International Information Programs Global Issues | Narcotics

25 February 2002

Bush Says Burma, Afghanistan, Haiti Failing in Anti-Drug Effort

Afghanistan, Haiti granted waiver on U.S. aid cutoff

President Bush notified the U.S. Congress that Burma has "failed demonstrably to make substantial efforts" to abide by international agreements to combat narcotics trafficking, the White House announced February 25. Under the law, this determination makes Burma ineligible to receive any but humanitarian aid from the United States.

Bush also cited Afghanistan and Haiti as nations that have failed in their anti-drug trafficking efforts. But exercising a waiver allowed by law, Bush has determined that continued aid to these two nations is vital to U.S. interests.

The annual assessment of global drug trafficking identifies 23 nations as being major illicit drug producing and drug-transit countries. They are: Afghanistan, The Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Thailand, Venezuela and Vietnam.

Following is the text of the White House statement:

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary

February 25, 2002

Statement by the Press Secretary

Annual Presidential Determinations for Major Illicit Drug Producing
and Drug-Transit Countries

Acting on recommendations from the Secretary of State, President Bush has sent to Congress his annual counternarcotics determinations with respect to the current list of major illicit drug producing and drug-transit countries (known as the "majors list").

This year the President is required to identify any country on the majors list that has "failed demonstrably to make substantial efforts" during the previous 12 months to adhere to international counternarcotics agreements and take certain counternarcotics measures set forth in U.S. law. This procedure is a change from previous years where the President determined what countries on the majors list had cooperated fully with the United States, or had taken adequate steps on their own, to achieve full compliance with the goals and objectives of the 1988 UN Drug Convention.

As in previous years, this year's determinations required the President to consider each country's performance in areas such as stemming illicit cultivation, extraditing drug traffickers, and taking legal steps and law enforcement measures to prevent and punish public corruption that facilitates drug trafficking or impedes prosecution of drug-related crimes. The President also had to consider efforts taken by these countries to stop production and export of, and reduce the domestic demand for, illegal drugs.

From the list of 23 major list countries identified by President Bush in his determinations sent to Congress last November, the President has identified three countries that failed demonstrably to make substantial counternarcotics efforts over the last 12 months. These three countries are Afghanistan, Burma and Haiti.

United States assistance under the FY 02 FOAA may be provided to these countries only if the President determines and reports to Congress that provision of such assistance to these countries is vital to the national interests of the United States, notwithstanding their counternarcotics performance. The President made this determination with respect to two of the three countries: Afghanistan and Haiti. The President did not make this determination with respect to the third country, Burma. Therefore, Burma will not be eligible to receive certain U.S. assistance. (This determination does not affect Burma's eligibility for certain humanitarian and other assistance, however.) A statement of explanation for the President's determinations with respect to each of these three countries is appended to the President's report to Congress.

end text



This site is produced and maintained by the U.S. Department of State's Office of International Information Programs (usinfo.state.gov). Links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

Back To Top
blue rule
IIP Home | Index to This Site | Webmaster | Search This Site | Archives | U.S. Department of State