Utterly staggering interview in the Independent with Mike Trace, the former deputy British drug czar, who was forced to resign from a key role as Head of Demand Reduction at the United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime in Vienna after the Daily Mail exposed his role at the centre of a network to subvert UN drug prohibition laws.

Trace was for a time in a position of unrivalled influence in the drugs world. After being deputy drug czar, he was Director of Performance at the Government’s National Treatment Agency. He was at the heart of Europe as chairman of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, (ENCDDA) the body which effectively draws up EU drug policy. And he was at the heart of the UN as its head of demand reduction. In all these posts, he was supposed to be upholding laws to reduce drug use.

I happen to know about this, since I was the journalist who exposed him after seeing a tranche of correspondence and emails. In January 2003, I wrote that he was ‘revealed to be the driving force behind a co-ordinated international effort to disband the world’s anti-drug laws by stealth’. The drug legalisers’ main obstacle was the UN conventions on drugs requiring countries to prevent the possession, use, production and distribution of illegal narcotics. I discovered that he was at the heart of a network operating covertly to undermine those conventions. The British headquarters of his operation – created from the shell of the ailing drug charity Release – was to be financed in part by the Open Society Institute, funded by the billionaire financier George Soros, which openly campaigns for ‘harm reduction’ and legalisation on the grounds that the war on drugs causes more harm than drugs themselves. I wrote:

‘But that’s not all. For Mr Trace’s attempts to obtain additional funds from European sources disclose a vast and intricate web of non-governmental organisations, all beavering away at drug legalisation. In particular, Mr Trace sought funding from the Brussels-based Network of European Foundations for Innovative Cooperation (NEF). This innocuous-sounding grant-giving body has actually spawned a proliferation of drug legalisation efforts through its offshoot ENCOD, the European NGO Council on Drugs and Development. ENCOD says that ‘drug use as such does not represent the huge threat for society as it is supposed to do’. The real threat, it says, is posed by the war on drugs to the ‘millions of peasants in Peru, Bolivia and Colombia’ -- the people cultivating the drug crops! So it wants a legal framework to bring about the industrialisation of drug production, no less. And to achieve this, it proposes that public opinion should be softened up by ‘harm reduction’ policies which will pave the way to eventual legalisation… ENCOD, moreover, has close links to the Transnational Radical Party, the drug legalisation outfit which has a toehold in the European Parliament and which has been the driving force behind the MEPs’ legalisation petition.’

Now I read this today in the pro-drug legalisation Independent:

‘The newspaper [the Daily Mail] published e-mails from the year before he started at the UN. It used them with characteristic sobriety. “Is This A Sinister Conspiracy To Get The World Hooked?”, an entirely sane headline asked.
Trace, it seemed, was not an honest and internationally-respected expert concerned with reducing harm. No - he “was pulling the strings of a huge operation in which international activists were agitating covertly to manipulate government and public opinion... [and leading] a sinister liberal elite that has made a dope of Blunkett and [wants to] subvert UN laws”.
The truth does not quite so closely resemble a Freddie Forsyth novel. After losing his job as deputy drugs tsar, Trace had been approached by billionaire philanthropist George Soros to put together plans for an international campaigning group which would lobby for the liberalisation of drugs policies.
“The Mail selectively quoted what I had said over the year I had been discussing this with Soros, to present it as some kind of conspiracy to undermine world order,” he says. “Unfortunately my style gives ammunition to fire against me. I said jokingly in one e-mail to a friend - when I was trying to decide whether to take the UN job - that I might go for it so I could be a ‘fifth columnist’. That was then quoted by the Mail as if it had been said seriously, as if there really was some organised conspiracy. It was completely insane.” Trace was gone within a week of the Mail’s story being published. The idea that there is a liberal elite manipulating drugs policy is preposterous, the idea that Trace was masterminding it would be hilarious had it not had such devastating consequences for the “war on drugs”.’

Oh really. Well, here are the quotes from Trace’s correspondence which formed the basis of the Mail story (written by my colleague Steve Doughty) and my column, which did indeed have this effect. Early in 2002, Trace outlined a brief project plan for what he called:

‘a set of actions that represent my view of the best way forward to achieve our objectives. Given the need to undertake some actions quickly, but with a number of uncertainties remaining on funding sources and partnerships, I suggest a staged approach.

‘Stage 1 – Next few weeks.
Project plan – Could you Ethan [Nadelmann of the Soros-linked Drug Policy Alliance in the United States], and Aryeh [Neier, President of OSI in New York] give me your views on the attached plan (and this proposed timetable), so we can agree to use it as the basis of our discussions with potential partners/funders.
Partners – My understanding is as follows:
Aryeh will progress discussions with Schmitt and Rausing Foundations.
I, together with Ruth Runciman, will try to find out more about the NEF initiative, and look for a basis of partnership.
Mabel [Wisse-Smit of the Open Society Institute] will draft letters to Branson, Roddick and the Oak Foundation, describing the outcome of the meeting, and seeking a meeting to discuss their possible involvement.
Aryeh and Ethan will consider which other European Foundations could usefully be approached.

