Divisions within the U.S. administration/NATO delayed release of a $475 million counternarcotics....

[Flabbergasted]

program for Afghanistan, where intelligence officials see growing links between drugs and the Taliban, the officials said.

"Afghanistan is providing close to 95 percent of the world's heroin," the State Department's top counternarcotics official, Tom Schweich, said at a recent conference. "That makes it almost a sole-source supplier" and presents a situation "unique in world history."

Pure Genius

Another Record Poppy Crop in Afghanistan

By MATTHEW LEE
The Associated Press
Saturday, August 4, 2007; 12:27 PM

WASHINGTON -- Afghanistan will produce another record poppy harvest this year that cements its status as the world's near-sole supplier of the heroin source, yet a furious debate over how to reverse the trend is stalling proposals to cut the crop, U.S. officials say.

As President Bush prepares for weekend talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, divisions within the U.S. administration and among NATO allies have delayed release of a $475 million counternarcotics program for Afghanistan, where intelligence officials see growing links between drugs and the Taliban, the officials said.

snip

Counternarcotics agents at the State Department had wanted to release a 123-page summary of the strategy last month and then again last week, but were forced to hold off because of concerns it may not be feasible, the officials said.

snip

Although the existing aid, supplemented mainly by Britain and Canada and supported by the NATO force in Afghanistan, has achieved some results _ notably an expected rise in the number of "poppy-free" provinces from six to at least 12 and possibly 16, mainly in the north _ production elsewhere has soared, they said.

(***Notice the last line which says the results are an "EXPECTED" (not actual) rise in the number of "poppy-free" provinces)



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/04/AR2007080400671.html

[Kagemusha]

1. Bottom line is, NATO allies will suffer more deaths the bigger the anti-drug effort.

That's why they're not all that eager to sign onto it.

[Flabbergasted]

2. Plus Schweich is seen as "soft on drugs"

GOP disappointed in new drug chief?

According to a press report this week, Congressional Republicans are upset with the appointment of a State Department official to a newly created post of an anti-narcotics chief in Afghanistan. According to one staffer, the position was intended for someone to "knock heads together;" when someone from Foggy Bottom was tapped they've argued that "all this has done is put another player on the field."

There seem to be two worries: first that Thomas Schweich, most recently of the INL and a former chief of staff at the US Mission to the UN, is not senior enough to make this happen, and second that he harbors "soft on drug" inclinations (one staffer said "It's putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop.")

Schweich's positions are not clear yet. From his comments he certainly doesn't seem one of those namby-pamby incrementalists so derided by the drug warriors. On alternative livelihoods without eradication, he has said "we don't think that's ever worked anywhere in the world." He's a clear proponent of spraying (though with the Afghan government's consent.)

Perhaps its his "pessimism" that has earned him enmity: he has said that eliminating poppies in the south is "a longer term proposition, maybe five or 10 years." For congress, that sounds hopelessly long. For those familiar with the challenge, it seems more than a bit optimistic...

http://thecenturyfoundation.typepad.com/aw/2007/03/gop_disappointe.html


The main point is that Opium funds the Taliban. The longer they delay the more danger they put their troops in.


I also wonder how the CIA is making out on this?

[Flabbergasted]

3. Sorry wrong reply