Showing posts with label SECURITY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SECURITY. Show all posts

Monday, April 28, 2014

STOLEN LAPTOPS AND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR NON-ENCRYPTED COMPUTERS UNDER HIPAA

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 
April 22, 2014
Stolen laptops lead to important HIPAA settlements

Two entities have paid the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (OCR) $1,975,220 collectively to resolve potential violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy and Security Rules.  These major enforcement actions underscore the significant risk to the security of patient information posed by unencrypted laptop computers and other mobile devices.

“Covered entities and business associates must understand that mobile device security is their obligation,” said Susan McAndrew, OCR’s deputy director of health information privacy. “Our message to these organizations is simple: encryption is your best defense against these incidents.”

OCR opened a compliance review of Concentra Health Services (Concentra) upon receiving a breach report that an unencrypted laptop was stolen from one of its facilities, the Springfield Missouri Physical Therapy Center.  OCR’s investigation revealed that Concentra had previously recognized in multiple risk analyses that a lack of encryption on its laptops, desktop computers, medical equipment, tablets and other devices containing electronic protected health information (ePHI) was a critical risk.  While steps were taken to begin encryption, Concentra’s efforts were incomplete and inconsistent over time leaving patient PHI vulnerable throughout the organization. OCR’s investigation further found Concentra had insufficient security management processes in place to safeguard patient information. Concentra has agreed to pay OCR $1,725,220 to settle potential violations and will adopt a corrective action plan to evidence their remediation of these findings.

OCR received a breach notice in February 2012 from QCA Health Plan, Inc. of Arkansas reporting that an unencrypted laptop computer containing the ePHI of 148 individuals was stolen from a workforce member’s car.  While QCA encrypted their devices following discovery of the breach, OCR’s investigation revealed that QCA failed to comply with multiple requirements of the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules, beginning from the compliance date of the Security Rule in April 2005 and ending in June 2012.  QCA agreed to a $250,000 monetary settlement and is required to provide HHS with an updated risk analysis and corresponding risk management plan that includes specific security measures to reduce the risks to and vulnerabilities of its ePHI.  QCA is also required to retrain its workforce and document its ongoing compliance efforts.

