UN SPECIAL SESSION ON DRUGS: HOPE TEMPERED WITH PESSIMISM

Observers in Latin America, Europe and Asia weighed in on the
just-concluded UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs held in New
York, where the 150 participating nations agreed to work together to reduce
the threat of worldwide drug trafficking and abuse within the next five
years. The plan included a focus on reducing drug demand, cutting drug
cultivation, implementing crop substitution programs and a pledge to do
more to expose money laundering. A majority of pundits looked favorably on
the UN's involvement in the issue, emphasizing that the "scourge" of
illegal drugs should be handled on the international level. "It is good
that the countries of the world are getting involved in a noble effort such
as the fight against drugs," one Ecuadorian writer said. However, hope that
the nations of the world were galvanizing to work together was tempered
with pessimism, with many analysts doubting that the nations would go
beyond "rhetoric" to carry out the proposals made at the session. President
Clinton's speech on the opening day before the assembly--also a subject of
discussion--garnered mixed reviews in the press. Some
editorialists--especially in drug-producing nations such as
Colombia--welcomed what they saw in his words as greater acknowledgment of
U.S. responsibility for the world drug problem. Bogota's Liberal
Party-oriented, second leading El Espectador noted that "the tone and
bottom line of President Clinton's words show a healthy and hopeful change
of direction." Others were less encouraged by his words. Milan's centrist,
top-circulation Corriere della Sera, for instance, complained that Mr.
Clinton's strategy was "purely punitive": "Clinton insisted on repressive
means, from interdiction of narcotrafficking to more severe legislation.
The word 'rehabilitation' was conspicuously absent from his speech."
Following are salient themes in the commentary:

HOPE: A number of commentators saw progress being made at the UN session,
stressing that "shared responsibility" would be the "new reality" in the
fight against illicit drugs. Turin's centrist, influential La Stampa noted:
"The most significant new element which justifies the optimism on the
anti-drugs front...is the gradual fall of the 'wall' between producing
nations and consuming nations." A Bolivian daily concurred: "Until today,
the poor countries have been the ones with the greatest pressure, while the
rich nations have evaded, at least in part, their share of responsibility.
The spirit that today lingers...is the spirit of equity." An observer in
Brazil judged that the session had "the virtue of reorganizing the fight
against drugs."

PESSIMISM: Chief among the criticisms of the UN effort was that there was
"no mention of the financing in the UN resolutions." Brussels' independent
De Morgen said that in the UN plan, the drug producing nations were to pay
"half of the cost" of the program to cut drug cultivation. "[This] seems,
given the poverty in the Third World, quite unrealistic. It is also
doubtful whether the rich countries will contribute enough to give the plan
credibility," the paper held. Critics also fretted that there were no new
ideas presented, that "repression" was still the main thrust of the UN
proposal, and that there was no talk of "alternatives" to that approach.
The conservative Ottawa Citizen concluded with this dim view of the UN
confab: "Sense and experience are ignored, folly is repeated, and the war
on drugs becomes a war on reason itself."

This survey is based on 44 reports from 18 countries, June 4-11.

EDITOR: Diana McCaffrey

LATIN AMERICA

MEXICO: "U.S.' Change Of Attitude"

Left-of-center La Jornada commented (6/9): "During the opening ceremony of
the UN Speical Session on Drugs, President Zedillo expressed Mexico's view
regarding the problems of drug trafficking and addiction. President Zedillo
also urged the UN to analyze the efforts of all member countries to fight
drugs and evaluate their improvements in a framework of co-responsibility,
respect for the nations' sovereignty and with equal rights and
commitments.... A recent and shameful event was Operation Casablanca, which
violated bilateral cooperation agreements.... Such actions and attitudes
not only undermine the effectiveness of government authorities to combat
drug addiction and trafficking, but also affect the bilateral relations
negatively. It is necessary to stress that the U.S. government has recently
shown moderation and respect for others, and has left arrogant attitudes
behind. This change of attitude was felt first when President Clinton
visited Mexico last year and yesterday at the UN when he said that the
United States is devoting a substantial part of its budget to fight drugs
and addictions. Such an attitude is a diplomatic victory for Mexico."

"U.S.' New Attitude"

Nationalist, pro-government Excelsior commented (6/9): "Things were
clarified when President Clinton publicly acknowledged Mexico's leadership
in fighting drug trafficking and thanked President Zedillo...at the UN
Special Session on Drugs.... President Clinton has proposed replacing
accusations and recriminations with cooperation. With this positive
attitude a new way to fight drugs could be integrated and strengthened."

BOLIVIA: "Shared Responsibility"

Centrist El Mundo of Santa Cruz noted (6/9): "The issue of shared
responsibility is in fact the crux of the matter. Until today, the poor
countries have been the ones with the greatest pressure, while the rich
nations have evaded, at least in part, their share of responsibility. The
spirit that today lingers over the modern and luxurious atmosphere of the
New York Crystal Palace is the spirit of equity. This UN Assembly is
another historical landmark, since after its conclusions, the battle
against drugs will be strengthened or it will lose vigor."

