THE 1993 INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL STRATIGY REPORT AND THE FUTURE OF U.S. v^/ NARCOTICS POUCY f 4. F 76/1 : N 16/31 he 1993 International Karcotics Co... ..^ARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIEST SESSION MAY 11, 1993 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign AfTairs DPPawORv DEC 2 1893 . 'urownCTrrnnr/iMcmrcncD/ioTiiirf U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 71-363CC WASHINGTON : 1993 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington,DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-0A1611-6 THE 1993 INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL STRATEGY REPORT AND THE FUTURE OF U.S. NARCOTICS POUCY ^__^ y 4.F76/1:N 16/31 rtte 1993 International Karcotics Co... ..^ARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 11, 1993 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs oppawnpv DEC 2 1993 . '»ucoMi«arrnnp/iimnTrcnco/ioTi/irf U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 71-363CC WASHINGTON : 1993 ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrimingOffice SuperintendentofDocuments.CongressionalSalesOffice,Washington.DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-0A1611-6 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS LEE H. HAMILTON. Indiana, Chairman SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York TOM LANTOS, California WILLIAM F. GOODLING. Pennsylvania ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey JAMES A. LEACH. Iowa HOWARD L. BERMAN, California TOBY ROTH. Wisconsin GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine HARRY JOHNSTON, Florida HENRYJ. HYDE. Illinois ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York DOUG BEREUTER. Nebraska ENl F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH. New Jersey Samoa DAN BURTON. Indiana JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota JAN MEYERS. Kansas CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York ELTON GALLEGLY. California MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN. Florida ROBERT A. BORSKI, Pennsylvania CASS BALLENGER. North Carolina DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey DANA ROHRABACHER. California ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey DAVID A. LEVY, New York ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois SHERROD BROWN, Ohio LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART, Florida CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY, Georgia EDWARD R. ROYCE, California MARIA CANTWELL, Washington ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida ERIC FINGERHUT, Ohio PETER DEUTSCH, Florida ALBERT RUSSELL WYNN, Maryland DON EDWARDS, California FRANK McCLOSKEY, Indiana THOMAS C. SAWYER. Ohio (Vacancy) MICHAEL H. Van DUSEN, ChiefofStaff Beth Ford, Professional StaffMember Jo Weber, StaffAssociate International Security, Lnternational Organization and Human Rights TOM LANTOS California, Chairman HOWARD L. BERMAN, California DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey FRANK McCLOSKEY, Indiana DAN BURTON, Indiana THOMAS C. SAWYER, Ohio Robert King, StaffDirector Michael ENNIS, Republican Professional StaffMember Kenneth R. TimmermaN, Professional StaffMember Beth PoiSSON, Professional StaffMember MaRYANNE Murray. Professional StaffMember (II) CONTENTS WITNESSES Page Hon. Melvyn Levitsky, Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics Mat- ters, Departmentoi State 2 John J. Coleman, Assisteint Administrator for Operations, Drug Enforcement Administration 8 APPENDIX Prepared statements: Hon. Melvyn Levitsky 31 JohnJ. Coleman 37 Presidential Determination 93-18, certifications for major narcotics producing and transit countries pursuant to section 490 of the Foreign Assistance Act 46 Executive Summary of "International Narcotics Control Strategy Report", U.S. Department ofState, Bureau ofInternational Narcotics Matters, April 1993 74 Comparison ofnarcotics certifications, 1988-1993, compiledby Foreign Affairs Committee staff, April 1993 90 Responses by the Drug Enforcement Administration to additional questions submittedbyChairman Lantos 92 Agenda and papers presented at seminar on Multilateralism and Drugs con- ducted by Center for Security and International Studies, and cosponsored by Representatives Tom Lantos and Benjamin A. Oilman, July 15, 1993, Washington, D.C. Papers given by: Georges Fauriol 116 D.F. Musto, M.D 117 Hon. Tom Lantos 125 Oiorgio Oiacomelli 127 Hon. Benjamin A. Oilman 132 Hon. Timothy Wirth 135 Irving O. Tragen 151 Lt. CommanderStephen E. Flynn 157 (HI) THE 1993 INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CON- TROL STRATEGY REPORT AND THE FUTURE OF NARCOTICS POLICY U.S. TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1993 House of Representatives, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2 p.m., in room 2200, Raybum House Office Building, Hon. Tom Lantos (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. Lantos. The subcommittee will come to order. If we could close the door, please. Today the Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights meets to discuss U.S. narcotics control efforts and to review the annual International Narcotics