Sunday, April 27, 2014

PRESIDENT OBAMA, PRIME MINISTER OF MALAYSIA ISSUE JOINT STATEMENT

FROM:  THE WHITE HOUSE 

Joint Statement By President Obama And Prime Minister Najib Of Malaysia

 The Honorable Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak, Prime Minister of Malaysia and The Honorable Barack Obama, President of the United States of America held a bilateral meeting on 27 April 2014 in Putrajaya, Malaysia.
The two leaders reflected on the historic nature of President Obama’s State Visit to Malaysia, the first Presidential visit in 48 years, and the resilience of bilateral relations between Malaysia and the United States.  Both leaders reaffirmed their mutual commitment to further enhance Malaysia – U.S. engagement on issues of bilateral, regional and international importance.
Reflecting on the search for missing flight MH370 which carried passengers and crew from 14 nations, including Malaysia and the United States, the Prime Minister expressed Malaysia’s gratitude to President Obama for the United States' unwavering support.  Malaysia is heartened by the presence of the United States from day one in the ongoing operations to locate flight MH370.  The support received exemplifies the strong ties of friendship and cooperation between the two countries.
Recognizing the growing cooperation between the two countries in a wide range of areas, Prime Minister Najib and President Obama decided to elevate the Malaysia – U.S. relationship to a Comprehensive Partnership with the aim of advancing the two countries’ common interests and the shared values of the people of the United States and Malaysia.  Under the Comprehensive Partnership, both countries commit to further strengthening dialogue mechanisms in key areas including political and diplomatic cooperation, trade and investment, education and people-to-people ties, security and defense cooperation, as well as collaboration on the environment, science and technology, and energy.
Political and Diplomatic Cooperation
The Prime Minister and the President welcomed the increasing high-level interaction between the two countries in recent years, including the numerous Cabinet-level exchanges of visits, and encouraged continued dialogue at various levels. Both sides also committed to reinvigorate the Malaysia – U.S. Senior Officials Dialogue as a key forum to pursue the implementation of the Comprehensive Partnership through regular consultations.
The Prime Minister appreciated the United States’ presence in Asia which contributes to peace, stability and prosperity in the region. President Obama reiterated the United States’ strong support for the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the importance of East Asian regional institutions. President Obama also welcomed Malaysia’s upcoming chairmanship of ASEAN in 2015 and expressed confidence that under Malaysia’s stewardship, ASEAN would further its regional ambition of economic integration.
The Prime Minister and the President acknowledged the importance of peace and stability for the security and economic prosperity of nations.  The leaders exchanged views on recent developments in the South China Sea and affirmed the importance of safeguarding maritime security and ensuring freedom of navigation and over flight throughout the region, including critical waterways in the South China Sea. The two leaders underscored the importance of all parties concerned resolving their territorial and maritime disputes through peaceful means, including international arbitration, as warranted, and in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The two leaders highlighted the importance of all parties concerned avoiding the use of force, intimidation, or coercion, and exercising self-restraint in the conduct of activities.
The Prime Minister and the President reaffirmed the importance of the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) in enhancing mutual trust and confidence amongst all parties concerned and recognized the need for ASEAN and China to work expeditiously towards the establishment of an effective Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC).
The two leaders underscored their commitment to promoting respect for human rights, as well as the importance of a vibrant and independent civil society consistent with the Charter of the United Nations and international human rights law.  Respect for diversity, respect for the freedom to express different views and practice different faiths, respect for all religions and respect for the rights of all in the populations are essential to healthy and prosperous democracies.
Both leaders welcomed efforts to promote tolerance and inter-faith understanding and counter violence and extremism. In relation to this, the two leaders also appreciated the goals of the Global Movement of Moderates to promote greater understanding and moderation among people of all faiths by expanding government-to-government and people-to-people engagement.
President Obama commended Malaysia’s leading role in facilitating the Southern Philippines Bangsamoro peace process that led to the recent signing of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro.
Both leaders welcomed the bilateral work agreement on the gainful employment of spouses of embassy and consulate officials which provides benefits for diplomatic families of both sides as well as the host country.
Economic and Trade Cooperation
Prime Minister Najib and President Obama celebrated the strong economic links between Malaysia and the United States, including bilateral trade amounting to U.S. $40 billion annually.  Prime Minister Najib and President Obama applauded the progress made so far in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations.  They reaffirmed their commitment to work together to resolve the remaining issues and conclude the high-standard agreement as soon as possible so that both countries’ businesses, workers, farmers, and consumers could begin benefitting.   Both leaders also discussed the importance of enhancing multilateral cooperation to promote trade, investment and inclusive growth in fora such as ASEAN, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the World Trade Organization (WTO).
Noting that the United States was the largest source of foreign investment in Malaysia in 2013, the Prime Minister acknowledged the beneficial and significant role of U.S. investors in the development of Malaysia’s economy. This close cooperation has resulted in support for Malaysian Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) through linkages between U.S. companies and Malaysian SMEs, sharing technology, promoting innovation and contributing to Malaysia’s economic transformation agenda.
The President similarly highlighted the United States’ openness to foreign investment, and noted the mutually beneficial nature of Malaysian investment in the United States.  The President encouraged Malaysian participation in SelectUSA, a U.S. Government initiative to promote and facilitate inbound business investment and a key partner and support system for potential Malaysian investors, including SMEs, seeking investment opportunities in the United States.
Both leaders emphasized the importance of a strong intellectual property rights regime, to promote innovation and for the mutual benefit of innovators and consumers. Such a regime has already helped support investments in new growth areas including in emerging and high technology sectors as well as high value-added, knowledge-based and skills-intensive industries which should generate more high income job opportunities in both countries and support Malaysia’s aspiration to become a developed nation by the year 2020. The two leaders expressed confidence that the ongoing economic reforms in Malaysia and the economic recovery of the United States would accelerate economic growth, opening greater opportunities for trade and creating employment in both countries.
