Questionable drug decision

       Portions of the US public and media have praised the unilateral decision by President Barack Obama to partially legalise possession, use and sale of so-called ''medical'' marijuana. The legal issue is a local matter, but the fallout will not remain inside US borders. The sudden turn-around on an important drug issue by the US leader will have ramifications in many other countries, including Thailand and its neighbours. As the public debate over this controversial step shows, the issue goes well beyond the intent of the Obama government to put anti-drug agents to work on more important cases than people trying to alleviate their pain through a drug.
       First and foremost is the question of whether the term ''medical marijuana'' is warranted and deserves recognition by a government. Thousands of anecdotes attest that sufferers of advanced glaucoma, back pain and other often untreatable symptoms feel better after smoking marijuana. But hundreds of medical studies have found no physiological support for the claims. In addition, hundreds of herbal and medical drugs are available over the counter or through prescription to treat pain. The available scientific evidence hardly supports the decision by the US federal government to legalise a prohibited drug for the first time in many generations.
       Sale and use of medical marijuana in the US and other countries has already become a joke. In Europe, Canada and in several US states, marijuana shops sell tonnes of the drug annually. Prescriptions allowing purchase, storage and use are simple to obtain from licensed ''medical workers''. There is no reason to believe that more widespread licensing of marijuana shops is likely to end the fraud: a tiny number of pain sufferers targetted for benefits from marijuana are almost lost in the crowd of scammers who simply want to smoke marijuana.
       The debate about marijuana _ whether it is harmful, whether it is rightly part of the worldwide ''war on drugs''' _ is beside the point. The decision by the US government, especially after President Obama specifically promised there would be no moves towards drug legalisation, will reverberate in many quarters. At the least, the effective if restricted legalisation will encourage illegal marijuana farming. The most ignored question in western countries which have blithely and unilaterally legalised recreational drugs is where the supplies come from. The US, like other governments, has made it legal to use a product that remains largely illegal to grow, harvest, package or sell in wholesale lots.
       In Thailand, of course, the US government's decision has no legal effect. Possession, sale in drugstores and use of marijuana may now be legal under government supervision in the US. But it remains illegal here. In both countries, it is illegal to grow, harvest, ship across borders or sell marijuana in large quantities. The profits for illegal drug dealing are therefore not going to be reduced, in Thailand and other countries, or in the US.
       While drug legalisation is a domestic US issue, there is great danger in the actions of the Obama government. The decision to support, rather than to target, the sellers and buyers of medical marijuana might deserve support except for one problem. By assuming control of the market, the US government now becomes both the regulator and more importantly the tax collector in a portion of the illicit marijuana trade in the US. This is potentially a dangerous and slippery slope. A government dependent upon taxes from the drug trade will naturally extend the scope of that business. One need only look at the virtual explosion of gambling in the US, let alone the expanding gambling business under the Thai government's supervision, to envision a government with a ''drug dependence'' and deeply involved in such a morally controversial subject.