 [23] Drugs, policy (1:375/48)  WORLD.DRUG.POLICY 
 Msg  : #890 [68]                           Loc                                 
 From : Michael Hess                        1:375/48        Wed 06 Jul 94 15:44 
 To   : All                                                                     
 Subj : US Drug Strategy files                                                  

What it is All?

I cross-posted this over to discuss it here as well:

I recently came across the transcripts from several hearings on US Drug
Strategy in it's various forms. These files are required reading for those who
really want to know what the government is doing with the US military in
fighting this failed "drug war". Just a short excerpt from one may raise a
question two for people you talk to about the failed drug policy in this
country, [] notes are mine:

---
      Copyright 1994 Federal Information Systems Corporation
                        Federal News Service
                      JUNE  22, 1994, WEDNESDAY

Section: Capitol Hill Hearing
Headline: Joint Hearing Of The International Security,
International Organizations And Human Rights Subcommittee And The
Western Hemisphere Affairs Subcommittee Of The House Foreign
Affairs Committee
Subject: U.S Anti-Drug Strategy For The Western Hemisphere

Chaired By:
Representative Tom Lantos (D-Ca)
Representative Robert Torricelli (D-Nj)

Witnesses:
Robert Gelbard,
 Assistant Secretary Of State For International Narcotics Matters,
Thomas Constantine,
 Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration
Brian Sheridan,
 Deputy Assistant Secretary Of Defense

Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, Dc

... [this is the opening of PART TWO]

REP. LANTOS: Before turning to Mr. Gilman, I'd like to just
explore a couple of issues that have been raised.

What happened on May 1 that compelled us to stop sharing
information?  Why was May 1 different from April 30, April 29 or
May 2?  What was the magic of that May 1 date?  Secretary Gelbard?

MR. GELBARD: I'm afraid I can't answer that.

REP. LANTOS: Well somebody made the decision.  Who, in your
judgment, made that decision, that on May 1 cooperation ceased? .

MR. GELBARD: The decision was made by the Department of Defense.

REP. LANTOS: Mr. Sheridan, why was the Department of Defense ready
to share information on April 30 and April 29 and April 28, and
all the proceeding months, and suddenly stopped sharing
information?

MR. SHERIDAN: There was a concern at the department, it was voiced
in the interagency some time previous to that, that we were having
problems, legal problems, with what could be done with our
information.  I would disagree respectfully with Chairman
Torricelli. The assets that we provided down there were never
intended by the previous administration or this one to shoot down
aircraft.  They were intended to provide information that could be
used to support ground- based end games, which the chairman I
think did describe quite accurately..

They have been successful in leading to ground operations which
have destroyed airfields and seized cocaine on the ground.  They
were never intended to provide information to shoot down aircraft
in flight.  And when it became apparent that the Colombians and
Peruvians wanted to do this, which was inconsistent with long-
standing U.S. policy and with agreements that we had with them, we
knew that we had a potentially large problem on our hands and we
decided that, given the ongoing nature of the discussions we were
having and the sense that we couldn't bring this to a close, that
we needed to protect DOD personnel and cease providing that while
we sort this out.

... [now we get to a part that caught my attention]


REP. LANTOS: Now what is the current status of the Colombian
government's efforts to negotiate a settlement with the leaders of
the Cali cartel under the surrender decree?

MR. GELBARD: We have had a major problem with their prosecutor-
general, Gustavo Degrave (ph), who is independent from the
government, and who, as we have said publicly, as we have said
privately, as we have been fighting, has been trying to avoid
serious prosecution and asset seizure of major traffickers -- from
major traffickers in the Cali cartel.  As a result, we have
suspended any --

REP. LANTOS: So when you say independent, you mean independent for
what period of time, and how can that independence be curtailed?

MR. GELBARD: He has an independent term.

REP. LANTOS: When does that term end?

MR. GELBARD: I believe he has several more years, theoretically,
in office.

REP. LANTOS: And under no circumstances can he be removed --

MR. GELBARD: He can be --

REP. LANTOS: -- prior to the termination of his tenure?

MR. GELBARD: As I understand it, he can be removed by the
Colombian constitutional or supreme court.

REP. LANTOS: And has that been attempted?

MR. GELBARD: That has not yet been attempted, but has been under
discussion within Colombia.  We have made very clear, both
publicly and privately, our refusal to work with him because of
his misuse of U.S.-provided assistance, his lack of seriousness
about prosecution of major drug traffickers.

REP. LANTOS: Well, and what -- what's the next step.

MR. GELBARD: And we hope that -- and we have tried to encourage
the government of Colombia, particularly there, to urge that he be
removed from his position, and we have stressed this through our
unwillingness to work with him..

