Afghanistan Illegal Drug Trade

1. Afghanistan Illegal Drug Trade LT Dan Ryan Capt Steve Felts Capt Bethany Kauffman

2. Agenda • Problem Statement • Background • Network • Max-Flow Interdiction Model • Conclusions • Questions

3. Problem Statement • Analyze the unimpeded flow of drugs across the global drug trade network • Identify optimal locations to place drug interdiction resources • Evaluate the expected impact of these interdiction strategies M

4. Backstory • Afghanistan produces 84% of the world’s heroin and opium supplies. • Profits from illegal drug sales fund criminal activities detrimental to Afghan and Global security • Illegal drugs from Central Asia supply consumer demands in North America and Europe- adding to illegal drug use and dependencies harmful to society. M

5. Backstory • Other main beneficiaries of the trade include international criminal organizations in Europe, Asia, and elsewhere. • Curtailing the illegal drug trade will reduce violence among traffickers and reduce profits that fund far-reaching criminal activities. M

6. Data -UN Office on Drugs and Crime • World Drug Reports 2010, 2011, 2012 • Global Afghan Opium Trade, A Threat Assessment • Heroin: Data and Analysis • Illicit Drug Trends in Central Asia -Interpol -Geopium P

7. Additional Notes • Considered data from both 2002-2008 and 2009, however 2009 data did not provide constructive results compared to the 2002-2008 data set, which was more robust • Emplacing an interdiction team on an edge represents an ‘Attack’ on the edge

8. The Network

9. The Network Start

10. The Network End

11. Europe Resolution • Divided Western Europe into 5 individual nodes to provide further resolution to the network: Italy, Germany, France, UK, Netherlands

12. Full Network

13. Building the Model • Design Stages: -Max Flow Interdiction (constant penalty, 1 interdiction per arc) -Max Flow Interdiction (non-constant penalty, 1 interdiction per arc) -Max Flow Interdiction (non-constant penalty, 2 interdictions per arc) -Max Flow Interdiction (non-constant penalty, 2 interdictions per arc, 2nd interdiction on an arc half as effective as the first)

14. Max Flow Interdiction Model

15. Penalty Calculation -Longer distance arcs have a higher probability of interdiction, or ‘penalty’, as more drugs are likely to be seized along longer routes. -Penalty based on great circle distances and with a constant of .1 (An interdiction team on an arc guarantees interdiction of 10% of heroin across an arc regardless of distance). *Also calculated for 50% guaranteed interdiction

16. Resiliency Curves 10% POI

17. 10% POI: 1 Attack Per Arc 1attacks per arc

18. 10% POI: 2 Attacks Per Arc

19. Resiliency Curves 50% POI

20. 50% POI: 1 Attack Per Arc

21. 50% POI: 2 Attacks Per Arc

22. Conclusions Assuming 10% POI: -The number of attacks performed on an edge (1, 2, or when the 2nd attack is half as effective as the first) is almost inconsequential with less than 5 attacks. -When multiple attacks per edge are allowed, the benefits of each additional attack is nearly linear. P

23. Conclusions Assuming 50% POI: -The number of attacks performed on an edge (1, 2, or when the 2nd attack is half as effective as the first) is again almost inconsequential with less than 4 attacks. -When multiple attacks per edge are allowed, the benefits of each additional attack is nearly linear up to 4 attacks as well. -After 4 attacks, the value of each attack (or the amount of drugs interdicted) decreases substantially P

24. Future Work • Modeling drug traffickers best responses- creating new nodes and routes (edges) • Increasing resolution within the model- i.e. identifying more intermediate nodes along the routes

25. Questions Thanks for your attention! P