NARCO-IMPERIALISM
Peeping Tom
Kaieteur News
March 7, 2007
The Peeper does not have to read the section of the recent US State Department International Narcotics Control Strategy Report on Guyana to know what it will state. So long as one gets an idea of the subject being dealt with, it is easy to assume what sort of details and fine print will follow.
Reports such as these have always represented US interests and their perceptions or misperceptions about the real situation on the ground. I recall a similar report dealing with trafficking in persons which was riddled with unsubstantiated claims but which forced the local administration to hurriedly pass legislation to placate the Americans.
When the last State Department's International Narcotics Control Strategy Report came out, it named one Shaheed Roger Khan as having gotten a large forestry permit from the government. This was of course not true since the government had signed no such document.
Despite the false claims, the government however understood that it had to be concerned with US perceptions than about the truth.
The government correctly read the signal that was being telegraphed and knew that it had to be responsive to the report. Within a few months, Khan was arrested and subsequently taken away to the United States where he is presently awaiting trial.
This year's report deals with money laundering and while I am sure that the government will try to be responsive, the truth is that the least successful aspect of the international war against narcotics is the anti money laundering effort.
Clearly recognising that drugs were being traded by large cartels, the United States decided that if the flow of the drugs could not be effectively stopped, then perhaps crippling the financial flows to the cartels would have a big impact on the counter-narcotics front.
In reality however, the fight against money laundering has been the least effective of the many campaigns launched against the narco trade. In fact, the most successful anti-narcotics effort within the region was Operation Kingfisher which targets drug lords and extradites them for prosecution.
The anti money laundering efforts in all countries, relative to the value of drugs traded and relative to expectations, has been a calamitous failure. Not even the United States where most of the world's illicit funds are laundered can boast about any meaningful success against money laundering.
Each year hundreds of billions of dollars in narcotics is illegally traded to the United States of America .
This means that every year hundreds of billions of dollars have to be laundered from within the United States back to the drug cartels operating in South and Central America and their satellites within the Caribbean .
Ask the United States of America , the drug economy of the world, to estimate the total value of narcotics flowing through its country each year. Then ask them about the value of the assets that they have been able to seize as a result of successful interdiction and prosecution of money launders. The value of the assets seized pales into insignificance when compared with the value of the trade operating within its borders.
The United States however expects small countries without enough money to keep its streets and communities free of crime to vigorously wage an effective campaign against money launderers.
How can a poor country which is under restrictions by the international financial institutions to pay proper salaries to its police be expected to wage a successful campaign against money launderers when the mighty United States of America has failed to bring down its own internal drug empires.
The United States of America does not have to remind anyone that no arrests or prosecutions for money laundering have been made in 2006 due to a lack of resources and adequate legislation.
The government I am sure will receive the signal that the most powerful nation on Earth is concerned about what is perceived as increased money laundering in Guyana . The government would have already gotten “cold sweat” having read that report.
The United States however needs to be reminded that building and prosecuting a money laundering case takes years and even then success is not guaranteed.
They must accept that most of the illegal funds finding its way to Guyana originate from their country which is the largest consumers of narcotics in the world. They must recognise that they too have failed to make a major impact at home against money laundering.
Against this failure on the part of the major narcotics-consuming countries of the world, what is being demanded of small countries like Guyana amounts to narco-imperialism.
I am sure that already the government of Guyana is trembling in its boots and like it did last year will willingly be responsive to US concerns.
The Peeper believes that Guyana has a legitimate interest in reducing the incidence of money laundering within the local economy.
Money laundering can distort the economy and can lead businesses that thrive on illegal funds to gain an unfair advantage over those utilising legitimately obtained funds.
The United States , however, cannot expect Guyana to launch an effective campaign against money laundering unless the United States of America is willing to assist substantially in this effort.
If the US wants small countries to do what the most powerful country has failed to do, it must be willing to provide significant financial assistance to those countries; it must provide more resources rather than seeking through its reports to dictate a policy of narco-imperialism.