BRAZIL: "Reorganizing The Fight Against Drugs"

Center-right O Estado de Sao Paulo held (6/9) that the "Special Session in
the UN on drugs is a realization by the international community that the
drug trafficking and consumption problem cannot be fought efficiently by
the actions of individual countries. The production and trafficking of
drugs is a transnational phenomenon which can only be attacked by the union
of all countries. Do not expect that these UN sessions will bring forth
fantastic decisions. The coordinated fight against drugs requires resources
and political will that do not exist on a sufficient scale to insure
success against organized crime. Drug trafficking and arms trafficking walk
hand in hand. In some countries, such as Colombia, Afghanistan and Burma
there is a relation between drug trafficking and guerrillas. The UN
conference may not produce immediate results, but at least it has the
virtue of reorganizing the fight against drugs, which today, because of
U.S. influence is practically totally concentrated on production.
Preliminary UN studies propose the eradication of plantations, combatting
trafficking and money laundering, controlling of chemical products used in
refining, and measures to promote cooperation among the countries'
judiciaries, since these crimes don't have borders.

"Emphasis is also given to family values and healthy social habits,
therefore attacking the problem on its most sensitive and forgotten side,
which is the demand provoked by moral and social disentegration."

"War On Drugs"

Center-right, pro-government Correio Braziliense observed (6/9): "President
Cardoso confirmed, in the UN, the creation of the National Anti-drug
Secretariat which will develop drug policies and coordinate federal and
state actions to fight and prevent the traffic and use of drugs. Brazilian
cocaine production, using raw materials from other Latin American
countries, has been increasing.... We are already the fourth largest
producer.... American authorities who recently visited Brasilia voiced
their concern over the size of the problem. They offered to cooperate with
the Brazilian government against the use, sale and transit of drugs through
Brazil. This cooperation is needed, and the United States would benefit
from it. Only two-way actions can be fruitful.... The Secretariat is a
basic precept to solve the problem, even though it will operate on very
scarce funding....

"In the United States, the drug prevention, treatment and border control
plans will spend an estimated $17.1 billion in 1998 alone. Results...have
so far been insignificant. The truth is that, until the large consumer
markets, with the United States, at the lead, are not drastically reduced,
drug trafficking will go on as boldly as it currently does.... The
Brazilian Armed Forces [using the SIVAM airspace surveillance equipment
being installed] may provide backup for law-enforcement activities, while
avoiding direct involvement. In addition to the new Secretariat,
complementary measures must also be enacted, such as drug education in
schools, a more active media campaign, and better treatment for addicts and
their families."

CHILE: "Useful Points"

Popular, conservative La Segunda (6/10) ran this editorial comment: "In his
presentation before this assembly, President Frei noted the negative
results of the efforts carried out until now...but also underlined some
important points which are useful to keep in mind.... Frei referred
especially to the need for nations to cooperate with each other, to have
mutual trust, solidarity and reciprocal assistance, with full respect for
national rights and the principles of international law. This observation
has to do with the repeated conflicts that have arisen principally between
the United States and some Latin American countries, such as Mexico, and
which have affected the sovereignty and sometimes the individual rights of
innocent citizens.... Until now special importance has been given to drug
production, especially by the more developed nations which are potent
consumers, and there has not been enough emphasis on consumption....
Finally, it is worth noting that there is the danger that the thesis of
renowned economists supporting legal drug trafficking and consumption might
be furthered by comparing drugs to alcohol and tobacco use and disregarding
their serious effects."

COLOMBIA: "Hope"

Liberal Party-oriented, second leading El Espectador held (6/10): "Sterile
recriminations or the implementation of odious unilateral measures, like
the certification prescribed by U.S. law, are no longer appropriate because
they are unfair and are ineffectual in the struggle against drugs. The tone
and bottom line of President Clinton's words show a healthy and hopeful
change of direction. Colombia was among those he recognized for their
efforts and results, particularly in crop substitution, and he rejected a
policy based on assigning guilt instead of seeking cooperation. He is
right. We hope his words are adopted by officials from the various
anti-drug agencies of his country.... In coming years, anti-drug
cooperation could benefit from the political consensus reached in New York,
and in particular the pressure which was exerted on the consuming countries
to adopt serious policies against drug addiction."

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: "Drug Fight Requires Coherent , Sincere Cooperation"

Nationalist tabloid El Nuevo Diario commented (6/10): "A fight against
international crime requires a coherent and sincere cooperation, because if
not, the United States would turn, for us, into a kind of laboratory to
form many of our future criminals. And it should not be so."

"UN Appropriate Forum For Treating Global Drug Problem"

Left-of-center Hoy observed (6/9): "The Dominican chief of state did not
hesitate to say that the main source of the drug problem is that it
originates in a market guided by the unwritten law of supply and demand,
the only law, by the way, respected by narcotraffickers. So serious is this
problem that developed countries, those which possess big consumers'
markets, do not accept the responsibility of reducing their demand by 50%
for the year 2008. It seems that they know that this is practically
impossible.... It is evident that we cannot let the Dominican border turn
into a free zone for drugs, but what one wishes is that the United Nations,
itself, covers, even if partially, the economic cost of an operation
directed to keep its most powerful member protected.

