*EPF407 03/02/00
Transcript: Albright, Holder, McCaffrey on Anti-Drug Certifications
(Afghanistan, Burma called "world headquarters" for drugs) (8810)

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright says that "for several years now, Afghanistan and Burma have been world headquarters for the heroin business. This past year," she said, "they retained that deadly dishonor."

Albright told reporters at a late afternoon March 1 briefing at the State Department that in Afghanistan, "the opium harvest grew substantially, and the Taliban's full complicity in the drug trade has extended to the point where both the harvesting and trafficking of opium is taxed."

In Burma, she said, "the smaller opium yield owed less to good intentions than to bad weather, and ordinary citizens enjoy less freedom than drug lords with the military still refusing to surrender notorious traffickers under indictment in the United States.

Joining Albright at the briefing, General Barry McCaffrey, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, told reporters that "the only thing I can tell that's working in Afghanistan is opium production, which is exploding in intensity. It is a massive threat, not to the United States primarily, but to Europe and the former Soviet Union states, and indeed to the region. The Iranians have paid a horrendous price trying to protect their own people, as an Islamic nation, from this incredibly evil trade. They are taking hundreds of casualties.

"I am not certain," McCaffrey said, "what impact de-certification even has on Afghanistan. The only modestly good idea I've seen us come up with is to support the leadership of Pinoarlacchi and the United Nations drug control program to the extent they have any influence at all inside Afghanistan. But as we reviewed our own results, it doesn't appear that the funding project we have, alternative economic development in Afghanistan, has any impact at all on heroin production. So we have great sympathy for the people of Afghanistan."

Acting Attorney General Eric Holder also briefed with Albright and McCaffrey at the State Department.

Holder made the following statement about four certification decisions announced by President Clinton March 1:

(begin Holder statement)

"I really would just like to take a moment to comment briefly on four of the certification decisions announced by the President today. From a law enforcement perspective, we are gratified by the progress made by the government of Colombia in targeting illicit drug trafficking. We are particularly pleased with the strong cooperation between the United States and Colombian law enforcement agencies, made possible in part by Colombia's decision to repeal its constitutional ban on the extradition of nationals. Colombia recently extradited one of its nationals to the United States and has initiated the extradition process with respect to several Colombian nationals whose extradition the United States is now seeking. We look forward to return to a full and unrestricted extradition relationship with Colombia.

"We recognize that much is left to be done in Colombia: strengthening its criminal justice system, reforming its prisons, implementing an effective asset forfeiture program, and addressing the black market peso exchange situation. All of these things still bear attention. We are confident that they can achieve significant progress in each of these areas, and we look forward to working closely with and supporting our Colombian counterparts in their efforts to do so.

"With regard to Haiti, all of us are deeply concerned about the nation's deteriorating situation. Haiti is the poorest nation in our hemisphere, with a disbanded parliament and a criminal justice system that has many problems. This has made it an ideal target and a staging area for the large and sophisticated international drug trafficking syndicates. It is my sincere hope that with the continued support and assistance of the world community in general, and the United States in particular, that we can stem the declining situation in Haiti and invigorate its counter-drug efforts.

"Regarding Venezuela, we appreciate that country's improved counter-drug performance in 1999, including increased success in drug interdiction. Nonetheless, we recognize that there is still room for progress and we would hope that the government of Venezuela will take all necessary steps to eliminate the newly enacted constitutional ban on extraditing Venezuelan nationals. In contrast to Venezuela, many countries throughout the hemisphere have taken steps to remove barriers to extradition, including those prohibiting the extradition of nationals. These actions send a clear signal to criminals that safe havens behind national borders are no longer available. We would also hope that the Venezuelan Government will pass much needed anti-organized crime legislation.

"And finally, despite the many challenges that remain, Mexico has become a real partner in our battle against drugs. We have worked closely with Attorney General Madrazo and we have established an excellent working relationship with him. As a result, both countries have helped to develop cases against major drug trafficking organizations and inaugurate a program of joint training of prosecutors and investigators from both nations. Currently, the government is negotiating memoranda of understand on asset sharing and chemical control, and we've seen progress on both of these issues.

"Both President Zedillo and Attorney General Madrazo are committed to establishing a professional law enforcement capacity in Mexico, and we are already seeing progress from their commitment. But success will not happen overnight. If Mexico is to succeed in its fight against drug trafficking and corruption, it will only happen with sustained, long-term efforts by the government of Mexico. Moreover, success will require a continuing relationship of cooperation and mutual respect between our two countries.

"We look forward to working with each of the nations that I've just talked about to achieve our mutual goal of reducing drug trafficking and to removing dangerous drugs from our streets."

(end Holder statement)

President Clinton has already sent Congress his annual determinations as to major illicit drug-producing and drug transit countries -- determinations that left only Afghanistan and Burma facing sharp restrictions on most forms of U.S. aid.

The President's determinations included findings that four countries -- Cambodia, Haiti, Nigeria and Paraguay -- also failed to take adequate steps to deal with the international narcotics problem.

But Clinton granted those four countries certification nonetheless, under a legal exemption permitted when such certification is deemed to be in the vital national interest of the United States.

