This diagram shows cocaine seizures as part of the ' War on Drugs ' and trends in seizure rate. The most observable factor is that most seizures occur on coridors leading into the United States, from Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia. There are also numorous routes leading to other continents, but seizure rates are significantly lower.

Two explanations are either 1) More cocaine goes into America, thereby increasing the likelyhood of seizures, or 2) the capacity for intercepting seizures leading across the Atlantic or Pacific Ocean is not nearly as effective.

Using a proof by contradiction, suppose scenario #2 outweighs scenario #1. Then, cocaine must spend longer times in transit as part of transportation, creating more shipping expenses. However, the assumed and substantial lack of risk would significantly outweigh the increased shipping costs. The consequence is that the expenses involved in European and Asian markets should be lower than the American markets. Given that the retail valuation of cocaine in markets within the Eastern hemisphere are much higher than Western markets, the expected profit margins should be higher. With these incentives, one would expect increased trafficking to the more profitable markets, in addition to the assumption of scenario #2, which suggests eastern corridors have less risk. Then seizure rates within American routes would drop. The American markets should decrease and wither. Clearly, the diagram states otherwise. Scenario #2 as the more significant factor contradicts itself.

The American markets are without dispute, the largest market. The only true conjecture from this diagram is that there is more incentive to provide supply into the United States, dispite the vastly larger volume of interception.

Source: Global Illicit Drug Trends 2003, pg. 70 - published by ONDCP