With
ISIS active on the island of Mindanao and Duterte’s ruthless war
against drugs as well as his move towards China and Russia and away
from the Untied States the attention should be on what COULD become
another hotspot in the struggle between the Empire and the emerging
multi-polar world.
We
now from Mike Ruppert that the CIA peddles drugs and moves against
‘inconvenient’ governments.
Duterte
is a controversial, even contradictory figure.
I
have put together some articles that try to explain the Duterte
phenomenon as well as background of US interference and drug
trafficking.
****
This is a Russian opinion piece. Are they rigt that a new Syria is in the making?
28
May, 2017
Most
recent events in the Philippines and Indonesia, where forces
affiliated with the Islamic State terrorist organisation (banned in
Russia) have been particularly active recently, suggest that there is
a new hotbed of international terrorism emerging in South-East Asia.
Its scale and destructive potential is likely to be as large as it
has been in the Middle East. Global powers, China in the first place,
will need to interfere as soon as possible to counter the growing
threat.
Terrorists
seized a whole city on the Philippine Island of Mindanao, while two
explosions rocked the Indonesian capital of Jakarta. This is very
similar to the beginning of an active phase of the operation to
destabilise the region. In the Philippines, the situation is getting
out of control: Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was forced to
cut short his visit to Russia and go back to his homeland to
personally supervise the anti-terrorist operation.
Apparently,
Duterte's actions against terrorists will be just as ruthless as his
actions against the drug mafia. One may assume that the situation in
the Philippines will escalate further, and the West will make Duterte
become another Bashar al-Assad.
Duterte
has been pretty stubborn lately. He publicly insulted former US
President Obama and said that he would rather refuse from cooperation
with the USA to establish close relations with Russia and China.
Sanctions, an international campaign against the bloody regime and so
on are likely to follow.
It
is not excluded that the forces in the Arab countries that have been
supporting ISIL and other terrorist groups will take advantage of the
situation. US President Trump said during his speech in Saudi Arabia
that the funding of terrorist organisations must be stopped. However,
the closure of Saudi, Qatari, and UAE organisations that have been
supporting ISIL will entail huge problems for ruling elites of those
countries. This funding is a price for loyalty, which influential
local clans take from royal and emir families. They would rather move
the centre of interests of the Islamic State from the Middle East to
Southeast Asia. As we can see, all these factors create a situation,
in which the emergence of a new Syria in Southeast Asia is almost
inevitable.
This
fully corresponds to strategic interests of the United States in the
region. Washington and Beijing are playing a complex game at a time
when Washington tends to increase its influence in Asia in a way not
to pose a threat to China. The emergence of a new hotbed of terrorism
seems to be a perfect excuse.
Dmitry
Nersesov
Pravda.Ru
'They
want me to fight China. It’s gonna be a massacre!' - Duterte to RT
(FULL INTERVIEW)
The
Philippines should have stronger ties with Russia and China, as
Western nations are only interested in double talk and disregard
Philippines interests, President Rodrigo Duterte told RT and other
Russian media ahead of his visit to Moscow.
"NATO
and the United States should change their policy because the time
when they dictate their conditions to the world has passed,"
Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Dushanbe, capital of the Central
Asian republic of Tajikistan
PHILIPPINES:
President Duterte for Dummies ~
Andre
Vltchek
27
May, 2017
“Duterte
reads a lot, and he admires Hugo Chavez. He is actually holding very
similar positions as Chavez. He is strongly critical of Western
imperialism in such places as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. He cannot
stand how the West is treating his own country. He was always
persistent in his anti-imperialist policy. Even as Mayor of Davao he
banned all US-Philippine military exercises. The US negotiated; it
offered plenty of money. It wanted to build a huge drone base in
Mindanao, but Duterte refused.” ~ Professor Roland Simbulan
The
following article by Andre Vltchek was first published in December
2016:
When
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ascended to power in 1999, almost no
one in the West, in Asia and even in most of the Latin American
countries knew much about his new militant revolutionary
anti-imperialism. From the mass media outlets like CNN and the BBC,
to local televisions and newspapers (influenced or directly sponsored
by Western sources), the ‘information’ that was flowing was
clearly biased, extremely critical, and even derogatory.
A
few months into his rule, I came to Caracas and was told repeatedly
by several local journalists: “Almost all of us are supporting
President Chavez, but we’d be fired if we’d dare to write one
single article in his support.”
In
New York City and Paris, in Buenos Aires and Hong Kong, the then
consensus was almost unanimous: “Chavez was a vulgar populist, a
demagogue, a military strongman, and potentially a ‘dangerous
dictator’”.
In
South Korea and the UK, in Qatar and Turkey, people who could hardly
place Venezuela on the world map, were expressing their ‘strong
opinions’, mocking and smearing the man who would later be revered
as a Latin American hero. Even many of those who would usually
‘distrust’ mainstream media were then clearly convinced about the
sinister nature of the Process and
the ‘Bolivarian Revolution’.
History
repeats itself.
Now
President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines is demonized and
‘mistrusted’, ridiculed and dismissed as a demagogue, condemned
as a rough element, mocked as a buffoon.
In
his own country he is enjoying the highest popularity rating of any
president in its history: at least well over 70 percent, but often
even over 80 percent.
“Show
me one woman or man who hates Duterte in this city”, smiles a city
hall employee of Davao (located on the restive Mindanao Island) where
Duterte served as a Mayor for 22 years. “I will buy that person an
exquisite dinner, from my own pocket … that is how confident I am”.
“People
of the Philippines are totally free now to express their opinions, to
criticize the government”, explains Eduardo Tadem, a leading
academic, Professorial Lecturer of Asian Studies (UP). “He says:
‘they want to protest? Good!’ People can rally or riot without
any permit from the authorities.”
Like
in the days of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, in the Philippines, the
press, which is mainly owned by right-wing business interests and by
pro-Western collaborators, is now reaching a crescendo, barking and
insulting the President, inventing stories and spreading unconfirmed
rumors, something unimaginable even in a place like the U.K. with its
draconian ‘defamation’ laws.
So
it is not fear that is securing the great support of the people for
Duterte in his own country. It is definitely not fear!
I
visited some of the toughest slums of the nation; I worked in the
middle of deadly cemeteries, just recently battered by crime and
drugs, where people had been literally rotting alive, crying for help
and mercy in absolute desperation. I also spoke to the top academics
and historians of the country, to former colleagues of Duterte and to
overseas workers in the U.A.E. and elsewhere.
The
louder was the hate speech from abroad and from local mass media
outlets, the stronger Duterte’s nation stood by its leader.
Men
and women who were just one year ago living in total desperation and
anger were now looking forward with hope, straight towards the
future. Suddenly, everything seemed to be possible!
In
my first report this month I wrote: “There is a sense of change in
those narrow and desperate alleys of the Baseco slum in the
Philippines’ capital Manila. For the first time in many years a
beautiful, noble lady visited; against all odds she decided to stay.
Her name is Hope.”
I
stand by my words, now more than ever.
However,
I also feel that I have to explain in more detail what is really
happening in the Philippines and why?
My
only request, my appeal to all those people all over the planet who
know nothing or very little about this part of the world in general
and about the Philippines in particular, would be: ‘Please do not
pass judgements based only on what you read in your own language and
especially in English, and from the sources that have been, on so
many occasions, and so thoroughly discredited.
Come by yourself, come
and see and listen. Like Venezuela many years ago, what is taking
place in the Philippines is ‘an unknown territory’, an absolutely
new concept. Something different and unprecedented, is developing,
taking shape.
This is like no other revolution that took place
before. Do not take part in ridiculing it, do not help to choke it,
do not do anything damaging before you come and see for yourself,
before you face those pleading eyes of the millions of people who
were defenseless and abused for so long and who are all of a sudden
standing tall, facing life with great hope and pride”.
Do
not participate in depriving them of their own country. For the first
time, after centuries of brutal colonialism, it is truly theirs. I
repeat: for the first time. Now!
Do
not deprive them of hope: it is all that they have, and it is much
more than anything they ever had in decades and centuries.
Fidel
Castro used to say: “Revolution is not a bed of roses.”
Revolution
is a tough, often very hard job. It is never perfect; it could never
be. To destroy any deeply rooted evil system takes guts, and
inevitably, blood is spilled.
Duterte
is not as ‘poetic’ as Fidel. He is a Visaya,
a brilliant but rough, candid and an outspoken man. Often he is
hyperbolic. He likes to shock his listeners, followers and foes.
But
who is he, really? Who is this man who is threatening to close down
all US military bases, to reach permanent peace with the Communists
and Muslim insurgents, to realign his foreign policy and ideology
with China and Russia, and to save the lives of tens of millions of
poor people of the Philippines?
In
search for the answers, let’s listen to those who really matter –
the people of the Philippines.
Let’s
silence the toxic waterfall of insults and selected pieces of
‘information’, coming from defunct Western media outlets; let’s
silence it by adopting ‘Duterte’s outrageous but honest
lexicon: “You
propaganda media of the West, you animal, fuck you!”
Who
Is President Duterte, Really? Why Does He Swear So Much, Why Does He
Insult Everyone, From President Obama To Such Mighty Institutions
Like the U.N., the EU, Even the Pope?
“He
comes from the South”,
explains Ms. Luzviminda Ilagan, a former member of the Congress, and
one of the country’s leading feminists:
“He
is a Visaya. In Luzon, they speak Tagalog, they are ‘well-behaved’,
and they look down at us. Politically, here we say ‘imperialist
Manila’. Ironically, Mindanao contributes greatly to Manila’s
coffers: there is extensive mining here, there are fruit plantations,
rice fields; but very little is shared with us, in terms of the
budgets…. And suddenly, here comes a Mayor from Davao, from the
South, and he is even speaking the language that they hate. He is
angry at the situation in his country, and he is swearing and
cursing. It is cultural; after all, he is Visaya! In Manila and
abroad, it is all misinterpreted: here you don’t swear at somebody;
you just swear, period. Yes, he is different. He tells the truth, and
he speaks our language.”