Afghanistan, Burma and the four countries granted vital national interest certifications are among 26 countries and jurisdictions identified by the Clinton administration last November, in an earlier submission to Congress, as major illicit drug producing and transit areas.

Clinton's March 1 determination granted full certification to the remaining 20, based on findings that they have cooperated fully with the United States, or have taken adequate steps on their own, to achieve the counternarcotics goals of the 1988 U.N. Drug Convention.

Those 20 are: The Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Hong Kong, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Taiwan, Thailand, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

Albright, at the State Department briefing, pointed to the cooperative aspects of the fight against drugs. Implicitly taking note of frequent complaints that the certification process is confrontational, she said she wished to "assure all of our partners that we're not demanding any more of them than we are of ourselves."

McCaffrey directly took on complaints against the certification process -- mandated by Congress -- and foresaw possible changes in U.S. law.

"The current certification process ill serves our national purpose," McCaffrey said. Terming it "a tool that requires a relook," he said he is sure that "there's a better way to do it." The drug policy chief said he hopes that the United States and other Western Hemisphere nations will decide at the Summit of the Americas scheduled for 2001 that "working in cooperation better serves our interests."

A statement issued by the White House in conjunction with the briefing listed the rationale for many of the President's decisions as to whether to certify a county or not.

In the case of Afghanistan, the statement said, the past year has seen "a sharp increase in poppy cultivation, in refining of opium into heroin, and in trafficking of illicit opiates." It cited "increasing evidence" that the largest of Afghanistan's factions, the Taliban, "is fully complicit in the illegal drug trade" and derives significant income from every phase of production and trafficking.

Burma, according to the statement, is the world's second-largest producer of opium and heroin after Afghanistan. While counter-drug efforts showed progress in several areas during 1999, the government's "effective toleration of money laundering, its unwillingness to implement its drug laws" and its failure to turn over "notorious traffickers" under indictment in the United States justify the decision not to certify Burma, it noted.

The White House statement had these comments on the four countries given "vital national interest" certifications:

-- Cambodia "took a number of steps forward in 1999," but "political turmoil and related violence, coupled with endemic corruption, effectively precluded a fully credible anti-drug effort." Still, the certification is needed "in order to promote democracy in Cambodia and stability throughout the region."

-- Haitian officials, facing problems including "extensive corruption, weak institutions and scarce resources," made little progress in changing the country's status as a significant transshipment point for drugs. A cutoff of most bilateral assistance, however, "would threaten security and democratic stability in Haiti, both of which bear immediately and directly on U.S. ability to disrupt the flow of both illicit drugs and undocumented Haitian migrants into the United States."

-- Nigeria is the base for criminal organizations that operate worldwide and account for a large part of the heroin imported into the United States. Despite encouraging statements by the new government of President Obasanjo, the country's counter-drug effort "remains unfocused and lacking in material support." But slashing aid to the country "would jeopardize not only an emerging democracy in one of Africa's most important countries, but also Nigeria's attempts to reinvigorate its failing economy and its support for democracy and peacekeeping throughout the region."

-- Paraguay, "failed to accomplish the majority of its counter-drug goals for 1999" and remained a significant drug transit country. "A decision not to certify Paraguay would, however, cut off civilian and military assistance programs designed to strengthen Paraguay's democratic institutions, thereby negatively impacting U.S. vital national interests relating to drug trafficking, terrorism, intellectual property piracy and environmental preservation."

Colombia, while still the world's largest cocaine producer, got good marks for progress in both the White House statement and the State Department report on which it was based.

Counter-drug efforts in that nation, according to the statement, "continue to improve in key areas, demonstrating the commitment of the Pastrana administration to implement decisive measures both on its own and in cooperation with the United States." Nonetheless, the White House noted, the illicit drug problem "constitutes an urgent crisis now confronting Colombia."

The White House said the United States strongly supports "Plan Colombia" -- a multi-faceted strategy to address the country's many challenges, specifically including the illicit drug problem.

Following is the as-delivered transcript of the State Dept. briefing:

(begin transcript)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman

March 1, 2000

ON-THE-RECORD BRIEFING
SECRETARY OF STATE MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT,
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE R. RAND BEERS,
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER,
ONDCP DIRECTOR, GENERAL BARRY McCAFFREY
ONDCP ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR ROBERT BROWN
ON THE PRESIDENT'S NARCOTICS CERTIFICATION DECISIONS

Washington, D.C.

MR. RUBIN: Welcome to today's briefing here at the Department. We have some old-timers that have re-arrived here. Let me tell you how we're going to proceed. Secretary Albright is going to deliver the opening statement on this. She'll then be joined by General McCaffrey and Eric Holder, the Deputy Attorney General. As a result of some scheduling difficulties, Secretary Albright is not going to be able to stay but Randy Beers from the State Department and Bob Brown from General McCaffrey's office will also be available to take your questions.

With that, Madame Secretary.

