PRESS BRIEFING BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UN OFFICE FOR DRUG CONTROL AND CRIME PREVENTION

Press Briefing

PRESS BRIEFING BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF UN OFFICE FOR DRUG CONTROL AND CRIME PREVENTION

Participation at the twentieth special session of the General Assembly devoted to countering the world drug problem together, was beyond expectations, the Executive Director of the United Nations Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, Pino Arlacchi, said at a Headquarters press briefing yesterday afternoon.

Stating that he was entirely satisfied with the statements that had so far been made by the heads of State at the session, said they had underscored the two fundamental pillars of combating the illicit drugs problem: demand reduction and alternative development. The President of Bolivia, in particular, had reaffirmed the intention of his country to eliminate coca cultivation in Bolivia over the next five years.

It had been extremely difficult to elaborate an international strategy on narcotics in only one year, but there had been exceptional levels of consensus and speed, allowing the creation, presentation and approval by Member States, of a world strategy against narcotics.

A correspondent asked whether the United Nations was open to the prospect of legalizing narcotic drugs. Mr. Arlacchi replied that the United Nations reflected the position of the international community. That did not imply that the Organization endorsed the legalization of such drugs. Since no Member States had raised the issue, the United Nations could not officially introduce the issue into the international agenda on its own initiative. The United Nations was an association of States, and could do nothing without their agreement. However, the Organization was open to every suggestion from every field. There were two new cards to play in combating illegal drugs: demand reduction and alternative development; that strategy already incorporated an element of tolerance, and of solidarity with addicts and the down-trodden.

A correspondent said that the Director of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy of the United States, General Barry McCaffrey, had said that while the United States supported the visionary thinking of the United Nations, there was as yet no plan on the table. Did Mr. Arlacchi agree? the correspondent asked. Yes, said Mr. Arlacchi, that position was the reality. In just one year, the strategy had been created. In the workings of the international community, that was an important result. That strategy and the concepts within it had to be transformed into plans of action and concrete projects. It would be a difficult process, but the foundations had been laid.

The Secretary-General had said that the process of preparing for the special session had been open, a correspondent said. At what stage had any

kind of input had been possible? he asked. Mr. Arlacchi said that the preparations for the special session had followed the normal procedures of the General Assembly and the Charter of the United Nations. There had been long discussions between Member States in the Commission on Narcotic Drugs. It had been a completely democratic and serious discussion of the issue, over more than one year.

Asking Mr. Arlacchi to address the issue of the profitability of the drug trade, a correspondent asked whether it was not true that the police methods used to control drugs were the main reason for the involvement of organized crime? If drugs were decriminalized, the correspondent continued, the profitability would disappear, leaving no motive for organized crime to be involved. Mr. Arlacchi replied that the profitability of the drug trade was well-known and had never been underplayed. In elaborating the strategy against illicit drugs, that aspect had been taken into account, including, for example, the issue of money-laundering. One of the pillars of the United Nations strategy was the fight against drug trafficking and drug traffickers. Drugs were very profitable, but it would be naive to think that the legalization of narcotic drugs and the subsequent removal of profits from such trade would put organized crime out of business. Organized crime syndicates were already diversifying their business and would find new outlets.

A correspondent said the process of preparation did not seem to be as open as had been stated. While Member States had been given the opportunity to take part, non-governmental organizations had had little chance to make their views known. Would there be a move towards making the process truly open, and to incorporate the views of such organizations? He understood that non-governmental organization participation was a serious issue, Mr. Arlacchi said, adding that Member States should be convinced to change procedures on the participation of those organizations. More should be represented, but it also had to be taken into account that there were thousands of such organizations worldwide, and there had to be a transparent but serious process of selecting their representation. The last word was with the Member States.

Referring to Mr. Arlacchi's visit to Myanmar last month, a correspondent said that international drug eradication programmes had to work with governments. "In a place like Burma, where the regime is the problem in a lot of these cases, how are you going to ensure that the money going to the Wa region would be effectively monitored?" she asked. Mr. Arlacchi had also spoken with Secretary One of the New Ruling Coalition of Myanmar, Khyn Nyunt, while he was there, she continued. "Khyn Nyunt, by a lot of evidence, is a person who benefits directly from drug production and trade in Burma; how is the United Nations prepared to deal with some of these political problems that are associated with drug eradication in Burma?", she asked.

Mr. Arlacchi replied that on his visit to Myanmar, he had seen a small programme of alternative development in the Wa region, financed by Japan. It

Arlacchi Briefing - 3 - 9 June 1998

had been started in response to requests by ethnic leaders in the country, who had approached the United Nations. The programme was only for $3 million a year, and the funds were focussed on alternative development, such as building basic infrastructures and developing crop substitutions. The money went directly to the regions and to the people who needed alternatives to drug production. There was no intention to expand the programme without agreement of the majority of Member States. There would be no big plans or commitment of large sums of money under the current situation, unless a political decision was made by the international community or unless there were changes in the situations of countries such as Myanmar or Afghanistan.

A correspondent asked for an update on the project of crop eradication to be carried out in Afghanistan, especially after reservations that had been expressed on the financial aspects of the plan and on the accountability of the Taliban, which was supposed to carry out the plan in cooperation with the United Nations International Drug Control Programme (UNDCP). Mr. Arlacchi said there was $7 million waiting in Vienna to be used for alternative development projects in Afghanistan. It was necessary to work with the Afghan people to provide alternative sources of income. He had refused to spend that money without imposing conditions -- the peasants must quit poppy cultivation in order for the money to be spent. The local Taliban authorities must commit to prohibit poppy cultivation, to have an area of the country completely poppy-free and to destroy all new poppy cultivation. None of the money had yet been spent in Afghanistan. However, on 1 June, the Taliban had destroyed two tons of opium, the equivalent of 200 kilograms of heroin, which was a significant event. The United Nations was also working with both parties in the civil war as a narcotic control agency, with no political agenda.

Was there any consideration of giving a larger role to the World Health Organization (WHO) in the special session of the General Assembly? a correspondent asked. The role of the WHO had to be developed, replied Mr. Arlacchi. After the special session, when it was time to implement the most important aspect -- demand reduction -- the research component of the work would have to be expanded and improved. The WHO was the leading agency for scientific research on drug abuse, and would be strongly involved in the formulation of the programme. There was already a working relationship with the WHO.

Financing in the range of half a billion dollars a year for 10 years had been quoted, yet there was only a quarter of a billion dollars available. Were there commitments from the United States and other countries for an actual sum of money? a correspondent asked. Mr. Arlacchi replied that there was currently a unanimous political commitment on the part of the Member States on strategies for demand reduction, money-laundering and the substantial reduction of illicit drugs. The next step would be to discuss concretely how the resources should be gathered and used. There had been

Arlacchi Briefing - 4 - 9 June 1998

assurances that the plans would be fully backed financially, but it was a complicated process.

There had been several different estimates of the number of drug addicts in the world, said a correspondent. Could Mr. Arlacchi clarify the figures for correspondents? he asked. There were many kinds of drugs, said Mr. Arlacchi. According to the drugs, there were different figures: there were 8 million heroin addicts, 14 million cocaine addicts and so on. All the figures were subject to a degree of oscillation. It was also important to improve the assessment systems in every country to have a better knowledge of the number of addicts and the nature of the drugs.

* *** *