Control Strategy Report submit- ted by the executive branch on the 1st ofApril. I very much welcome the recent naming by President Clinton of a Drug Czar, Lee Brown, and look forward to working with him on issues that affect our foreign drug control efforts. I also look forward to working with my former colleague Under Secretary Tim Wirth in his new position at the Department of State on these issues and on the reorganization of the narcotics, terrorism and crime functions. Taken in isolation, events around the world paint a fairly bleak picture of efforts to control the production, trafficking, and con- sumption of illegal narcotics. The break up of the former Soviet Union has unfortunately led to a startling increase in trafficking activities throughout that region, leading some observers to believe that in the near future, these newly independent states will go the way ofColombia. Narcotics-related corruption is endemic in many countries, the most notable being Pakistan, Colombia, Thailand and Mexico, and this threatens the very fabric ofdemocracy in these countries. Unfortunately, the United States, despite an increase in aware- ness of other developed nations, is in large part still going it alone in efforts to assist producer and transit nations, and the debate still rages over the real effectiveness ofour own overseas programs. There have been some positive developments, which I am certain our distinguished witnesses will discuss in their statements. I am very pleased to welcome the Assistant Secretary ofState for International Narcotics Matters, the Honorable Mel Levitsky and (1) Mr. John Coleman, the Assistant Administrator for Operations at the Drug Enforcement Administration. We are dehghted to have you with us today, gentlemen. I look forward to a frank discussion with you about events in the last year in order to lay the groundwork for the subcommittee's further consideration ofthe future ofU.S. narcotics control policy. Without objection, the full written statements of both of our dis- tinguished witnesses will be included in the record. Ambassador Levitsky, you may proceed any way you choose. STATEMENT OF HON. MELVYN LEVITSKY, ASSISTANT SEC- RETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS MATTERS, DE- PARTMENT OF STATE Mr. Levitsky. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be here and to renew my acquaintance with you. I recall a very successful visit you made to Bulgaria when I was Ambassador there and, in fact, we had on the agenda both narcotics and terrorism. Mr. Lantos. Absolutely. Mr. Levitsky. The narcotics financing of arms sales to some ter- rorist groups. And I recall your having brought that up with the then Communist Bulgarian Government, a thing ofthe past in this era. Mr. Lantos. There is no doubt that visit contributed to trans- forming Bulgaria into a democracy. Mr. Levitsky. I will second that. If I might summarize my statement, I have a rather short state- ment, but I would also like to leave plenty of time for an exchange with you and your colleagues, Mr. Chairman. Let me say, first, to point out you have before you a very thick report on the yearly developments in narcotics around the world. It is thicker this year than it ever has been, because in all its wis- dom. Congress last year passed a law that required us to report on more countries. I think it is a very good report. There are very interesting and fascinating sections on such things as money laundering and chem- ical controls, which is very important for the worldwide effort to stem the drug trade. THE SCORECARD ON CERTIFICATION I would call your attention to it. That report is the basis for the President's certification, again by law, of whether some 27 coun- tries considered to be major producers and transit countries, should be certified as having cooperated with the United States fiilly to carryout the terms ofthe U.N. Convention, or taken adequate steps on their own. That certification was sent to the Congress on April 1st, and it is before you. — Of the 27 countries, 3 countries were denied certification Burma, Iran and Syria. And two countries were denied certification but granted national interest waivers, the reasons for which have been laid out in the certification. Those two countries were Afghan- istan and Lebanon. Let me point out Mr. Lantos. Mav I stop you there for a minute, if this is an ap- propriate question: Mr. Levitsky. Yes. Mr. Lantos. You submit your recommendations for certification. How many countries that you recommended for decertification have, in fact, been certified? Mr. Levitsky. Well, I am not sure I can answer tha—t because this is the President's certification, and if I were to say well, let me put it this way: The Secretary of State makes a recommendation to the Presi- dent. The President signs the certification. There was a great deal of correspondence between those recommendations and what the President did. Mr. Lantos. My question is not designed to be critical. I fully un- derstand that there may be overriding considerations of a different nature that would result in a country that was initially rec- ommended for decertification being certified. I understand that. I just would like to know how