Untitled Document
United States “anti-drug” policy faces a major setback in Venezuela
this week, and the drug warriors are loosening their ties as the heat rises.
At the State Department’s press briefing yesterday, Deputy Spokesman Adam
Ereli responded to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s warnings
on Sunday that Venezuela
would no longer work with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. Chávez
said that, far from abandoning efforts to combat trafficking and money laundering
in his own country, his government had decided that – as Narco News has
reported for over five years – the DEA’s war on drugs has nothing
to do with actually shutting down the business, but is rather part of a strategy
of political intervention in Latin American affairs.
Ereli’s limp response was to charge that Venezuela’s statements
about DEA crimes are merely noise designed to distract from what he said was
the country’s own increasingly poor performance on drug control, a claim
which the U.S. government’s own past statements and reports show to be
untrue. Ereli furthermore revived one of the U.S.’s oldest political weapons
in the drug war, threatening to end Venezuela’s certification as a country
participating in anti-drug efforts.
Ereli told the press
in Washington:
Well, first of all, the accusations that somehow the Drug Enforcement Agency
is involved in espionage are baseless. There’s no substance or justification
for them. And as for reports that Venezuela is going to end cooperation with
the Drug Enforcement Agency on fighting drug trafficking, those are certainly
regrettable.
First of all, cooperating in the fight against illicit drug trade is beneficial
to both United States and to Venezuela and failure to cooperate only benefits
narcotraffickers.
Second of all, we, for our part, want to continue counternarcotics cooperation
but I would note that over the past several months, we’ve seen a steady
deterioration in the Government of Venezuela’s commitment on this front.
Looking ahead, I mean obviously, a decision—if Venezuela did indeed
go forward with severing this or ending cooperation, that would obviously have
an impact on deliberations concerning our annual decision-making process regarding
Venezuela’s counternarcotics cooperation efforts under the International
Narcotics Control Act.
If Venezuela has been “steadily deteriorating” in its anti-narcotics
work, why are we just hearing about it now? U.S. officials jump at the chance
to disparage the Venezuelan government, consistently repeating allegations with
“no substance or justification,” by any standard, that Chávez
funds Colombian rebel groups or engineers protests in Bolivia or any number
of other claims. So why wasn’t the U.S. making a stink about this earlier?
The fact is that the U.S. has repeatedly, though without much fanfare, recognized
the success of the Chávez government in this area, despite some law enforcement
corruption problems similar to those that affect all countries through which
narco-dollars move. Some key excerpts from the State Department’s International
Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) for 2005:
Cocaine seizures during the first six months of 2004 equaled the amount
seized in Venezuela during all of 2003, thanks in large part to two multi-ton
seizures made by Venezuelan task forces that worked closely with USG and UK
law enforcement. The GOV also carried out some 400 cocaine and heroin seizures
during the first half of the year. Several important cocaine and heroin trafficking
organizations were effectively attacked during 2004, and several important extraditions
were made.
The GOV recognizes that drug consumption is high in Venezuela and is working
hard to reduce it. There are dozens of private, state, and NGO demand reduction
and treatment groups in Venezuela. These are organized into larger associations
that meet and cooperate on a regular basis. By law, all private companies employing
more than 200 workers must donate one percent of their profit to public awareness
and demand reduction programs. There is no shortage of resources in Venezuela
for demand reduction.
DEA and British law enforcement work closely with vetted GOV counternarcotics
units. These units continue to be very successful, not only in seizing multi-ton
loads of cocaine, but also in breaking apart the organizations that traffic
drugs in and through Venezuela. The GOV affords complete operational latitude
to these vetted units.
And as Gregory Wilpert reports
in Venezuelanalysis.com:
According to the 2003 annual report of the U.S. Embassy in Venezuela, drug
interdiction efforts in Venezuela increased dramatically when Chavez came into
office. For example, the interdiction of cannabis more than doubled in the first
four years of Chavez’s presidency, relative to the four years prior to
his presidency. Also, the interdiction of heroin more than tripled in this time
period.
The U.S. Embassy stopped posting annual drug control reports on its website
in 2003. According to this last report, the Venezuelan government managed to
improve its drug control work despite the political upheavals that took place
in 2002. “the number of interdictions was high, to a large degree thanks
to the implementation of a variety of new programs.”
As for the certification process that Ereli alluded to, the record is pretty
clear that “certification” from the U.S. on either drugs or human
rights is essentially a political exercise, meant to reward countries cooperating
with U.S. interests and pressure those from whom the U.S. wants certain concessions.
Colombia is a perfect example of this; see this
interview with former Colombian Attorney General Gustavo de Greiff in the
Mexican newspaper Por Esto!:
The government most interested and invested in the policy of the drug war
and at the same time is its grand promoter, he said, is the United States government,
which has used the policy to subjugate the countries of Latin America. On one
end they use the “de-certification” process. De Greiff notes: “They’ve
used this on multiple occasions as a threat when U.S. conditions that have nothing
to do with the drug war are imposed, as was the case in 1995 when the U.S. Ambassador
in Colombia conditioned that country’s certification on changes in a banana
export agreement with Europe.” On the other end they use political and
military intervention, more and more, to try and maintain domination and protect
the warehouse of cheap natural resources for the United States.
(See also this 2002 report
by Al Giordano on a typical case of certification hypocracy in Mexico.)
In fact, coincidentally enough, Colombia’s “human rights certification”
has just been approved after nearly a year-long holdup (see this
report at the Center for International Policy for more details). And after
those chummy moments
between Bush and Uribe in Crawford, Texas, you can bet Colombia ain’t
gonna have too many problems with its drug war certification for a while either.
Never mind that, among other things, the new “peace
and justice law” in Colombia is essentially encouraging
paramilitary traffickers to sell off their cocaine stocks, safe in the knowledge
that they will be able to hold on to their profits while they legally reenter
society.
On the one hand, the “de-certification” threat is a pathetic one,
as it appeals to the old logic that a country had to bend over backwards to
win approval from the U.S. in order to maintain international legitimacy. Chávez
has been one of the principal people to break that trance, and such a move won’t
faze him or his supporters. But read between the lines and there is the further
threat of violence that Chávez has so often denounced and U.S. officials
so indignantly dismiss. The United States has only ever denied counter-narcotics
certification to two Latin American countries. One is Colombia. The other is
Panama, and that certification denial was quickly followed by a bloody
U.S. invasion.