Why
should he not be angry? Once the richest country in Asia, the
Philippines is now one of the poorest. Its appalling slums are
housing millions, and further millions are caught in a vicious cycle
of drug addiction and crime. Crime rate is one of the highest on the
continent. There is a brutal civil war with both Muslim and Communist
rebels.
And
for centuries, the West is mistreating and plundering this country
with no shame and no mercy. Whenever the people decide to rebel, as
it was the case more than a century ago, they are massacred like
cattle. The US butchered 1/6 of the population more than a century
ago, some 1.5 million men, women and children.
‘Dynasties’
are ruling undemocratically, with an iron fist.
“In
the Congress, the House of Representatives and the Senate, some 74%
of the seats are taken by members of local dynasties”, explains
Prof. Roland Simbulan. “This is according to serious academic
studies”.
Before
President Duterte came to power, most of the social indicators were
nearing the regional bottom. The country lost its voice, fully
collaborating with the West, particularly against China.
An
angry man, a socialist, President Duterte is outraged by the present
and the past, but especially by the ruthlessness of Western
imperialism.
He
talks but above all he acts. He takes one decisive step after
another. He pushes reforms further and further, he retreats when an
entire project gets endangered. He is steering his ship through
terrible storms, through the waters that were never navigated before.
One
error and his entire revolution will go to hell. In that case, tens
of millions of the poor will remain where they were for decades –
in the gutter. One wrong move and his country will never manage to
rise from its knees.
So
he swears. So he is moving forward, cursing
.
Why
Does The West Want To Overthrow Duterte?
First
of all, how could the United States and Europe not hate someone who
is so out-rightly rejecting imperialism and the horrid colonialist
past to which the Philippines was subjected for the centuries? To the
past, however, we will return later in this essay.
A
legendary academic, Prof Roland Simbulan, from the Department of
Social Sciences of the University of the Philippines, explained,
during our daylong encounter in Manila:
“Duterte
reads a lot, and he admires Hugo Chavez. He is actually holding very
similar positions as Chavez. He is strongly critical of Western
imperialism in such places as Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. He cannot
stand how the West is treating his own country.
He
was always persistent in his anti-imperialist policy. Even as Mayor
of Davao he banned all US-Philippine military exercises. The US
negotiated; it offered plenty of money. It wanted to build a huge
drone base in Mindanao, but Duterte refused.”
As
‘punishment’, two bombs exploded in Davao: one at the pier, one
at the international airport.
Lately,
he ordered to stop all US-Philippine joined military exercises and he
keeps threatening to close all US military facilities on the
territory of his country.
A
couple consisting of leading Philippine Academics, Eduardo and Teresa
Tadem, have no doubts about direction of Duterte’s foreign policy:
“The
trend is clear: away from the West, towards China and Russia. We
think that he will soon reach a territorial agreement with China.
Plenty of goodwill is now coming from President Xi Jinping. Things
are done quietly, but some great concessions are already visible: our
fishermen are allowed to return to the disputed area. China is
pledging foreign aid, investment, and it is promising to make our
railways work again.”
All
this is a nightmare for the aggressively anti-Chinese foreign policy
of the West, particularly that of the United States. Provoking still
the militarily weak China, eventually even triggering a military
conflict with it, appears to be the main goal of Western imperialism.
If the Philippines reach a compromise with China, Vietnam will most
likely follow. The aggressive Asian anti-Chinese ‘coalition’
hammered together by the West, would then most likely collapse,
consisting only of Taiwan, Japan and possibly South Korea.
“Duterte
is just being sensible. What China is doing is defensive. The West is
behind the confrontation”, explained a leading historian Dr. Rey
Ileto:
“Just
to put this into perspective: Gloria Arroyo – she visited China
ahead of the US. She moved closer to China. They got her indicted for
corruption! Only Duterte released her…”
To
the West, Duterte’s Philippines is like a new Asian contagious
disease; a virus that has to be contained, liquidated as soon as
possible. Countless independent (at least on the paper) but in
reality controlled and humiliated nations of the region could get
otherwise inspired, rebel, and begin to follow Duterte’s example.
The
West is in panic. Its propaganda machine is in full gear. Different
strategies on how to unseat the ‘unruly’ president are being
designed and tried. Local ‘elites’ and the NGOs are collaborating
shamelessly.
Is
Duterte Really A Socialist?
Yes
and no, but definitely more yes than no.
He is actually a self-proclaimed socialist, and for years, he has
been forging extremely close links with the Marxists.
Prof.
Roland Simbulan explains:
“When
Duterte was a college student, he joined KM, the leftist student
organization. He understands the ideology of the left. He also
understands the roots of the insurgencies in his country, both
Communist and Muslim. He keeps repeating: ‘you cannot defeat the
insurgency militarily: you have to address socio-economic problems
that has led to it.”
He
invited Marxists into his administration, even before they asked him
to join. He is gradually releasing political prisoners, who were
captured and locked up during the previous administrations.
Professors
Teresa and Eduardo Tadem agree:
“Social
reforms are part of the peace talks. The fact that a Communist leader
used to be Duterte’s professor is also helping. Duterte introduced
a moratorium on land conversions, so the land of the peasants could
be preserved for agriculture. Labor is also enjoying many good
things. He is bringing an end to short contracts, to so called
contractualisation. Basically, the government is trying to make sure
that after people get hired, they get benefits, immediately.
There
are many positive changes taking place in such a short time:
environment, social issues, social justice, education, health,
housing, science…”
Duterte
recently sent his Health Secretary to Havana, to study the Cuban
model. The visit was so successful that he is now planning to fly an
entire government delegation, including the ministers, to the
revolutionary island.
However,
while he is certainly putting great accent on social justice and
independent anti-imperialist foreign policy, there are still
finances, trade and economic policies firmly in the hands of the
pro-market ministers.
“When
Duterte was a mayor”,
explains Prof Simbulan, “he
acted as a pragmatist, valuing harmony above all. However, one thing
has to be remembered: whenever there arose some irreconcilable
conflict between labor or indigenous people or the poor and big
business or plantation owners, at the end he’d always take the side
of the ‘small people’. This is how he managed to convince the
left that he is one of them.”
In
the brutal Baseco slum, built from rotting metal sheets and
containers around the docks and shipyards, everyone seems to agree
that the new President brought both hope and long overdue changes.
“Now
people have free education here”,
explains Ms. Imelda Rodriguez, a physiotherapist employed by the
Department of Social Welfare and Development:
“There
are also free ‘medical missions’ in this settlement, where people
can get all sorts of check-ups and consultations. We also get certain
cash allowances. The government creates jobs. Of course much more
still has to be done, but there is undeniably great progress,
already.”
Social
progress is evident in the city of Davao, where Duterte served for 22
years as a mayor. Once a crime-ridden hellhole with collapsed social
structure, Davao now is a modern and forward looking city, with
relatively good social services and improving infrastructure, as well
as new public parks and green areas.
“So
many things got better for the poor people here”,
explains the driver, taking me from the Municipality to my hotel. “In
just two decades, the city became unrecognizable. We are now proud to
be living here.”
At
the City Government of Davao, Mr. Jefry M. Tupas showers me with the
information and data I came to request: the resettlement areas for
the poor and homeless people, the public housing for the rebels who
recently surrendered, ‘slum improvement resettlements’; the
number of projects is endless.
Like
in the revolutionary countries of Latin America, the enthusiasm of
the people involved in the ‘process’ is contagious and pure. At
the medical centers doctors and nurses speak proudly about new
immunization plans, free medicine for diabetes and high blood
pressure, treatment of tuberculosis and family planning center.
“Now
we also hope that things will improve economically as a whole, if we
don’t depend on the US, anymore”,
says Ms. Luzviminda Ilagan. “If
we now open up to much friendlier countries like China and Russia,
there is great hope for all of us! Before, in Mindanao, we only had
Western mining companies: from places like Australia and Canada. As a
result, all profits went abroad, and Mindanao people are still dirt
poor. Under President Duterte, all this is dramatically changing!”
Is
Duterte Really A Mass Murderer?
If
you read (exclusively) the Western and local right-wing press, you
could be excused if you start to believe that Duterte is ‘personally
responsible’ for some 5.000+ ‘murders’ in what is now
customarily labeled as his ‘war
on drugs’.
However,
talk directly to the people of the Philippines, and you’ll get an
absolutely different picture.
The
Philippines before Duterte were overwhelmed by crime rates unseen
anywhere else in Asia Pacific. According to the United Nations Office
on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), in 2014 the homicide rate of the country
stood at a staggering 9.9 per 100.000 inhabitants, compared to 2.3 in
Malaysia, 3.9 in the United States, 5.9 in Kenya, 6.5 in Afghanistan,
7.5 in Zimbabwe and not much below war-torn countries like the
Democratic Republic of Congo (13.5).
Drug
gangs used to control the streets of all major cities. Very often,
the military and police generals and other top brass were actually
controlling the gangs.
The
situation was clearly getting out of control, entire communities
living in desperation and fear. For many, the cities were turning
into real battlegrounds.
A
driver taking me to the South Cemetery in Manila recalled: “In my
neighborhood, we just had a horrid killing: a teenager got
decapitated by a drug pusher…”
Profs
Teresa and Eduardo Tadem explained:
“In
Davao, the crime rate was horrible. Generally, in this country,
people are so fed-up with crime that they’d support anything …
Duterte encouraged the police to act. He is a lawyer, so he tries to
stay within the legal limits. He says: ‘If they surrender, bring
them in, if they resist, shoot!’ More than 5.000 died so far, but
who is doing the killings? Often it is vigilantes, motorcycle gangs
…”
Prof
Roland Simbulan clarifies further:
“Many
killings are taking place … We can never be sure who actually kills
whom, whether for instance some rival drug lords do the killings in
order to destroy their competition. In the Philippines we have
terrible corruption, and even officers and generals are involved in
the drug trade. Police periodically conducts raids, and then recycles
captured drugs. Even the BBC interviewed gangs that confirmed the
police gave them a list of whom to murder. What makes Duterte so
vulnerable is his language, his strong words. What he says is very
often misinterpreted.”
