Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries Report 2008

Christy McCampbell
Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Washington, DC
September 17, 2007

Briefing on Release of Annual Report on the Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries for FY 2008

(11:00 a.m. EDT)

MR. GALLEGOS: Good morning. Today we have Christy McCampbell, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement. She's going to be delivering remarks on the release of the Annual Report on the Major Illicit Drug Producing Countries for Fiscal Year 2008.

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Good morning, everyone. It's a pleasure to be here. Again, I'm Christy McCampbell and I'm the Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs here at Department of State. I think as all of you know, each time at this part of the year, the President designates what we call the Majors list of illegal drug transit and drug producing countries. I really appreciate the opportunity to talk with you about this this morning. And some of -- and to talk with you a little bit about our international aspects of our efforts to combat illegal drugs.

The Majors list as you know, many nations are overwhelmed by drug related violence, crime and corruption and it truly takes a global effort on all of our parts to try to deal with these problems. Each year, the President is required under the Foreign Relations Act to notify Congress of countries that are considered either illegal transit countries or drug producing countries. And I want to make a very specific point here. Because a country is listed on the Majors list does not necessarily mean that that country supports narcotic trafficking or is lagging in its counter-narcotics efforts. The law stipulates that a major illicit drug producing country is defined as one that either cultivates or harvests at least a thousand hectares or more of coca or opium or also five thousand hectares of cannabis during a single year. Now, a country may be designated as a major drug transit country if it is a significant source of illicit narcotics or psychotropic drugs or other controlled substances that affect the United States or also if it's a country through which drugs transit to the United States.

Now, according to the law, the President may also determine that a country has failed demonstrably -- these are the particular words that we used -- failed demonstrably, when it doesn't meet its obligations to counter – to the counter narcotic conventions and the international agreements. So such countries are then subject to sanctions and a country can also be determined to have failed demonstrably, but be given a waiver of these sanctions when there is a vital national interest in continuing assistance.

Now, the countries that are listed for this year's Majors list are the same as they have been for the last two years and real quickly, I'll just read them. I think they're in your press packets there, but let me just read them to you real quickly: Afghanistan, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Laos, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru and Venezuela.

Now, the President determined that during this past year, two countries, Burma and Venezuela, have in fact failed demonstrably to cooperate with the United States and to make substantial efforts to adhere to their obligations under our UN agreements. Venezuela has been given a waiver to possible sanctions under U.S. law. The waiver will allow us to continue to support some of their democratic institutions and their society and to assist in small community development programs for the benefit of the Venezuelan people.

This is the third year that the President has determined that Venezuela has failed demonstrably. And this assessment comes as a result of the Government of Venezuela's insufficient action against drug trafficking. Although Venezuela has indicated that it has developed some new programs to fight increased drug trafficking and they say they are doing some seizures, and it definitely continues to be limited in their -- in what they're doing at their ports of entry and exit along -- and along their border of Colombia. Venezuela, no doubt, is a growing transshipment point for drugs bound for the U.S. as well as the European nations, and a situation that has both enabled and exploited by corrupt officials and created a weak judicial system and allows for organized crime.

In addition, Venezuela has not renewed formal counternarcotics cooperation agreements, what we call our LOA, our letters of agreement, with the United States including the signing of this letter of agreement that would make funds available for cooperative programs to fight the flow of drugs to the U.S.

Burma; it has also failed demonstrably. Burma is the largest source of methamphetamine pills in Asia and pill production continues to grow. The country's declining poppy cultivation has been matched by a sharp increase in methamphetamine production. Burma's military regime has not made the necessary efforts to curb production and has also been very lackluster in the areas of demand reduction that we think are important, interdiction that's very important and combating corruption.

Also, the President has identified certain countries where exceptional factors are at play including Afghanistan, Bolivia, Ecuador, India, and Nigeria. Canada and Guinea-Bissau, although not on the Majors list, were also identified for comment in the presidential determination. Now Canada has definitely made strides in curbing their precursor chemicals. However, there are still concerns about their frequent hydroponic homegrown marijuana that ends up in the U.S. Guinea-Bissau has also become a transit hub and a warehouse for cocaine traffickers from Latin America.

Now the Administration is aware of the difficult situation facing President Karzai in Afghanistan and he commends his government for establishing an overall counternarcotics strategy and seeking foreign donor assistance. President Karzai has strongly attacked the narcotrafficking as one of the greatest threats to Afghanistan. Opium accounts for one-third of their economy, according to UN statistics. This contributes, of course, to the widespread public corruption, to the damages of economic growth -- illicit economic growth, and it definitely strengthens the insurgency problems there. Additionally, according to recent figures from the United Nations, poppy cultivation has increased, there's no doubt, by 17 percent this year. The increase was almost exclusively, however, in some of the southern provinces that border Pakistan.

