You Are In: USINFO > Products > Webchats > uncnd_01_mar_2007

Panelists Discuss Fight Against Illegal Synthetic Drugs

USINFO Webchat transcript, March 2

A panel of experts on U.S. drug enforcement policy discussed the global challenges posed by illegal synthetic drugs in a “rolling” webchat completed March 2.

They answered questions submitted via e-mail between February 21 and March 1 relating to the international fight against illegal synthetic drugs such as methamphetamine and Ecstasy.

Panelists included Thomas A. Schweich, principal deputy assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs; Joseph T. Rannazzisi, deputy assistant administrator, Office of Diversion Control, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration; and James O'Gara, deputy director for supply reduction, White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Following is the transcript:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of International Information Programs
USINFO Webchat Transcript

Combating Synthetic Drugs, A Global Challenge: U.S. and International Responses

Guest:     Thomas A. Schweich, Joseph T. Rannazzisi and James O'Gara
Date:      March 2, 2007
Time:      12:00 p.m. EST (1700 GMT)

Moderator: Welcome to our webchat! We will be posting answers to your questions today. Please check back often!

There will be no live discussion today.

U.S. Drug Enforcement Panelists:  We welcome you to this online Question and Answer session. On March 12-16, the fiftieth session of the U.N. Commission on Narcotics and Drugs will convene in Vienna. The United States is working with partners around the globe to combat the scourge of synthetic drug use, manufacturing and trafficking. We welcome your questions in this regard and ask that you submit them to us via the box below or via email.

We look forward to hearing from you: Thomas A. Schweich, Joseph T. Rannazzisi, James O'Gara.

Question [Guest]: Dear sirs,

In the wake of the cold war, there was/is a huge concern about scientists from former USSR using their knowledge in the employment of rogue nations, criminal groups, and terror groups. Primarily this has been a fear of using knowledge to build weapons.

Given the continued economic hardships faced by well educated scientists and technicians in the former USSR, is there evidence that these scientists are using their knowledge to create powerful drugs?

U.S. Drug Enforcement Panelists: Thank you for your question. This is Thomas Schweich.

The United States has provided assistance to Russian and other former Soviet Union countries to generate viable economic alternatives, including for displaced scientists. Today, our assistance programs continue to help former bio-weapons scientists find peaceful, civilian, and commercial uses for their skills. With the freedom of immigration and the globalization of science, scientists in the former Soviet Union no longer view their horizons as limited only to government research positions in their home countries. In recent years, Russian scientists are working in larger numbers for international pharmaceutical firms researching and creating vaccines to combat HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis, for example. Some are researchers in foreign government health institutions, such as the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. Finally, there is a long tradition of fruitful U.S. and Russian government cooperation on a wide range of health issues, including scientific exchanges.

In the area of drug control, the United States continues to work with collaboratively with countries of the former Soviet Union. The upcoming UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs (March 12-16, 2007) will be one such venue. At the Commission, the international community will come together to discuss a balanced, comprehensive approach to drug control that includes: drug abuse prevention and treatment, illicit crop eradication, alternative development for those engaged in illicit crop cultivation, control of precursor chemicals used to manufacture illicit drugs, interdiction and other law enforcement measures. Through the adoption of such comprehensive strategies, countries contribute to the development of a sound rule of law and strong system governance. With these elements in place, citizens will be more likely to reject the temptation to engage in unlawful activities, such as drug trafficking, and become a productive part of the licit economy.

Q [Donnah]: Why the developing countries like Madagascar are [succumbing to the proliferation] of drugs?

U.S. Drug Enforcement Panelists: Thank you for your question Donnah. This is Joseph Rannazzisi.

A common practice among drug and chemical traffickers is to exploit those regions and countries that have less than desirable socio-economic conditions. Law enforcement in developing countries is limited by a lack of resources, funding, training, and expertise. Other issues such as dealing with civil unrest, corruption, and other economic welfare issues divert the attention of officials and provide ample opportunity for traffickers to operate freely.

The United States Government is sympathetic to the problems that these countries face. We maintain that drug abuse and the illicit production of drugs contribute to the problems that these countries are confronting. The international community, including the U.S., is willing to assist these countries, to the extent possible, by providing the tools necessary to combat drug and chemical trafficking.

Q [Santiago B]: What do you think the role of the military should be in drug interdiction? Do you have concerns about the militarization process escalating the levels of violence and infringing human rights?