In
the slums and cemeteries inhabited by the poorest of the poor, an
overwhelming majority of the people would support much tougher
measures than those implemented now. As I am told by the South
Cemetery dwellers:
“Here
we hate those who are investigating so called extrajudicial killings.
They only care about the rights of the suspects. But we, good
citizens who have been suffering so much for decades, weren’t
protected at all, before this President got elected.”
In
Davao, Ms. Luzviminda Ilagan is standing by her President,
determinately:
“It
is totally understandable why the President is waging a war on
corruption and drugs. And if the opposition talks about the
extrajudicial killings, it should be obliged to prove that they are
actually committed on the orders of the authorities… Could it be
proved?
“The
situation is complicated, of course people are getting killed. But
look at the numbers: they are much lower now than those during
Benigno Aquino: during his administration, farmers, indigenous people
and the urban poor were constantly murdered – people who were
fighting for their basic human rights … And under Gloria, mining
companies were actually given permission to enter the country and to
kill those who stood in their way … Under the previous
administrations, things got even worse: the military received an
exceptional permission to deliver ‘security services’ to the
mining companies’. All this is now changing!”
Even
the most vitriolic critics of President Duterte, who are claiming
that ‘his war on drugs’ killed over 5.000 people, now have to
admit that the ‘itemization of the killings’ is ‘slightly’
more complicated. As reported by Al-Jazeera on December 13, 2016:
“Police
records show 5,882 people were killed across the country since
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte took office on June 30. Of that
number 2,041 drug suspects were killed during police operations from
July 1 to December 6, while another 3,841 were killed by unknown
gunmen from July 1 to November 30.”
So
around 2,000 people died during battles between police and drug
gangs, which are the deadliest and the most heavily armed in the
entire Asia Pacific. Fair enough. Who are those ‘unknown gunmen’
and why is the mainstream press immediately pointing fingers at the
president, relying only on the statements coming from his archenemies
like Senator de Lima?
Isn’t
the coverage of the Philippines by Western mainstream media becoming
as ridiculous, propagandist and one-sided as that of Aleppo and
Syria, as well as of the Russian involvement there?
Also,
are Philippines local narcos being
just mercilessly slaughtered, or should a little bit more be added to
the story? Isn’t there something being constantly left out?
Peter
Lee writes on the ‘rehabilitation’ of drug addicts and on China’s
help:
“Another
area of potential Philippine-PRC cooperation is PRC assistance in a
crash program to rehabilitate the Philippine drug users who have
turned themselves in to the police to avoid getting targeted by the
death squads.
Though
virtually unreported in the Western media, over 700,000 users have
turned themselves in.
Let
me repeat that. 700,000 drug users have turned themselves in.
And
they presumably need to get a clean “rehab” chit to live safely
in their communities, presenting a major challenge for the
Philippines drug rehabilitation infrastructure. Duterte has
called on the Philippine military to make base acreage available for
additional rehab camps and the first one will apparently be at Camp
Ramon Magsaysay.
Duterte
has turned to the PRC to demand they fund construction of drug
treatment facilities, and the PRC has obliged. According to
Duterte and his spokesman, preparatory work for the Magsaysay
facility has already begun.
There’s
an amusing wrinkle here.
Magsaysay
is the largest military reservation in the Philippines. It is
also the jewel in the diadem, I might say, of the five Philippine
bases envisioned for US use under EDCA, the Enhanced Defence
Cooperation Agreement that officially returned US troops to
Philippine bases. It looks like the US military might be
sharing Magsaysay with thousands of drug users…and PRC construction
workers.”
Duterte
And Marcos
What
shocked many recently was Duterte’s decision to re-bury former
dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the ‘Heroes’ Cemetery’.
“Has
the President gone mad?”
asked some. “Is
he joining some right-wing cult?”
exclaimed others.
None
of the above! President Duterte is a left-wing revolutionary, but he
is also perfectly well aware that in the morally debased society
controlled by vicious political clans and corrupt military and police
officers and generals, one has to be a great chess player in order to
survive, while pushing essential reforms forward.
“The
move was not at all ideological”,
clarifies Prof. Rolan Simbulan:
“It
was clearly a pragmatic move. He took some money, and he openly
admitted that he took some money for his election campaign … Then,
in exchange for some votes he promised the burial of Ferdinand Marcos
at the ‘Heroes’ Cemetery’. Marcos Junior wanted to run as his
Vice-President, but he lost to Leni …”
Dr.
Reynaldo Ileto, a leading historian, adds: “the Cemetery
has bayani or
the ‘hero’ name, but in fact it is a cemetery for almost all
former presidents … The focus of the opposition on the Marcos
burial is deliberate, it is to avoid real and important issues.”
“Duterte
is stubborn”,
Eduardo and Teresa Tadem told me:
“He
made his promise to the Marcos family and he kept it … Does he
admire Marcos? If he admires him for anything, it is only for being
strong and uncompromising. Marcos brought the country to ruins, but
after him, things never improved, and so he is judged positively by
some sectors of society. But overall: Duterte’s decision to burry
him at Bayani Cemetery was a gross miscalculation.”
“What
is this never-ending obsession of so many people in the Philippines
with Marcos?”
I asked a leading left-wing journalist and thinker Benjie Oliveros.
“Could
it be compared to Peron in Argentina?”
“Oh
yes”,
he replied. “That
seems to be a good comparison.”
“Duterte,
a supporter of Marcos?”
Luz Ilagan rolls her eyes:
“During
the martial law, he was a prosecutor in Davao. He always protected
the activists here. ‘Release them to me!’ he often ordered. He
saved lives. His father served as a minor minister in Marcos’
government, before the martial law, but his mother played a very
important role in the protest movement. She was a vocal, a fearless
woman … She had huge influence on her son.”
Does
Duterte Really Despise Women?
Again,
it has to be remembered that Duterte is a Visaya man. He is
outspoken, often graphic and definitely ‘politically incorrect’.
Duterte
made comments about the attractiveness of the knees and legs of his
Vice-President Leni Robredo, and he accused his vocal critic Senator
Leila de Lima of sleeping with her driver (it was later proven that
the liaison really existed).
In
this staunchly Catholic country, Duterte annulled the marriage with
his first wife (they parted amicably), had several affairs, and now
lives with his common–law wife.
All
this is too much for some, but surprisingly, he is actually admired
by most of the women.
“When
he makes jokes about women, in Manila they can’t take it”,
laughs Luz Illagan, who is one of the leading feminists in the
country:
“But
we always compare his words to his deeds, to what he has done for our
women. He always helped; he always protected us. His Davao got awards
for being a women-sensitive city. He created the ‘integrated gender
development office’, the first one in the Philippines, and other
cities are now copying the concept. Every year, before the Women’s
Day celebration, women evaluate the performance of the office, and
they submit a new agenda. Everything is very transparent.”
In
an international hotel in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, I spoke to a
group of women workers from the Philippines. What do they think about
their new president?
While
answering (and they did not hesitate to answer for one second), I
realized that two of them had tears in their eyes:
“For
the first time in our lives, we feel proud to belong to our country.
Duterte gave us our dignity back. He gave us hope. To say that we
support him would be to say too little. We love him; we feel enormous
gratitude. He is liberating us; he is liberating our country!”
Duterte
And The Past Of The Philippines
President
Duterte is not only outraged about the present, he is furious about
the past.
“American
scholarship in the Philippines – it created an entire mindset”,
explained Dr. Reynaldo Ileto to me in Manila. “The
America-Philippine War is a non-event; people don’t know about it.
Everything was ‘sanitized’”.
“We
still have not recovered from the hangover caused by US colonialism”,
states, novelist Sionil Jose.
US
colonialism was nothing less than genocide.
Alfonso
Velázquez wrote:
“Between
the years 1899 and 1913 the United States of America wrote the
darkest pages of its history. The invasion of the Philippines, for no
other reason than acquiring imperial possessions, prompted a fierce
reaction of the Filipino people. 126000 American soldiers were
brought in to quell the resistance. As a result, 400000 Filipino
“insurrectos” died under American fire and one million Filipino
civilians died because of the hardship, mass killings and scorched
earth tactics carried out by the Americans. In total the American war
against a peaceful people who fairly ignored the existence of the
Americans until their arrival wiped out 1/6 of the population of the
country. One hundred years have passed. Isn’t it high time that the
USA army, Congress and Government apologised for the horrendous
crimes and monstruous sufferings that were inflicted upon the peoples
of Filipinas?”
Gore
Vidal confirmed:
“The
comparison of this highly successful operation with our less
successful adventure in Vietnam was made by, among others, Bernard
Fall, who referred to our conquest of the Philippines as “the
bloodiest colonial war (in proportion to population) ever fought by a
white power in Asia; it cost the lives of 3,000,000 Filipinos.”
(cf. E. Ahmed’s “The Theory and Fallacies of Counter-Insurgency,”
The Nation, August 2, 1971.) General Bell himself, the old
sweetheart, estimated that we killed one-sixth of the population of
the main island of Luzon—some 600,000 people.
Now
a Mr. Creamer quotes a Mr. Hill (“who grew up in Manila,”
presumably counting skulls) who suggests that the bodycount for all
the islands is 300,000 men, women, and children—or half what
General Bell admitted to.
I
am amused to learn that I have wandered “so far from easily
verified fact.” There are no easily verified facts when it comes to
this particular experiment in genocide. At the time when I first made
reference to the 3,000,000 (NYR, October 18, 1973), a Filipino wrote
me to say she was writing her master’s thesis on the subject. She
was inclined to accept Fall’s figures but she said that since few
records were kept and entire villages were totally destroyed, there
was no way to discover, exactly, those “facts” historians like to
“verify.” In any case, none of this is supposed to have happened
and so, as far as those history books that we use to indoctrinate the
young go, it did not happen.”
It
was reported that in September 2016, at the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (Asean) Summit which was also attended by President
Obama, Duterte produced a picture of the killings done by American
soldiers in the past and said:
“This is my ancestor[s that] they
killed.”
I
visited several bookstores in Manila,
including National and Solidaridad.
In both places the staff looked baffled when I asked about books
dealing with the massacres committed by US troops on the territory of
the Philippines.
