-Caveat Lector-

from:
http://www.lycaeum.org/drugwar/DARKALLIANCE/ciah4.html
Click Here: <A HREF="http://www.lycaeum.org/drugwar/DARKALLIANCE/ciah4.html">T
he CIA and The Politics of Heroin</A>
-----
An Interview with Alfred McCoy


by David Barsamian

Conducted at University of Wisconsin-Madison, February 17,1990

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Part Four
Australia had no drug problem in 1975. They now have a drug problem with
heroin, as large in proportion as the United States. It came from the same
period. So you suddenly have two big new markets - not only America as your
destination. Well, meanwhile, American dealers can't get their stuff from
Southeast Asia so they turn to Mexico. Mexico booms, Mexico gets closed down
and then they turn to Southwest Asia - Pakistan and Afghanistan. In short,
what you get as a result of this attempt at suppression is an elaboration of
global trafficking routes - not just one big market, America, but now three
big markets - Europe, Australia and America. And not just one major source,
Turkey, but in fact, the whole of this mountain band of Asia is ready to
supply the world. There's now been a disruption with cocaine in Central
America because of all this pressure and there's been some disruption in
Afghanistan. Southeast Asia is now number one. In short, what we have then is
an elaboration of trafficking routes - more areas of consumption, more areas
of production, more tightly knit together so that the attempted interdiction
complicated the global trafficking to the point that it's now beyond any
interdiction effort. I would think that the probable consequences of the Bush
attempted interdiction in Latin America will be similar. You can't predict
quite how it's going to work out, but based on what we know from the Nixon
drug wars, it'll make the problem worse.

Barsamian: And in your view, the enforcement effort has been totally
compromised?

McCoy: Well, yeah, the enforcement effort such as it is. Although, you know,
it's usually run by bureaucrats that are reasonably dedicated to what they're
doing. If you meet drug agents and you talk to them about what they're doing,
they believe they're trying to do something good. They think that keeping
drugs out of America is a good thing to do and I think that everybody would
agree that these guys are doing an important job. That's why we keep hiring
more of them and they get killed like Camarena in Mexico and take a lot of
risks. I'm not talking about them, okay? But what are they essentially trying
to do? What are these drug agents trying to do?

They're trying to find out who the drug brokers are, they're trying to get
the drug brokers arrested, they're trying to get the host government where
they're operating - whether it be Mexico or Thailand - to use their very
substantial police forces to crack down on the drug lords. The next thing
they're trying to do is to cut the connection between 'Thailand and Mexico or
Central America and the United States. So, over the short term, they're
trying to stop the drugs, make seizures, disrupt it. Over the long term,
identify the traffickers, the brokers and their political supporters, and get
these guys out of business. That's the job of the anti-drug bureaucracy.

It's only been a strong bureaucracy now for about 15 years, since the Nixon
war on drugs they beefed the DEA up and it keeps getting beefed up. One of
the things that will happen as a result of the Bush drug war I expect will be
another major expansion of the DEA. Working against that has been the Central
Intelligence Agency. Because of their mandate to stop communism or to run a
secret army in Laos or to harass the Nicaragua government with the contra
operation - because they've had a political covert action mandate- they have
found it convenient to ally themselves with the very drug brokers the DEA is
trying to put in jail. While you're working with the CIA you are untouchable.
The CIA backs you up. There are instances of minor traffickers being arrested
in the United States for importing drugs and the CIA will actually go to the
local police and courts and get them off and out because oftentimes they
threaten to talk, make trouble, so the CIA just gets them out. What the CIA
does in these known instances it does more broadly. I, for example, had
reason to gather evidence based on talking to American officials in my own
inquiry that the Chief of Staff of the Royal Laotian Army and the commander
of the CIA secret army was involved in drugs. What happened when I made this
allegation? The CIA did everything to discredit my allegations. They attacked
me. 'They didn't attack Vang Pao who was operating a heroin ring. They didn't
go after General Owen Radicone(?) who had the world's biggest heroin
operation - they went after me! They tried to suppress my book, they
threatened to murder my sources, they spent $25 million in staging a massive
opium burning by the Nationalist Chinese forces in northern Thailand announcin
g they were retiring from the drug trade. I mean, they went through all kinds
of hoops to discredit me and my allegations. They protect these guys. While
you're working with the agency, you are protected.