Education and People-to-People
Recognizing people-to-people relations as the foundation of strong bilateral ties, the two leaders affirmed their shared intention to foster better understanding, goodwill and friendship between the peoples of both countries.
Reflecting the Prime Minister and President Obama’s shared aspiration to enhance people-to-people interaction first discussed in 2010, the two leaders celebrated the success of the Fulbright English Teaching Assistant (ETA) Program.  Likening the spirit of the Fulbright ETA program to the Peace Corps program, which ran for two decades in Malaysia, Prime Minister Najib and President Obama announced that the governments of Malaysia and the United States have extended the Fulbright ETA Program for another three years.
The two leaders applauded the network of eight Lincoln Corners in six different Malaysian states and Kuala Lumpur that host hundreds of educational programs and promote connections between Malaysia and the United States. Both leaders also recognized the value of sharing the rich cultural heritages of our two countries through exchanges of displays in art galleries and museums in both countries.
The Prime Minister and President Obama welcomed the establishment of the Malaysia-America Foundation and the exploring of opportunities to establish sister city relationships between the two sides.
Prime Minister Najib and President Obama acknowledged that university level linkages between the United States and Malaysia continue to grow. Both sides encouraged the expansion of research and study partnerships between U.S. and Malaysian institutions of higher education.
Both leaders emphasized the importance of youth empowerment, particularly in promoting entrepreneurship, environmental protection, education, and civic participation in Malaysia and across the region, including through such programs as the Malaysian Global Innovation and Creativity Centre (MaGIC) and activities under the Young Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative (YSEALI).
Defense and Security
President Obama welcomed Malaysia’s commitment to counter the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction with the endorsement of the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) Statement of Interdiction Principles.
The two leaders reaffirmed the longstanding military-to-military cooperation between Malaysia and the United States which provides a solid foundation for enhancements across a broad front. Both leaders acknowledged the value of continuous dialogue on regional and global security challenges as well as coordination on military matters through the Malaysia – U.S. Strategic Talks (MUSST) and the Bilateral Training and Consultative Group (BiTACG).
Prime Minister Najib and President Obama decided to continue discussions on opportunities for practical future cooperation in the maritime domain, including ways the United States could support the development of Malaysia’s maritime enforcement capacity through the provision of training, equipment and expertise.
President Obama applauded Malaysia’s troop contributions to peacekeeping in United Nations missions, including in Afghanistan and Lebanon and thanked Malaysia for its successful deployment of a military medical team in Afghanistan.  Both sides committed to strengthen cooperation in peacekeeping training under the Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI) and welcomed U.S. support for the Malaysian Peacekeeping Training Centre.
The two leaders welcomed the expansion of ties between the defense industries of Malaysia and the United States, which contribute to Malaysia’s economic development. Both sides committed to work further to nurture and deepen defence bilateral engagements, including promoting the interoperability between the two armed forces.
Malaysia and the United States noted with satisfaction the progress in various ongoing scientific sectors, including cooperation to raise awareness and capacity in biosecurity laboratories and research facilities in Malaysia dealing with biological threats.   These activities reflect a shared commitment to the Global Health Security Agenda, which seeks to accelerate progress toward a world safe and secure from threats posed by infectious disease.
Prime Minister Najib and President Obama expressed a firm commitment towards enhancing cooperation between their two countries in trade and investment.  Among the areas of interest are customs administrative matters and to this end would therefore encourage officials engaged in the negotiations to expedite the early conclusion of the Customs Mutual Assistance Agreement. The two leaders are also committed to work toward finalizing the memorandum of understanding on immigration information exchange.
Prime Minister Najib and President Obama also decided to consult on Malaysia’s interest in meeting the statutory requirements for participation in the Visa Waiver Program.  As a first step, the United States has committed to provide technical briefings on security requirements and information sharing agreements this year.
Recalling the Memorandum of Understanding on Transnational Crime signed by both sides in 2012, the two leaders look forward to convening the inaugural Joint Working Group Meeting to review the efficiency and effectiveness of our law enforcement cooperation.
The two leaders decided that Malaysia and the United States would strengthen cooperation in humanitarian assistance, disaster relief and management, including exploring capacity building initiatives to increase preparedness in handling natural and man-made disasters.
Environment, Science and Technology, and Energy Cooperation
The Prime Minister and President Obama welcomed the active cooperation between Malaysia and the United States in science and technology following the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding on Science and Technology Cooperation in 2010. Pursuant to the MOU, the leaders noted the establishment of focus areas on biotechnology, marine science, climate studies, conservation science and management under the Joint Committee of Science and Technology.
The Prime Minister highlighted to President Obama the initiatives under the Global Science and Innovation Advisory Council (GSIAC), a joint New York Academy of Sciences and Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT) forum with a mandate to develop science, technology and innovation strategies to achieve Malaysia’s vision 2020.
Malaysia recognized the U.S. Government’s tremendous role as an important partner of the Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI). The Prime Minister conveyed his appreciation to President Obama for United States’ contributions of more than U.S $60 million in technical and financial assistance and capacity building programs to CTI member countries.
Noting the shared visions of the two countries to develop a stronger bio-based economy to ensure sustainable growth, both leaders recognized expanded private sector research collaboration and cooperation in biotechnology.
The Prime Minister sought the United States’ support to build Malaysian knowledge and expertise to develop green technology and thanked President Obama for U.S. assistance in creating Malaysia’s newly announced green technology development strategy and clean energy cooperation to date under the U.S. Asia Pacific Comprehensive Energy Partnership.
The Prime Minister and President Obama reiterated a common commitment to the conservation of biodiversity and agreed to strengthen cooperation in addressing illegal wildlife trade.
Conclusion
Looking ahead, both leaders pledged their commitment to elevate the Malaysia – U.S. bilateral cooperation to a Comprehensive Partnership that would cover wide-ranging areas for the expansion of trade and investment, security and defense, education, science and technology, energy, and people-to-people relations, for the collective benefit of both countries.