All
this may change now, soon. Duterte is openly speaking about US
colonialist wars and invasions, about the massacres in Luzon and
Mindanao Islands.
For
decades, the US was portraying itself as the ‘liberator’ of the
Philippines. Now, Duterte depicts it as a country of mass murderers,
rapists and thieves. According to him, the countries of the West have
no moral mandate to criticize anybody for violations of human rights.
He described President Obama as a son-of-a-bitch. He shouted ‘Fuck
you!’ at the European Union. He has had enough of hypocrisy.
In
this part of the world, such emotional outbursts could ignite
rebellion. I have worked in Southeast Asia for many years, and I know
what a thick blanket of lies covers the history of the region.
Southeast
Asia lost tens of millions of people in the midst of outrageous,
brutal European colonialism. It lost millions in Indochina (Vietnam,
Cambodia and Laos) during the so-called ‘Vietnam War’ (or
‘American War’ as it is known in Vietnam).
Between 1 and 3 million Indonesians vanished during the US-sponsored coup in Jakarta in 1965/66, and the genocide in the Philippines took nearly 1.5 million fighters-patriots, but mostly civilians. The East Timorese lost around one third of its entire population, after Indonesia invaded, backed by the US, UK and Australia.
Between 1 and 3 million Indonesians vanished during the US-sponsored coup in Jakarta in 1965/66, and the genocide in the Philippines took nearly 1.5 million fighters-patriots, but mostly civilians. The East Timorese lost around one third of its entire population, after Indonesia invaded, backed by the US, UK and Australia.
Such
history is as explosive as dynamite. I have spoken to hundreds of
people in this part of the world. They keep quiet, but they remember.
They know who the real murderers are, who their real enemies are.
President
Duterte is not only playing with fire. He is also re-writing and
changing the entire twisted Western narrative. The whole region
is watching, breathless. Both horror and hope are detectable in the
air, and so are the strong smells of blood and dynamite.
PH
Not A Vassal State: Duterte
“I
am anti-West. I do not like the Americans. It’s simply a matter of
principle for me.” That’s
how President Duterte sees the world: it is simple, reduced to the
essence. He further clarifies:
“The
PH is not a vassal state, we have long ceased to be a colony of the
US. Alam mo, marami diyang mga columnista they look upon Obama and
the US as we are the lapdogs of this country. I do not respond to
anybody but to the people of the Republic of the Philippines. Wala
akong pakialam sa kanya. Who is he to confront me, as a matter of
fact, America has one too many to answer for the misdeeds in this
country.”
He
said to Chinese officials, during his visit on October 20, 2016:
“I
announce my separation from the United States, both in military but
economics also. America has lost now. I’ve realigned myself in your
ideological flow. And maybe I will also go to Russia to talk to Putin
and tell him that there are three of us against the world: China,
Philippines and Russia. It’s the only way.”
A
deafening applause followed.
Duterte
actually talked to President Putin on the sidelines of the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Leaders’ Meeting in Lima, Peru,
in November 2016.
The new era for the Philippines has begun: cooperation with China, Russia, Cuba, and Vietnam. A growing distance between this huge and important archipelago, and the West.
He
calls Americans “sons of bitches” and “hypocrites”, and
he tells the superpower straight in the face:
“We
can survive without American money. But you know, America, you might
also be put to notice. Prepare to leave the Philippines, prepare for
the eventual repeal or the abrogation of the Visiting Forces
Agreement… You know, tit for tat. It ain’t a one-way traffic.
Bye-bye America.”
What
About Trump?
These
days, to be a friend of the West is a terrible liability. A leader
from a colonized country could be easily discredited by just one
friendly phrase, one friendly gesture towards some US or UK official,
towards the Western regime, or its corporation.
The
Western mass media is well aware of it.
That
is why, when President Duterte spoke on the phone with President
elect Donald Trump, it immediately began reporting that the two men
are on a similar wavelength.
Hardly.
Once Mr. Trump begins his reign, President Duterte’s close ties
with China, Cuba and other socialist countries will soon reinstate
his name on the extended hit list of the Empire’s regime. He
already is on it, under Obama’s administration (even the coup
attempts plotted from the US were already exposed and stopped). It
would be a miracle if the racist and anti-Chinese/anti-Asian Donald
Trump would actually decide to spare an anti-imperialist Southeast
Asian leader.
Duterte
and Trump are still talking politely. Duterte even offered a
compliment to his US counterpart: “”I like your mouth, it’s
like mine”. Well, hardly a proof of warming-up of the relationship
between two countries.
My
Filipino colleagues kept warning me: “Please do not read
commentaries of the pro-Western media. If you want to judge, demand
the full transcript of the conversation … Is there actually any
transcript available?”
In
the meantime, Washington is sugarcoating the obvious bitterness of
the relationship between the US and the Philippines. The new US
envoy, Ambassador Sung Kim, a Korean-American, is all smiles and
‘respect’:
“For me the most meaningful, the most fundamental is the deep and extraordinary warmth in the peoples of the two countries …”
What
could President Duterte reply to this? Definitely not: Fuck you, son
of a bitch!” In Asia, courtesy is met with courtesy. However, no
matter what, each week, the Philippines are moving further away from
the West, as planned and as foretold.
Who
Hates Duterte And Who Is Afraid Of Him?
As
we established earlier, the West hates him, and especially those
there who are trying to trigger wars with China and Russia. Duterte
admires both countries, saying that China has “the kindest soul of
all”, while openly admiring Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“(Russians) they do not insult people, they do not
interfere,” Duterte declared.
Big
multinational corporations hate him, particularly those huge mining
conglomerates that were operating in the Philippines for years and
decades, murdering thousands of defenseless Filipino people,
plundering natural resources and devastating the environment.
President Duterte is putting a full stop to such, feudal, fascist
lawlessвess.
He
is hated by the mass media, at home and abroad, for ‘understandable
reasons’.
He
is hated by many local and international NGOs, often because they are
simply paid to hate him, or because they mean well but are badly
informed about the situation “on the ground” (in his country), or
simply because they are accustomed to using the Western perspectives
to judge occurrences in all corners of the world.
Some
victims of the Marcos dictatorship hate him, but definitely not all
of them. Many present-day ‘activists’ have actually too close
ties with the West, at least for my taste. Ms. Susan D. Macabuag, who
is in charge of Bantayog
ng mga Bayani (A
Tribute To Martial Law Heroes and Martyrs) and a person whom I met on
several previous occasions, is not hiding her antipathy towards the
President:
“It is pity it is Duterte who is saying things that he says about the US … If another person would say it, it would go a long way.”
She
then made several statements illustrating her dislike of China. Later
she dded:
“My
son lives in the US. Many of us have families in the United States.
We are very concerned about the situation …”
For
a while, I was trying to figure out what exactly she meant, but then
I decided to let it go.
At
a small but iconic intellectual bookstore Solidaridad,
I met the most respected living novelist of the Philippines, F.
Sionil Jose, who was just celebrating his 92st birthday.
For a while, we spoke about Russia, about Indonesia, about the modern
literature. Then I asked him point blank: “Do
you like President Duterte?”
“I like him, and I don’t like him”, replied an iconic author, evasively, while smiling. “But I have to say: he is a narcissist.”
Ms.
Leni Robredo, Duterte’s vice-President (and former MP and HR
lawyer), hates her boss. Constitutionally, he couldn’t fire her as
a Vice-President, so he at least blocked her from attending his
regular cabinet meetings earlier in December.
(‘He doesn’t trust her, anymore.’ He believes that her party tries to depose him). Later she resigned from her position as a chairperson of the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC), and began gathering forces against Duterte’s administration.
(‘He doesn’t trust her, anymore.’ He believes that her party tries to depose him). Later she resigned from her position as a chairperson of the Housing and Urban Development Coordinating Council (HUDCC), and began gathering forces against Duterte’s administration.
“There
are so many of us against the policies of the president. I hope I
will be able to portray the role of unifying all the discordant
voices,”
Robredo told Reuters in
an interview at her office in Manila’s Quezon City.
Ms.
Robredo is an important figure in the “yellow”
Liberal Party. As early as on September 13, 2016, Inquirer reported:
“Without
directly mentioning the LP, Duterte on Monday accused “yellow”
forces of mounting moves to impeach him by highlighting the issue of
human rights violations under his administration.
“Let’s
not fool ourselves. Do you know who’s behind this? It’s the
yellow,” the President said, referring to the LP’s political
color.”
On
December 5th,
I met historian Dr. Reynaldo Ileto in Manila, who said: “Leni
is tugging the same (Western) policy on the South China Sea…”
We
discussed the “color revolutions” triggered by the West, and the
pattern: Ukraine, Brazil, Argentina, and Arroyo in the Philippines,
after she dared to move closer to China. Will Robredo try to do to
Duterte what Temer did to Dilma? Is there going to be yet another
‘revolution’ in the name of some ‘anti-corruption drive’ or
‘human rights’?
Dynasties,
powerful political and business clans, also hate President Duterte.
Of course they do! In the past, I got to know them, gained ‘access’
to some. I was shown how they operate: shamelessly, brutally and with
total impunity.
The dynasties had been killing and raping those who stood in their way. They have been plundering the country for centuries. Like in Central America (the Spanish and US colonialist legacies) they never hesitated to sacrifice thousands, even millions of ‘peons’.
The
top military brass, educated in the United States and elsewhere in
the West, hates him. It actually hates him passionately.
He
is hated by millions of Filipinos living in the United States. He has
to be careful while dealing with some of them. Recently, in the city
of Davao, President Duterte declared:
“Better
be careful with the word ‘we separate or severed, severed our
diplomatic relations’. (It) is not feasible. Why? Because the
Filipinos in the United States will kill me.”
In
fact, he is hated by so many from the ‘elites’ and by so many in
the West, that it appears to be a miracle that he is still alive and
in charge.
The
coup plots have been exposed. Entire Western mainstream propaganda
apparatus has been employed in order to weaken and to discredit him.
He does not care. He is now 71. His is in poor health. He does not believe that he will make it till the end of his term. He is a warrior. He never kneels in front of the former or present colonizers. Recently, he said:
“I
do not kneel down before anybody else, except the Filipino in Quiapo
walking in misery and in extreme poverty and anger.”