However, there is one model of success that can be drawn by comparing the marked difference in cultivation between the northern and southern provinces. Thirteen of the northern provinces are now poppy-free. That's seven more than last year that were poppy-free. In the north, sufficient security has allowed for alternative development programs to take effect and it's helped the farmers to improve their economic livelihood.

President Bush looks to the Government of Afghanistan to take further steps to combat poppy cultivation and corruption. Despite the significant gains the country has made since 2001, the country does continue to face tremendous challenges. Not addressing these challenges now could undermine security, compromise democratic legitimacy, and imperil international support for vital assistance to that country.

Now, I just want to speak a little bit on Bolivia. I'll take some questions at the end, so keep that in mind. In Bolivia, the Bolivian counternarcotics cooperation has been what we consider uneven. The government's policy of zero cocaine but not zero coca, which -- that is a direct quote. It has focused on interdiction there. The Bolivian Government has cooperated with us on some interdiction and some operations and seizures have reached fairly high levels, at least record levels recently.

The government appears to be on track to reach their cultivation -- or to reach the 5600 hectares of eradication this year. Nonetheless, coca cultivation has increased. We know that and Bolivia remains the third-largest coca producer in the world. The U.S. strongly encourages Bolivia to make reductions and eventual elimination of the excess coca crops and make that their number-one priority is what we ask of them. We also urge Bolivia to revamp its natural -- national drug control strategy and it's important that Bolivia adopt and implement a modern anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing law, take concrete steps to strengthen and better enforce precursor chemical controls, and they need to enhance asset forfeiture programs in their country.

Ecuador continues to be an important partner in combating narcotics trafficking destined for the U.S. However, we see a dramatic increase in the quantity of cocaine transported towards the U.S. using Ecuadorian-flagged ships and that remains a very serious concern to the U.S. Effective cooperation between the U.S. Coast Guard and Ecuadorian navy; we need to streamline maritime operational procedures that have resulted in an increase in the amount of cocaine interdicted.

Another country I just want to comment on is India. It produces significant amounts of opium poppy for legitimate pharmaceutical purposes. Although it maintains tight controls on the industry to deter the diversion of the legal narcotics and raw materials to illegal markets, the potential diversion of this crop for illicit purposes is a continuing concern to the United States. Recently, Indian law enforcement officials discovered and destroyed very large fields of poppy grown in areas where before, we thought there was no illicit cultivation. We encourage very much the Indian officials to investigate this matter and to prosecute those behind this surprisingly large and disquieting find.

As in the past, we have been concerned about coca in Nigeria, about official corruption there, although the country has taken steps to combat this corrosive problem. We encourage, very much, Nigeria to make more progress in the areas of extraditions and prosecutions of major drug traffickers.

Lastly, I just want to say that we understand very well that illegal drugs and transnational organized crime are a global threat to all of us across the world. We all have to work together to deal with these issues combining eradication and interdiction, alternative development, criminal justice modernization, anticorruption and demand reduction programs is essential for all of us to deal with this major problem of drugs across the nations. It will -- certainly, if we could ever get this completely under control, it will help in our political, economic, and social wellbeing to all of our countries.

So with that, I'm -- I will certainly take some questions. Yes. Can you state where you're from?

QUESTION: Yes, sure. Elise Labott with CNN. I have two questions. You threw out a bunch of countries where there are extenuating circumstances. I understand Afghanistan being one of them, but a few of the other ones are close U.S. allies and in some cases, this is what Plan Colombia has been going on for many years. Why are there extenuating circumstances in these countries beyond the fact that they're U.S. allies?

And also, on the issue of Bolivia and the coca, last year at the UN, President Morales made quite clear that the Bolivians see coca as -- you know, a non-narcotic crop that they can use. And does the U.S. feel that -- is there any legitimacy to this? I mean, in this country, we use a lot of hemp which can also be used for marijuana -- as a crop.

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Okay. Well, first of all, let me go back to your questions about -- you mentioned Plan Colombia. Plan Colombia has absolutely been a success and a lot of that is because of the assistance that the United States has put in there. Now they are on the -- what we're -- Colombia is going on a downhill -- gradually moving downhill to take over all the eradication and the counternarcotics activities themselves. We call it nationalization. They have done a great job down there and because of Plan Colombia, they have amazing statistics. Their kidnappings are down by 76 percent. Their homicides are down by over 40 percent. There has been a great success rate there.

So when you talk about extenuating circumstances, they still are growing cocaine -- or coca. They still are producing cocaine. But in the overall picture, over the last years that we have helped them and worked with them as partners on Plan Colombia, it has been nothing but a success. So that's what I would say to you on Plan Colombia.