‘Stage 2 – Next 6 months
I suggest we view this as a development phase in which the essential infrastructure and partnership building is progressed but that you reserve judgment on a long term investment, and I do likewise on formally stepping out of my current statutory roles. The actions that can be progressed during this period are:
Development of the infrastructure of a London based institute
Development of partnerships with funders and other reform organisations
Development of a list of opinion formers willing to support the initiative
Work to refine and operationalise the project plan
(Potentially) work with IHRD [International Harm Reduction Development – A program of the Open Society Institute on the accession of the issue.

‘I am thinking that we could do this by asking Shona Beaton (the woman who I´ve earmarked to lead on operations/administration of this initiative) to work full time during this period, and engage sessional staff as necessary. I myself could devote something like a day per week to overseeing the above actions, and attending key meetings. Would OSI be willing to make available $100,000 to resource this development phase?

‘Stage 3 – 3 years from October 2002
Subject to the progress we make during Stage 2, we will hopefully be in a position to proceed with the full project plan by October, which will give us time to get the Institute, Network and Comite des Sages fully operational for the 2003 global drug policy reviews.’

In correspondence with Aryeh Neier, Trace wrote: ‘in terms of my own involvement, I think that it would be of most use…providing advice and consultancy from behind the scenes, in the light of my continuing role as chair of the EMCDDA, my association with the UK government and some work I am being asked to put together by the UNDCPD in Vienna. This “fifth column” role would allow me to oversee the setting up of the agency…while promoting its aims subtly in the formal governmental settings.’ This is what Trace refers to in the Independent as ‘said jokingly to a friend’. Some joke. Some friend.

In another message, Trace wrote: ‘The host organisation in London [to challenge the UN drugs conventions] will be Release, a long established drugs and civil liberties NGO.’

He wrote to Neier: ‘The basic objectives remain the same – to assemble a combination of research, policy analysis, lobbying and media management that is sufficiently sophisticated to influence governments and international agencies as they review global drug policies in the coming years. The key decision points remain the reviews of the European Union Drug Strategy in 2003 (and again in 2004), and the political summit of the UN Drug Programme in Vienna in April 2003.’

His involvement was kept secret and advice was given about the line to take to conceal it. One meeting minuted thus:

‘Mike to remain on the group, and contribute to the initiative, but members need to ensure that, externally, the line is that he gave advice on policy and lobbying in the summer but is no longer involved.’

Trace himself wrote: ‘Now I have taken up my post at the UN, I absolutely cannot be associated with a lobbying initiative – the line I am using is that, through the summer, I gave advice to several groups on how the EU and UN policy structures worked, but am now no longer in contact.’ He also warned a colleague: ‘A small but crucial point – can I from now on not be referred to by name in any written material.’

He also wrote: ‘Finally, I have been offered the post of Head of Demand Reduction at the UN, and intend to accept it. The Executive Director, Antonio Costa, is, at least for the moment, asking me for guidance on how to handle the April meeting, so I have the opportunity to influence events from the inside, while continuing to work on this initiative.’

Trace outlined a short term programme of action targeted at the following year’s UN and EU meetings. ‘This should be undertaken as a joint programme of work agreed with NEF (Network of European Foundations) – they would concentrate on NGO mobilisation and media management, we would concentrate on research, policy analysis and the development of a group of high profile spokespeople.’ He estimated that financing ‘in the region of $320,000 to cover the next 9 months’ was needed and proposed that this should be provided by the Soros-funded OSI and that a decision on longer term funding should be made later. ‘I hope that Mr Soros is able to agree to this proposal – I remain keen to help move things forward and fear that, without our involvement, the lobbying work on this issue will be badly directed and ineffective.’

Trace established contact with advisers to George Papandreou, who predicted that his department would host a European Conference at political level to review the EU drug strategy during the Greek Presidency. ‘He is also likely to be the Minister responsible for putting together the EU position for the UN meeting, which would present obvious opportunities,’ Trace stated.

In a subsequent article in the Mail on Sunday Trace’s former boss, the former British drugs czar Keith Hellawell, said he was not surprised to learn that Trace had been instrumental in setting up an organisation to undermine global drugs policy. ‘I worry how much damage he and his co-conspirators have already caused. I know all their names – some are very prominent figures in their own countries and have the ear of senior politicians… However, it is an act of cowardice to masquerade behind a position of respectability, protected by public office, to undermine something you are paid – out of hard-earned taxes – to uphold. Shame on you, Mr Trace.’

The Independent headline on its interview reads: ‘So why was Mike Trace hounded from his job, and vilified as a dangerous extremist?’

Readers can judge the answer for themselves.

Posted by melanie at March 30, 2004