Dr.
Rachel Ehrenfeld,
Director the Center for the Study of
Corruption and the Rule of Law (CSC) NYC
Blind to Narco-terrorism:
US Fails to Confront a Growing Threat
"Since Narco-terrorism has not been
recognized as one the of the leading killers
of American citizens in the last two decades-
in the form of Cocaine and Heroin. And since
the Narco-terrorist organization has not been
identified as the driving force behind the
real on - going chemical warfare on the
citizens of the US; And as the most corrupting
influence on our moral fiber, the so called
"war on drugs", that lip service of
the Administration in the forms of a few
billions here and there, will, as it has so
far, only fuel the corruption in those
countries where we are allegedly helping
to fight this scourge. And while as with
an ineluctable aspect of any society,
corruption by means of drugs and ultimately
drug money, can take advantage of even the
most advanced, democratic, capitalistic
system. That is a threat the US can not afford
to ignore."
The Soviet Union
has ceased to exist and state sponsored
terrorism is on the decline. Terrorism, drug
trafficking, and organized crime are
recognized as global threats to civil society.
However, the international community, led by
the US, still seems oblivious to an even
more insidious threat posed by the
alliance between terrorist organizations, drug
traffickers and organized crime, better known
as Narco -terrorism.
It is hard to
understand why, but US policy makers seem
unable to grasp that ideological enemies
of democracy and stability, and crime in
the forms of drugs and arms trafficking and
money laundering mixed with simple, personal
opportunism, can go hand in hand
despite sometimes "internal" small
conflicts.
I have identified and
described this very threat, "Narco-Terrorism,"
in a book I've written 11 years ago. [Narco-Terrorism,
Basic Books, NYC, 1990] I noted then
that: "But ignored as
contemporary Narco-terrorism has been, it
comes as a shock that drugs and terrorism now
have become interdependent to a degree
un-imaginable even a decade ago."
Unfortunately, very little was done to destroy
these unholy alliances or to stamp out the
drug problem in another decade since my book
was published.
"It is [Narco-Terrorism]
a deadly symbiosis that tears at the vitals of
Western civilization - not just the United
States. Moreover, from relatively modest
beginning a few decades ago, Narco-terrorism
has become increasingly global in nature, to
become a favorite {tool and} weapon wielded
against the West by its sworn enemies. For
comfortable, tolerant, and self-absorbed
societies to acknowledge they have enemies a
major relevation and difficult to accept. That
these adversaries would use both terrorism and
the poison of narcotics in their war against
those societies smacks of nightmare and
paranoia. How could it be? Surely handful of
criminals might do so. But those who have
studied the phenomenon of Narco-terrorism are
arguing far more. They contend that it is not
simply a few private individuals at war with
the West {the US, or their legitimate
government], that far more than illicit
profits are at stake.
Students of Narco-terrorism
argue that for several decades at the very
least, governments have been in the drug
trade. This is to say that by and large Narco-terrorism
has become a state-sponsored phenomenon that
without state protection neither prospers nor
increases, an allegation almost wholly ignored
until the 1970s. Indeed, the notion that some
states actually sponsor terrorism --narcotics
aside for a moment --was a scandalous
proposition only a decade ago."(Narcoterrorism,
Basic Books, 1990.)
Now, the State Department has
"de-escalated" the rhetoric for even
those states; they are no longer identified as
"rogue states," they are only a
cause for "concern."
"Narco-terrorism
has been ignored thus far because of what are
considered other
political priorities. If this continues it
will result in further escalation. The past
failure to acknowledge Narco-terrorism has
helped create an infrastructure operating so
successfully and independently that today
middle-sized countries like Colombia have
virtually abandoned their national sovereignty
to large areas of the country and these Narco-terrorist
regimes.
When
we began the "war on drugs" we
viewed ourselves, as standing on the edge of a
precipice, and in light of what is happening
today, it seems that the only progress
we have made is to take a giant leap forward.
The face of terrorism,
-- an acknowledged threat -- has changed
since the end of the Cold War, and so did the
methods the US and other countries have
developed to contain and to fight it. Some
more successful than others and some we hope
not to find out.