On Bolivia, as we said, it's definitely uneven there. They view -- under President Morales, they consider the coca something that they should be -- they can build their economy and build an industry on. Our belief is that if we could eradicate all coca, we could eradicate all cocaine, because it is the basic ingredient for cocaine. Bolivia does use coca for some traditional purposes. They make tea there, they do -- their culture calls for chilling the coca leaves. And so we acknowledge that and that's why we don't try to push the fact that they should eradicate all coca. We understand that they do have some use for it. We don't have use for that in this country, but we continue to work with that government to try to reach some kind of understanding so that their coca that turns into cocaine doesn't end up either here or in Europe.

QUESTION: Well -- but just to follow, I mean -- in addition to Plan Colombia, I mean, your whole Andean Regional Initiative, which was launched several years ago -- why are these countries still the major drug transit or producing nations? I mean, I understand that you say that there's been some success, but how can you claim it's a success when out of all the countries in the world, these are still the most major producing and transiting countries?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, my answer to that is they are a success because they are absolutely working with the United States. Those governments are trying their best to keep the coca and the cocaine out of our country, and that's what we're striving for. And I have to tell you, I've personally been down to Colombia, as many of my staff has, and we've worked with them through UN agreements and just meeting with the Colombians. And I can tell you they are truly appreciative of the United States efforts. And when I hear -- when I can go down to that country and not be concerned about being kidnapped by narcotraffickers or I know that there's safety on the streets or there are alternative development crops there, we can certainly call that a success.

I had the opportunity to go out into the jungles where there are alternative development. They're growing pineapples. They're growing hearts of palm. And the pride that we see in the farmers that are out in those countries is amazing, and they really feel that they are working. We also see the eradicators that are of Colombian nationality in those countries working, and many know that they are trying to keep cocaine off the streets.

Yes.

QUESTION: Yes, Maria with EFE News Services. You know, back a few weeks ago at the summit in Quebec, a lot of was made of the increased cooperation between the U.S. and Mexico in fighting drugs, and they kept saying that they're not yet ready to announce the details of a so-called Plan Mexico which would be somewhat similar to Plan Colombia without the presence of U.S. military personnel in that country.

Can you give us any headway as to where those talks are at this point?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, the only thing I can tell you on that right now is that both the governments are working very hard and rapidly to come up with the equation where we will be working as partners together. Certainly, President Uribe has -- I'm sorry, I'm sorry, President Calderon has done an excellent job with his narcotrafficking, what he's doing in that country right now. I mean, he's put his military troops out. They have made some huge arrests there. They have made some great seizures. And we consider Mexico a partner and we don't have exact figures yet. We've sent teams down there to meet with Mexican officials and we will -- that will be announced sometime in the near future. I don't have the announcement here today.

Yes.

QUESTION: Anything in the report about the Middle East? How's the cooperation between the United States and Middle Eastern states?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, the Middle Eastern states -- I assume that you're talking about our drug eradication in Afghanistan. And Afghanistan, you know, we just rolled out the strategy --

QUESTION: You've already talked about Afghanistan, but the other states like the Gulf states or other Arab states.

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, our -- I think I would have to answer you on that is our major focus on drug eradication, of course, is in Afghanistan and partially Pakistan, but mostly Afghanistan is where our funds are going and where our efforts are, because that's where the most -- that is the country or the state that grows the poppy for opium.

Yes.

QUESTION: Yes. Well, Richard Finney with Radio Free Asia. Is Laos mainly a producing or a transit country, and how would you rate the Lao Government's efforts to stamp out whatever problems they have?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, the U.S.-Lao cooperation in counternarcotics efforts has been very good. We consider it excellent cooperation. Opium production there has been dramatically reduced and it's to a fraction of what it used to be. The reduction is the result, we consider, of U.S.-funded crop control programs there. They've been very good with us on that. Complementary assistance from the UN -- UNODCP -- or UNODC, the UN Office of Drug Control. That's their contributions and other donors. It's all worked well with the Laotians and we consider it excellent. So we continue to work with them, but it is -- definitely it's a transit country and they do some producing there, too.

QUESTION: Enough so that they're still on the Majors list?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Yes.

QUESTION: What --

MS. MCCAMPBELL: And as we said, there's at least a thousand hectares in order -- they have to produce at least a thousand hectares in order -- that it has some significant effect to the U.S..

QUESTION: And the Laotian drug producers are producing that much in the country?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Yes. And we're also concerned with Laos about the methamphetamine trafficking, and abuse there is also a problem that we're quite concerned about.

QUESTION: But that's a transit problem.

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Yes. So we consider it both there in that country.

Yes.