SECRETARY ALBRIGHT: Good afternoon. President Clinton today sends to Congress his annual decisions on narcotics certification and the State Department sends also to Capitol Hill its report on international narcotics control strategy. I am here to discuss the President's key decisions, and I begin by welcoming my colleagues, Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, General McCaffrey, and Acting Attorney General Holder.

Their presence underscores the strong team effort we are making in the war against drugs. Such teamwork is essential, for we are all diminished when and wherever illicit drugs are produced or trafficked, sold or consumed. Young people risk their lives and squander their futures; institutions lose integrity; economies are undermined; societies lose confidence in the rule of law; and decent law-abiding people are forced to live in fear.

Since we're all vulnerable, we all must do our share, from reducing demand to fostering alternative crops, to combating corruption, to prosecuting and extraditing drug kingpins. Clearly, we will succeed only if consuming countries, producing countries and transit countries work together, not pointing fingers but linking arms.

The certification process was meant to encourage just such cooperation. We make our certification decisions not to stand above other countries in judgment but to hold them up to the same public scrutiny to which we hold ourselves. And we expect to be measured publicly by the effectiveness of our national drug plan. So let me again assure all our partners that we're not demanding any more of them than we demand of ourselves.

This year, the President granted full certification to 20 of the 26 major drug producing and transit countries on our list. Four nations -- Cambodia, Haiti, Nigeria and Paraguay -- were not certified for cooperating but were granted a national interest waiver. Two others -- Afghanistan and Burma -- were denied certification outright. Assistant Secretary Rand Beers and Acting Deputy Director Robert Brown of the ONDCP Office of Supply Reduction can and will provide you with more detail in response to your questions. But I want to say a few words about the countries denied full certification and about our anti-drug partnership in the Western Hemisphere.

For several years now, Afghanistan and Burma have been world headquarters for the heroin business. This past year, they retained that deadly dishonor. In Afghanistan, the opium harvest grew substantially, and the Taliban's full complicity in the drug trade has extended to the point where both the harvesting and trafficking of opium is taxed.

In Burma, the smaller opium yield owed less to good intentions than to bad weather, and ordinary citizens enjoy less freedom than drug lords with the military hunter still refusing to surrender notorious traffickers under indictment in the United States.

Nigeria received a national interest waiver. The authorities must do more to investigate, prosecute and punish those who peddle drugs and launder money. But Nigeria is engaged in a high-stakes test of democracy, and President Obasanjo deserves a chance to follow through on his strong public denunciations of narco-trafficking and financial crime.

In Cambodia, despite some steps forward, weak governing institutions have effectively precluded a credible effort for the last two years. Vital national interest certification was granted to promote democracy in Cambodia and stability in the region.

Paraguay also received a national interest waiver. Outright denial of certification would have cut off assistance designed to strengthen Paraguay's democracy and advance American interests.

Haiti cooperated in some anti-drug actions last year, but it did not meet the standard for certification. A national interest waiver was granted in order to preserve our own ability to interrupt the flow of narcotics and to deter undocumented Haitian migrants from risking their lives on unsafe vessels headed for the United States.

Finally, in South America the path of progress has been well marked. Overall, cocaine production in the Andes continued to decline last year. Since 1995, coca cultivation in both Peru and Bolivia is down by more than a half. These commendable results demonstrate what international collaboration can achieve over time.

In Colombia, however, the government's ambitious eradication campaign to date has met with heavy resistance from traffickers and armed insurgents. Plan Colombia is designed to help law-abiding Colombians reclaim their country. It will support alternative development programs, increase our backing for narcotics interdiction, and strengthen judicial reforms and human rights. President Pastrana has put forward the right plan for Colombia. With four-fifths of the cocaine that enters our nation either coming from that country or passing through it, we have an obvious stake in helping him succeed. And I hope Congress will support President Clinton's budget request for Plan Colombia promptly and in full.

With that, let me turn the floor over to General McCaffrey. Thank you.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, let me just make some brief comments. First of all, I'll begin by thanking Assistant Secretary Randy Beers and the team, who have managed the certification process. It is an inter-agency vehicle. It goes on for months. I thought it was balanced and professional, and I thank them for their leadership.

Three comments. First of all, the counter-drug strategy in the hemisphere, I would argue, is working. In fact, there has been a 19 percent reduction in cocaine production in the last four years. There are literally less tons of cocaine flowing into consuming nations than there were when we started this process. And a good bit of this, as Secretary Albright has already mentioned, goes not just to regional cooperation, is not just a credit to the intelligence cooperation of the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Customs Service and others, but instead goes to the leadership in both Peru and Bolivia.

The most important thing many of us argue they have done is create a political climate in which operating against these drug production areas has been acceptable to the people, and we commend publicly both President Banzer and President Fujimori. Cultivation is down 55 percent and 64 percent, respectively, in a very short period of time. It's astonishing.

The second observation I would offer for you to consider is that international cooperation makes continued progress. We went to the Summit of the Americas in Santiago. The 34 nations, heads of government, instructed us to put together a mechanism to achieve multinational cooperation. We did so. We signed the MEM, the Memorandum of Evaluation in Montevideo, Uruguay, on 5 October of last year.