"President Fernandez is right when he says that since it is a global
problem [that of narcotrafficking and its consequences] no fora is more
appropriate than that of the United Nations to treat it globally as well.
The disease, the terrible disease cannot be combated with rhetoric.... It
is necessary to have international cooperation directed to those goals that
will benefit all nations, without forceful impositions, without pressure or
blackmailing."

ECUADOR: "World Against Drugs"

Guayaquil's conservative El Telegrafo held (6/9): "As the drug problem in
the world has worsened to become a real threat for the security of the
nations, governments have adopted the fight against this scourge as a state
policy. Therefore it is very important to closely follow the actions of the
UN General Assembly where new and more effective actions to be applied
jointly against the world threat of drugs are expected. It is good that the
countries of the world are getting involved in a noble effort such as the
fight against drugs. We long for a healthy humanity, free of vices and
illnesses preventing the full performance of human resources on earth."

"Pessimism Justified"

Regionalist El Deber of Santa Cruz held (6/9): "Knowing as we do the
results of similar world events, the pessimism of many analysts is
justifiable. They fear that everything will end in pure rhetoric and things
will not change.... The demand creates the supply, such an elemental
principle of the market is also applicable to drug trafficking.... This New
York meeting is considered to be a game of ping-pong between the
responsibility for the supply and the responsibility for the demand,
between producing countries and consuming countries. The little ball will
have a bigger impact on the rhetoric concerning recommendations directed
more to the effects than to the causes. We sincerely hope that the
(negative) premonitions of many experts do not come true."

"The Dangers Of Drugs"

Centrist leading El Comercio had this editorial (6/8): "While in some zones
it is an obligation to fight those who cultivate and sell drugs, in the big
world centers it is necessary to put up measures to discourage, as much as
possible, their consumption. The role of the UN in this issue may be
important, as long as it addresses the main points and distributes
obligations properly."

PERU: "Attacking The Demand Side"

Pro-government Expreso's Jorge Morelli observed (6/9): "At the inaugural
session, President Clinton launched a $2 billion demand reduction program
for the next five years, but he made no further contribution to the
anti-global strategy. The drug 'czar' Barry McCaffrey would later explain
that it is 'premature' to discuss financial support since this is an issue
that is still in the process of gaining 'political consensus.'
Nevertheless, the document that will be signed at the summit engages all
countries to reduce the demand for drugs by the year 2003. Clearly the
tacit message is that the problem has to be attacked by suppressing the
demand of drugs before the supply.

"Peru has demonstrated in advance its 'political will' to fight against
drug trafficking on the supply side and basically on its own.... This has
been recognized by the United States and the UN, and Peru stands out now as
a model. President Fujimori proposed a new idea: debt for alternative
development swaps. He is right. There are debt swaps for environment and
for cultural patrimony. Why not for alternative development? It is even
more right if the intention is to alleviate the country's debt not only
with the substitution of coca crops, but with the narco-dollars from its
balance of payments. But, sure--as President Fujimori said yesterday-- here
is a need for 'political will' to translate their intentions to resources."

"An Important Proposal Against Drugs"

Peruvian editorials praised the Peruvian president's proposal to exchange
foreign debt for funds for coca eradication and substitution programs.
Straightforward, respected El Comercio, for example, commented, (6/10):
"The proposal of the Peruvian president coincides with America's new
anti-drug policy which acknowledges that the struggle against drugs in
general, and the illicit trafficking in particular, is a shared task that
involves both producing and consuming nations. The crop substitution
process is a complex and ambitious task, and within a global strategy it
should go hand in hand with mechanisms to combat illegal trafficking and
with education to reduce consumption. It should also include a
comprehensive development process which promotes the sustained development
in rural areas, licit activities that generate income and the improvements
in the quality of life of the local populations."

"The UN And Drug Production"

A member of the Andean commission of jurists specializing in the drug
issue, Ricardo Soberon, wrote this column in pro-government El Sol (6/4):
"A fundamental problem to be discussed is that alternative development
should be present in the debate, but without the factors that make it
unviable today: the current conditions which the coca growers face to
market their alternative products in the international market. Another
important aspect is the absence of the $4 billion necessary to finance
alternative development in Peru. It seems it will be difficult to get that
much, because no country has committed to an amount in advance since the
United States decided to involve multi-lateral organizations (CICAD, the
EU) into financing alternative development in the high forest areas.
Another thing is the lack of discussion of the commercial exchange
problems, like the opening to imports, especially to those coming from the
northern hemisphere that compete unfairly with local producers, especially
with those from the coca-growing valleys. Maybe one of the positive aspects
of the world plan to reduce illegal drug crops is that vis-a-vis the
current alternatives (the stick in Bolivia or the carrot and stick in
Colombia and Peru), the UNDCP has a strategy based on alternative
development."

(continued in Part 2)

Checked-by: Richard Lake