The Kingpin Strategy: Assassination as US Policy and How It Failed, From 1990-2015
--
Having tartly informed DEA officials that their statistics were worthless, mere random noise, Rivolo set to work developing a statistical tool that would eliminate the effect of the swings in purity of the samples collected by the undercover agents. Once he had succeeded, some interesting conclusions began to emerge: the pursuit of the kingpins was most certainly having an effect on prices, and by extension supply, but not in the way advertised by the DEA. Far from impeding the flow of cocaine onto the street and up the nostrils of America, it was accelerating it. Eliminating kingpins actually increased supply.
It was a momentous revelation, running entirely counter to law enforcement cultural attitudes that reached back to the days of Eliot Nesss war against bootleggers in the 1920s and that would become the basis for Washingtons twenty-first-century counterinsurgency wars. Such a verdict might have been reached intuitively, especially once the kingpin strategy in its most lethal form came to be applied to terrorists and insurgents, but on this rare occasion the conclusion was based on hard, undeniable data.
In the last month of 1993, for example, Pablo Escobars once massive cocaine smuggling organization was already in tatters and he was being hunted through the streets of Medellín. If the premise of the DEA strategy -- that eliminating kingpins would cut drug supplies -- had been correct, supply to the U.S. should by then have been disrupted.
In fact, the opposite occurred: in that period, the U.S. street price dropped from roughly $80 to $60 a gram because of a flood of new supplies coming into the U.S. market, and it would continue to drop after his death. Similarly, when the top tier of the Cali cartel was swept up in mid-1995, cocaine prices, which had been rising sharply earlier that year, went into a precipitous decline that continued into 1996.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30482-the-kingpin-strategy-assassination-as-policy-in-washington-and-how-it-failed-from-1990-2015
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)but he fails to produce a solution...If he has a moral issue with it I'm fine with that, but I've also seen no analysis to indicate that HVT elimination isn't having some kind of effect on the enemy...
Also, the DEA/Escobar comparison doesn't quite work, since eliminating Escobar would have no direct effect on Coca production whatsoever, nor its lucrative demand worldwide, which common sense would indicate other upstarts would quickly fill the void...
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)*No wonder the Saudis want to follow in our footsteps in Yemen. Its a big world. Whos next?
K&R
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Let me try to get this right. The Saudis are bombing Yemen because they fear the Shia Houthis are working for the Iranians. The Saudis are also bombing Isis in Iraq and the Isis in Syria. So are the United Arab Emirates. The Syrian government is bombing its enemies in Syria and the Iraqi government is also bombing its enemies in Iraq. America, France, Britain, Denmark, Holland, Australia and believe it or not Canada are bombing Isis in Syria and Isis in Iraq, partly on behalf of the Iraqi government (for which read Shia militias) but absolutely not on behalf of the Syrian government.
The Jordanians and Saudis and Bahrainis are also bombing Isis in Syria and Iraq because they dont like them, but the Jordanians are bombing Isis even more than the Saudis after their pilot-prisoner was burned to death in a cage. The Egyptians are bombing parts of Libya because a group of Christian Egyptians had their heads chopped off by what might notionally be the same so-called Islamic State, as Isis refers to itself. The Iranians have acknowledged bombing Isis in Iraq of which the Americans (but not the Iraqi government) take a rather dim view. And of course the Israelis have several times bombed Syrian government forces in Syria but not Isis (an interesting choice, wed all agree). Chocks away!
---
And then, of course, there are the really big winners in all this blood, the weapons manufacturers. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin supplied £1.3bn of missiles to the Saudis only last year. But three years ago, Der Spiegel claimed the European Union was Saudi Arabias most important arms supplier and last week France announced the sale of 24 Rafale fighter jets to Qatar at a cost of around £5.7bn. Egypt has just bought another 24 Rafales.
---
But blow me down if the Yanks are back to boasting. More than a decade after Mission Accomplished, General Paul Funk (in charge of reforming the Iraqi army) has told us that the enemy is on its knees. Another general close to Barack Obama says that half of the senior commanders in Isis have been liquidated. Nonsense. But its worth knowing just how General Pierre de Villiers, chief of the French defence staff, summed up his recent visits to Baghdad and Iraqi Kurdistan. Iraq, he reported back to Paris, is in a state of total decay. The French word he used was decomposition. I suspect that applies to most of the Middle East.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/robert-fisk-who-is-bombing-whom-in-the-middle-east-10222938.html