Sunday, April 20, 2014

TELEMARKETER PERMANENTLY BANNED FROM TELEMARKETING

FROM:  FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 
Marketer of Robocalling Services Banned from Telemarketing

The head of an operation that enabled telemarketers to make illegal robocalls, call phone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, and mask Caller ID information, is permanently banned from telemarketing and robocalling under a settlement with the federal government.

In November 2011, on the Federal Trade Commission’s behalf, the Department of Justice filed a complaint alleging that Joseph Turpel sold services to telemarketers who were violating the FTC's Telemarketing Sales Rule.  The complaint alleged that Turpel knew, or consciously avoided knowing, that clients used his services while calling numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, transmitting inaccurate caller ID information, and making illegal prerecorded telemarketing solicitations (robocalls).

According to the complaint, Turpel’s clients offered credit card services, home security systems, and grant procurement programs. He allegedly gave clients the means to hide their identity by transmitting inaccurate caller names, such as “SERVICE MESSAGE” or “SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT,” on caller ID displays.

In addition to banning Turpel from telemarketing and robocalling, the settlement order imposes a $395,000 civil penalty that is suspended based on his inability to pay. The full penalty will become due immediately if Turpel is found to have misrepresented his financial condition.

The Commission vote authorizing DOJ staff to file the proposed  stipulated final order was 4-0. The final order was entered by the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on April 15, 2014.

The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 2,000 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s website provides free information on a variety of consumer topics. Like the FTC on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, and subscribe to press releases for the latest FTC news and resources.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

REMARKS BY WILLIAM BROWNFIELD ON "DRUGS, SECURITY, AND LATIN AMERICA"

FROM:   U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Drugs, Security, and Latin America: The New Normal?

Remarks
William R. Brownfield
Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas
Austin, Texas
March 27, 2014


Ladies and gentlemen, it is indeed a pleasure to be back in Austin. As the Dean has suggested, I spent three years of my life at that fine academic institution, just across the street in that direction, and in fact it was my nearly three years at the law school that brought me into the Foreign Service and the Department of State. Trust me when I tell you that the first year of law school was so decidedly unpleasant that when I saw the advertisement on the bulletin board, which said Foreign Service exam and included the magic word, “free,” I said, “Right. Maybe I want to be a Foreign Service Officer.”

And for those of you who actually are still trying to determine your own profession or career choice for the next 30 or 35 years of your lives, let me assure you: sometimes you just enter a profession, if you will, by the back door, through no more systematic or intellectually driven process than that the entry exam is free. And that, ladies and gents, was 35-plus years ago. And at least for me it worked out just fine.

Ladies and gentlemen, the title of today’s little talk is “Drugs, Security, and Latin America: The New Normal?” I’m actually going to talk about anything that you want me to talk about, because that is the purpose of a dialogue. However, there is some logic to the title. I have spent virtually my entire professional career doing Latin America, so logically I might have at least some observations of value that are related to Latin America. Drugs are part of what I now deal with for a living. I am the Assistant Secretary of State for Drugs and Law Enforcement, and to be clear, I officially oppose the former and support the second. I want there to be no confusion on that particular point, although I have a broader responsibility as the Assistant Secretary for INL.
We started life 40 years ago as the part of the State Department that does international drug programs. Beginning about 20 years ago, we expanded to broader crime issues, realizing perhaps that there is more crime out there of an international nature than just drug trafficking. Within about the last 15 years, we expanded more broadly into law enforcement writ large – police training, exchanges, equipment, support, academics, etc. And within the last 10 years or so, driven, believe it or not, by our experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, we’ve expanded our portfolio and our writ to cover what we would call all of rule of law, which is not just police, but is also prosecutors, courts, judges, corrections systems. If it is part of the criminal justice system in essence, we will now work with and support it in some way, shape, or form.

And the last two or three words of the title of this talk – The New Normal? – is just a way to tease you into wondering if this is the direction we are heading in the Western Hemisphere in the 21st century.

Let me start with a little bit of history. I’ll offer some observations, and then I will stop and let you all actually guide me in the direction you would prefer to hear from me in terms of your own thoughts and your own interests.

A little bit of history: In the 1970s, the United States of America, or at least its government, discovered the drug issue. Richard Nixon declared a ‘war on drugs,’ a very unfortunate selection of terms, by the way, since in fact it’s not a war. It’s certainly not a war against our own population that in some way, shape, or form is part of the drug issue. And for that reason, ever so wisely, in the year 1993, the then newly-inaugurated president of the United States Bill Clinton said, and I quote, “It’s not a war, and we’re going to stop calling it a war on drugs.” Things move slowly in the federal government and the media, but don’t you all come at me in 15 minutes and start condemning me for the war on drugs, because I have already told you in advance it is not a war on drugs, it has not been a war on drugs for 21 years, and what we are doing goes a bit beyond the classical, typical definition of the term war, combined with the word drugs.

Having, however, declared a war on drugs in 1972, the Nixon Administration then proceeded to attempt to win it. They did it by what I would call single-issue approach to the drug abuse problem. First it was eradication. We will go down to Peru, Bolivia, and Colombia, eradicate it at the source, and the problem will be solved. Now, they had some success in eradicating. At the end of the day, however, for every hectare or acre eradicated, another acre or two or three would come under production and cultivation. Obviously, eradication alone was not the answer or the solution.

Solution number two, we will dismantle. We will go after the criminal organizations and arrest or remove their leadership from operation. Once we have removed the leadership of the criminal organizations, the cartels, the entire structure that drives the drug trafficking industry, will then collapse. Once again, there were the occasional successes. Those of you – and some of you are actually not old enough to remember when this happened – in 1993, in a particularly effective operation, the Colombian National Police took down, literally removed – perforated about 125 times – Mr. Pablo Escobar, who had been for the preceding 10-15 years the head of the largest, most vicious, most violent drug trafficking cartel in the history of the human race, called the Medellin Cartel, a cartel that might quite conceivably have been responsible for up to 10,000 murders in the preceding decade.