So at critical points in the history of the international drug trade, the CIA
has moved in and allied itself with local drug brokers. Often times the
brokers have been able to use that alliance to their advantage and at a
critical time when they were making new connections, they were reaching out
and opening new markets there their whole apparatus was exposed in a way that
it won't be once they get it tied down and get the procedures established. At
this critical point they're under protection from the CIA.

Barsamian: Are there any facets of the documentation that you developed and
the evidence that you uncovered in your research in writing The Politics of
Heroin in Southeast Asia, any new information that you've uncovered in recent
years that you might add or change regarding your original investigations?

McCoy: The book was, for whatever reason, pretty solid. A number of CIA
people I've met since have said that it's pretty accurate. Some of them - the
only complaints I've had are some who say that "it wasn't really us in
analysis, it was really the covert action boys." It was really what's called
"plans," the director of the plans, which is one of four divisions of the
CIA. A lot of agency people who I'm sure are in intelligence analysis feel
kind of besmirched and offended, but they generally agree that it's a pretty
accurate depiction of what's going on.

Barsamian: Do you think that the current war on drugs might be used as a
vehicle of U.S. intervention in foreign countries?

McCoy: That is something I can't answer. We can only speculate. This is a
conversation, so I'll speculate. The evidence brought out by Jonathan
Marshall who's preparing a book on cocaine in Central America - he's the op
ed page editor of the Oakland Tribune - and most recently by the New York
Times, raises real questions about the Panama operation. I mean, Noriega was
portrayed as this desperate drug lord, this satanic figure that had to be
knocked out in order for the drug war to go ahead. And we knocked out this
evil man, Noriega, and put him on trial in Miami.

Then we put in a government which, according to the New York Times g don't
know if you saw that report) ... a government which is, in fact, linked
either personally or their relatives are linked with the Panamanian banking
industry.

Now ... why is there a big banking industry in Panama?

Panama is a little tiny country that was formerly a province of Colombia
before the United States separated them and built the canal. For Colombians,
Panama is just like next door. It's the old province. And yet it's not a part
of Colombia any more. So if you're a Panamanian cocaine merchant, if you're
the Medellin cartel or the Cali cartel, where do you do your banking? You
don't do it in Bogota, you do it in Panama City and you do it through these
big Panamanian banks. If you've ever noticed the photographs of the financial
district of Panama City, it looks like a mini-Wall Street or a mini-downtown
Los Angeles. Why? Why in this poor economy do you have this elaborate banking
structure? It's built from money laundering and the Endara government, as
individuals - and of his vice presidents, several of his cabinet ministers -
are an the boards of banks which have been big in the money laundering
industry. Moreover, one of Endara's key cabinet people was actually a lawyer
for one of the big drug lords of Colombia. So what you're looking at is we
replaced Manuel Noriega who is supposedly this evil drug dealer who moved a
million dollars of drugs and made $4 million from the Medellin cartel - we
replace this guy with people who represent the Panamanian money- laundering
industry which was moving the money from the United States to Colombia. We
got rid of some petty thug, some tough guy on the street who's stealing
hubcaps, and we put the Mafia in power.

Why? Why? I don't know yet. I mean, what it means to me is that the whole
Panamanian operation didn't have anything to do with the drug war. I think it
has to do with essentially trying to maintain influence in Panama. And
Noriega, whatever else he was, was a nationalist who was very good at
manipulating the United States. I think that infuriated us. Just to continue
my speculative theme, my scenario - uninformed and totally ignorant, just
based at looking at Laos and then guessing what could be going on in Colombia
and Panama - my scenario would be that the hidden history of Panama maybe
reads like this:

You have a nationalist general who takes this colonial creation of the United
States, this country of Panama, and gives it some dignity, a charismatic
figure - General Omar Torrijos. The United States hated Torrijos. They hated
him why? Because Torrijos was a convincing nationalist. He mobilized the
Panamanian people, he had some kind of intentional prestige, and he forced
the United States to give up our greatest jewel of empire - the canal, which
for a certain type of American is embedded in our consciousness. I mean, what
India was to the British, what the Netherlands Indies was to Holland, the
Panama Canal is to us. That's our empire, you know, our great triumph.

