-Caveat Lector-

CIA COVERT ACTIONS & DRUG TRAFFICKING
by Alfred McCoy

Excerpted from testimony before the Special Seminar
focusing on allegations linking CIA secret operations
and drug trafficking-convened February 13, 1997, by
Rep. John Conyers, Dean of the Congressional Black
Caucus

Let's look at the heroin boom of the 1980s. In the
1980s, CIA op-erations again played a role in the
revival of the U.S. drug problem. In 1979, the Soviets
invaded Afghanistan and the Sandinistas seized power
in Nicaragua, prompting two more CIA operations with
some revealing similarities. Let us now pay
particularly close attention to the CIA's Afghan
operation. Not only is the Afghan operation
simultaneous and similar to the controversial contra
operation, but its direct and negative impact on U.S.
drug supply is beyond question or controversy.

In 1980 and 1981, heroin production in Southwest Asia,
Afghanistan and Pakistan suddenly expanded to fill
gaps in the global drug market. Although Pakistan and
Afghanistan had zero-zero-heroin production in the
mid-1970s, by 1981 Pakistan had suddenly emerged as
the world's number one heroin supplier. Reporting from
Teheran in the mid 1970s, U.S. Ambassador Richard
Helms, the former CIA Director, insisted that there
was no heroin production in this region, only
localized opium trade. This region, he said, then
supplied zero percent of the U.S. heroin supply. In
1981, by contrast, the U.S. Attorney General announced
that Pakistan was now supplying sixty percent of the
U.S. demand for heroin. Inside Pakistan itself the
results were even more disastrous. Rising from zero
heroin addicts in 1979, Pakistan had five thousand
addicts in 1980 and one million two hundred thousand
addicts in 1985, the world's highest number in any
terms. Why was Pakistan able to capture the world's
heroin market with such surprising speed and ease?

After the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979,
the White House assigned the CIA to mount a major
operation to support the Afghan resistance. Working
through Pakistan Inter-Service Intelligence, the CIA
began supplying covert arms and finance to Afghan
forces. As they gained control over liberated zones
inside Afghanistan, the Afghan guerrillas required
that its supporters grow opium to support the
resistance. Under CIA and Pakistani protection,
Pakistan military and Afghan resistance opened heroin
labs on the Afghan and Pakistani border. According to
The Washington Post of May 1990, among the leading
heroin manufacturers were Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, an
Afghan leader who received about half of the covert
arms that the U.S. shipped to Pakistan. Although there
were complaints about Hekmatyar's brutality and drug
trafficking within the ranks of the Afghan resistance
of the day, the CIA maintained an uncritical alliance
and supported him without reservation or restraint.

Once the heroin left these labs in Pakistan's
northwest frontier, the Sicilian Mafia imported the
drugs into the U.S., where they soon captured sixty
percent of the U.S. heroin market. That is to say,
sixty percent of the U.S. heroin supply came
indirectly from a CIA operation. During the decade of
this operation, the 1980s, the substantial DEA
contingent in Islamabad made no arrests and
participated in no seizures, allowing the syndicates a
de facto free hand to export heroin. By contrast, a
lone Norwegian detective, following a heroin deal from
Oslo to Karachi, mounted an investigation that put a
powerful Pakistani banker known as President Zia's
surrogate son behind bars. The DEA in Islamabad got
nobody, did nothing, stayed away.

Former CIA operatives have admitted that this
operation led to an expansion of the
Pakistan-Afghanistan heroin trade. In 1995 the former
CIA Director of this Afghan operation, Mr. Charles
Cogan, admitted sacrificing the drug war to fight the
Cold War. "Our main mission was to do as much damage
to the Soviets. We didn't really have the resources or
the time to devote to an investigation of the drug
trade," he told Australian television. "I don't think
that we need to apologize for this. Every situation
has its fallout. There was fallout in terms of drugs,
yes, but the main objective was accomplished. The
Soviets left Afghanistan."

Again, distance insulated the CIA from political
fallout. Once the heroin left Pakistan, the Sicilian
Mafia exported it to the U.S., and local gangs sold it
on the street. Eventually U.S. drug agents arrested a
bunch of middle-aged Sicilians migrants at pizza
parlors from Boston, MA to Milton, WI in the famous
pizza connection case of the 1980s. Not surprisingly,
most Americans did not make the equation between
Afghan drug lords, the pizza parlors and the heroin in
their cities. Hence, there was no controversy over
this Afghan operation.

In Central America, however, simple proximity has made
the fallout from the CIA operations explosive. Unlike
the CIA's Asian warlords, Nicaragua's Contras did not
produce drugs and had to make their money by
participating in the smuggling of cocaine directly
into the U.S. Proximity brought these operations to
the attention of Congress in the late l980s, when
Senator John Kerry's subcommittee investigated the
Contra-cocaine links. His investigators established
that four Contra-connected corporations hired by the
U.S. State Department to fly humanitarian relief goods
to Central America were also involved in cocaine
smuggling. The DEA operative assigned to Honduras, Mr.
Thomas Zepeda, testified that his office had been
closed in June 1983 since it was gathering
intelligence that the local military, the Honduran
military, was involved in cocaine smuggling. His
reports were threatening the CIA's relationship with
the Honduran military in this key frontline state for
Contra operation. In effect, Agency operations had
once again created a de facto zone of protection
closed to investigators from outside agencies. Read
closely, the Kerry Committee established a pattern of
CIA complicity in Central America strikingly similar
to the one we saw in Laos and Afghanistan: tolerance
for drug dealing by assets and concealment to protect
larger covert operations.

The Mercury story tries to go the next step. It tries
to establish a direct link between CIA operations and
drug distribution in the U.S. According to Mercury
reporter Gary Webb, this dark alliance began in the
early 1980s when the contra revolt against Nicaragua's
leftist Sandinista government was failing for want of
funds. Here is his scenario.