QUESTION: Paul Eckert of Reuters. India -- did India get on the list of Majors because of it's licit or because of the discovery of the other fields you mentioned?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: No. The reason that India is on the Majors list is they do have a large problem of diversion of chemicals there and of opium production. Because of the diversion from their licit opium that they do grow, it's finding its way to the illicit market, and as much as 30 percent of their opium is being diverted that we believe. And so that is why that would be considered -- I guess you could consider that both a transit and a producing country because of the opium that is going into the diverted markets.

QUESTION: And if I might follow up. North Korea is not on the list, is it, because they fall below the amount or --

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Yes. It's not affecting -- North Korea is not affecting the United States as much as the requirements on the list.

Yes.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) with Agence France Presse. Can you elaborate a little bit on the situation of Peru?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Of Peru? Sure. Peru -- we consider Peru to be a very cooperating country. We put a lot of assistance in that country. They are the second largest producing country of the coca. They are a key partner in our counternarcotics efforts and cooperation, and President Garcia has publicly taken a very strong stance against the illicit coca production and he favors increased efforts to interdict precursor chemicals in that country as well.

The government there, they've made significant progress in their police presence out in the drug-growing zones and in 2007 they've addressed maritime smuggling as well. So we are working as partners and, I mean, there's always more that can be done, but we consider them very much a cooperating country but they still are producing.

Yes.

QUESTION: Jose Diaz with Reforma newspaper from Mexico.

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Yes.

QUESTION: One of the classic answers of the Mexican Government when coming with -- when asked about this question of being transit country of drugs is that the U.S. is also a transit country of drugs considering that many precursor chemical shipments stop by Long Beach in its way down to Mexico. Is the U.S. ready to take any action specifically on (inaudible) what to -- how to prevent shipments stopping in Long Beach down to Mexico, coming from Asia?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, I will tell you this. The Combat Meth Act, which addresses the issues of precursor chemicals, is something that we have worked on very closely with Mexico. We certainly are trying our best to watch the shipments, and because of the Combat Meth Act we've identified who the five top countries are that export precursor chemicals and the top five countries who import those chemicals. And we're working on this year -- those countries have been named, and we're working together very closely with Mexico to try to work as partners in the flow of these chemicals.

And the problem is many of these precursor chemicals are used for legitimate use, so you don't want to just stop all transit of these chemicals because they're certainly used in -- you know, particularly in cold medicines and various cleaning chemicals and things like that. So we can't totally stop it; we just need to control it. And Mexico has certainly come out with some statements of strong support in this effort both the U.S. and Mexico wants to conduct.

MR. GALLEGOS: One last question.

QUESTION: Regarding Bolivia, you mentioned -- you had some positive assessment for them, but they did say even -- the Administration said even a year ago that they need to eradicate this crop. And currently -- the current report says they're just on track to eradicate. It's been a whole year. Why do you accept the delay on that?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, they are meeting the minimal standards of cooperation, but they are -- they are working on it. They -- we think that they'll probably have managed to eradicate 5,600 hectares this year. That's less than what they've done in the past. But they are doing something. They are working. And we are working with their government on it. It's a new government. It's fairly new. And we definitely look to them for interdiction. They've gone way up in their stats on seizures and going out in the jungles. They're working very hard with their national police, their counter police, in taking down drug labs. So they're taking down labs, they're doing interdictions. Their coca eradication -- it needs work, but it is not -- it's not that they're not doing anything.

QUESTION: One more? I'm Dave Gollust from Voice of America. We have a rather difficult political relationship with Venezuela and the report says that they are not cooperating with us, not responding to requests. To what extent is their noncooperation on narcotics a factor of this rather odious relationship that we have with them?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: Well, first of all, we have tried very hard to work with them to draft up a letter of agreement so that we can, you know, continue our narcotic or our drug eradications with them. And they just can't seem to come to an agreement with signing a letter of agreement. They just won't do it.

And so that's part of the problem. I mean, DEA still does work there. We still do work with the police there and do eradication efforts. One of our greatest concerns, though, is the corruption there that -- with narcotrafficking and it is such a transit country. It's just becoming a real hub for drugs moving on through that country. A lot of it's going to Europe. It's not necessarily all coming to the United States, but we need to -- we need to come to an agreement with them.

QUESTION: Do you think this is an advertent or inadvertent phenomenon there? I mean, is the government, do you think, sort of, well, the United States gets all bent out of shape about drugs so we'll just let this -- let this go on? Is that a factor there?

MS. MCCAMPBELL: There is no doubt that the drug trafficking is going on through that country and a government that does not care about that is certainly not a cooperating government. And as I said, they do do some efforts and we have an embassy there and it's not like we're not in the country. There are some efforts to do things there. And as long as we can keep some sort of dialogue going on, I think it benefits every country in -- every country across the world and it benefits the United States as well to try to continue talks. You can't -- you don't want to just shut out any kind of attempts at diplomatic relations.

MR. GALLEGOS: Thank you.

ENDS

© Scoop Media