Impact? Well, 1994 came along and drugs continued to flow. Taking down or decapitating organizational leadership, in and of itself, obviously was not the solution.
Next proposal, in the 1980s, was interdiction. “Okay,” they said. “We can’t seem to stop it by eradicating at the source, we can’t seem to stop it by eliminating the leadership of the trafficking organizations. Let us build a picket line down below the U.S. southern borders, both on the ground and at sea, stop the ships, the boats, the planes that are bringing this stuff into the United States, andvoila, problem is solved.

Once again, there were some successes. The truth of the matter is the Caribbean in the 1980s was a region that was at risk of losing control. Fourteen different governments were at risk of losing control of their sovereign national territory to multi-billion dollar drug trafficking industries. And in their defense, that generation of the 1980s actually did effectively interdict the flow of drugs through the Caribbean toward the United – the southeastern United States of America.
But did that solve the problem? No. Where are we today? We’re in central Texas. Where do the drugs now flow into the United States? They come up straight through the land corridor, starting in Colombia, working their way through Central America, processing up through Mexico, and entering through the southwest border of the United States of America. In other words, yes, you can plug your finger in one hole of the dam, but in all likelihood – one might almost say with complete certainty – another hole is going to open up. And at the end of the day you have a finite number of fingers to plug with, defined by how much money the United States Congress and the taxpayers that send them to office are prepared to dedicate to this particular exercise.
Finally, and with somewhat greater coherence and success, the government began to develop an approach in the 1990s which I would call sustainable economic development. And that is accepting the reality that campesinos – or if you’re in Afghanistan and dealing with opium poppy, subsistence-level farmers, actually are not inherently criminal; they do not plant coca or opium poppy because they wish to be part of criminal enterprises. They do it because they are trying to provide a basic living to their families, and coca or opium poppy actually gives them better income and more secure income than corn or frijoles or wheat or whatever it might be that is otherwise being grown in that region.

Now this approach actually made some degree of sense, and I would suggest to you that where it is applied, it does produce long-term results. Problem: It is amazingly expensive. It costs a good bit of money to actually manage on a nationwide basis an alternative development program. It’s not just giving them a barrel of corn seed so that they will plant corn rather than coca. It’s also giving the tools and the training. It’s also giving them the infrastructure, the road system that allows them to get their product to market once they have harvested it, because remember: the drug traffickers will come to them, buy their product, and take it away at no cost to the farmer. The farmer who has instead two tons of corn somehow has to get it to market, or within a month or two he has more or less two tons of mulch that is gradually deteriorating and rotting in his back yard.

On top of that, if you want the campesino to remain committed to this, you have to give him or her some stake in the community. That means maybe schools, maybe clinics. That means electricity, running water, sewage, the sort of thing that makes a family say, one, I do have an interest in staying here, and two, I have a future here over and above whether I can grow an acre of coca or an acre of opium poppy.

Okay. Eradication, dismantling, interdiction, economic development – none of them in and of themselves solved the drug problem. So the question is, since the drugs are still an issue, what is the correct response? Are you ready? Bill Brownfield says the correct response is all of the above and then a little bit more as well.

Let us flash-forward to 1999, when the United States Government, jointly with the Government of Colombia, actually did this the right way. But I will prejudge the conclusion by letting you know the right way cost $8.5 billion over roughly a 12-year period of time. But we launched – the Colombian government launched what came to be called Plan Colombia. Plan Colombia was a comprehensive, structured approach designed to address the economic issue, the security issue, and the drugs and law enforcement issue. And when I said economic, I should also have said social, to include health impact, education, as well as job generation and economic activity.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would suggest that that worked for Colombia. The huge cartels that in the 1990s were actually threatening the very existence of the Colombian government have been atomized, admittedly to still annoying criminal activities, but are not anywhere remotely as powerful, as strong, or as threatening as Mr. Pablo Escobar and his Medellin cartel at the start of the 1990s, or the Rodriguez Orejuela brothers and the Cali cartel at that same timeframe.
Cocaine production in Colombia, we estimate, is down 60 percent or so from its heyday, as recently as 10 years ago. The tourism industry in Colombia today is booming. There are probably 20 times as many tourists going to Colombia today as 10 years ago. And if you will, tourists vote with their feet. If tourists are going to Colombia, you assume the security situation obviously has reached a point where people are prepared voluntarily to spend their own money to go visit a country that 10 or 15 years ago they would not have dreamed of doing so without a battalion of the United States Army or Marine Corps joining them and providing them security at every step.

And may I note as well that there is some correlation between the fact that production of cocaine in Colombia has dropped by some 60 percent, and consumption of cocaine in the United States of America has dropped by some estimates between 40 and 50 percent? I’m not giving you the Pollyanna story here. I freely acknowledge other sorts of drug consumption have grown in this same time period. But the two things that have most driven the Latin America to North America drug trafficking crisis – cocaine and methamphetamines – have both gone down dramatically in terms of demand in the United States.

