184. Minutes of the Working Group of the Cabinet Committee on International Narcotics Control1 2
The Working Group was attended by the participants listed on Tab A (attached) to consider the proposed agenda items listed in the December 10, 1975 memorandum by which the meeting was called (attachment B).
Ambassador Vance welcomed Ambassador Jack Myerson (USUN), Commissioner of Customs Acree, and others who had not attended Working Group meetings regularly in the recent past. He indicated that, as a matter of procedure, he would bring the Group up to date with respect to each agenda item thereby introducing the item for contributions from others and group discussion.
Ambassador Vance cited Mexico as the most serious current problem area with 70–80% of the heroin seized in this country arriving from that source. He described the meeting which Mr. Dogin, Ambassador Jova and himself had had in early November with the Mexican Attorney General, noting that increased cooperation had in this and other meetings been sought and was obtained from the Government of Mexico. This year’s intensified eradication campaign and increased enforcement activity had been undertaken earlier than previous campaigns, covered more provinces, and included a decision by the Mexicans themselves to employ the use of herbicides.
Continuing, he noted that we were far from satisfied and are continuing to push the pace of activity forward. Working groups have been set up in Washington and at Embassy Mexico City to coordinate at both ends the U.S. assistance role to the Mexican eradication program. This role fell to State, DEA, and AID in terms of agency action. Nevertheless, other CCINC elements, (e.g., Customs, Agriculture, Defense, etc.) would be asked to contribute on items of direct concern to them.
[Page 2]Ambassador Vance also referred to the public statements issued by Attorney General Levi and Secretary of State Kissinger in reaction to the Mexican Attorney General’s November 13 press conference announcing the campaign program including the use of herbicides. He further made reference to the intense Congressional interest in the Mexican program. The campaign was, however, off to a slow start.
Mr. Dogin expressed concern that the eradication program had not begun soon enough and that the Mexican army was not fully participating in it. It seemed to him it was a race between the army and the farmers, which the latter may be winning. He said he planned to call the Mexican Attorney General on this and also to ask Attorney General Levi, who will meet with the Mexican Attorney General later this month, to press him on it. Ambassador Vance added that Ambassador Jova was under new instructions to take this up with Ojeda and with the President.
Mr. Kennedy was concerned with another aspect, corruption in Mexico, notably that a Commandante Durazo, known to have corrupt affiliations with traffickers was apparently likely to be placed in the higher position in the government establishment.
Ms. Wampler noted Dr. Gertz (the new Mexican campaign coordinator) was himself concerned at the slowness of progress in the campaign. She observed this had lead to a decision by him to equip all of the Bell 206 helicopters with herbicide spray capability and that the Mexicans were considering the hiring of additional spray pilots, possibly including some Americans.
Dr. DuPont observed, as did Dr. Jones and Mr. Cusack, that the eradication campaign must be looked upon as an all year round affair rather than as an intensive effort during a certain season. It was now clear that poppy cultivation can be and is being undertaken all year long.
Mr. Parsons wanted to know what was going on, other than the eradication campaign, that might be cited as a sizeable indicator of Mexican cooperation. He noted that Congressman Rangel with a large delegation of other Congressmen were to talk with the President on the drug problem next week. Mr. Dogin referred to the joint prosecution efforts, joining cooperation on integrity issues and the intensified interdiction measures. Mr. Cusack opined that interdiction is off to an excellent start in the current campaign.
[Page 3]Dr. DuPont felt we were “losing ground with Mexico,” that new initiatives should be taken and that an approach should be made to the Mexican President, not just to the Mexican Attorney General. He foresaw that this issue will become involved in presidential politics and recommended that the Secretary of State and the President specifically raise the question with the President of Mexico.
Mr. Dogin commented that this posed the issue as to whether we have an adequate government commitment to narcotics control right here in Washington.
Ambassador Vance felt Mexico might be doing all it had the capacity for right now, if it implemented the present program. This was very substantially more than had been done before. Mr. Cusack agreed, saying the only thing that can not be defended is the matter of there not being more Mexican army troops deployed in the eradication effort at this time.
Referring again to the President’s projected meeting with the Congressmen, Mr. Parsons felt there should be some options for the President coming from within the bureaucracy. Otherwise, the Congressional group and the President might concoct them in the course of their meeting. Ambassador Vance felt it was preferable to deal further with the Mexican Attorney General first and noted that instructions had already been sent to our Ambassador on the question of Mexican army troops committed to the campaign. Mr. Johnson felt that a special group on Mexico should be activated to prepare a paper on the problem. Ambassador Vance suggested that the measure and character of the problem is already known and that no additional groups were needed. What is most needed is effective implementation of present policy; then, other courses of action would become timely.
Mr. Parsons felt the President might possibly direct the Secretary of State to go to Mexico and take this up with the proper authorities and as the “number one issue.”
Mr. Cusack noted the importance of a response coming from Ambassador Jova concerning his demarche prior to the time the President receives the Congressional delegation.