In 1981 the CIA hired ex-Nicaraguan army colonel
Enrique Bermudez to organize the main Contra force
known as the FDN. Bermudez turned to two Nicaraguan
exiles in the U.S. to supposedly supplement meager
agency support with drug profits. In California,
Danilo Blandon, the former director of Nicaragua's
foreign marketing program, used his business skills to
open a crack distribution network for the Contras in
Los Angeles. During its decade of operation this crack
network supposedly enjoyed a de facto immunity from
prosecution. The people involved in this network were
somehow miraculously exempted from investigation or
arrest despite substantial involvement in the traffic.

While the Agency's relations with Asian opium lords
were lost in the mists of far-off mountains,
Representative Maxine Waters, the Black Caucus leader
from Los Angeles, has police documents to charge the
CIA with protecting Contra leaders.

Let us now return to the four questions we asked at
the outset. Question one: Did the Agency ever ally
with drug traffickers? Yes. Beyond any doubt. Once
controversial, not even the CIA any longer bothers to
deny that it has often allied with major and minor
drug dealers. Question two: Did the CIA protect these
allies from prosecution? Yes. There is a recurring
pattern of protection. During a major CIA operation,
the operational zone becomes a special de facto
protected area where everything is subordinated to the
protection of this covert operation. To protect the
integrity of the operation, the CIA blocks all
investigation, by the DEA, Customs, Congress and local
police. Whenever anyone connected with this effort is
arrested outside of the protected area, the CIA often
blocks prosecution that will compromise its operation.
And lest we forget, there is only one element that any
criminal needs to become a powerful entrepreneur of
vice and violence: protection against prosecution.

Question three: Did such alliances and protections
contribute significantly to an expansion of the global
drug trade and U.S. drug supply over the past fifty
years? This is a question that is open to
interpretation. If we were to place perfect
information on the tables of two academics, they would
probably produce two books with two very different
answers to two very different interpretations. I would
argue, with my imperfect information, that in Burma,
Laos and Afghanistan, CIA operations provided critical
elements, logistics, arms and political protection
that facilitated the rapid growth of heroin and opium
production in both areas. Clearly the CIA alliance was
central to the rise of some major drug dealers and
catalytic in the expansion, production and processing
in certain drug zones. It would not be unreasonable to
conclude, therefore, that such CIA operations led to
an increase in the production and processing of
illicit drugs in these covert war zones. But it is
difficult to state unequivocally that these individual
dealers and these zones did or did not shape the
long-term trajectory of supply and demand within the
vastness and complexity of the global drug traffic.

Question four: Did the CIA encourage drug smugglers to
target African American communities? This pattern of
CIA complicity in drugs proceeds from the internal
logic of its covert operations, an inadvertent
consequence of a style of indirect intervention
abroad. There is a striking similarity in the patterns
of CIA complicity with drug dealers in Laos,
Afghanistan and Central America. Just as I can find no
evidence, nor any logic, to the proposition that the
CIA in Laos during the Vietnam War wanted one-third of
the American soldiers in South Vietnam to become
heroin addicts, so I can see no evidence nor any logic
of any CIA targeting of blacks in South Central Los
Angeles. During the 1980s, however, there is every
indication that the CIA was aware that its Afghan
operations contributed to the export of heroin to the
U.S. and did nothing-nothing-to slow this drug flow.
At the same time, the same agency, the same division
of the same agency, mounting an operation of a very
similar character in Central America, may or may not
have known. This is something that needs to be
pressed. But in Afghanistan it's very clear that they
knew.

Since a substantial portion of the African American
community already suspects the worse, that the CIA
willfully flooded their communities with drugs, the
time has come for an unflinching search for answers to
these questions. As Congress investigates, I have a
good idea of what it will find. I doubt that there is
evidence the CIA actually trafficked in drugs or
targeted any Americans, whether GIs in South Vietnam
or blacks in South Central. But investigators will
discover CIA alliances with warlords, colonels and
criminals who used this protection to deal drugs.
Suffering from what I call "mission myopia," CIA
agents, in Mr. Charles Cogan's words, regarded
narcotics as "mere fallout." For CIA agents in Laos,
the heroin epidemic among GIs in Vietnam was only
fallout. For agents in Pakistan, drug shipments to
America were just fallout. In the case of the CIA's
Afghan operation, it is clear that the Agency created
a zone of protection for heroin production, and agents
tolerated trafficking by local assets that supplied
much of the entire U.S. heroin markets. For Vietnam
veterans and for African Americans who live with the
pain of this fallout, these findings will be
profoundly disturbing. That the CIA apparently
regarded increased drug shipments to the U.S. as
acceptable fallout may spark considerable controversy.
But these findings will be better for this nation's
political health than the CIA's blanket denials, which
can only fan the flames of allegations that have
willfully targeted black communities for drug
distribution.

--Alfred McCoy is Professor of Southeast and Asian
History at the University of Wisconsin and author of
The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global
Drug Trade He serves as Director of the federally
funded Center for Southeast Asian Studies and holds
degrees from Columbia University, Berkeley, and Yale.
The transcript of this special seminar on CIA secret
actions and drug trafficking came to NCX from David
Barsamian, noted journalist, interviewer, and Director
of Alternative Radio.

The 2-tape set and/or the complete transcript of the
special seminar, focusing on allegations linking CIA
secret operations and drug trafficking, can be ordered
directly from Alternative Radio by calling David
Barsamian's 800 number, 1-(800) 444-1977, or writing
Alternative Radio, 2129 Mapleton, Boulder, CO 80304.

http://www.sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/97-08%20AUG/ciacovert.html


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to