Heroin is moving at a much smaller level – I mean, the simple truth, the quantity of heroin that moves. Marijuana, synthetics, and pharmaceuticals: apparently we’re quite capable of producing our own domestically in the United States of America. What has been driving the crisis of violence, of homicide, of crime in the Central America-Mexico corridor is cocaine and methamphetamines. The extent to which that product and the trafficking in that product is going down is actually good news for those seven Central American and Mexican countries and governments.

That said, I do not mean to suggest to you that by addressing the problem in Colombia the problem was resolved. On the contrary – and I’m not going to walk you through each of these in the same degree of detail, but the balloon theory – they were squeezed, the bad guys were squeezed in Colombia. What did they do? Largely they moved to Mexico, where, as those of you who could remember where we were about seven or eight years ago, Mexico was confronting a crisis of large cartels that actually represented a threat to the sovereignty of the government itself. And we launched what came to be known as the Merida Initiative, a joint effort in which the Mexican Government offered roughly $13 to every $1 offered by the United States to address this problem.

We squeezed them in Mexico, and what happened? Many of them moved to Central America. The crisis of the last five years has been the surge in violence, in homicides, in crime, in gang activities in Central America. Response? CARSI, the Central America Regional Security Initiative. Much smaller than that for Mexico, but the truth of the matter is there’s a finite number of dollars that are available to be applied to this problem. We squeeze them in Central America and what do we see increasingly happening? You will be stunned to learn that the statistics of drug flows through the Caribbean, that same region that was in fact successfully shut down in the 1980s, has been growing from a factor of roughly 4 percent of U.S. drug consumption three years ago to 8 percent two years to 9 or 10 percent over the last year, and now an estimated 14 percent.

If you’re tracking the trend line, even if we don’t know precisely how much is moving, the fact of the matter is what I have described for you is a tripling of drug flow through the Caribbean over the last three years. Watch this space. If in the course of the next two or three years you see the occasional headline saying, “Drug crisis in the Caribbean,” you will be able to say, yeah, Brownfield at least was prescient enough to predict that would be happening.
Each of the initiatives that I have laid out – Plan Colombia, Colombia; Merida Initiative, Mexico; CARSI, Central America; CBSI, Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, for the Caribbean – had, I would suggest – while each was different, each had its own particular characteristics – they had several common principles.

One, there was an attempt and still is an attempt to link together all the elements of the problem: law enforcement, security, rule of law institutions, economic and social development. Second, they are sustainable. Sustainable means the host government – whether it’s Colombian, Mexican, Central American, Caribbean – sees enough of their own interest at stake that they’re prepared to put their own resources into the problem and the solution. Third, they accept as a principle that the host government makes the decision. If we want a particular program and they don’t, at the end of the day, their view is what determines what will be done. Fourth, they try to focus on institutions and institution-building rather than equipment, rather than hard stuff, rather even than operations, the thinking being if you build an institution, you get value for a generation. If you do a successful takedown operation, you get a headline and value that might last you for a day or two.

Fifth, they are regional in nature – by the way, even the bilateral programs, Colombia and Mexico, are regional to the extent that they link into other countries in the region. Today, for example, Colombian police are training more police in Central America than is the United States. And some of it is actually being done with our assistance, which is another way of saying we actually pay for it. But the quality of the training and the ability of the trainers from Colombia is actually greater than what we ourselves can offer, partly because of their experience, partly because, of course, it’s a lot easier for a Spanish-speaking national police officer from Colombia to do training in Central America than it is even for a Spanish-language-trained U.S. law enforcement officer.

And the sixth principle that we have – I think linking all of these together – is the concept of partners. With each initiative, we have drawn in more and more international partners to play into this effort. Why? One reason I suggest to you is that even as consumption of cocaine in the United States has been dropping steadily since 2007, consumption of cocaine in Western Europe or in East Asia has been growing dramatically, without even mentioning the largest country in South America – Brazil – which is today confronting what could almost be called a crack cocaine crisis. And obviously, as their populations and communities are increasingly victims – or participants, depending upon your perspective – in this process, there is obviously greater interest in joining in efforts as partners to address the problem either at its source or in the midpoint, in short, before it arrives on the shores of France or Italy or Spain or the United Kingdom.

Ladies and gentlemen, may I suggest to you that it is a little bit early, perhaps a century or two, perhaps a millennium or so, to declare success on this particular issue? May I suggest to you it is not too early to say the year 2014 and the next five or ten years will offer a different problem set, a different set of realities from what we were dealing with in the 1970s, ‘80s, ‘90s, or even the last decade? First, you have one nation that has emerged, if you will, from the hell of the 1990s, and is now able to export its experience and its talent set. That nation is Colombia. And let us not forget that having a model out there that other nations in the region can look at has an impact. That is different from where we were 10 or 15 years ago.

