Against fentanyl scourge, US and China have good reason to join forces

The synthetic opioid presents a unique challenge not just to America but the world
Anything but a resumption of full US-China cooperation would be a lost chance to prevent new, unscheduled fentanyl precursor chemicals from spreading

Zha Daojiong

Published: 3:30pm, 1 Nov 2023

Why you can trust SCMP

Fentanyl features prominently in high-level exchanges between the US and Chinese officials and, of late, has become a must-mention topic. As recently as in August, US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo identified the combating of fentanyl as among pressing challenges such as artificial intelligence and climate change that require cooperation with China, during her trip to Beijing.

In anticipation of a meeting between Presidents Xi Jinping and Joe Biden on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in San Francisco this month, American experts expect the reduction of the flow of fentanyl precursor chemicals from China to be foremost on the list of US requests for Chinese cooperation.

Given that former US president Donald Trump raised the fentanyl issue as far back as in November 2017 during his Beijing visit, a sense of impatience, even frustration, with China on the part of American officials and its China policy researchers can be discerned.

Fentanyl is the leading cause of death for Americans aged 18 to 45, plaguing public health across congressional districts and communities. Since its invention in the late 1950s, fentanyl has been used safely for decades in clinical settings. The widespread use of illicit fentanyl – about 100 times more potent than morphine – is a recent phenomenon. Addressing the public health crisis posed by illicit fentanyl and other drugs laced with it is a constant and challenging task.

Across the foreign policy communities of the US, however, the narrative seems straightforward: the root of the problem lies in China.

Yet since May 1, 2019, China has included all fentanyl-related substances in its controlled list of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances with non-medical use. This makes China’s drug scheduling policy, which includes the prohibition of exports, one of the strictest in the world. In contrast, fentanyl scheduling in the United States, while recognised as an effective measure, is a matter of federal and state prerogative.

12:56

Fighting fentanyl: the drug from China destroying American lives

But even those who credit China’s efforts note the emergence of new fentanyl precursor chemicals that elude its ban, allowing drug cartels in Mexico to make and smuggle fentanyl – often laced with heroin – into America.

China maintains it has worked with the US to help deal with its fentanyl abuse crisis and sees it as a firmly American problem.

In response to fentanyl sanctions last May on Chinese companies and individuals, the Chinese embassy in the US said America was “attempting to blame China for its own fentanyl problem” despite Chinese efforts to help that were “guided by the humanitarian spirit”. In July, the Chinese embassy in Mexico published a statement to refute accusations that the precursor chemicals used by Mexican cartels to make fentanyl came from China.

Given this, if there is to be a positive outcome from the US-China fentanyl discussions expected on the sidelines of the Apec summit in San Francisco, there has first to be a de-escalation in the diplomatic finger-pointing on both sides.

The Chinese suppliers fuelling America’s fentanyl epidemic

Cross-border flows of illicit drugs have a long history, as do the political complexities behind the attribution of cause and effect. Still, there are very strong reasons to untie the knot of US-China acrimony over fentanyl.

First, there has to be a broader acceptance of the unique challenge that illicit fentanyl poses. Unlike, say, heroin or cocaine, which are plant-based, fentanyl is a synthetic drug. In any society, its manufacture, trafficking and abuse would be a malaise hard to eliminate. Law enforcement and public health authorities, as hard as they try, are invariably crisis-driven and stuck in a responsive mode.

This recognition demands that both American and Chinese foreign policy observers go beyond the usual conceptual mode of placing “geopolitical trust”, a vague notion to begin with, at the root of the level of cooperation or lack of – whether real or perceived.

01:36

Fentanyl trafficker in China sentenced to death

Second, illicit drug markets are incredibly resilient. When one society steps up control, as the US is doing, it is contributing to the prevention of a faster and more global spread. The world community stands to benefit from that government’s efforts, including through international cooperation.

In other words, any cooperation of the Chinese authorities in stemming newly identified chemicals that are proven to have gone to the workshops of illicit drug manufacturers would be not so much in a “humanitarian spirit” as a pre-emption of the same ill fate falling on their own society.

Blaming China for fentanyl threat won’t solve America’s opioid crisis

Third, if China and the US can let go of the bad sentiments – that China is condoning a “reverse opium war” or the US is simply outsourcing its domestic problem – their law enforcement and public health authorities would gain much-needed political and policy space to conduct evidence-based exchanges and cooperation.

The educational, scientific research and healthcare entities and individuals of both countries should be able to work without worrying about political issues like “national security” or “state intent”.

The most desirable scenario of a Xi-Biden meeting at the Apec summit in San Francisco would be the public announcement of a US-China decision to return to full public health cooperation. Simply put, it would be responsible politics and policymaking to allow scientists, and public health and law enforcement officials in both countries to resume the interactions they require to do their jobs properly.

Settling for anything less than full cooperation would be a lost opportunity to stop the flow of chemicals known to be the culprits of illicit products in circulation in the United States.

Zha Daojiong is a professor of international political economy in the School of International Studies, Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development, Peking University