That
is what Chavez, Morales or Fidel would say. That is what gets people
murdered by the Empire, by the Western regime. As simple as that!
The
Empire knows what is at stake. The Philippines is a nation with more
than 100 million inhabitants, strategically located on some of the
most important maritime routes. It used to be one of the most
obedient, and resigned countries in Asia Pacific.
It
is no more! Its people are suddenly waking up, defiant and angry. The
West has been killing, plundering and humiliating them for centuries.
The education had been twisted to glorify invaders. The culture was
stripped of its essence, and injected with deadly doses of Western
pop.
Again
and again I was told that if President Duterte is killed or deposed,
the country would explode. There would be a civil war. Once rebellion
ignites millions of souls, no way back is possible.
Unless
some people have failed to notice by now, this is a genuine
revolution. It is an extremely slow and painful revolution. It is not
a ‘beautiful’, or operatic revolution. But a revolution it is.
“If
Duterte moves too fast, he will be overthrown by the military”,
uttered Prof Roland Simbulan.
Duterte
says “Bye-bye America!” He is cancelling common military
exercises, while he is also talking to Donald Trump, politely. The
atmosphere is extremely tense. Anything could happen at any moment:
an assassination, a coup … It is a minefield all around him, almost
right there, under his feet.
He
is aware of it. This is how history is written; with blood, with
one’s own blood.
What
is taking place in Manila now is not a board meeting of some
Western-sponsored human rights NGO. It is a striking, shocking image
of a huge, scarred, tortured nation, getting up from its deathbed,
still covered by blood and puss, but suddenly daring to hope for
survival, angry and defiant but determined to live, to prevail.
In
order to live, it will have to dare, to fight, perhaps against all
odds.
In
the middle of the horrid cemeteries inhabited by the wretched human
beings, I witnessed hope. I testify that I did. Those who don’t
believe me, those who do not understand, should go and see with their
own eyes. They should go to the horrendous Baseco slum, and to the
city of Davao. Then they can speak. Otherwise, they should be quiet!
I
testify that the Philippines is a country in rebellion, galvanized by
one man and his tremendous determination and courage.
Is
he a saint? No, he is not. He himself says that he is not. Anyway, I
don’t believe in saints, do you? Duterte cannot afford to be a
saint. There is more than one hundred million men, women and children
behind him, clinging to his back, right now … most of them very
poor, most of them robbed of absolutely everything.
If he gets through the storm, most of them will survive, will benefit. Therefore, exhausted and injured, he is marching forward. His fists are clenched, he is cursing. He has no right to fail or to fall. He has to, he is obliged to get through: in the name of one hundred million of his people.
As
he hears insults, feels punches, as he envisions assassins waiting
for him all along the way, most likely he keeps repeating in his mind
what his great hero, Hugo Chavez used to shout until the very end:
“Here
No One Surrenders!”
***
Andre
Vltchek is
a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He
has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Three of his
latest books are revolutionary novel“Aurora” and
two bestselling works of political non-fiction: “Exposing
Lies Of The Empire” and “Fighting
Against Western Imperialism”. View
his other books here.
Andre is making films for teleSUR and Al-Mayadeen. After having lived
in Latin America, Africa and Oceania, Vltchek presently resides in
East Asia and the Middle East, and continues to work around the
world. He can be reached through his website and
his Twitter.
Hundreds Flee Southern Philippines as Clashes Continue Between Govt Forces and Daesh
"NATO
and the United States should change their policy because the time
when they dictate their conditions to the world has passed,"
Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Dushanbe, capital of the Central
Asian republic of Tajikistan
CIA
Running Drug Trafficking Show in Philippines to destroy a sovereign
Nation
@
smoloko
10
October, 2017
Historically,
illegal drugs were being used to destroy sovereign countries, and by
now the Philippines’ war on drugs is a regular headline by CIA
funded journalists and media networks, and a constant object for
criticism of the Soros’ Open Society Foundation funded
pseudo-non-government organizations, for being brutal and violative
of human rights.
Those
same critics, however, failed to put their money where their mouth
is, especially when it comes to helping the Duterte government
rehabilitate close to a million drug surrendered. They would rather
focus our attention into the 3,700 deaths, some of which are the
direct result of the decisive police action, and the rest were
victims of the drug syndicates who are now cleaning their own ranks
from squealers, i.e. those who have surrendered and subsequently
named their suppliers.
The
same bleeding hearts who chose to ignore the fact that the statistics
related to crime are just the same as in past administrations, only
this time it is the criminals who are dying, because once a poor brat
is hooked into meth, he must do whatever he can get his fix for the
day, which include cell phone snatching, daylight robbery, etc.
Other
sordid crimes relating to meth addiction were also brought to light
including cannibalism, and in the realm of politics, it has sent a
former justice secretary to the present senate, on top of congressmen
and mayors who are already funded with drug money for years.
In short, the Philippines’ war on drugs is a necessary measure that must be taken before the country plunges completely into another failed state.
Still
at 100th day in office, the Duterte government is able to reduce the
crime rate to 50% nationwide using only the national budget crafted
by his predecessor. The same budget, which does not include the
establishment of rehabilitation centers necessary to help the
projected 4 million drug dependents, and for whom the US, EU and UN
“human rights advocates” could help more than just paying lip
service to the 3,750 so called victims of extrajudicial killings.
To those who would rather criticize the sensible actions of the Philippine government that is enjoying 97% trust rating, are you really raising concerns over human rights vilolations, or just in it to protect the illegal drug industry?
The Real Drug Lords: A brief history of CIA involvement in the Drug Trade
By
William Blum
This
article was first published on August 31, 2008.
1947
to 1951, FRANCE
According
to Alfred W. McCoy in The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, CIA
arms, money, and disinformation enabled Corsican criminal syndicates
in Marseille to wrestle control of labor unions from the Communist
Party. The Corsicans gained political influence and control over the
docks — ideal conditions for cementing a long-term partnership with
mafia drug distributors, which turned Marseille into the postwar
heroin capital of the Western world. Marseille’s first heroin
laboratones were opened in 1951, only months after the Corsicans took
over the waterfront.
EARLY
1950s, SOUTHEAST ASIA
The
Nationalist Chinese army, organized by the CIA to wage war against
Communist China, became the opium barons of The Golden Triangle
(parts of Burma, Thailand and Laos), the world’s largest source of
opium and heroin. Air America, the ClA’s principal airline
proprietary, flew the drugs all over Southeast Asia. (See Christopher
Robbins, Air America, Avon Books, 1985, chapter 9)
1950s
to early 1970s, INDOCHINA During U.S. military involvement in Laos
and other parts of Indochina, Air America flew opium and heroin
throughout the area. Many Gl’s in Vietnam became addicts. A
laboratory built at CIA headquarters in northern Laos was used to
refine heroin. After a decade of American military intervention,
Southeast Asia had become the source of 70 percent of the world’s
illicit opium and the major supplier of raw materials for America’s
booming heroin market.
1973-80,
AUSTRALIA
The
Nugan Hand Bank of Sydney was a CIA bank in all but name. Among its
officers were a network of US generals, admirals and CIA men,
including fommer CIA Director William Colby, who was also one of its
lawyers. With branches in Saudi Arabia, Europe, Southeast Asia, South
America and the U.S., Nugan Hand Bank financed drug trafficking,
money laundering and international arms dealings. In 1980, amidst
several mysterious deaths, the bank collapsed, $50 million in debt.
(See Jonathan Kwitny, The Crimes of Patriots: A True Tale of Dope,
Dirty Money and the CIA, W.W. Norton & Co., 1 987.)
1970s
and 1980s, PANAMA
For
more than a decade, Panamanian strongman Manuel Noriega was a highly
paid CIA asset and collaborator, despite knowledge by U.S. drug
authorities as early as 1971 that the general was heavily involved in
drug trafficking and money laundering. Noriega facilitated
”guns-for-drugs” flights for the contras, providing protection
and pilots, as well as safe havens for drug cartel otficials, and
discreet banking facilities. U.S. officials, including then-ClA
Director William Webster and several DEA officers, sent Noriega
letters of praise for efforts to thwart drug trafficking (albeit only
against competitors of his Medellin Cartel patrons). The U.S.
government only turned against Noriega, invading Panama in December
1989 and kidnapping the general once they discovered he was providing
intelligence and services to the Cubans and Sandinistas. Ironically
drug trafficking through Panama increased after the US invasion.
(John Dinges, Our Man in Panama, Random House, 1991; National
Security Archive Documentation Packet The Contras, Cocaine, and
Covert Operations.)
1980s,
CENTRAL AMERICA
The
San Jose Mercury News series documents just one thread of the
interwoven operations linking the CIA, the contras and the cocaine
cartels. Obsessed with overthrowing the leftist Sandinista government
in Nicaragua, Reagan administration officials tolerated drug
trafficking as long as the traffickers gave support to the contras.
In 1989, the Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics, and
International Operations (the Kerry committee) concluded a three-year
investigation by stating:
“There
was substantial evidence of drug smuggling through the war zones on
the part of individual Contras, Contra suppliers, Contra pilots
mercenaries who worked with the Contras, and Contra supporters
throughout the region…. U.S. officials involved in Central America
failed to address the drug issue for fear of jeopardizing the war
efforts against Nicaragua…. In each case, one or another agency of
the U.S. govemment had intormation regarding the involvement either
while it was occurring, or immediately thereafter…. Senior U S
policy makers were nit immune to the idea that drug money was a
perfect solution to the Contras’ funding problems.” (Drugs, Law
Enforcement and Foreign Policy, a Report of the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations, Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and
Intemational Operations, 1989)
In
Costa Rica, which served as the “Southern Front” for the contras
(Honduras being the Northern Front), there were several different
ClA-contra networks involved in drug trafficking. In addition to
those servicing the Meneses-Blandon operation detailed by the Mercury
News, and Noriega’s operation, there was CIA operative John Hull,
whose farms along Costa Rica’s border with Nicaragua were the main
staging area for the contras. Hull and other ClA-connected contra
supporters and pilots teamed up with George Morales, a major
Miami-based Colombian drug trafficker who later admitted to giving $3
million in cash and several planes to contra leaders. In 1989, after
the Costa Rica government indicted Hull for drug trafficking, a
DEA-hired plane clandestinely and illegally flew the CIA operative to
Miami, via Haiti. The US repeatedly thwarted Costa Rican efforts to
extradite Hull back to Costa Rica to stand trial. Another Costa
Rican-based drug ring involved a group of Cuban Amencans whom the CIA
had hired as military trainers for the contras. Many had long been
involved with the CIA and drug trafficking They used contra planes
and a Costa Rican-based shnmp company, which laundered money for the
CIA, to move cocaine to the U.S. Costa Rica was not the only route.