Second, let us accept that you now have two new – not so new, but two much more major players in this drama in the region. They are named Bolivia and Peru, and their production level is moving in a sharply upward direction. What is also new, however, is that they are not feeding the North American market; they are feeding the Brazilian and Western European market. It’s an east-west problem as much as a north-south problem. I don’t say one is better than the other; I say it is a different problem set, which is going to require a different set of solutions.
Third, as I have mentioned several times, we are dealing with a consumption matter, a consumption issue, that is changing. As the American taste, if you will, shifts from cocaine and methamphetamines to other sorts of drugs, whether it is heroin or opium-based drugs, other synthetics, diverted pharmaceuticals or marijuana, it is a different problem set and presumably requires a different set of solutions.

Fourth – if you wondered if I was going to mention it, and I’m going to mention it right now – nations are experimenting with alternative approaches to drug control. Uruguay, a small nation located in between Brazil and Argentina, has recently, as a matter of national law, legalized the consumption of marijuana throughout the country. Some of you who have been asleep for the last 12 months may be unaware that two states of the union in the United States of America have done exactly the same thing. One of them is wrapping up its third month of this experiment, that’s Colorado, and the other goes online sometime, I think, about the first of July as they work their way through their rules and procedures. And I am not yet in a position to draw any firm conclusions from any of these experiences. I am in a position to say this is a 2014 reality, and let’s take it into account as we figure: How are we going to work this issue over the next five to ten years?

And fifth, and finally – and I do emphasize this point, because I do believe we haven’t – this Administration, the Administration of Barack Obama has not gotten credit or at least as much credit for this as it should – there is a strong realization in this country, your country, the United States of America, that drugs, drug abuse, and the overall total drug issue is far more a matter of public health than it is a matter of criminal justice. It is both unfair to the criminal justice system as well as to many of those who are caught up in the criminal justice system to try to address drug abuse solely in the criminal justice system. It is not just a matter of criminal justice. It is obviously a matter of health, of the medical care and medical profession, and of how you deal with the health and medical aspects of the use of drugs.

Now, I am not saying that the one excludes the other, but I am very definitely saying that trying to address the issue from only one side is pretty much condemned to failure. Those, I submit, are four new elements available as of the 27th of March, 2014, that were different from what we would’ve discussed if we had been sitting here 20 years ago, 10 years ago, quite frankly even as recently as five years ago. We’ve got to figure how to incorporate them into our own thinking.
These are, ladies and gentlemen – those of you who are – it’s about 75 percent of you who I predict are at least below the age of 40 if not below the age of 30 – these are going to be your challenges. Why? Because, I got to tell you, old Brownfield’s going to be checking out of this business in another three or four years, and it’s going to be you and your generation who have to figure out how to deal with these issues. I will offer you only five suggestions as you move proudly into the future on this issue on how to do it.

One, think long term. We didn’t get into this mess overnight, and we’re not going to get out of it overnight. Don’t even think in terms of years, maybe not even decades. Think in terms of generations. Don’t come up with some program that is supposed to solve the problem by 2015. It’s not going to happen.

Second, flexible and adaptable. Tastes change, conduct and behavior changes. The bad guys, the large, transnational criminal organizations who are involved in this, are constantly adapting and adjusting their approach. You had better have your own strategy and policy that can be adjustable and adaptable as well.

Third, be comprehensive. We tried the single-issue approach, ladies and gentlemen. It doesn’t work. We cannot just eradicate ourselves out of this problem. We cannot just interdict our way out of this problem. We also cannot just economic develop our way out of this problem. We have got to address all aspects of the problem. Otherwise we will not succeed.

Fourth principle, build institutions. No one loves a cool operation more than I do. No one loves some snappy new equipment as much as I do. But at the end of the day, your long-term value comes from building better law enforcement capabilities, building more competent prosecutors and investigators, building more effective, efficient, and honest courts and judicial systems, and don’t forget, building a corrections system that actually provides correction as opposed to a graduate course on how to advance from Criminal Activity 101 to the advanced Ph.D. course during three months of incarceration in a detention facility.

And finally, if I might, there is and always will be a criminal justice aspect to this, but principle number five: focus on the big organizations. It’s fine to pump up your numbers, I guess, in terms of how many you can arrest, but if you’re not going after the multibillion dollar organizations who engage not just in drug trafficking, but in trafficking in firearms, trafficking in people, trafficking in general contraband, money laundering that actually corrupts and undercuts and hollows out entire financial institutions, if you’re not focused on them, you’re missing the entire picture.
Okay, back to the title. So what is the new normal? Are you ready? The new normal is constant change. That, ladies and gents, is what we had better wrap our heads around. And we never have for the last 40 years. We’ve always taken the snapshot and said here is what we’re dealing with; now let us develop a strategy that will solve that problem. Wrong-o. That is not what we are going to be dealing with. What we’re looking at today on the 27th of March, I absolutely assure you, is going to be completely different by the time we get into 2015. That’s the new normal. And we had better be ready and able to address that, domestically and internationally, as a criminal justice matter and as a public healthcare matter.