Our purpose prior to the Summit of the Americas in Canada in 2001 is to assemble evidence that cooperation better serves the interests of the American people and other hemispheric partners than does confrontation. I would urge you to watch the degree to which the OAS CICAD committee's leadership is able to bring us together on multiple areas of cooperation, not just intelligence sharing and interdiction but also demand reduction and cooperation.

Finally, I need to underscore that we do have ongoing crisis in the drug issue in the Americas. There are 800 million of us. The consumption rate of drugs has enormous impact on the health care systems, the work force and the family structure throughout the hemisphere. This is not a problem of a drug producing region, a transit region and consumption region. The United States is involved right now as a major drug-producing nation, methamphetamines and other drugs, and conversely we find high rates of consumption throughout the region.

In Colombia, in particular, we have seen an explosion in drug production in a reasonably short period of time. We suggest that this year's data indicates Colombia is now producing probably 70 percent of the cocaine produced in the world, 520 metric tons. And, indeed, their heroin production has now gone up substantially by about 23 percent. Now, they are capable single-handedly of supplying more than half the U.S. consumption of heroin.

It's an argument for coherent regional cooperation with Colombia and the other Andean ridge nations, and again I would underscore that we have what we think is a well-thought-out, balanced, $1.6 billion, two-year support package for the Andean ridge nations.

Finally, I would mention Haiti as another example of a country in crisis caused largely by the smuggling of drugs. We estimate there are now 13 percent of the flow of cocaine to the United States. Aircraft are flying through Venezuelan airspace, landing in daylight and darkness in Haiti, and off-loading cocaine. And we're taking measures, obviously, both in cooperation with the Dominican Republic as well as the U.S. Customs Service in South Florida, the U.S. Coast Guard, but it's an ongoing problem that will present a huge challenge to Haiti's attempt to develop democracy.

On that note, let me, if I may, as Acting Attorney General Eric Holder to make his remarks.

ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER: Good afternoon. I want to express our thanks and the congratulations of the Department of Justice to the Department of State, to Secretary Albright and, particularly, to Assistant Secretary Beers and his staff for leading and coordinating the inter-agency deliberations again this year. As a result of their efforts, the deliberations which led to today's certification are really full, frank and comprehensive, and we are pleased to have participated in the process.

I really would just like to take a moment to comment briefly on four of the certification decisions announced by the President today. From a law enforcement perspective, we are gratified by the progress made by the government of Colombia in targeting illicit drug trafficking. We are particularly pleased with the strong cooperation between the United States and Colombian law enforcement agencies, made possible in part by Colombia's decision to repeal its constitutional ban on the extradition of nationals. Colombia recently extradited one of its nationals to the United States and has initiated the extradition process with respect to several Colombian nationals whose extradition the United States is now seeking. We look forward to return to a full and unrestricted extradition relationship with Colombia.

We recognize that much is left to be done in Colombia: strengthening its criminal justice system, reforming its prisons, implementing an effective asset forfeiture program, and addressing the black market peso exchange situation. All of these things still bear attention. We are confident that they can achieve significant progress in each of these areas, and we look forward to working closely with and supporting our Colombian counterparts in their efforts to do so.

With regard to Haiti, all of us are deeply concerned about the nation's deteriorating situation. Haiti is the poorest nation in our hemisphere, with a disbanded parliament and a criminal justice system that has many problems. This has made it an ideal target and a staging area for the large and sophisticated international drug trafficking syndicates. It is my sincere hope that with the continued support and assistance of the world community in general, and the United States in particular, that we can stem the declining situation in Haiti and invigorate its counter-drug efforts.

Regarding Venezuela, we appreciate that country's improved counter-drug performance in 1999, including increased success in drug interdiction. Nonetheless, we recognize that there is still room for progress and we would hope that the government of Venezuela will take all necessary steps to eliminate the newly enacted constitutional ban on extraditing Venezuelan nationals. In contrast to Venezuela, many countries throughout the hemisphere have taken steps to remove barriers to extradition, including those prohibiting the extradition of nationals. These actions send a clear signal to criminals that safe havens behind national borders are no longer available. We would also hope that the Venezuelan Government will pass much needed anti-organized crime legislation.

And finally, despite the many challenges that remain, Mexico has become a real partner in our battle against drugs. We have worked closely with Attorney General Madrazo and we have established an excellent working relationship with him. As a result, both countries have helped to develop cases against major drug trafficking organizations and inaugurate a program of joint training of prosecutors and investigators from both nations. Currently, the government is negotiating memoranda of understand on asset sharing and chemical control, and we've seen progress on both of these issues.

Both President Zedillo and Attorney General Madrazo are committed to establishing a professional law enforcement capacity in Mexico, and we are already seeing progress from their commitment. But success will not happen overnight. If Mexico is to succeed in its fight against drug trafficking and corruption, it will only happen with sustained, long-term efforts by the government of Mexico. Moreover, success will require a continuing relationship of cooperation and mutual respect between our two countries.

We look forward to working with each of the nations that I've just talked about to achieve our mutual goal of reducing drug trafficking and to removing dangerous drugs from our streets. Thank you.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I guess we can respond here on questions. Bob, are you the man?