Discussion then moved to the question of possibilities for the application of greater US resources in drug interdiction at US borders, particularly the Mexican border. Commissioner Acree said he must state frankly “we don’t know how it is getting in, nor does DEA.” He noted that 98% of the heroin seized by Customs was by “cold” seizures. More was being seized, 38 pounds of heroin last year and 238 pounds this year so a lot is coming in. He made a plea for improved information on the methodology of the trafficker in order that Customs [Page 4] might have a better idea than it does now on how heroin was crossing the US border.
Mr. Cusack described the current-day problem of “trafficker profiles,” noting that no longer did traffickers have distinctive profiles which stood out from those of the bulk of the people transiting the border.
Ambassador Vance referred to the Customs “Startrek,” exercise, what it told us about Customs’ limited air interdiction capabilities, what it did not tell us about heroin movement and what it told us about the shocking lack of air defense the United States has. Why couldn’t Army and Air Force capabilities be brought better into play in drug interdiction efforts? Mr. Miller referred to long-standing legislation and policy against the use of military services in civil law enforcement activities. Mr. Acree said some Air Force radar consoles had been monitored by Customs operatives. This had been a help. When asked if he could not bail high speed Air Force interceptor aircraft in order that smuggler aircraft now out-running the Customs aircraft might be successfully intercepted. Mr. Acree indicated that Customs did have some aircraft on bail from the military at the present time. The group encouraged Mr. Acree to explore this further.
Ambassador Vance noted we are in a poor position to complain to the Mexicans or other governments about their lack of commitment or activity when we ourselves can not seem to bring our own resources into use. He called upon the group to demonstrate that the United States has a top-level commitment to narcotics control, not only by finding a way to strengthen our interdiction forces but by giving narcotics control its proper priority in our federal budget.
Mr. Kennedy spoke to the importance of operational support funds in the context of the bilateral cooperative narcotics assistance programs. He considered it very important that Congress understand that these often play the key role in persuading other governments to take real narcotics control steps.
Mr. Cook advised there may be but limited possibilities for the bailing of high speed interceptor aircraft to the Customs service because of reduced Air Force inventories of that type of plane. Nevertheless, he saw possibilities. Mr. Parsons added his understanding that when Air National Guards were in a “State” status the legal constraint (pase comitas) did not apply. It was re-affirmed that the Customs service would definitely pursue this matter further.
Mr. Cook moved to the question of APO mail, a matter of immediate concern to the DOD. He noted that about 2% of the [Page 5] “suspect mail” moving in APO channels to the United States was found to carry contraband. DOD, without opening mail, was going to survey intra-APO mail i.e., that not coming into the Customs territory of the United States, to see what percentage of it might be in the “suspect” category. This would give some measure of the seriousness of the problem. In the limited discussion of this question that followed, it was noted that the special task force on APO mail was expected soon to receive a unified DOD position. Assuming that this coincided with the Customs position, i.e., that authority exists for the opening of suspect mail by the APO’s outside of the United States, the issue would then be narrowed to a difference in legal interpretation between United States Postal Service and other agencies involved. The apparent next step was to put this to the Justice Department for legal opinion. Ambassador Vance urged that this matter be moved to conclusion as rapidly as possible.
Brief reference was made to a number of other agenda items for which time did not allow fuller discussion. Ambassador Vance noted that information concerning the Turkish control program continued to be that it had been highly successful, the Burmese interdiction program had been stepped-up with CCINC supplied helicopters being utilized effectively and fruitfully in narcotics control there, and the situation in Thailand called for careful study of US actions that might be taken. Ambassador Vance noted his January trip to both Mexico and the Latin American countries of concern in the production and transit of cocaine. Copies of the State Department reply to the recommendations in the “White Paper on Drug Abuse” were made available for interested working group members.
Mr. Acree regretted Mr. Dogin had had to leave a few minutes before the end of the meeting because he wanted to acknowledge Mr. Dogin’s great effort and cooperation in bringing about the recently concluded DEA/Customs understanding on operational relationships. Mr. Acree was optimistic that problems that had existed would be rectified in the best interest of narcotics control.
Speaking on behalf of DEA, Mr. Miller responded. He thanked Mr. Acree and noted that when there was a will, there was a way. He felt both agencies had the will to achieve good working relationships.
Ambassador Vance commended those concerned in bringing about the understanding, noting that it would be a real [Page 6] contribution to international narcotics control.
The Working Group agreed to meet again during the first week of February. This would enable it to continue discussion on a number of today’s agenda items which undoubtedly would still be of concern, to receive Ambassador Vance’s comments on his visits to the Latin American countries, including Mexico, and to review preparations for the late February meeting of the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs.
- Source: Washington National Records Center, RG 59, INM/P Files: Lot 84 D 147, Cabinet Committee–Working Group. The meeting took place in room 6320 at the Department of State. Confidential. Drafted by Lawrence. Tabs A and B are attached but not published.↩
- The Working Group focused primarily on developments involving Mexico.↩