http://www.counterpunch.org/



Pirates of the Air and Seas

Scenes from the Drug War

Imagine, you're flying at a height of 34,000 feet somewhere over the Persian
Gulf; you see a fighter plane with what appear to be Saudi markings not far
off on the port side. Next thing you know, the fellow next to you, with whom
you'd been drinking gin and tonic only a moment before, is slumped forward
with a machine gun bullet through his heart. The plane's depressurized from
the bullet breaking the window but the pilot manages to land. Two are dead
from the salvo, which many witnesses aboard your plane agree came from that
Saudi plane.

Of course there's a big stink because the dead guys are both American. In the
end it turns out that, under certain secret protocols in Saudi law, craft
(whether maritime, airborne or terrestrial) suspected of harboring substances
forbidden by the Koran, like alcohol, can be subject to "interdiction", i.e.
shot up or down. The Saudi pilot claimed he'd waggled his wings at the
passenger plane, indicating that it should follow him. Only after repeated
efforts to signal had finally fired the fatal.

All a fantasy of course. True, the Saudi royal family doesn't endorse public
consumption of alcohol, but it isn't in the business of shooting down
booze-laden planes, however well informed the Saudi Royal Air Force might be
about the consumption of gin aboard the suspect plane. And who knows, the
Saudi royal family might even have reservations about the prudence, not to
mention legality, of firing on civil aircraft.

But suppose the drug in question isn't booze but cocaine. And suppose the
shooter's sponsor and legal protector isn't the puny Saudi royal family but
the Government of the United States?

In that case we have as policy guide the decision memorandum signed by
President Bill Clinton in June of 1994, bringing "closure", to use a
fashionable term, to acrimony within the administration on this issue. The
documents in question are all available from the National Security Archive,
whose Kate Doyle sued for them under the Freedom of Information Act.

As the Archive's preamble to the documents narrates, the U.S. began sharing
real-time aerial tracking
information with Colombia and Peru in July of 1990. When the Colombians told
the US they were thinking of a shootdown policy for suspected drug planes,
the US State Department got nervous about possible legal ramifications, if US
advisors were involved, as they undoubtedly would be. So the State Department
proclaimed piously that both U.S. and international law precluded the use of
weapons against civilian aircraft except in self-defense. The Colombians said
they wouldn't give up on the idea but would shelve it, at least for a while.

Peru adopted a force down policy in 1993, and at the end of that year the
Colombians (probably after back channel prodding from the US shootdown
faction) said they would now implement the shootdown strategy formulated in
1990. A U.S. interagency group began a review of the new policies in January
1994. On May 1 the Clinton administration, led by the Department of Defense,
announced a suspension on the sharing of real-time aerial tracking data with
the two governments.

This was the signal for savage hand-to-hand bureaucratic combat inside the US
government. On the one side were ranged those departments and agencies
deriving funding and a sense of mission in life from the War on Drugs: the
State Department's bureaus of International Narcotics
Matters (INM) and Inter-American Affairs (ARA), not to mention DEA, CIA,
Customs, and so forth.

On the other side were the teams at the State Department's legal department
and at Justice, offering the view that it was a perilous strategy to shoot
down civil planes and that "mistakes are likely to occur under any policy
that contemplates the use of weapons against civil aircraft in flight, even
as a last resort." Veterans at State remembered the tremendous,
self-righteous stink raised by the US after the Soviet Union shot down a
Korean Airliner (KAL 007) which had penetrated its air space. The State
Department cited a 1984 amendment of the Chicago Convention on civil aviation
- adopted in the wake of the KAL incident - banning the use of force against
civil
aircraft.

In the end Clinton characteristically tried to please both factions, while
going along with the hawks. On June 21, l994, he secretly okayed US
cooperation with Colombia and Peru's shoot-down/force-down policy, allowing
US aerial tracking data to be used in operations against suspicious aircraft
"if the President has determined that such actions are necessary because of
the threat posed by drug trafficking [sic] to the national security of that
country and that the country has appropriate procedures in place to protect
innocent aircraft."

As one bureaucrat happily noted, this Solomonic compromise would "reduce the
[United States government's] exposure to criticism that such assistance
violates international law." Colombia and Peru would be instructed that one
way to cope with the difficulties presented by international agreements
against shooting down civil aircraft would be to declare a "national
emergency" as permitted under the relevant conventions. Another stratagem
contemplated a campaign to convince nations deemed "aviation partners" to
accept a "narrow exception" to international law in cases where "drug
trafficking threatens the political institutions of a state and where the
country imposes strict procedures to reduce the risk of attack against
non-drug trafficking aircraft."