MR. BROWN: Yes, please.

QUESTION: General McCaffrey, you said cooperation serves us better than confrontation. But doesn't the certification process have a confrontational aspect built into it, or isn't the U.S. in effect saying, "You fully cooperate, or else"?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, I don't think there's any question. The certification process is a federal law; therefore, we will fully comply with federal law. And indeed, in sort of a defensive way, I would say it's a federal law that has nothing to do with foreign leadership. It has impact only on U.S. leadership. In the words of one my mentors, a senator currently serving, the law was passed not because we didn't trust foreign governments but because the Senate didn't trust the U.S. Government.

So we're trapped with a tool that some would argue requires a re-look. And I think our own collective viewpoint, Secretary Albright and I and others, is that this memorandum of evaluation that now under OAS auspices will pull us together in multinational cooperation, that over time this will make the certification process irrelevant, because it is my own view that we'll better serve the interests of the American people by working in cooperative partnership than by having these bi-national confrontations.

Q: General McCaffrey, specifically I would ask is there still approximately 520 metric tons of cocaine being produced in Colombia? And there is an apparatus to move that drug primarily to Mexico. And then there are big gangs in Mexico, Arellano Felix and Juarez cartels and others, that are moving that cocaine into the United States, sir.

Is there, over time or in the short term, any decrease in the amount of cocaine that's getting into the U.S.?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, of course, one of the challenges is that supply grossly exceeds demand. Most of the numbers I have are suspect, but our own collective judgment is the U.S. is consuming probably a quarter of the world's cocaine. Another third of the world's cocaine gets seized and destroyed by somebody's law enforcement agency. A bunch of it is now showing up all over the Americas. There is a serious cocaine consumption problem in Rio, Caracas, Lima, Bogata, the U.S.-Mexican border. This is not an American problem.

The Europeans are now paying double the price per kilogram of cocaine as we are paying in the United States, which is why you're seeing it show up in a major way through Spain and the Netherlands. I don't believe that law enforcement activity alone can stop the flow of cocaine out of Colombia and now, to a decreasing extent, Peru and Bolivia. I think we are going to have to go to the source and eliminate it, as Presidents Fujimori and Banzer are doing with increasing success.

Q: With regards to Bolivia, you praised the performance of the administration there but, today, the U.S. Embassy in La Paz is criticizing in a very drastic tone the government because of a group of Italian presumed narco-traffickers have been set free by the justice. One of them also linked with family links to the president. Is that consistent?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I wasn't able to take the phone call of the Bolivian Ambassador before I came over here, and I knew it was about the Diodato affair. I don't have enough information to comment.

I would say, without qualification, that the greatest threat to all of us, certainly to include the Bolivian Government and its authorities, is corruption posed by hundreds of millions of dollars of drug-related funding. And none of us can maintain credibility in the international community over time unless we confront and deal with that corruption. So, let me if I may defer any specific comment though on the Diodato case until I learn more about it.

Q: General, recently the U.S. ambassador in Mexico, Jeff Davidow, said that -- you must be familiar with his comments. He said that Mexico is becoming the headquarters for the most important drug cartels in the world. What are the bases for this statement, sir?

MR. MCCAFFREY: Well, you know, I think part of it was to add a little zest to your life in the international news media. Let me be blunt. Jeff Davidow -- I've known him for 10 years -- I think is one of the most talented, dedicated public servants I've even run into. I hated to see him leave Washington, even though I knew how important -- arguably our most important bi-national relationship is with Mexico. He is just a tremendous friend to Mexico and very seriously focused on trying to continue to build partnership.

I think he was misquoted. I think in context what most of us have tried to say is don't talk about the government of Mexico or the government of Peru or the government of the United States as being the problem; talk about international criminal organizations and how we're going to confront these incredibly violent corrupting influences. And certainly, on both sides of this border, Mexico and the United States, we have massive internal threats of violence and corruption, and I think the solution for both people is just to work in partnership. That is essentially where Ambassador Davidow comes down on this issue.

Q: Afghanistan is already a dangerous place to be in with Usama bin Ladin, who the United States is looking for. Now Afghanistan is one of the two countries you did not grant certification and also one of the largest country producing drugs. Now what steps are being taken to bring Afghanistan into certification or bring Usama bin Ladin to justice? Because he is also benefiting from the drugs in Afghanistan.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: The only thing I can tell that's working in Afghanistan is opium production, which is exploding in intensity. It is a massive threat, not to the United States primarily, but to Europe and the former Soviet Union states, and indeed to the region. The Iranians have paid a horrendous price trying to protect their own people, as an Islamic nation, from this incredibly evil trade. They are taking hundreds of casualties.

So I think all of us are saddened and concerned. I am not certain what impact de-certification even has on Afghanistan. The only modestly good idea I've seen us come up with is to support the leadership of Pinoarlacchi and the United Nations drug control program to the extent they have any influence at all inside Afghanistan. But as we reviewed our own results, it doesn't appear that the funding project we have, alternative economic development in Afghanistan, has any impact at all on heroin production. So we have great sympathy for the people of Afghanistan.

