Bold Experiment : Drugs: Dutch Gain With a Tolerant Tack

The web of canals and narrow alleys they call “De Wallen,” not far from the train station and the Royal Palace, is not a pretty picture here in the city of Rembrandt.

Emaciated junkies slouch on the curbs, injecting themselves from syringes or--”chasing the dragon”--inhaling fumes from heroin that they have heated and vaporized on aluminum foil. Heroin-addicted prostitutes shiver in the doorways, beckoning customers with haunted, hollow eyes. Pill pushers, pimps and grungy dope runners clog the bridges.

Occasionally, a tall, blond policeman looking like an advertisement for orange juice and clean living steps carefully and politely through the human debris on his way to a take-out Indonesian restaurant, fetching an order for the crew back at precinct headquarters.

Seemingly Indifferent Police

On the surface, things could not look worse: open and flagrant use of hard drugs; prostitution; lurking criminals; a seemingly indifferent, oblivious police force.

Yet in all the world, Amsterdam is one of the very few success stories in the struggle against hard drugs. In fact, De Wallen is the pride and showcase of a Dutch policy that could scarcely be more different from the “War on Drugs” enforcement policies of the United States and most other countries.

Ridiculed for years as being too permissive, the Dutch experiment is getting a second look from other European countries these days largely because of its impressive reduction of addiction rates and extremely low incidence of AIDS among intravenous drug users.

However, it has not yet attracted much positive attention in Washington, headquarters of the international drug war. Commented one U.S. drug expert posted here in the Netherlands: “I would have to say the consensus body of opinion in Washington regarding the Dutch drug policy is negative.”

Still, supporters of the Dutch policy say the numbers tell the story. In Amsterdam, for example, the number of heroin addicts has declined from an estimated 9,000 in 1984 to fewer than 6,000 today. Even more impressively, the average age of addicts has risen from 26 to 31 years old in the same period, indicating, experts say, that very few new users are being added to the rolls.

The Netherlands is able to keep good tabs on its drug users because it encourages them to “surface” in unofficially designated “tolerance zones” such as De Wallen in Amsterdam. A remarkable 70% of Amsterdam addicts are registered and monitored, mainly through a pioneer mobile methadone distribution system that was designed by the Medical-Social Union for Hard Drug Users (MDHG), a functioning, government-financed bargaining union, composed of drug users.

“In four or five hours,” boasts Rene Mal, staff director of the so-called “Junkie Union” during an interview at its canal-front office, “we can mobilize more than 400 users for a demonstration or a meeting.”

Dutch officials say there is no evidence that “crack,” the bane of the American inner city, has made any inroads in the Dutch addict community.

Even the use of marijuana and hashish has declined among Dutch youth, although, paradoxically, the government permits “house dealers” to sell up to 30 grams of the substances in municipal youth centers and teen clubs without threat of criminal prosecution.

Indeed, the whole of Dutch policy is built on such paradox.

A law, dating from the Dutch Opium Act of 1919, makes possession of even a small amount of marijuana illegal. Yet it is never enforced.

“You can smoke a joint on the steps of police headquarters and never be arrested,” said a Dutch Justice Ministry official recently.

Controlled Atmosphere

Like American parents who encourage their children, after first warning them of the dangers, to experiment with drink at home rather than outside, the Dutch, while not endorsing marijuana, would rather have young people try it in a controlled, decriminalized atmosphere, than on the streets.

Meanwhile, a carefully measured “healthy living” curriculum has been developed for schools, beginning in the elementary grades, that objectively outlines the pleasures--the kind of euphoria produced by various drugs, for example--as well as the dangers of drug use.

“They don’t attempt to b.s. the kids,” said an admiring American diplomat. “As a result they have gained enormous credibility.”

An example of the sometimes startling Dutch objectivity is contained in publications from the Dutch Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Culture that carefully note that drug overdoses result in an average of 64 deaths each year while 2,000 people die from the effects of alcoholism and 18,000 from smoking.