Guatemala, whose military intelligence service — closely associated
with the CIA — harbored many drug traffickers, according to the
DEA, was another way station along the cocaine highway.
Additionally,
the Medellin Cartel’s Miami accountant, Ramon Milian Rodriguez,
testified that he funneled nearly $10 million to Nicaraguan contras
through long-time CIA operative Felix Rodriguez, who was based at
Ilopango Air Force Base in El Salvador. The contras provided both
protection and infrastructure (planes, pilots, airstrips, warehouses,
front companies and banks) to these ClA-linked drug networks. At
least four transport companies under investigation for drug
trafficking received US govemment contracts to carry non-lethal
supplies to the contras. Southern Air Transport, “formerly”
ClA-owned, and later under Pentagon contract, was involved in the
drug running as well. Cocaine-laden planes flew to Florida, Texas,
Louisiana and other locations, including several militarv bases
Designated as ‘Contra Craft,” these shipments were not to be
inspected. When some authority wasn’t clued in and made an arrest,
powerful strings were pulled on behalf of dropping the case,
acquittal, reduced sentence, or deportation.
1980s
to early 1990s, AFGHANISTAN
ClA-supported
Moujahedeen rebels engaged heavily in drug trafficking while fighting
against the Soviet-supported govemment and its plans to reform the
very backward Afghan society. The Agency’s principal client was
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, one of the leading druglords and leading heroin
refiner. CIA supplied trucks and mules, which had carried arms into
Afghanistan, were used to transport opium to laboratories along the
Afghan Pakistan border. The output provided up to one half of the
heroin used annually in the United States and three-quarters of that
used in Western Europe. US officials admitted in 1990 that they had
failed to investigate or take action against the drug operabon
because of a desire not to offend their Pakistani and Afghan allies.
In 1993, an official of the DEA called Afghanistan the new Colombia
of the drug world.
MlD-1980s
to early 199Os, HAITI
While
working to keep key Haitian military and political leaders in power,
the CIA turned a blind eye to their clients’ drug trafficking. In
1986, the Agency added some more names to its payroll by creating a
new Haitian organization, the National Intelligence Service (SIN).
SIN was purportedly created to fight the cocaine trade, though SIN
officers themselves engaged in the trafficking, a trade aided and
abetted by some of the Haitian military and political leaders.
William
Blum is author of Killing Hope: U.S Military and CIA Interventions
Since World War ll available from Common Courage Press, P.O. Box 702,
Monroe, Maine, 04951
Washington’s Hidden Agenda: Restore the Drug Trade
Global
Research, October 01, 2016
In
2014 the Afghan opium cultivation has once again hit a record high,
according to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime’s 2014
Afghan Opium Survey.
In
the course of the last four years, there has been a surge in Afghan
opium production. The Vienna based UN Office on Drugs and Crime
(UNODC) reveals that poppy cultivation in 2012 extended over an area
of more than 154,000 hectares, an increase of 18% over 2011. A UNODC
spokesperson confirmed in 2013 that opium production is heading
towards record levels.
According
to the 2012
Afghanistan Opium Survey released
in November 2012 by the Ministry of Counter Narcotics (MCN) and the
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). potential opium
production in 2012 was of the order of 3,700 tons, a decline of 18
percent in relation to 2001, according to UNODC data.
There
is reason to believe that this figure of 3700 tons is grossly
underestimated. Moreover, it contradicts the UNOCD’s own
predictions of record harvests over an extended area of cultivation.
While
bad weather and damaged crops may have played a role as suggested by
the UNODC, based on historical trends, the potential production for
an area of cultivation of 154,000 hectares, should be well in excess
of 6000 tons. With 80,000 hectares in cultivation in 2003, production
was already of the order of 3600 tons.
It
is worth noting that UNODC has modified the concepts and figures on
opium sales and heroin production, as outlined by the European
Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA).
A change in UN methodology in 2010 resulted in a sharp downward revision of Afghan heroin production estimates for 2004 to 2011. UNODC used to estimate that the entire global opium crop was processed into heroin, and provided global heroin production estimates on that basis. Before 2010, a global conversion rate of about 10 kg of opium to 1 kg of heroin was used to estimate world heroin production (17). For instance, the estimated 4 620 tonnes of opium harvested worldwide in 2005 was thought to make it possible to manufacture 472 tonnes of heroin (UNODC, 2009a). However, UNODC now estimates that a large proportion of the Afghan opium harvest is not processed into heroin or morphine but remains ‘available on the drug market as opium’ (UNODC, 2010a). …EU drug markets report: a strategic analysis, EMCDDA, Lisbon, January 2013 emphasis added
There
is no evidence that a large percentage of opium production is no
longer processed into heroin as claimed by the UN. This revised UNODC
methodology has served, –through the outright manipulation of
statistical concepts– to artificially reduce the size of of the
global trade in heroin.
According
to the UNODC, quoted in the EMCDDA report:
“an estimated 3 400 tonnes of Afghan opium was not transformed into heroin or morphine in 2011. Compared with previous years, this is an exceptionally high proportion of the total crop, representing nearly 60 % of the Afghan opium harvest and close to 50 % of the global harvest in 2011.
What
the UNODC, –whose mandate is to support the prevention of organized
criminal activity– has done is to obfuscate the size and criminal
nature of the Afghan drug trade, intimating –without evidence–
that a large part of the opium is no longer channeled towards the
illegal heroin market.
In
2012 according to the UNODC, farmgate prices for opium were of the
order of 196 per kg.
Each
kg. of opium produces 100 grams of pure heroin. The US retail prices
for heroin (with a low level of purity) is, according to UNODC of the
order of $172 a gram. The price per gram of pure heroin is
substantially higher.
The
profits are largely reaped at the level of the international
wholesale and retail markets of heroin as well as in the process of
money laundering in Western banking institutions.
The
revenues derived from the global trade in heroin constitute a
multibillion dollar bonanza for financial institutions and organized
crime.
The
following article first published in May 2005 provides a background
on the history of the Afghan opium trade which continues to this date
to be protected by US-NATO occupation forces on behalf of powerful
financial interests.
Michel
Chossudovsky, January 2015
The Spoils of War: Afghanistan’s Multibillion Dollar Heroin Trade
by
Michel Chossudovsky
Global
Research, May 2005
Since
the US led invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, the Golden
Crescent opium trade has soared. According to the US media, this
lucrative contraband is protected by Osama, the Taliban, not to
mention, of course, the regional warlords, in defiance of the
“international community”.
The
heroin business is said to be “filling the coffers of the Taliban”.
In the words of the US State Department:
“Opium is a source of literally billions of dollars to extremist and criminal groups… [C]utting down the opium supply is central to establishing a secure and stable democracy, as well as winning the global war on terrorism,” (Statement of Assistant Secretary of State Robert Charles. Congressional Hearing, 1 April 2004)
According
to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), opium
production in Afghanistan in 2003 is estimated at 3,600 tons, with an
estimated area under cultivation of the order of 80,000 hectares.
(UNODC at http://www.unodc.org/unodc/index.html ).
An
even larger bumper harvest is predicted for 2004.
The
State Department suggests that up to 120 000 hectares were under
cultivation in 2004. (Congressional Hearing, op cit):
”We could be on a path for a significant surge. Some observers indicate perhaps as much as 50 percent to 100 percent growth in the 2004 crop over the already troubling figures from last year.”(Ibid)
“Operation Containment“
In
response to the post-Taliban surge in opium production, the Bush
administration has boosted its counter terrorism activities, while
allocating substantial amounts of public money to the Drug
Enforcement Administration’s West Asia initiative, dubbed
“Operation Containment.”
The
various reports and official statements are, of course, blended in
with the usual “balanced” self critique that “the international
community is not doing enough”, and that what we need is
“transparency”.
The
headlines are “Drugs, warlords and insecurity overshadow
Afghanistan’s path to democracy”. In chorus, the US media is
accusing the defunct “hard-line Islamic regime”, without even
acknowledging that the Taliban –in collaboration with the United
Nations– had imposed a successful ban on poppy cultivation in 2000.
Opium production declined by more than 90 per cent in 2001. In fact
the surge in opium cultivation production coincided with the
onslaught of the US-led military operation and the downfall of the
Taliban regime. From October through December 2001, farmers started
to replant poppy on an extensive basis.
The
success of Afghanistan’s 2000 drug eradication program under the
Taliban had been acknowledged at the October 2001 session of the UN
General Assembly (which took place barely a few days after the
beginning of the 2001 bombing raids). No other UNODC member country
was able to implement a comparable program:
“Turning
first to drug control, I had expected to concentrate my remarks on
the implications of the Taliban’s ban on opium poppy cultivation in
areas under their control… We now have the results of our annual
ground survey of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan. This year’s
production [2001] is around 185 tons. This is down from the 3300 tons
last year [2000], a decrease of over 94 per cent.
Compared to the
record harvest of 4700 tons two years ago, the decrease is well over
97 per cent.
Any
decrease in illicit cultivation is welcomed, especially in cases like
this when no displacement, locally or in other countries, took place
to weaken the achievement” (Remarks on behalf of UNODC Executive
Director at the UN General Assembly, Oct
2001,http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/speech_2001-10-12_1.html )
United Nations’ Coverup
In
the wake of the US invasion, shift in rhetoric. UNODC is now acting
as if the 2000 opium ban had never happened:
“the
battle against narcotics cultivation has been fought and won in other
countries and it [is] possible to do so here [in Afghanistan], with
strong, democratic governance, international assistance and improved
security and integrity.” ( Statement of the UNODC Representative in
Afghanistan at the :February 2004 International Counter Narcotics
Conference,
In
fact, both Washington and the UNODC now claim that the objective of
the Taliban in 2000 was not really “drug eradication” but a
devious scheme to trigger “an artificial shortfall in supply”,
which would drive up World prices of heroin.