Q: This week, Representative Gilman from the International Relations Committee of the House said that they thought they need much more to certify Mexico than what is ought to be done. What do you expect from Congress on the basis of such a statement?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, of course we'll listen very carefully to Mr. Gilman's viewpoints. He's an informed observer and an important actor in congressional support for a counter-drug effort. We'll take their views into account, Senator Helms and others. I'll listen very carefully what their viewpoints are.

Having said that, the criteria under the federal law of certification essentially asks do we believe that the government we're dealing with is supportive of the 1988 Vienna Convention on Drugs, yes or no? And I can't imagine us not concluding that President Zedillo and Attorney General Madrazo and Minister Cervantes and Minister Rosario Green and these people are serious. They're scared. They've spent a huge amount of money. They're spending a higher per capita percentage basis of their budget on counter-drug activities than the United States is. I just went down and reviewed their Southern Mexico drug interdiction strategy, and if this is a charade -- one of the press asked me "Is this a charade" -- it was the most expensive one I've ever seen. A $520 million equipment buy with a billion dollars of operating budget.

And oh, by the way, the drug seizures of the Mexican Navy have skyrocketed. They're working in cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard. The PGR -- Attorney General Madrazo is putting ten new of these giant x-ray devices that our U.S. Customs Service are using are going into place in the southern border, and the Mexican Armed Forces have created a series of so-called GAFE and GANFE units with close-in sea interdiction.

I think they are deadly serious about trying to stand up to this. The biggest problem Mexico faces is we've got $37 billion a year the United States is spending on cocaine. That is fueling a blowtorch of corruption and violence directed against Mexican democratic institutions, and I think they're fighting for their future. And I can't imagine the United States taking any other viewpoint than trying to work in partnership with them.

Q: Sir, you said that this system of certification is -- you said we're trapped in it with a tool that some would argue needs a re-look. Why not give it a re-look? Why not try a different way of going after drugs in this so that there are the -- the critics argue that you've got so many national security exceptions and whatnots that this ends up not being a clear list, a straightforward system that everyone can understand that says where are the drugs coming from.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: Well, I actually feel that the Department of State, taking the inter-agency viewpoints into account, actually complies with the law. I, to be blunt, don't agree that we play this as a charade. I think there's a great deal of effort and agony. And obviously we're trying to look out for U.S. national interests, but we're going to comply with the law. So I think the program the Secretary of State tabled here actually reflects our good judgment.

Having said that, I think we are looking at alternatives. This is probably not a good year to do it. We've got a presidential election going on. In my own view as a nonpartisan officer of government, is that we're not going to get a serious re-look on this issue in the coming year.

I think what I hope we'll do is in the year 2001 at the Summit of the Americas in Canada, that it will be the collective judgment of the heads of government in the hemisphere that working in cooperation better serves our purpose. I think that's really happening right now. We've gone from utter hostility and animosity and finger-pointing, all of us, to the point where in June, I hope, the U.S. will be among the first countries to put itself under the microscope of evaluation by this new CICAD organization. And I think we ought to feel very comfortable that we're going to look pretty good. I mean, we're spending a lot of money and we've got a lot of parents and employers that are serious about confronting drugs. So that's where we're going.

Q: Does that mean that you favor scrapping the certification system in 2001?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I wouldn't want to give you a solution ad ref. I do believe in the hemisphere the current certification process ill serves our U.S. national purpose. And I think there is a better way to do it, and that's to work through the Organization of American States where we -- and I don't mean public political rhetoric, but where we work on this issue together over the coming decade to grind down drug production and consumption in the region. And I think that's going to happen.

Q: Thank you.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I'm being dismissed.

MODERATOR: We will continue now with Assistant Secretary of State Rand Beers and Deputy Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Bob Brown for any of you who have continuing questions.

Q: Randy, could you -- after General McCaffrey's presentation, I wonder if you could point or tell us how, if at all, the certification process has improved any aspect of the war on drugs. I mean, you have to admit that what McCaffrey just said was pretty pessimistic. He's not terribly excited about the process.

Is there any value to it?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: I think there is. I think there certainly has been. Let me say -- and I think Barry hit it right on the head -- when the law was originally passed, it was passed because there was a belief within the Congress of the United States that the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government was not seriously treating the issue of international drug control. And they, by their legislation, required an annual decision process on a group of key countries, which we call the majors, and making a determination as to whether or not they were fully cooperating.

I think that that process has been an important contributor over time to, one, the Vienna Convention of 1988; two, the series of summits that have taken place in this hemisphere, the Cartagena Summit, the San Antonio Summit, the Miami Summit, the Santiago Summit, insofar as they discussed drugs, the first two were exclusively drugs, the second two were hemispheric issues but drugs were certainly a component. And I think that the move in the Western Hemisphere to change the nature of the dialogue from them-us to a we kind of discussion, to develop a strategy, to develop this multilateral evaluation mechanism that General McCaffrey has talked about are, in many ways, a result of the heightened scrutiny that the drug issue got on an international basis as a result of the fact that the U.S. Government was required to pay more attention than Congress believed it had been paying up to that point.