One element was conspicuous by its absence. Nowhere in the torrent of US
advice to Peru and Colombia was there any hint that military and intelligence
assistance from the US might be conditioned on a solution to the
international legal problems. Significantly, the document notes that, "The
President explicitly did not condition the resumption of assistance on a
solution to the international law problems associated with the USG's
provision of such assistance." As the US State Department proudly (but of
course secretly) boasted to President Samper of Colombia in December of that
year, the Clinton administration had made "a tremendous legal and
administrative effort" to get the intelligence sharing arrangements back on
track. Ambassador Busby was told to tell President Samper, that "Because
narcotics is very important to us, the administration expended a great deal
of effort to change U.S. law and permit us to resume our
cooperation."

The world took notice in March of this year when a family of evangelical
Baptists, having concluded a bout of predatory spiritual rampages among the
hapless Indians along the Peruvian Amazon, was halved in size, after a bullet
fatally pierced Veronica and Charity Bower (mother and 7-month infant) while
wounding Cessna pilot Kevin Donaldson and sparing the Baptist paterfamilias,
Jim Bower, and his son Cory.

Magnanimously, Bower he had ``no hard feelings'' and could see God at work in
their deaths from gunfire by the Peruvian air force. "Cory and I are
experiencing inexplicable peace, and to me that's proof that God is in this,"
Bowers told about 600 mourners at the funeral of his wife and daughter. "Our
attitude toward those responsible is one of forgiveness. Is that not amazing?
It shouldn't be amazing to us Christians.' ``Roni and Charity were instantly
killed by the same bullet. To me that's pretty amazing. That bullet stayed in
Charity's head, not going through Kevin's back, causing the rest of us to
die." By sparing him, his son and Donaldson, Bowers said God must have
something bigger in mind for them, although he didn't know what it was.

Of course, if an Amazonian Indian shaman had successfully aimed a
heat-seeking missile at the Bowers on the very reasonable grounds
(sustainable by profuse historical evidence) that the evangelical Baptists
were a threat to the national security of his tribe, there would have been no
end of trouble for the shaman.

But this was no shaman, this was the Peruvian Air Force, ordered to fire by a
high ranking Peruvian officer on the ground. And this was the CIA, in the
sub-contracted guise of Aviation Development Corp, out of Maxwell AFB in
Alabama, flying above the Amazon (two Anglos and one Peruvian, not able to
talk to each other very well owing to language barriers) telling the Peruvian
Air Force that an unidentified plane was approaching Iquitos. And this was
long-range US radar based in Vieques, Puerto Rico, advising the CIA
subcontractors about the unidentified plane. And this was US Southern
Military Command, monitoring the whole scene from its war room in Key West.
What a very large mass of people and resources to be watching one small plane
which, if you believe Mr Bower, was also being tracked by the mightiest radar
of them all, the Big Fellow himself.

It turns out the CIA, the subcontractors and Southcom and Colombia and Peru
have been responsible for downing anywhere from 25 to 30 small planes over
the passage of the years since 1994. Who were they? No one seems to know and
please, the occupants of these planes weren't murdered in acts of
international terrorism and piracy. No, they were "successfully interdicted",
thus bringing a glow of satisfaction to the cheeks of those waging the war on
drugs.

Okay. Now you're in your cruise ship, in the Indonesian archipelago, still
sipping at your gin and tonic. Muslims board the boat, ransack your
possessions. Yes, they're dead set against booze

We'll cut the satirical parable short and remind you that in mid May the US
Coastguard ecstatically announced the largest haul in US maritime drug
enforcement's history: an alleged $1 billion's worth of cocaine, (13 tons)
found after five arduous days' search aboard a freighter in the eastern
Pacific the Svesda Maru, a 152-foot trawler flying the flag of Belize. Two
Russians and 10 Ukrainians were charged with drug smuggling and jailed at the
federal prison in downtown San Diego.

On March 4, another Belize-flagged fishing ship, the Forever My Friend, with
8.8 tons of cocaine, had been towed into San Diego after being seized 250
miles west of Acapulco.

Count up the seeming breaches of laws and treaties here, starting with piracy
on the high seas and use of US Navy ships for law enforcement. But it turns
out when US Customs or Coastguard is alerted by the US Navy or Air Force to
suspicious craft outside territorial waters, they phone the State Department,
which phones the nation under whose flag the suspect is floating and gets the
green light. So Belize is going to say No?

And just to cope with the Posse Comitatus Act forbidding the US military to
be involved in civil law enforcement there was a Coastguard unit aboard the
Navy's ship. You want to ask about the likelihood of a fair and speedy trial
for those Russians and Ukrainians now in the federal pen in San Diego?

Want to have the spring's drug headlines wrapped up for you? The US Supreme
Court defies the clear intent of voters in nine states and says medical
marijuana is a no-no and a London newspaper reports that in London in 1995 a
gram of cocaine cost around $120, but the same amount can now be picked up
for about $80. The new drug czar, John Walters, picked after three months by
former cocaine dealer George Bush (at Yale, in ounce bags according to one
source) says the war on drugs can be won.

Gin and tonic, anyone?


Reply via email to