from last year, I think, and it would be wonderful to have his participation because we want to know solutions, right?. Like Dr. Gregory was, um, his participation was really useful to know what are the challenges. Not o militarization policies! that's the conclusion that I got from his participation.

Moderator: , finally, our next panelist is Dr. Umaña. He will talk about evidence-based drug policies, environmental human rights to end the war on drugs. , on to you, Mr. Dr. Umaña.

 

Dr. Umaña: Well, hello everyone. Thank you for the invitation. Um, I was invited to refer to the war on drugs' impact on the environment, and maybe I should frame it broadly as the drug issue and how it has impacted both on the side of production and narco-trafficking and the war on drugs on the environment. One of the main effects that we perceive from Colombia was the impact on the environment from the eradication policies targeting the crops from Turba in the 1970s, but was applied in different governments since then in the country, ending up with Santos' administration that stopped, um, due to the ruling of the constitutional court, the use of glyphosate for aerial eradication. However, as a country, we remain with land eradication of coca crops using Roundup, which remains one of the biggest concerns in terms of environmental policies or its impact, not only on the plants and animals but also the communities. Most of these communities, at least in Colombia, are located in areas of natural value and protection and also cultural heritage lands from indigenous and afro-descendants.

We can perceive that there is a broader effect on the change of location of crops and narco-trafficking structures and criminal organizations. The balloon effect has also caused a big burden on the environment, and how the adaptability of criminal groups has taken many different locations, and how drug policies that don't address the issue of the market but address the issue of production as something geographically located in terms of crops, the presence of crops creates a value effect that is easily assimilated by criminal groups and other communities needing this activity to broaden the space of crop cultivation and also contributing to the deforestation of the forest.

Um, if you take the maps of Colombia and you position the deforestation indicators together with the presence of crops, it is coincidental but not as exact. Meaning that the greater deforestation in the country is not happening through the existence of crops like cocoa, but also through other illegal and legal economies, which means that coca cultivations are just one of the contributing factors but also means that criminal organizations have adapted through a multi-crime scenario where they can exploit the lands in very different ways through their minerals but also the plants but also other sorts of illegal economies.

Um, climate change has also significantly affected the presence of these groups but also the possibility of developing illegal economies. The diversification of the illegal businesses is also impacted by climate change and the migration of different people across the continent looking for better opportunities and also for addressing the climate change issues that are significantly affecting many populations, especially peasant populations and other communities that are particularly vulnerable in the continent.

The attack against a particular plant or particular plants and substances in the country, I guess, comes from colonial times. The idea that addressing drug trafficking by attacking biological diversity involves not only a lack of solution to the issue but also other multiplying collateral damages to the environment that harms the communities. The steps that Colombia has taken into the rescheduling of the coca leaf, not as a dangerous substance, but as a plant that needs to be also investigated and protected in its traditional and ancestral uses, especially by indigenous communities, takes that approach in the search of protecting life. The new Colombian policy called "Protecting Life and Moving Away from Narco-trafficking" recognizes the importance of a drug policy that is concerned with the wider and broader protection of life, which includes, of course, the environment, nature, and the ways of life of communities across the country.

Um, let me just end by suggesting some possible answers to these impacts of drug policies and the war on drugs on the climate and especially the environment. As an international phenomenon, the drug market should be addressed by an international policy concerned with the impacts on the environment. This could have a multi-layer approach, not only at the worldwide level as can be perceived now in Vienna but also in a regional way, with Latin America protecting one of the most diverse environments in the world. We have countries like Brazil or Colombia, which are top three or four countries with the most biodiversity in the world, needing to take a step in creating a shared policy. The criminal organizations, but also some of the national policies or the drug market, does not recognize borders as much as governments. So, governments should take further steps of integration of international policies, recognizing the impacts and also addressing them all together with the issue of migration and the issue of the criminal organizations exploiting the resources in our regions.