But I would also agree with General McCaffrey and with the question that occurred here earlier, that there is obviously a degree of confrontation with respect to where the U.S. Government is required to make a judgment with respect to the issue of full cooperation. Now, it is also fair to say that in this process one of the things that we have tried to do is to, instead of having it simply be a judgment, to meet and talk with each of the countries who are on the majors list about the issues of common interest within the drug area and agree on some areas of focus for efforts in the year ahead. And that is focus that doesn't just involve the host government but also talks about where the U.S. might also be able to make a contribution. It is not a perfect system and I don't mean to convey in any way that it is.

But I think that that kind of a dialogue, which is also the precursor of the multilateral evaluation mechanism, is another way in which this process has adapted and evolved into what I think is a better system than it was originally, but I still would agree with General McCaffrey: we can do better.

MODERATOR: Bob Brown, did you want to add to that?

MR. BROWN: I would add, if I may, just the observation, a bit of an historical point. The date of the certification law was an era when perhaps there was much more of a demand-and-supply -- at least in our own hemisphere -- debate, the consuming countries versus the supply region. As you see that transition into the modern day here where it's a common problem, as several of the speakers, surely General McCaffrey has underscored, the pluses and minus with the current certification thing would be evaluated differently, I would say.

You still see countries influenced by the certification process, to be sure, but the essential international cooperation that's key to success causes much more of a negative reaction, I would say, in this current era of a common hemispheric problem. So I would just add an historical point, if I may.

Q: Yes, thank you. A couple of weeks ago when General McCaffrey was in Mexico, he seemed to single out Panama as a place where drug transit -- the transit of drugs has increased significantly, even seeming to put us in the same category with Haiti. I would ask the gentlemen from General McCaffrey's office to please amplify the basis for those remarks. But also, Mr. Beers, if you could address how Panama is doing, particularly under the new government.

MR. BROWN: Well, just with regard to the drug reality, Panama remains essentially a transit country. I think it is just the obvious fact of looking at a map and knowing where the source and the consuming areas are. I think the essential problems with regard to drug transit, drug issues for Panama remain to be interdiction, interdiction levels, interdiction apparatus, law enforcement capacity as well as the financial aspect of money laundering, management oversight, the whole of the banking sector.

In fact, the flow of drugs, there is a certain dynamic, 60 percent generally through the Central American area. That can be eastern Pacific, western Caribbean and through the Central American isthmus itself, and another 40 percent through the Caribbean. Specifically, in the past year, the movement of drugs through Panama, I think, has relatively declined, the amount of drug movement.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: One of the things that has happened with respect to the new government taking office is that they immediately asked for a series of high-level discussions, and one of the major discussion areas was the issue of justice in counter-narcotics cooperation. We have had one meeting of that group in the fall. We will have another meeting this month or early next month, and we have had an ongoing series of discussions between our embassy and the government in Panama. I think that there is, with respect to the new government, a serious commitment to do something about this issue, but they are quite candidly just beginning to get their feet on the ground and it's a little early to see results.

Q: I've read in detail the report on Burma and noticed that it has many positive elements in it. You say that there's been significant improvements in various areas, and I wonder whether you could say anything to persuade -- to convince me that the de-certification of Burma was not based solely on political consideration and that if it was in Latin America it would have been certified.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: I think that the level of production in Burma, the level of cultivation married with the level of effort on the part of the government to do something serious about that activity, is the first indication. The second is despite some seizures, the degree to which the traffickers are able to control territory and operate well beyond the reach of the law, the degree to which these criminal enterprises are states in and unto themselves is probably the clearest indication of why this government in any hemisphere would have been de-certified.

Q: According to your report, a new mutual legal assistance treaty between the United States and Greece was signed.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: Between the United States and who?

Q: Greece. A mutual legal assistance was signed. Do you know what it is about does that means deployment of U.S. federal agencies in Greece?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: No. Mutual legal assistance treaties are basically documents by which governments exchange information regarding law enforcement cases and activities. For example, a case that was under investigation in the United States that had information that was lodged in Greece would, through this process, lead to a note being tendered to the Greek Government asking for information that was relevant to the case of the United States. The Greek Government, under the obligations of the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, would provide a response to that. That's the general nature of these kinds of agreements.

Q: According to the same report, police protocol agreements which has been signed will enhance operation and police cooperation between the two countries. That means deployment in Greece to U.S. policemen to conduct operations on Greek soil?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: No. U.S. law enforcement officials are not permitted by law in the United States to conduct operations on foreign soil. It is against the law. The Mansfield Amendment says that. What it says is a U.S. law enforcement official, as there are in many countries around the world, legal attaches representing the Federal Bureau of Investigation have liaison relationships with local law enforcement officials, which may lead those local law enforcement officials to conduct operations but not for the U.S. to conduct such operations.