U.S. Drug Enforcement Panelists: Thank you Santiago B.  This is James O’Gara.

When organized violent, illegal armed groups threaten national security there is a strong argument for employing the national defense force.  As a general principle we have observed that militaries do not increase the level of violence, but are reluctantly drawn into national defense against illegal armed groups when the level of violence exceeds that which police forces are able to control.  Drug interdiction is a role that military forces can and do fulfill effectively, but it often occurs as part of the military’s overall effort to establish peace and security in a region.  Drug trafficking terrorist organizations such as those in Colombia seek to control areas of the country, and the military are needed to reestablish state control in those areas and provide the peace and security that allow restorative efforts such as social services and alternative development to take root.  It is often noted that in some countries trafficking organizations are better armed than the police -- one way in which they are able to intimidate and neutralize the police and civil society.  Concern for human rights violations is essential.  Persons reasonably charged with such acts should be investigated and compelled to face justice.  The slaughter of civilians, kidnapping, and torture by trafficking organizations as methods of eliminating restraints on illegal drug trafficking is practiced in many countries.  We consider such acts to be egregious violations of human rights.  In the vast majority of cases they are practiced by criminal/terrorist groups rather than governments.

The FARC in Colombia is an example of an insurgent group terrorizing everyday citizens and violating their human rights as they seek to profit from the illicit drug trade.  U.S. assistance is part of a balanced strategy developed by Colombia to deal with that country's multiple challenges.  A combination of law enforcement, interdiction, alternative economic development, and judicial reform has contributed to reduction in drug production, as well as an improvement in the human rights situation.  The U.S provides human rights training to all military personnel in Colombia and has made protecting human rights a high priority. Until violent insurgent groups are demobilized, the Colombian military, with some limited support from the United States, must continue to be a part of the solution.

For the United States, our military, including the U.S. Coast Guard, plays a very helpful support role in drug interdiction, working with Customs and Border Protection and partner nations.  Interdiction, especially on the high seas, is a very complex endeavor requiring a mix of intelligence, operational capability, and law enforcement authorities.  Without the military it would have been impossible for us to achieve four record setting years of illicit drug seizures in the transit zone.

Q [Abraham_Lincoln]: I would appreciate it if you would advise as to whether international manufacturing and trafficking of drugs would hinder democratic process of governance of various nations. If the answer is yes, in what way?

Thank you.

U.S. Drug Enforcement Panelists: This is James O’Gara again.

Millions of dollars in the hands of international drug mafias are “reinvested” by drug traffickers to corrupt and intimidate government officials, to buy arms to kill those who oppose them, and to prevent democratic governments from controlling national territory in extreme cases.  Drug-lords are fundamentally anti-democratic, harking back -- as the name implies -- to a feudalistic system of dominance by a chief who rules by force of arms.

This threat to democratic institutions is not a new phenomenon.  For decades, the international illegal drug trade has constituted a significant transnational security threat. The illegal drug trade threatens democratic governments, undermines the rule of law, terrorizes populations, impedes economic development, and causes regional instability. Its operations, organizations, and networks often fuel arms and human trafficking, money laundering, and violent multinational gangs. The illicit drug trade finances insurgencies, as we have seen in Colombia and Afghanistan, and also support the activities of extremist groups around the world.

In Colombia, the FARC, AUC, and ELN have abandoned their ideological focus in favor of the cocaine production and trafficking business, likely receiving hundreds of millions of dollars annually from the trade.  These groups have moved from taxing drug proceeds to increasingly controlling the production and distribution of cocaine.  A growing body of reporting by DEA and other agencies has shown that local Taliban commanders in Afghanistan receive funding from the drug trade.  These activities may include taxation of opium poppy farmers, laboratories, and narcotics transporters passing through Taliban checkpoints; providing security/safe passage for drug shipments; collecting “donations,” both monetary and supplies such as vehicles from wealthy traffickers to support the Taliban cause.

Democratic governments have no choice but to aggressively fight the narcotics trade in all its aspects.  The failure to push back aggressively against drugs will ultimately result in the weakening of democratic structures.  On the other hand, as we have seen in Colombia in recent years, strong counter-narcotics measures can strengthen society and democratic institutions.

Moderator: We wish to thank our speakers Thomas Schweich, Joseph Rannazzisi, and James O'Gara. The webchat is now closed. Please visit our USINFO Webchat Station homepage where today's webchat transcript will be posted within one business day.