Um, of course, this shouldn't take primacy over the communitarian views or the local understandings of these impacts. It needs to be a coherent regional policy and maybe one very important issue is that these policies need not only to take a step or go in-depth into the impacts on the environment but also in a more holistic, integral kind of recognition of the impacts on nature, the communities, and the ways of life of communities. This encompasses not only environmental policy but also migratory policies and also criminal policies that allow to improve the control of these situations and these problems for the continent. And well, finally, I guess that the bet to reclassify the coca leaf is one first step forward to start acknowledging the importance of preserving the traditional knowledge around different plants in our regions, but also the importance of finding responses to these problems, not through the eradication of the ways of life of people, but through authentic alternatives and local development according to the community's views and their life. And this is pretty much what I wanted to say. Thank you for your patience and thank you for this very interesting exchange.

 

Moderator: Thank you for your insight, um, Dr. Umaña. Um, thank you for all of these insightful presentations. , we now invite questions and discussions. Um, before asking a question, please introduce yourself so that we know who's speaking. Um, yes. So, is there any other questions? Yes, I have a question.

 

Jorge: Okay, thanks, Anosa. I am Jorge, advocacy officer in Agora. The participation from Professor Umaña was incredible, also because it was coherent with what we expressed in previous participations, considering all the speakers' speeches. Because a common element, based on Professor Umaña's participation, I would conclude that the policies must be coherent, right?. Like a criminal policy that may address different topics related to drug trafficking, to violence reduction, etc., but also migration policies, drug policies, etc., no?. And another topic that was highlighted was the militarized policies, and Dr. Professor Umaña was, from my perspective, suggesting that a regional policy would be ideal to address all those issues, right?. So, my question would be, how to pass or what are the policies that could be adopted at the regional level, maybe through the Organization of American States, Mercosur?. I have no idea what intergovernmental body could work. To shift from militarized policies, which is the common factor in the region for me, to the demilitarization strategy, you know, the peacebuilding policies. Should I replay? I don't know, Anosa, tell me, can he?

 

Moderator: Yes. Um, so, , I think Jorge was directing the question towards you on this issue.

 

Dr. Umaña: Thank you. Yeah. Thank you, Jorge, for your very important and relevant question. I think, um, there are many multilateral forums that should be set in place. It's not a big mystery that multilateralism has been suffering these last years from a lack of efficiency with regards to most of the biggest international issues. So, I am a big believer in multilateralism as a way of conducting dialogues, even if it is not proving to be in its best times. OAS, CCAD has a big role in it for a regional policy that could encompass different of these anxieties and needs of the communities. But there is not a single body that could be comprehensive enough.

I think that bilateral relations between countries, especially around different issues as protecting the Amazonian jungle or protecting the rivers which we don't name it usually on the international relations arena, what is going on with the river Putumayo, the river Caquetá or Guaviare, which are very important, seen as very important highways for the trafficking industry but and suffer a lot from all this exploitation, so I guess bilateral agendas around verifiable objectives of protection with an amount of indicators that allow us to actually prove that we are making or not any progress are extremely important.

The control, I totally agree with what you suggested in your question, shouldn't be just limited to a military exchange. It should be broadened to academic exchange between universities, for instance. It should broaden to the migratory policies. It should be broadened to the exchange of the agencies protecting the forests and the jungles. It should be broadened to the community organizations that have a presence, for instance, in rivers and in zones of special influence of crops.

So, I believe that an horizontal exchange, bilateral but also between not only governmental level but also the judiciary and the community level, is highly important to reach specific engagements that allow us to have agreements on how to plan and how to understand these issues because natural biospheres and contexts are not limited by political borders. Um, and sometimes, the political centers of the countries are very far, not only geographically but also emotionally, and they have very far concerns from what these natural environments actually require.

So, I guess this can be one of the strategies. I am a strong believer in the Latin American dialogue and the possibility that we can overcome different political agendas, particular ones from every country, to reach a regional stand, a regional view of these issues that could lead to these sorts of agreements.

(Moderator (Anosa) speaks)

Moderator: Thank you, Dr. Umaña, for your insight. Um, and thank you, Jorge, for the insightful question. Um, is there any other questions for our panelist today? If not, um, I wanted to thank our speakers for the valuable contribution and all participations for their engagement. Today's discussion, um, has highlighted that addressing drug policy reforms and environmental protection together is both an urgent factor and can be achievable. So, thank you so much for all of our panelists. And thank you for being part of this important dialogue. Thank you everyone.

 

Dr. Gregory: Thank you.