On a recent, guided visit through De Wallen with Dutch criminologists, an Israeli official from that country’s Department of Justice shook her head in amazement as she gazed at dope dealers congregating on a bridge famous for its traffic in pills. Several drug transactions took place before her eyes. In the recess of a nearby stairwell, a man inserted a syringe into his flexed left arm.

“This would never work in Israel,” she commented, “but our research showed there were only two places that showed a decline in drug use, here and Singapore.”

Singapore, the Draconian counterpart to democratic Holland, has waged a successful, although ruthless, battle against drugs by promising the death penalty for people caught in possession of as little as 15 grams of heroin.

In contrast, the Dutch policy is what Amsterdam Mayor Eduard van Thijn, a feisty, bushy-haired, Dutch socialist who some say has visions of becoming prime minister, calls “The Third Way.”

“It is impossible to win a war against drugs without setting any priorities,” he said in a recent interview here. “We have a pragmatic policy. On the one hand, we reject legalization of hard drugs very strongly, because that is surrender. But we also reject a policy of total war, which is overkill.”

The Dutch policy has made converts of some official Americans. A detailed 24-page report, dated May 26, was produced by the U.S. Embassy in The Hague and portrayed Dutch policy in a glowing light.

“The fundamental difference in Dutch drug policy,” states the report, “is its demand-oriented approach to the problem as opposed to the supply-oriented approach favored by the United States and many other countries. The latter centers on substance eradication, law enforcement and punitive considerations. Dutch policy focuses on the drug abuser. It views him primarily as an unfortunate with health and social problems rather than primarily as a criminal. It attempts to keep him ‘above ground’ and it wants him within reach of medical authority.

“The policy attempts to stabilize his life and to limit the damage he causes to society, to family and to himself. It encourages and supplies immediate therapy--virtually upon demand whenever he is ready for it--including methadone maintenance, free needle exchange to reduce risk of AIDS and hepatitis infection if he is an intravenous abuser, counseling and residential or out-patient long-term treatment.

“Finally and when possible, it assists his eventual reintegration into society. The policy is often mistranslated and misinterpreted as ‘indulgent’ or ‘permissive.’ In fact, in this society, it acts as a powerful social control.”

No Large Ghettos

The authors of the embassy report, which was approved by U.S. Ambassador to the Netherlands John Shad, cautioned that many aspects of the Dutch policy are probably not applicable in the United States. The Netherlands, they noted, does not have large ethnic ghettos as does the United States, where drug addiction flourishes amid poverty. The Dutch social welfare system is so extensive that laid-off workers are paid 80% of their former salaries. Until recently the government even bought paintings from artists who could not sell their work elsewhere.

Nonetheless, the authors were disappointed when the report failed to be taken seriously in higher levels of the State Department.

“They thought we suffered from ‘clientism,’ ” commented one diplomat, refering to the phenomenon of diplomats becoming overly infatuated with their host country.

In essence, the Dutch policy involves vigorous enforcement against hard drugs, which arrive in huge quantities at Rotterdam, the world’s largest port; official tolerance of “soft drugs” such as marijuana and hashish, and decriminalization of all users.

Gave Heroin Back

“A week ago a cop stopped me after I bought a gram of heroin and a gram of cocaine,” recounted Ronald, 38, a heroin addict who lives in De Wallen. “He asked me some questions. I acted polite and he gave the heroin and cocaine back to me.”

That treatment was not exactly hard-line, but it was consistent with the Dutch policy of not arresting people in possession of small amounts of drugs.

Probably the most important and successful aspect of the Dutch program is the separation of the hard drug from the soft drug market.

“The secret to our pragmatic policy,” said Mayor Van Thijn, “is this distinction between hard and soft drugs. In Amsterdam, the two scenes have been completely separated. We have proven that the stepping-stone theory doesn’t work, that soft drugs do not necessarily lead to hard drugs.”