But since Narco-terrorism
has not been recognized as one of the leading
killers of American citizens in the last two
decades, in the form of Cocaine and Heroin,
our strategy remains allusive. Narco-terrorist
organizations have not been identified as the
driving force behind the real on - going
chemical warfare on the citizens of the US.
Their direct contribution to the most
corrupting influence on our moral fiber - drug
use, has been ignored for decades, and
the so called "war on drugs", that
lip services of the Administration in the
forms of a few billions here and there, will,
as it has in the past -- and as with other US
and foreign aid and aid from other
international organizations, with little or no
conditions attached, and even less monitoring
of program implementation and accountability
for the allocation of funds -- only fuel
the corruption in the countries we are
allegedly helping to fight this scourge.
John Featherly, a
former Senior DEA official suggests that the
US know who the Narco-terrorists are. "We
know their roots, where they live, where the
cultivate and produce the drugs and the ways
they corrupt and who they corrupt. Yet , we do
little to stop them. If the US was serious
about the "war on drugs" it would
provide the necessary means and funds
to really fight a "war on drugs" at
their source, using special methods that are
available to the government. They may not be
the most popular methods, but they will do the
job and cut in half the number of dying
addicts, AIDS infections, crime and the moral
degeneration of millions of Americans. The
cost benefits of ridding ourselves of this
scourge, go far beyond the political out cry
from those with stakes in the business.
However, it is clear that the political will
to seriously fight this scourge is missing in
all fronts."
Decades after
Colombia's leftist guerrilla adopted Narco-Terrorism
as their main path to achieve their
political agenda , they continue to benefit
from a strange case of "willful
blindness" among US policy makers.
Despite a general agreement articulated by
Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey while testifying in
Congress and on many other occasions that
Colombia's problem has reached
"emergency" proportions, the Clinton
Administration and Congress seem unable to
deal with the situation. Both Congress and
State Secretary Madeleine Albright's offered
solutions to the war raging in Colombia would
be suitable for a political conflict, but the
struggle in Colombia is not about politics,
its about money and the power it buys.
And it is waged by a ruthless international
criminal organization.
Indeed, Colombia's
Narco-Terrorists powerful tentacles are
threatening to turn South America's oldest
democracy into its first Narco-cracy, posing a
security threat to the whole continent. As we
all know, it has claimed the lives of tens of
thousands of innocent Colombians while
corrupting the country's political
institutions and ruining its economy. Yet,
instead of staging an unconditional war to rid
Colombia of this menace, peace talks have been
chosen to resolve a criminal conflict and to
appease dangerous criminals under the guise of
a political agenda, which if looked at
closely, would reveal a nightmarish plan for a
totalitarian rule by ruthless murderers on
their way to the Presidential Palace. Not
surprisingly previous US attempts to help with
the negotiations have failed. And there is
little expectation that either the forthcoming
US aid, or diplomatic intervention would
change the situation.
In a little noticed,
but truly revealing statement last month, the
FARC announced that it was going to enforce
its General Law No. 2, taxing the rich.
However, the FARC refused to disclose its Law
No. 1, which they promise to reveal only when
they are in power. Clearly, being in power is
not beyond their reach, considering that they
control about 50% of the country, and that
they have a distinct presence at the
outskirts of Bogota. And from what we know of
the FARC by now, it is reasonable to assume
that when, or if they do, their system of
government will be totalitarian, nothing they
care to advertise in advance for fear of
loosing popular support. Perhaps as a
condition for Pastrana's next negotiation with
them, he should demand that they make public
their Law No. 1.
Illegal drugs provide
the Narco-Terrorists with revenue of about
$750 million to $1 billion annually in
Colombia alone. Not surprisingly they deny
their involvement in the drug trade. But it is
surprising that Colombian Pres. Andres
Pastrana supports their claim, stating that
"there is no evidence that the FARC are
drug traffickers" in an interview last
year to the Argentine newspaper 'Clarin'. On
the contrary says Pastrana, "The FARC
have always said they are interested in
eradicating illegal crops." And US Drug
Czar Barry McCaffrey, though noting the
linkage between the drug traffickers and the
guerrillas, claims that only "two thirds
[of the terrorists] benefit financially from
this association."