So Torrijos took away the canal and - guess what!? - Reagan comes into office
and Torrijos has an aircraft accident.

Why? How? It's never been explained. Maybe he was killed. The CIA runs a lot
of maintenance and aircraft firms in the Caribbean - maybe they did it.
Anyhow, somebody kills Torrijos so they're looking around for some new
pliable man to put in power to make sure they don't have trouble. So they
install Noriega and they know Noriega's reliable because they know Noriega's
been doing the drug operations for them in a small kind of petty way. So they
know they've got him. He's manageable - he moves the drugs, he does whatever
he wants, he's the intelligence chief under Torrijos. Now he's the CIA's
liaison and perfectly reliable. What does Noriega do? He turns around and
does exactly what Torrijos did. He plays to the nationalist crowd, he uses
the drug money and the Panamanian economy to build up an independent
political base so that he's no longer controllable. So what do we do? We
stigmatize him as a drug lord, we go in and invade, we get rid of him, we put
in an ugly, pliable government. We got rid of a man who maybe made $4 million
from drugs and we replace him with a cabinet who are representatives of a
multi-billion dollar bank-cum-money laundering industry.

To me the logic is not so much to get rid of drugs but to maintain U.S.
influence in a key strategic area at a time when the Canal is about to be
turned over and the Canal still remains strategically significant for the
United States. So my hunch, my guess, my uninformed opinion is that the
Panamanian intervention has very little to do with drugs and everything to do
with U.S. power abroad We dressed up our national strategic interest, no
longer in the ball gown of anti-communism but in the formal wear of
anti-narcotics policy. We're still just maintaining U.S. power and it's
likely that the drug war is going to have other episodes like this. Whether
or not the whole drug war will ultimately become a prisoner, a creation of
U.S. global strategic interests I don't know. It's too early to say. But in
this particular instance the major battle in the drug war looks very dubious.

Barsamian: In your view, there will be a marked increase and expansion of
drug addiction and drug use in the United States, Europe and Australia -
Incidentally, earlier you mentioned that the drug flow went into Europe and
Australia, but not into Japan, is that correct?
McCoy: Yes.

Barsamian: Why not?

McCoy: The relationship between the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (the
conservatives) and the big organized crime syndicates, which are enormous in
Japan, is a very tight one and has been historically since the end of World
War II. There's been a very close integration with the organized crime
operations and the ruling conservative party. The conservatives have been in
power now in Japan since 1948. It's one of the longest reigns of any party
anywhere in the world. There's a kind of entente, an understanding between
the syndicates and the government - it's not rigid - but the basic
understanding is no drugs. That's the basic thing. Don't move drugs. And the
Japanese police are ruthlessly efficient. If any of the syndicates, any of
the big families - some of them have 10,000 members in them - broke this
rule, the police have sufficient mechanisms of control to punish them for it.
So in this complex politics of organized crime in Japan, they can do
prostitution, they can do all kinds of fraud, they can do many things - but
not drugs. So Japan's never opened up.

DeGaulle had a very similar relationship with the Corsican syndicates during
his reign in the 1960s and early 1970s. The understanding was that the
Corsican syndicates in Marseilles would manufacture in Marseilles under
protection. But they would not sell in France. They would only export to the
United States. That began to break down. DeGaulle died, Pompidoux replaced
him and the Gaullists lost power, there was pressure on the syndicates, some
new groups came in and started breaking the rule, and France wound up with a
drug problem. But for practically a decade that rule held.
-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
Omnia Bona Bonis,
All My Relations.
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections 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, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
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