After being appointed mayor by Queen Beatrix in 1981, after he had served as minister of the interior in the Labor government, Van Thijn at first began a Dutch version of a crackdown on the drug scene. Coffee shops that dealt in hard drugs were closed. Those that openly discouraged hard drug use were allowed to stay open and sell marijuana and hashish.

Outsiders Lose Privileges

To avoid the particular Dutch phenomenon of “drug tourism,” mainly from neighboring West Germany, where stiff criminal penalties still exist for possession and use of drugs, Van Thijn withdrew drug treatment privileges from most foreigners. Outsiders can no longer receive free methadone, the heroin substitute that blocks the craving for the drug but which is also addictive, from the mobile clinics installed in buses.

Foreigners found in possession of hard drugs are bused back to their native countries.

“My first aim,” said Van Thijn, “was to get rid of the situation in which Amsterdam was an exceptional case, the drug Mecca for Europe.”

In a recent budget proposal, the Dutch justice minister has proposed going a step further by limiting the sale of marijuana products except to Dutch citizens. However, this may run into the problem faced by another recent Dutch initiative to tax the proceeds from marijuana and hashish sales. Confronted with the proposed sales tax, two Dutch youth centers, The Mole and The Happy Family, appealed to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, which ruled that the Dutch government could not tax something that was technically illegal.

Gradually Eliminated

Meanwhile, areas in the city where hard drug users congregated were gradually cleared until most of the hard drug activity became centered in De Wallen, the center of the city (literally translated, “The Ramparts”).

In this regard, the concentrated hard-drug scene is uglier than it has ever been.

“One consequence of the separation of soft drugs and hard drugs is that all the hard-drug activity has been forced out on the street,” said Dr. Giel Von Brussel, one of the medical directors of the Amsterdam drug treatment program. “This worsens our cosmetic problem. The paradox now is that it looks worse now than before.”

With the aging of the addict population, the physical appearance of many of the addicts has also deteriorated.

“Ten years ago,” said Von Brussel, “at the beginning of our epidemic, we saw a lot of young people who looked more or less normal. Now we have damaged people with an addiction history of 10 or 15 years. The prognosis for these people is very bad. We are left with people who are not going to recover, very troubled and sick people.”

But even this may have a positive side, he argued: “They are a very visible lesson for those who see them, a living anti-drug argument.”

Although most drugs, including marijuana, are still technically illegal under Dutch law, the sale and use of small amounts of marijuana and hashish are tolerated by the government. Most of these “soft drugs” are sold over the counter in “coffee shops” scattered around the cities, including more than 350 in Amsterdam. Anyone seeking soft drugs can usually find them in one of these cafes, spelled with a “c” for “cannabis” rather than the Dutch-Germanic “k” as in kafe.

The Bulldog coffee shop on Leidse Place, not far from Vondel Park, the famed hippie hangout from the late 1960s, has a printed price list for hashish and marijuana. Two grams of Afghani “black” hashish, for example, were listed at 25 Dutch guilders, about $13. The shops also sells a powerful variety of home-grown seedless Dutch marijuana, nurtured in greenhouses, for the same price.

No Lebanese ‘Red’

However, Jann, 33, the salesman, lamented that the shop had run out of Lebanese “red” hashish because of the political troubles in that Middle Eastern country. Chatting amicably like a feed-store salesman shooting the breeze over a sack of grain, Jann pointed to a sign posted over the entrance of the coffee shop, one in a chain of four in the city.

The sign listed house rules that Jann said were strictly enforced:

No Hard Drugs. No Stolen Goods. No Aggression.

Within a few minutes, Jann, who asked not be identified by his full name--”Because I might want to visit your country some time”--had sold nearly $500 worth of hashish to several customers.

Like many of the coffee shop and youth center dealers, he was practically evangelical about the virtues of the government policy discriminating against hard drugs and favoring his products.

“I only wish that kids in America could get ahold of some good grass a little earlier instead of crack and coke,” he said. “It is the nature of mankind that people are always looking for something. Even in high school, people go out for a beer. I feel bad that in places like Germany and the United States, it is easier to find hard drugs than grass.”