Ironically,
this twisted logic, which now forms part of a new “UN consensus”,
is refuted by a report of the UNODC office in Pakistan, which
confirmed, at the time, that there was no evidence of stockpiling by
the Taliban. (Deseret News, Salt Lake City, Utah. 5 October 2003)
Washington’s Hidden Agenda: Restore the Drug Trade
In
the wake of the 2001 US bombing of Afghanistan, the British
government of Tony Blair was entrusted by the G-8 Group of leading
industrial nations to carry out a drug eradication program, which
would, in theory, allow Afghan farmers to switch out of poppy
cultivation into alternative crops. The British were working out of
Kabul in close liaison with the US DEA’s “Operation Containment”.
The
UK sponsored crop eradication program is an obvious smokescreen.
Since October 2001, opium poppy cultivation has skyrocketed. The
presence of occupation forces in Afghanistan did not result in the
eradication of poppy cultivation. Quite the opposite.
The
Taliban prohibition had indeed caused “the beginning of a heroin
shortage in Europe by the end of 2001″, as acknowledged by the
UNODC.
Heroin
is a multibillion dollar business supported by powerful interests,
which requires a steady and secure commodity flow. One of the
“hidden” objectives of the war was precisely to restore the CIA
sponsored drug trade to its historical levels and exert direct
control over the drug routes.
Immediately
following the October 2001 invasion, opium markets were restored.
Opium prices spiraled. By early 2002, the opium price (in dollars/kg)
was almost 10 times higher than in 2000.
In
2001, under the Taliban opiate production stood at 185 tons,
increasing to 3400 tons in 2002 under the US sponsored puppet regime
of President Hamid Karzai.
While
highlighting Karzai’s patriotic struggle against the Taliban, the
media fails to mention that Karzai collaborated with the Taliban. He
had also been on the payroll of a major US oil company, UNOCAL. In
fact, since the mid-1990s, Hamid Karzai had acted as a consultant and
lobbyist for UNOCAL in negotiations with the Taliban. According to
the Saudi newspaper Al-Watan:
“Karzai has been a Central Intelligence Agency covert operator since the 1980s. He collaborated with the CIA in funneling U.S. aid to the Taliban as of 1994 when the Americans had secretly and through the Pakistanis [specifically the ISI] supported the Taliban’s assumption of power.” (quoted in Karen Talbot, U.S. Energy Giant Unocal Appoints Interim Government in Kabul, Global Outlook, No. 1, Spring 2002. p. 70. See also BBC Monitoring Service, 15 December 2001)
History of the Golden Crescent Drug trade
It
is worth recalling the history of the Golden Crescent drug trade,
which is intimately related to the CIA’s covert operations in the
region since the onslaught of the Soviet-Afghan war and its
aftermath.
Prior
to the Soviet-Afghan war (1979-1989), opium production in Afghanistan
and Pakistan was directed to small regional markets. There was no
local production of heroin. (Alfred McCoy, Drug Fallout: the CIA’s
Forty Year Complicity in the Narcotics Trade. The Progressive, 1
August 1997).
The
Afghan narcotics economy was a carefully designed project of the CIA,
supported by US foreign policy.
As
revealed in the Iran-Contra and Bank of Commerce and Credit
International (BCCI) scandals, CIA covert operations in support of
the Afghan Mujahideen had been funded through the laundering of drug
money. “Dirty money” was recycled –through a number of banking
institutions (in the Middle East) as well as through anonymous CIA
shell companies–, into “covert money,” used to finance various
insurgent groups during the Soviet-Afghan war, and its aftermath:
“Because the US wanted to supply the Mujahideen rebels in Afghanistan with stinger missiles and other military hardware it needed the full cooperation of Pakistan. By the mid-1980s, the CIA operation in Islamabad was one of the largest US intelligence stations in the World. `If BCCI is such an embarrassment to the US that forthright investigations are not being pursued it has a lot to do with the blind eye the US turned to the heroin trafficking in Pakistan’, said a US intelligence officer. (“The Dirtiest Bank of All,” Time, July 29, 1991, p. 22.)
Researcher
Alfred McCoy’s study confirms that within two years of the
onslaught of the CIA’s covert operation in Afghanistan in 1979,
“the Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands became the world’s top heroin producer, supplying 60 per cent of U.S. demand. In Pakistan, the heroin-addict population went from near zero in 1979 to 1.2 million by 1985, a much steeper rise than in any other nation.”
“CIA assets again controlled this heroin trade. As the Mujahideen guerrillas seized territory inside Afghanistan, they ordered peasants to plant opium as a revolutionary tax. Across the border in Pakistan, Afghan leaders and local syndicates under the protection of Pakistan Intelligence operated hundreds of heroin laboratories. During this decade of wide-open drug-dealing, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency in Islamabad failed to instigate major seizures or arrests.
U.S. officials had refused to investigate charges of heroin dealing by its Afghan allies because U.S. narcotics policy in Afghanistan has been subordinated to the war against Soviet influence there. In 1995, the former CIA director of the Afghan operation, Charles Cogan, admitted the CIA had indeed sacrificed the drug war to fight the Cold War. ‘Our main mission was to do as much damage as possible to the Soviets. We didn’t really have the resources or the time to devote to an investigation of the drug trade,’ I don’t think that we need to apologize for this. Every situation has its fallout. There was fallout in terms of drugs, yes. But the main objective was accomplished. The Soviets left Afghanistan.’”(McCoy, op cit)
The
role of the CIA, which is amply documented, is not mentioned in
official UNODC publications, which focus on internal social and
political factors. Needless to say, the historical roots of the opium
trade have been grossly distorted.
According
to the UNODC, Afghanistan’s opium production has increased, more
than 15-fold since 1979. In the wake of the Soviet-Afghan war, the
growth of the narcotics economy has continued unabated. The Taliban,
which were supported by the US, were initially instrumental in the
further growth of opiate production until the 2000 opium ban.
This
recycling of drug money was used to finance the post-Cold War
insurgencies in Central Asia and the Balkans including Al Qaeda. (For
details, see Michel Chossudovsky, War and Globalization, The Truth
behind September 11, Global Outlook,
2002,http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/truth911.html )
Narcotics: Second to Oil and the Arms Trade
The
revenues generated from the CIA sponsored Afghan drug trade are
sizeable.
The Afghan trade in opiates constitutes a large share of
the worldwide annual turnover of narcotics, which was estimated by
the United Nations to be of the order of $400-500 billion. (Douglas
Keh, Drug Money in a Changing World, Technical document No. 4, 1998,
Vienna UNDCP, p. 4. See also United Nations Drug Control Program,
Report of the International Narcotics Control Board for 1999,
E/INCB/1999/1 United Nations, Vienna 1999, p. 49-51, and Richard
Lapper, UN Fears Growth of Heroin Trade, Financial Times, 24 February
2000). At the time these UN figures were first brought out (1994),
the (estimated) global trade in drugs was of the same order of
magnitude as the global trade in oil.
The
IMF estimated global money laundering to be between 590 billion and
1.5 trillion dollars a year, representing 2-5 percent of global GDP.
(Asian Banker, 15 August 2003). A large share of global money
laundering as estimated by the IMF is linked to the trade in
narcotics.
Based
on recent figures (2003), drug trafficking constitutes “the third
biggest global commodity in cash terms after oil and the arms trade.”
(The Independent, 29 February 2004).
Moreover,
the above figures including those on money laundering, confirm that
the bulk of the revenues associated with the global trade in
narcotics are not appropriated by terrorist groups and warlords, as
suggested by the UNODC report.
There
are powerful business and financial interests behind narcotics. From
this standpoint, geopolitical and military control over the drug
routes is as strategic as oil and oil pipelines.
However,
what distinguishes narcotics from legal commodity trade is that
narcotics constitutes a major source of wealth formation not only for
organised crime but also for the US intelligence apparatus, which
increasingly constitutes a powerful actor in the spheres of finance
and banking.
In
turn, the CIA, which protects the drug trade, has developed complex
business and undercover links to major criminal syndicates involved
in the drug trade.
In
other words, intelligence agencies and powerful business syndicates
allied with organized crime, are competing for the strategic control
over the heroin routes. The multi-billion dollar revenues of
narcotics are deposited in the Western banking system. Most of the
large international banks together with their affiliates in the
offshore banking havens launder large amounts of narco-dollars.
This
trade can only prosper if the main actors involved in narcotics have
“political friends in high places.” Legal and illegal
undertakings are increasingly intertwined, the dividing line between
“businesspeople” and criminals is blurred. In turn, the
relationship among criminals, politicians and members of the
intelligence establishment has tainted the structures of the state
and the role of its institutions.
Where does the money go? Who benefits from the Afghan opium trade?
This
trade is characterized by a complex web of intermediaries. There are
various stages of the drug trade, several interlocked markets, from
the impoverished poppy farmer in Afghanistan to the wholesale and
retail heroin markets in Western countries. In other words, there is
a “hierarchy of prices” for opiates.
This
hierarchy of prices is acknowledged by the US administration:
“Afghan heroin sells on the international narcotics market for 100 times the price farmers get for their opium right out of the field”.(US State Department quoted by the Voice of America (VOA), 27 February 2004).
According
to the UNODC, opium in Afghanistan generated in 2003 “an income of
one billion US dollars for farmers and US$ 1.3 billion for
traffickers, equivalent to over half of its national income.”
Consistent
with these UNODC estimates, the average price for fresh opium was
$350 a kg. (2002); the 2002 production was 3400 tons.
The
UNDOC estimate, based on local farmgate and wholesale prices
constitutes, however, a very small percentage of the total turnover
of the multibillion dollar Afghan drug trade. The UNODC, estimates
“the total annual turn-over of international trade” in Afghan
opiates at US$ 30 billion. An examination of the wholesale and retail
prices for heroin in the Western countries suggests, however, that
the total revenues generated, including those at the retail level,
are substantially higher.