We feel that President Gaviria and his government, who have very
strong records of fighting against drug trafficking, are also very
dissatisfied with his performance, and they've made that very
clear. President Gaviria has come out very strongly against him
publicly.

... [ then the transcript goes on to say about Gustavo de Greiff]


REP. LANTOS: Is it your judgment that the government is doing
everything it can to get rid of him?

MR. GELBARD: I feel quite confident that President Gaviria's
government has tried to be very effective on this and they are
very frustrated, extremely frustrated.

REP. LANTOS: That's not a good enough answer for me.  What do you
mean by frustrated?

MR. GELBARD: Under their system, they do not have the ability to
remove him.  As I said earlier, he has to be removed by the
courts.

MORE.

REP. LANTOS: And the courts are intimidated.

MR. GELBARD: For whatever reasons --

REP. LANTOS: Well, what's your judgment?  I mean, this is not an
unusual question.  I mean, if the courts have the legal right to
remove the obstacle in the way of getting at the kingpins of the
drug world, then why don't the courts do it?

MR. GELBARD: I really don't --

REP. LANTOS: They're either paid off or they're intimidated. So,
which of the two is the answer?

MR. GELBARD: Mr. Chairman, I really don't know the answer to that,
but I am still hopeful that DeGrave (sp) will be removed from his
position.

REP. LANTOS: Well, what is your hunch?  Are they intimidated or
are they paid off?

MR. GELBARD: I'd rather not answer that in open session.

REP. LANTOS: Well, we will have a closed session on this whole
subject because the answers, frankly, are simply unacceptable to
the American people; that this nightmare of the drug epidemic
continues because an individual in Colombia is unwilling to
prosecute the kingpins of this giant international conspiracy.

-end of excerpt-

These files are available here and in the July archive. I hope to announce a
wider release in a couple of days.

US94DOD.ZIP  U.S. Anti-Drug Strategy, Dept. of Defense. DoD 06/22/94
US94DOS.ZIP  U.S. Anti-Drug Strategy, Dept. of State. 06/22/94
US94INCP.ZIP U.S. Int'l Narcotic Control Programs. DEA, DoJ. 06/22/94
USDSWH1.ZIP  U.S. Anti-Drug Strategy, Western Hemisphere 1/2. 06/28/94
USDSWH2.ZIP  U.S. Anti-Drug Strategy, Western Hemisphere 2/2. 06/28/94
---

The first thing that comes to my mind is why are officials in the US government
causually talking about how to get rid of an official in another country who is
in the way of a failed policy?

Dave Borden first reported in The Activist, May 21st, 1994 that Gustavo de
Greiff is the Attorney General of the nation of Columbia. He directed the forces
that dealt with Pablo Escovar, this man has been around the front lines of the
American Drug War. He came out and publicly declared his support of other
alternatives to the present failure, including legalization.

Now that you have been reminded who this man is they are talking about in the
above excerpts, go back and read it again.

Ok, they are trying to pin the fact that Columbia has in effect legalized the
possession of certain drugs on de Greiff and make him a media scapegoat.

An AP report circulating around the 'net dated May 7th, 1994, more than a month
before these hearings, Columbias Constitutional court reportedly legalized
possession of marijuana, cocaine and other drugs in amounts for personal use.

The US would have considerably more people to get out of the way if it goes
after the Constitutional Court of Columbia and since there are news reports
dated so far prior to the hearings that clearly state what Columbia has done,
the Honorable Chairman of this hearing has made a grave omission by not
including this information in the open hearing we were reading above.

In the end they decide to pursue the "answers" in a closed session.

If everything that has been reported so far here in this echo and elswhere is
fairly accurate I would say that Robert Gelbard is going to having a tough time
in the closed session :)

There is plenty about this that makes me sick to my stomach. Has this country
gotten so bloated and out of hand that hearings on Capitol Hill can openly talk
about how to "get rid of' an Attorney General in another country who they don't
feel is cooperating?

Why do these hearings have such a glaring omission; Columbias legalization?

And is it mere coincidence that the date cooperation stopped was just a week
before the news that Columbia had legalized possession of drugs?

The fact that two Constitutional Courts, in two widely divergent countries, have
declared it legal to possess certain amounts of drugs is seemingly ignored. Can
we ignore the kinds of tactics and strategies that the US is using in other
countries to keep this failed war breathing a little more?

No.

   michael.hess@f48.n375.z1.fidonet.org

 == A clean disk is a sign that a FORMAT has been done

--- Golded 2.42 1635US1 via D'Bridge 003179 ---
 * Origin:  BBSNEWS * Lake Jordan, Alabama * USR 16.8 205-567-9310  (1:375/48)