many such instances there are? Mr. Levitsky. I don't recall any. Mr. Lantos. So every single Mr. Levitsky. In the last 4 years, I don't recall any. Mr. Lantos. So every single one of the countries that you rec- ommended for decertification were in fact not certified? Mr. Levitsky. That is right. Mr. Lantos. I am very pleased to hear that. U.S. ANTINARCOTICS POLICY GOALS Mr. Levitsky. Let me also point out that I am here today as the narcotics control effort is under review. The Administration is look- ing at a range of options and a mix ofprograms as part ofthe com- prehensive review. We are going to take a hard look and are taking a hard look at what the U.S. Government has been doing over the last 4 years, what has worked, what has seemed not to work. We have, obviously, a tight budget situation, so we have to match resources to results. That review, I hope, will be before you soon, and we will certainly look forward to consulting with you and other committees ofthe Congress at that time. But it is not completed. Let me say it is taking place within the context of our effort to promote two broad goals. The first goal is an obvious one. It is to support the domestic objective of reducing drug abuse and drug-related crime in the United States by promot- ing and assisting efforts by other countries and multilateral insti- tutions to stem drug production trafficking and use worldwide. But the second goal, which is often lost in the mix, I think, is to support other important foreign policy priorities in promoting de- mocracy, respect for human rights, sustainable economic growth and environmental protection. And that goal recognizes that drug production and trafficking and the whole drug chain weakens democratic systems and free market economies, because traffickers attempt to corrupt and threaten institutions such as the courts, ju- dicial systems in general, the police, legislatures, financial systems, and because such things as slash and burn drug cultivation and the indiscriminate use of chemicals bring about environmental deg- radation. Now, as I said the policy is under review, but I would like to cite a statement by President Clinton during the ceremony when he an- nounced the nomination of Lee Brown as Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, the Drug Czar. President Clinton said, and I quote: "We will continue to work with other nations who have shown the political will to fight illegal drugs. They will con- tinue to get our full support and cooperation." There have been other similar statements, and I would call at- tention to Deputy Secretary Wharton's statement to the Council of the Americas on May 3rd, when he was speaking on behalf of Sec- retary Christopher. Mr. Wharton made a similar statement with regard to this hemisphere. So with this background in mind, I would like to just very briefly take a look at developments over the past year and look at this as a movie rather than a snapshot, if I might. Since I have been in this business for about 4 years, I think it is worthwhile to look at it in a somewhat broader perspective. INCREASED MULTILATERAL COOPERATION ON NARCOTICS As always, when we try to do a balance sheet on this issue, Mr, Chairman, we see both the good side and the bad side. I would like to start what we consider to be the positive side—. Looking at the more positive side of things and remember for eve—ry good action, there seems to be a bad one always cropping up let me point out, first, under the general rubric ofmultilateral activity, note our view, and it is outlined in our report, that there are more countries that have come on board in international co- operation, more countries that have seen this as a threat, not as a favor to the United States but something that threatens their own national security, their own societies, their own economies. They do what they are doing for their own national interests. I think that is a positive. We, along with several other countries, have undertaken a broad effort to get the United Nations more heavily and more effectively involved. A couple of years ago, we pushed very hard for, and had formed, the U.N. Drug Control Program, which consolidated sev- eral U.N. programs. It now is a major aid provider in the counter- narcotics field and we pushed for something called the System- Wide Action Plan or the SWAP, which seeks to involve agencies such as the UNDP and UNICEF in the drug program in terms of how drugs affect their particular interests. For example, I have spoken on this issue with the head ofUNICEF and UNDP. When you see children in the streets of Rio de Janeiro who are street children selling drugs, sniffing glue and taking drugs on their own, there has to be a concern on the part of UNICEF as to how the drug issue affects the health and well-being of children. It has been that kind of issue we have been trying to promote in the United Nations. I would also point out in the chemical control area and the money laundering area, two broad efforts exist, the Chemical Ac- tion Task Force and the Financial Action Task Force, both ofwhich stem from G-7 summits which have involved approximately 27 or 28 countries in trying to promote chemical control and money laun-