Wholesale Prices of Heroin in Western Countries
It
is estimated that one kilo of opium produces approximately 100 grams
of (pure) heroin. The US DEA confirms that “SWA [South West Asia
meaning Afghanistan] heroin in New York City was selling in the late
1990s for $85,000 to $190,000 per kilogram wholesale with a 75
percent purity ratio (National Drug Intelligence
Center,http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs/648/ny_econ.htm ).
According
to the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) “the price of SEA
[South East Asian] heroin ranges from $70,000 to $100,000 per unit
(700 grams) and the purity of SEA heroin ranges from 85 to 90
percent” (ibid). The SEA unit of 700 gr (85-90 % purity) translates
into a wholesale price per kg. for pure heroin ranging between
$115,000 and $163,000.
The
DEA figures quoted above, while reflecting the situation in the
1990s, are broadly consistent with recent British figures. According
to a report published in the Guardian (11 August 2002), the wholesale
price of (pure) heroin in London (UK) was of the order of 50,000
pounds sterling, approximately $80,000 (2002).
Whereas
as there is competition between different sources of heroin supply,
it should be emphasized that Afghan heroin represents a rather small
percentage of the US heroin market, which is largely supplied out of
Colombia.
Retail Prices
US
“The NYPD notes that retail heroin prices are down and purity is relatively high. Heroin previously sold for about $90 per gram but now sells for $65 to $70 per gram or less. Anecdotal information from the NYPD indicates that purity for a bag of heroin commonly ranges from 50 to 80 percent but can be as low as 30 percent. Information as of June 2000 indicates that bundles (10 bags) purchased by Dominican buyers from Dominican sellers in larger quantities (about 150 bundles) sold for as little as $40 each, or $55 each in Central Park. DEA reports that an ounce of heroin usually sells for $2,500 to $5,000, a gram for $70 to $95, a bundle for $80 to $90, and a bag for $10. The DMP reports that the average heroin purity at the street level in 1999 was about 62 percent.” (National Drug Intelligence Center,http://www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs/648/ny_econ.htm ).
The
NYPD and DEA retail price figures seem consistent. The DEA price of
$70-$95, with a purity of 62 percent translates into $112 to $153 per
gram of pure heroin. The NYPD figures are roughly similar with
perhaps lower estimates for purity.
It
should be noted that when heroin is purchased in very small
quantities, the retail price tends to be much higher. In the US,
purchase is often by “the bag”; the typical bag according to
Rocheleau and Boyum contains 25 milligrams of pure
heroin.
A
$10 dollar bag in NYC (according to the DEA figure quoted above)
would convert into a price of $400 per gram, each bag containing
0.025gr. of pure heroin. (op cit). In other words, for very small
purchases marketed by street pushers, the retail margin tends to be
significantly higher. In the case of the $10 bag purchase, it is
roughly 3 to 4 times the corresponding retail price per
gram.($112-$153)
UK
In
Britain, the retail street price per gram of heroin, according to
British Police sources, “has fallen from £74 in 1997 to £61 [in
2004].” [i.e. from approximately $133 to $110, based on the 2004
rate of exchange] (Independent, 3 March 2004). In some cities it was
as low as £30-40 per gram with a low level of purity. (AAP News, 3
March 2004). According to Drugscope (http://www.drugscope.org.uk/ ),
the average price for a gram of heroin in Britain is between £40 and
£90 ($72- $162 per gram) (The report does not mention purity). The
street price of heroin was £60 per gram in April 2002 according to
the National Criminal Intelligence Service.
The Hierarchy of Prices
We
are dealing with a hierarchy of prices, from the farmgate price in
the producing country, upwards, to the final retail street price. The
latter is often 80-100 times the price paid to the farmer.
In
other words, the opiate product transits through several markets from
the producing country to the transshipment country(ies), to the
consuming countries. In the latter, there are wide margins between
“the landing price” at the point of entry, demanded by the drug
cartels and the wholesale prices and the retail street prices,
protected by Western organized crime.
The Global Proceeds of the Afghan Narcotics Trade
In
Afghanistan, the reported production of 3600 tons of opium in 2003
would allow for the production of approximately 360,000 kg of pure
heroin. Gross revenues accruing to Afghan farmers are roughly
estimated by the UNODC to be of the order of $1 billion, with 1.3
billion accruing to local traffickers.
When
sold in Western markets at a heroin wholesale price of the order of
$100,000 a kg (with a 70 percent purity ratio), the global wholesale
proceeds (corresponding to 3600 tons of Afghan opium) would be of the
order of 51.4 billion dollars. The latter constitutes a conservative
estimate based on the various figures for wholesale prices in the
previous section.
The
total proceeds of the Afghan narcotics trade (in terms of total value
added) is estimated using the final heroin retail price. In other
words, the retail value of the trade is ultimately the criterion for
measuring the importance of the drug trade in terms of revenue
generation and wealth formation.
A
meaningful estimate of the retail value, however, is almost
impossible to ascertain due to the fact that retail prices vary
considerably within urban areas, from one city to another and between
consuming countries, not to mention variations in purity and quality
(see above).
The
evidence on retail margins, namely the difference between wholesale
and retail values in the consuming countries, nonetheless, suggests
that a large share of the total (money) proceeds of the drug trade
are generated at the retail level.
In
other words, a significant portion of the proceeds of the drug trade
accrues to criminal and business syndicates in Western countries
involved in the local wholesale and retail narcotics markets. And the
various criminal gangs involved in retail trade are invariably
protected by the “corporate” crime syndicates.
90
percent of heroin consumed in the UK is from Afghanistan. Using the
British retail price figure from UK police sources of $110 a gram
(with an assumed 50 percent purity level), the total retail value of
the Afghan narcotics trade in 2003 (3600 tons of opium) would be the
order of 79.2 billion dollars. The latter should be considered as a
simulation rather than an estimate.
Under
this assumption (simulation), a billion dollars gross revenue to the
farmers in Afghanistan (2003) would generate global narcotics
earnings, –accruing at various stages and in various markets– of
the order of 79.2 billion dollars. These global proceeds accrue to
business syndicates, intelligence agencies, organized crime,
financial institutions, wholesalers, retailers, etc. involved
directly or indirectly in the drug trade.
In
turn, the proceeds of this lucrative trade are deposited in Western
banks, which constitute an essential mechanism in the laundering of
dirty money.
A
very small percentage accrues to farmers and traders in the producing
country. Bear in mind that the net income accruing to Afghan farmers
is but a fraction of the estimated 1 billion dollar amount. The
latter does not include payments of farm inputs, interest on loans to
money lenders, political protection, etc. (See also UNODC, The Opium
Economy in
Afghanistan,http://www.unodc.org/pdf/publications/afg_opium_economy_www.pdf ,
Vienna, 2003, p. 7-8)
The Share of the Afghan Heroin in the Global Drug Market
Afghanistan
produces over 70 percent of the global supply of heroin and heroin
represents a sizeable fraction of the global narcotics market,
estimated by the UN to be of the order of $400-500 billion.
There
are no reliable estimates on the distribution of the global narcotics
trade between the main categories: Cocaine, Opium/Heroin, Cannabis,
Amphetamine Type Stimulants (ATS), Other Drugs.
The Laundering of Drug Money
The
proceeds of the drug trade are deposited in the banking system. Drug
money is laundered in the numerous offshore banking havens in
Switzerland, Luxembourg, the British Channel Islands, the Cayman
Islands and some 50 other locations around the globe. It is here that
the criminal syndicates involved in the drug trade and the
representatives of the world’s largest commercial banks interact.
Dirty money is deposited in these offshore havens, which are
controlled by the major Western commercial banks. The latter have a
vested interest in maintaining and sustaining the drug trade. (For
further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, The Crimes of Business and
the Business of Crimes, Covert Action Quarterly, Fall 1996)
Once
the money has been laundered, it can be recycled into bona fide
investments not only in real estate, hotels, etc, but also in other
areas such as the services economy and manufacturing. Dirty and
covert money is also funneled into various financial instruments
including the trade in derivatives, primary commodities, stocks, and
government bonds.
Concluding Remarks: Criminalization of US Foreign Policy
US
foreign policy supports the workings of a thriving criminal economy
in which the demarcation between organized capital and organized
crime has become increasingly blurred.
The
heroin business is not “filling the coffers of the Taliban” as
claimed by US government and the international community: quite the
opposite! The proceeds of this illegal trade are the source of wealth
formation, largely reaped by powerful business/criminal interests
within the Western countries. These interests are sustained by US
foreign policy.
Decision-making
in the US State Department, the CIA and the Pentagon is instrumental
in supporting this highly profitable multibillion dollar trade, third
in commodity value after oil and the arms trade.
The
Afghan drug economy is “protected”.
The
heroin trade was part of the war agenda. What this war has achieved
is to restore a compliant narco-State, headed by a US appointed
puppet.
The
powerful financial interests behind narcotics are supported by the
militarisation of the world’s major drug triangles (and
transshipment routes), including the Golden Crescent and the Andean
region of South America (under the so-called Andean Initiative).
Table
1
Opium
Poppy Cultivation in Afghanistan
Year
Cultivation in hectares
Production (tons)
1994
71,470
3,400
1995
53,759
2,300
1996
56,824
2,200
1997
58,416
2,800
1998
63,674
2,700
1999
90,983
4,600
2000
82,172
3,300
2001
7,606
185
2002
74 000
3400
2003
80 000
3600
Source:
UNDCP, Afghanistan,
Opium Poppy Survey, 2001, UNOCD, Opium Poppy Survey,
2002.http://www.unodc.org/pdf/afg/afg_opium_survey_2002.pdf
Aside
from the fiat monetary scam and bloodsoaked petrodollar, another
significant source of funds for the Nazionist Khazarian Mafia is the
“healthcare” industry which registered
a whopping $3.09 trillion in 2014,
and is projected to soar to $3.57 trillion in 2017, in the US alone.
We believe that this is just a conservative figure.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.