Identifier | Created | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|
04BRUSSELS2683 | 2004-06-23 15:01:00 | UNCLASSIFIED | Embassy Brussels |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available. |
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 002683 |
1. This cable contains an action request. See para. 9. 2. Summary. During its June 22 meeting, the members of the Central Dublin Group (DG) reviewed regional reports from Eastern Europe (submitted by Germany), the Balkans and the Near East (Greece), Central Asia (Italy), South West Asia (U.K.), and South East Asia (Japan). The U.K. and U.S. gave presentations on counter-narcotics efforts in Afghanistan. The 10 new EU accession states participated as full members of the Group for the first time. The Commission and the EU Drug Monitoring Center attended as observers, but Europol and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) did not attend. (UNODC was preparing for the Paris Pact meeting in Moscow.) DG Chair Raymond Yans of the Belgian MFA launched a self-examination of the Group's objectives, structure, work program, and criteria for accepting new members. The chair intends to circulate a questionnaire to solicit member views on these issues. Survey results will be discussed at the winter meeting in December. U.S. rep to the meeting was USEU/NAS Frank Kerber. End Summary. -------------------------- Thematic Discussion on Afghanistan -------------------------- 3. Lesley Pallet of the U.K.'s FCO Department on Drugs and International Crime gave a general overview of counter-narcotics (CN) objectives and operations in Afghanistan. (Entire powerpoint presentation has been faxed to INL/PC.) Pallett noted that Afghanistan generates 70 percent of the world's heroin. Opium poppy covers one percent of the country's total arable land. Seven percent of the population grows opium. In 2003, 80,000 hectares were under cultivation, yielding 3,600 tons of opium. The Afghan Narcotics Force is now operational. Over 32 tons of opium have been seized and 32 heroin labs destroyed. The Afghan Counter Narcotics Police, with 170 trained officers and 7 offices nationwide, is now conducting stop and search operations in Kabul. USDEL then presented an overview of USG assistance to the CN effort and distributed materials provided by INL. Japan noted the June 14, 2004 report by UNODC Director Costa which was unusually candid and negative in its evaluation of the drug situation in Afghanistan. Japan noted that most interdiction assistance is targeted on Afghanistan's western borders to the neglect of its eastern borders. As a result, Afghan opium flows are increasing toward Asia. Several members noted the work of the Paris Pact in coordinating efforts to staunch opium flows from Afghanistan to Europe. USDEL suggested that UNODC present a report at the next meeting on the Paris Pact roundtables in Moscow and Tashkent and on the policy planning meeting to be held in Vienna this fall. Group discussion focused on the poor security in the countryside and the critical role of NATO's military cooperation. In summing up the discussion, the Chair suggested that the thematic discussion at the next DG meeting be on NATO's efforts to secure Afghanistan. This suggestion was agreed to by the members. -------------------------- Regional Reports -------------------------- 4. The members reviewed regional reports from Eastern Europe (Germany), Balkans and the Near East (Greece), Central Asia (Italy), South West Asia (U.K.), and South East Asia (Japan). (Reports will be sent to INL/PC.) As instructed, during the discussion of the U.K report on the South West Asia, USDEL noted the recommendation made by the Mini Dublin Group (MDG) in New Delhi that capitals support the USG's co-funding of phase 2 of UNODC's chemical precursor control project and observed that these projects are among the best projects run by the UNODC worldwide. This view was supported by Japan. USDEL also flagged the semiannual report submitted by the Mexico City MDG. -------------------------- Self-Evaluation of the Dublin Group -------------------------- 5. Chairman Raymond Yans distributed a paper entitled "The Future of the Dublin Group" in which he outlined the Group's strengths and weaknesses he has observed during his three years as chairman. The DG began almost 15 years ago - at USG urging - as a forum for donor countries to coordinate anti-narcotics programs around the world. The Group has not revised its operational guidelines since 2000. The addition of the ten EU accession states on May 1 increased membership in the Group to 30, plus regular observers Europol, UNODC, the EU Drug Monitoring Center and the Commission. With membership applications from Turkey, China, Russia and Thailand in the hopper and no clear criteria for accepting new members, Belgian Chair Raymond Yans opined this was an opportune time to take stock 6. In his paper, the Chair notes that the quality of the regional reports has improved during his chairmanship, that better work is being done by some - but not all - of the Mini-Dublin Groups, and that the "thematic debates" held at the Central DG meetings have been successful and informative. On the negative side, he notes that some Mini Dublin Groups do not meet at all or only rarely. Some delegates to the MDG meetings do not receive instructions from their capitals for their meetings. The level of participation at the Central DG meetings continues to deteriorate. Some delegations are now sending second or third secretaries who have nothing to contribute to the meetings. Finally, the regional reports often arrive too late for translation and distribution; consequently, participants do not have time to read and reflect on the reports. 7. The chair therefore called on the Group to begin a process of reflection and self-evaluation. He suggested that the Secretariat send out a questionnaire to all delegations which would solicit views on the objectives of the Dublin Group, its present organizational structure, the value of the thematic discussions and regional reports, and possible criteria for admitting new members. Survey results would be due by the end of October and discussed at the next meeting in December. Italy, Japan, the Commission and the U.S. spoke out in favor of the proposal. -------------------------- Comment -------------------------- 8. It is clear some regional groups are more active than others. Some MDG's (there are currently some 75 MDGs worldwide) and regional chairs could be dropped entirely in favor of focusing on the more active ones of more concern to the members. The 2000 guidelines state that regional chairs should be rotated every two years. The work of the regional chairs currently falls disproportionately on eight countries: Spain, Greece, Italy, Japan, Germany, The Netherlands, France and the U.S. The role of regional chairs should be spread more widely and regularly rotated among the other members. (The U.K. privately agreed with these views.) -------------------------- Action Request -------------------------- 9. The annual U.S. report on Central America and Mexico is on the agenda for the next meeting. The Chair has requested that all reports be submitted by December 1 to allow sufficient time for translation, distribution and consideration by capitals. The evaluation questionnaire, along with Mission views, will be forwarded to INL/PC when received, Washington is reminded that submissions will be due the end of October. Finally, it is likely the Secretariat will approach NATO for a speaker for the next SIPDIS thematic discussion on NATO's role in facilitating CN efforts in Afghanistan. However, Washington should consider whether we should also offer a U.S. presentation. FOSTER |