Q: Considering last Sunday's assassination of Tijuana Police Chief Alfredo de la Torre, while Mexico may be cooperating fully with the United States, do you believe the Mexican Government actually has control over its situation and over the drug traffickers?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: The tragic death of the Tijuana Police Chief is pause for all of us to look at how serious the situation is with respect to drug trafficking in Mexico and along the entire Southwest border of the United States. While that situation is tragic and while the individuals who committed act are criminals of the worst sort, we do not take that particular act to represent our inability to work with the government of Mexico in full cooperation and we do not take it to mean that the government of Mexico is corrupt.

But to say that there is corruption in Mexico or the United States or any country around the world is to say something that is an absolute fact in every country.

Q: But considering that --

MR. BROWN: Just one more specific comment on that. I would just underscore what Director McCaffrey mentioned with regard to the amount of money, by our best estimate, the United States citizens spends on cocaine alone, $37 billion annually, and the corrosive effect that that money has throughout the hemisphere, surely on our border between San Diego and Tijuana. Both Randy and I and others in the Government had a chance to offer another example, to visit Colombia here just a few weeks back. You see similar high rates of murder and similar crime in the southern part of Colombia, where this Plan Colombia is focused.

So I would offer you something of an axiom with a little bit of reservation in suggesting I know anything definitive about drug trafficking. But the two things I would suggest, where you see the movement of drugs, you see increased levels of violence like the assassination of this chief of police. You also inevitably see increased levels of consumption along that whole chain.

Q: Dr. Beers, it is true that the heart of the U.S. package that the administration has requested for Colombia, it is going for the portion in Putumayo. But at the same time, that plan is already creating a lot of tensions in the zone. FARC yesterday declared that the United States was an enemy, was at war with the FARC, and they also are promoting an armed strike to stop the push into Putumayo precisely.

Is the United States aware of the situation that is being raised over there, and what is your response to the FARC threat against the United States?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: The United States Government proposal with respect to Plan Colombia is an effort that is focused principally on narco-trafficking. To the extent that the FARC are involved in narco-trafficking, they can expect that our assistance may well be directed against them. If the FARC are prepared to follow their rhetoric and say that they have nothing to do with drug trafficking and back out of the drug trafficking activities, then they have nothing to fear from U.S. support for this plan, because this plan is about drug trafficking.

If they want to come to the peace table, if they want to make a political negotiation with the government of Colombia, if they want to come to peace that's okay with us. Our only concern with respect to this issue at this time in Colombia, is the drug trafficking issue. Yes, we would like to see Colombia be a stable country; yes, we would like there to be an end to the insurgency. But that is not what this plan is about. The FARC are the ones who have chosen to be involved.

MODERATOR: Bob Brown and Director McCaffrey just got back from Colombia and might want to add something.

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I don't want to add anything.

Q: The United States is listed as one of the major countries that is involved or allows money laundering. It is in the list of money laundering countries. What is the U.S. doing to try and combat this?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY BEERS: The U.S. is certainly a country in which money laundering takes place. It is absolutely no secret that most of the monetary transactions that occur in the world today go through U.S. banks. The United States, London, perhaps Singapore and Hong Kong, are the major dollar transit points of money around the world. Some of that money starts in the U.S., some of that money ends up in the U.S. What we have is a system which has reporting requirements with respect to, one, cash transactions over $10,000; and two, suspicious transaction, those transactions which are just under $10,000, for example, or which have some other kind of suspicious activity.

In addition to that, there are other notices that the Office of Currency Control puts out to all of the banks in this country. The United States Treasury Department in conjunction with the Justice Department announced last year a new money-laundering strategy. They will be making another report on that shortly next month. Secretary Summers will be making a speech on Friday of this week which will be a major announcement about U.S. money-laundering activities. It's a serious problem here. We take it seriously, and we're trying to make serious inroads against it.

Q: General McCaffrey mentioned the U.S. and the production of -- what is it -- methamphetamines. Could you tell us where the U.S. stands? Is this the most productive country in terms of -- or do we produce the most methamphetamines here or what, because he didn't mention a ranking or anything?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: It's a good question. Let me rank order or drug threats as we, in cooperation with State and the rest of the U.S. government, would assess them to be. Our principal drug threat remains cocaine. We have three-plus million chronic cocaine addicts and other casual users. The second drug threat is heroin. Heroin is about a million addicts. Our third drug threat is that of synthetic drugs like methamphetamine. There are others. And, lastly, and by far and away the most widely abused drugs is cannabis, or marijuana.

Methamphetamines are produced both in Mexico and the United States, and for some number of years generally originating in our Southwest has become a significant drug of abuse of concern. However, it is a global concern. We mentioned Burma here a minute ago. From our concern, Burma's production of heroin is a big issue. But in the Southeast Asia neighboring countries are concerned with amphetamine or methamphetamine production emanating from Burma as well.

So I apologize for not being able to give you specific numbers or percentage of U.S. produced or Mexican produced methamphetamine as a portion of the total in the world, simply to say methamphetamine, synthetic drug abuse, is a worldwide concern.

Q: Would you say that we are one of the biggest producers, the U.S.?

GENERAL MCCAFFREY: I would say we're a significant producer and consumer, but it is again a global concern in Europe and Asia, not so much elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere.

MODERATOR: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming.

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: usinfo.state.gov)
NNNN