8. 3 Summary


The policy domain

Insufficient co-ordination of actions was pointed out as a problem that
stood in the way of an efficient drug policy. Consequently the bill in
1984 was titled "A Co-ordinated Drug Policy". The difficulty of
accomplishing co-ordination between actors is one example of a
constraining structural factor. The central position of state authorities in
Sweden in the implementation of the national drug policy has its pros
and cons. It enables fast action by each authority but at the same time
each authority has to guard its part in the action programme in order to
secure the budgetary gains of participating in the combat against drugs.
This can be exemplified by the description of the situation in which the
Swedish Narcotics Commission had to work. It reported that providing
a foundation for a coherent drug policy was not an easy task: "We are
not on virgin soil. On the contrary, there is hardly room for all flies on
the sugar cube: a swarm of authorities and other institutions scramble
around, and in modern times two attempts have been made before."
(Narcotics Commission, 11 January 1983). The advantage of such a
large group of actors was that the commission could use a great deal of
expertise, experiences, and ideas. However, it made it also hard to find
a new and fresh grasp. There was a multitude of activities and
contradictory interests that were hard to grip and co-ordinate in such a
short time (Ibid.).
Furthermore, the emphasis on cutting of supply of drugs to Sweden
entails that data monitoring the availability of drugs in society are of
utmost importance. This can explain why central authorities such as the
National Police Board and Customs had such profound influence on the
perception of the situation as threatening.
As regards issue pressure groups, the RNS and FMN influenced
public opinion and politicians by organising petitions and lobbying and
achieved many of their goals. The third important issue pressure group,
the RFHL joined the campaign to create an anti-drug culture and
agitated against the methadone programme.


The problem definition

As proclaimed by the Riksdag, illegal drug use did not belong to the
Swedish culture. Cleaning the People's Home from drugs had become a
"national project" that concerned all Swedish people.93 The
controversies between "epidemic" and "symptom" theories became
subordinated to the goal of a "drug-free society". There was no single
cause but a complex of interacting causes. The drug problem had
entrenched Swedish society, which was seen as a failure for the welfare
state. The blame for this development was put on the liberal, flum
attitudes that had prevailed from the 1960s until the end of the 1970s.
Nevertheless, regarding the incidence and prevalence of drug abuse,
there was reason for "controlled" optimism. The use of traditionally
problematic drugs ­ amphetamines and opiates ­ seemed to be confined
to socially deviant but controllable populations. There were no
indications of increased experimental drug abuse. On the contrary, a
decrease was noticed, and at the beginning of the 1980s, the incidence
rate among youth was the lowest ever recorded. However, police and
customs reported an increase in the number of drug seizures. While the
increase of seizures and arrests as shown by data from the police were
due to increased police activities (the offensive of 1980/1981), the
customs service had not changed its routines, which was perceived as
evidence of increased availability of drugs in the country.
However, even if the situation had improved, several potential
dangers were waiting around the corner. The first were producers and
dealers of drugs, who could start a price war at any time. Secondly, a
drug-glorifying culture that aimed in a subterraneous way to induce
Swedish youngsters into drug abuse and had caused the "new wave" of
cannabis abuse. The new threat consisted of a commercialised drug
culture that exposed itself in pictures, rock music, and movies. The
quite abstract enemy, constituted by unscrupulous big drug dealers who
seemed impossible to catch, was replaced by a concrete enemy that was
recognisable in record shops and cinemas, and if nothing was done, a
whole generation was at risk.
The drug now in focus: ­ cannabis ­ seemed to be disseminating to
"normal" groups that were out of reach of agencies for formal social
control. This was a serious matter because, as the stepping stone theory
predicts, this could lead to an increase in the use of amphetamines and
opiates. Furthermore, the fact that cannabis in itself was a dangerous
drug had become indisputable. Besides, socially adjusted abusers
actually kept the drug trade going while they were not addicted and did
not really need to buy drugs.


Assistance

While establishing the chain of care went quite smoothly, the expansion
of treatment homes remained a source of concern. The slow pace was
blamed on the hampering structure of state subsidies and the absence of
governmental guidelines for treatment of drug abusers. At the end of
the period studied the situation had improved slowly and politicians
expressed their satisfaction with the good job performed by treatment
homes. Nevertheless, the conclusion was drawn that assistance had
failed to prevent that demand for drugs was still substantial and the goal
for treatment remained abstinence. As stated by the Narcotics
Commission, no one was hopeless, and all could (and should) be cured
of addiction.
This strong belief in abstinence as the only possible goal for care and
treatment can also explain the discussions on methadone. Neither the
government nor the Riksdag discussed methadone. It was a matter for
the National Board of Health and Welfare to solve. The issue was
whether the programme should be allowed to continue or be ended.
After vehement debates, the programme was allowed to proceed as an
experiment and surrounded by restrictions.
The compulsory treatment of adult drug abusers that had been in
focus for the controversies on the action programme for so long was
realised by the LVM Act.


Control

The police had failed to nail the sharks, employed a new strategy and
directed actions towards street-level drug dealing. By disturbing retail
trade, drug use would be prevented and demand reduced. Especially,
potential users and socially adjusted cannabis smokers could be
sensitive to police enforcement. Guidelines from the chief prosecutor
were considerably sharpened and dismissal from prosecution for tiny
quantities of cannabis and amphetamine would only be applied to first-
time offenders. The Drug Act was revised to enable house searches in
cases of minor offences as well. Customs also played an important role
in preventing drugs from coming into the country and concentrated on
the so-called "ant" trafficking of small amounts of drugs. Controlling
individual travellers from ferries and at airports was not very efficient
when counted in quantities of seizures but had an important symbolic
function. Anyone could see that customs officers were at their posts.


Prevention

In Sweden, the preventive effects of judicial measures became
increasingly important, as described above. To counteract the negative
influence of the drug-glorifying culture, a healthy Gemeinschaft with
drug-free activities organised by popular movements, governmental
organisations, and drug-free young people themselves was to be
established. Opinion formation became a new weapon and a matter for
the whole population. It was the responsibility of the state to give the
right signals and to demonstrate its repudiation of drugs. The primacy
of mediating a consistent message to the people was also an argument
for including or excluding provisions in penal law. However, it also
implied the exclusion of disturbing messages from the commercialised
drug culture.


The international context

Through the eyes of the Swedes, the Netherlands was not only a main
transit country for drugs to Sweden. The Dutch attitude towards
cannabis became a threat to the struggle against the drug culture that
had started in Sweden just when the City Council in Enschede decided
to allow the house dealer in the Kokerjuffer. Against this backdrop, the
Swedish strategy to change other country's attitude becomes
understandable. When the efforts to bring amphetamines under
international control had succeeded, attention turned to influence how
other countries complied with the provisions of the UN conventions.

93 This denotation was introduced by Tham (1995) in an article on the Swedish drug
policy as a national project in the 1980s. However, the idea of the drug problem as a
threat to the nation and therefore a matter for the whole population has been an
essential element in the action programme against drugs from the very start in the
1960s.