Why these outrageous
statements that fly in the face of evidence
and common sense? In whose interest is this
fiction advanced? Why keep alive the myth that
there is a distinction between the terrorists
and the drug traffickers in Colombia? Why
provide them with respectability and
legitimacy by maintaining the fiction that
these greedy criminals have a
"social and political agenda"? Does
anyone really think that by turning a blind
eye to their narcotics involvement, we will
"socialize" them and bring them into
the democratic political arena?
Many
acknowledge that US foreign policy in
Latin America has often failed. The post-Cold
War era dictates Washington must above all
else maintain the appearance of not meddling
in other countries' internal affairs, domestic
terrorism included. At least, that will be the
policy until some unpredictable cataclysmic
crisis forces Washington to grapple with the
on-going destruction of civil society by
criminal organizations in a country as
important as Colombia.
That may be coming
sooner rather than later. According to the
General Accounting Office (GAO) reports, the
Marxist Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC) and
the National Liberation Army (ELN), Colombia's
two Narco-terrorist guerrilla organizations
are responsible for the country's heroin and
cocaine expanding production. The GAO projects
that Colombian heroin, already the primary
source for the eastern US, will rise by as
much as 50% in the next two years. And the 165
tons of cocaine, which ended up on the streets
of America in 1998, will swell to at least 250
tons by the year 2001."
The amalgamation of
drug trafficking and terrorism started back in
the early eighties as a marriage of political
convenience. The economic incentive for the
leftist guerrillas was clear: drug money
provided them with the resources to carry out
their revolution. In exchange the drug
traffickers received guerrilla protection and
trained assassins to carry out acts of
intimidation. While the motives of the two
pariahs were different, their common goal was
to destabilize and undermine the government.
But the so-called "Marxist rebels,"
had long since replaced their
"social" agenda with the lucrative
drug business. Denial of the changes that have
taken place has helped the Narco-terrorists to
take control of more than 50% of Colombia's
territory. But this loss we are told was a
"gesture of good will by Pastrana"
to the rebels. And according to Secretary
Albright, the extensive growth in the
supply of drugs is caused not by the Narco-terrorist,
but by "our [America's] demand for
drugs." Such denials help the Narco-terrorist
in their savage destruction of the country. It
also helps other elements in our society to
call for "drug legalization". It's
hard to think of a better way to end democracy
in America than by doping it.
And there is no relief
in sight. Off-on negotiations between the
Colombian government and the FARC were never
significant because the rebels have no real
agenda -- except to continue their
profiteering on drugs to expand their
political power.
The geopolitical
reality is that drug trafficking increasingly
knows no national boundaries. The Colombian
guerrillas threaten regularly retaliation in
neighboring countries willing to help the US
to combat drug trafficking. It is a war the US
has spent many billions fighting all over the
world inefficiently, with a constantly
changing strategy, thus, with very
little to show for. We know of the deep
involvement of the Colombian cartels in Mexico
and the use of their fellow traffickers in
Mexico for moving great amounts of their
"product" into the U.S. This is the
evidence that the diseas of Narco-terrorism is
international, that it is growing, that its
tentacles are spreading throughout the Third
World and reaching into our daily lives in the
industrial countries, foremost among them, the
U.S.
Stopping
massive killings, human right abuses and other
atrocities was good enough reason to go to war
in Kosovo. But apparently similar and even
worse conditions do not justify putting an end
to a prolonged vicious war that has claimed
tens of thousands of lives over the last
decade, has already corrupted and
subverted democratic institutions
throughout the region, it has and is
destroying the free market system,
destabilizes and corrupts financial systems
throughout the Americas, and is posing a
growing threat to the stability of the region.
While ineluctable aspect of any society,
corruption by means of drugs and ultimately
drug money, can take advantage of even the
most advanced, democratic, capitalistic
system. That is a threat the US can not afford
to ignore.
A US led coalition, as
Secretary Albright suggested, should be
assembled -- but not to negotiate an effort to
lend respectability to a hideous criminal
effort, or promise them foreign investments as
NYSE Chair Richard Grassoso reportedly did
last Summer. What must be our goal is an
all-out effort to stop Narco-terrorism
from destabilizing the region and the
Colombianization of the neighboring countries.
|