The truth of the matter is we have to have a policy and approach that allows us to move in whatever direction our societies and those who are trying to take advantage of them will be moving in. And ladies and gentlemen, if that’s the new normal, I at least think we’ve got an approach that we can work with in a realistic way and that at least would take us one step beyond where we were 30 or 35 years ago when we started down this road.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

SECRETARY KERRY'S REMARKS AT U.S..-EU ENERGY COUNCIL MEETING

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Remarks at the U.S.-EU Energy Council Meeting

Remarks
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Brussels, Belgium
April 2, 2014


Deputy Secretary Dan Poneman and I are very, very pleased to be here for the 5th U.S.-EU Energy Council today, and I’m particularly happy to join High Representative Cathy Ashton who is doing a superb job in my judgment wearing a lot of hats and helping to fight fires in many places, as well as lead our efforts in the Iran nuclear talks. I’m delighted to be here with Commissioner Oettinger and Giannis Maniatis – thank you very much. We’re happy to be here with you also representing the EU presidency.

I think the difficulties of the recent days underscore the imperative to what brings us here today: energy security – not just for Ukraine but all across Europe – that it frankly requires a major amount of transatlantic cooperation and transatlantic leadership. And that’s why President Obama asked us to come together with our European partners in order to tackle these challenges head-on.

It really boils down to this: No nation should use energy to stymie a people’s aspirations. It should not be used as a weapon. It’s in the interest of all of us to be able to have adequate energy supplies critical to our economies, critical to our security, critical to the prosperity of our people. And we can’t allow it to be used as a political weapon or as an instrument for aggression. So we are taking important steps today in order to make it far more difficult for people to deploy that tool.

And we’re working in lock-step to help Ukraine bring natural gas in from Poland and Hungary and develop a route through Slovakia. Ukraine is committed to do its part. And through their recent commitments to the IMF they’ve agreed to act on energy subsidies and to make their energy market more competitive. This is critical, obviously.

The United States and the EU have a lot of work to do in order to diversify our energy supplies. We’re working on it very hard in the United States. President Obama’s implemented a climate action plan, and Europe – no group of nations have done more than the European community to try to move on this front. But we, all of us, have to make certain that we are not dependent on one single source of energy.

So our agenda today, or at least part of it, is going to be to look at how do we get more natural gas through what folks call the Southern corridor, from Azerbaijan to Turkey and on to Europe. There are also other opportunities, including LNG terminals planned across Europe, and pipelines that can get gas to customers.

I think it’s fair to say that American entrepreneurship is hard at work trying to help change this equation. Our new capacities as a gas producer and the approval of seven export licenses is going to help supply gas to global markets, and we look forward to doing that starting in 2015. And we will supply more gas than all of Europe consumes today.

So whether it’s confronting the immediate energy challenges in Ukraine, which is critical, or the absolute imperative of all of us meeting the challenge of climate change, which in the latest IPCC report we see underscored for its importance, we’re going to have a partnership – with a partnership between the United States and Europe is absolutely vital in this effort.
So we couldn’t be more pleased than to have leaders like Representative Ashton and Commissioner Oettinger alongside us today to begin this work, and we look forward to a really healthy, productive discussion. Thank you.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

DISA DELIVERS 2.0 OF DEPS ON SECRET INTERNET PROTOCOL NETWORK (SIPPRNeT)

DISA RELEASES DOD ENTERPRISE PORTAL SERVICE 2.0 FOR CLASSIFIED NETWORK

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY 
The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) delivered version 2.0 of the DoD Enterprise Portal Service (DEPS) on the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet) Feb. 28.

DEPS 2.0 introduces both dedicated and shared service offerings. The environments allow mission partners the flexibility to select the offering that best supports their mission from a range of capacity and storage options. The 2.0 version for the Sensitive, but Unclassified Internet Protocol Network (NIPRNet) will be available in the third quarter of fiscal year 2014.

DEPS provides a scalable, cloud-based collaboration capability that facilitates information sharing through an independently managed community of mission-focused sites, including:

Shared document libraries, calendars, task lists, blogs, and workflows.
Global, anytime access to shared resources.
Increasing operational efficiency by leveraging highly secure Defense Enterprise Computing Centers (DECCs), which consolidate administrative, hardware, and software resources.
“DEPS 2.0 is another example of how DISA’s enterprise services are evolving to meet the needs of our mission partners. 2.0 will offer the ability to select shared or dedicated operating environments, while adhering to the principles of an enterprise service and delivering operational and budgetary efficiencies for the DoD,” said Alan Lewis, DISA’s program executive officer for enterprise services.
Both dedicated and shared DEPS environments offer the benefits of a DISA-managed common infrastructure, including security and data replication.

Wednesday, March 5, 2014

THE QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW

FROM:  U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT 

Right:  Robert F. Hale, the Defense Department's comptroller; Christine E. Wormuth, deputy undersecretary for strategy, plans and force development; and Air Force Lt. Gen. Mark F. Ramsay, Joint Staff director for force structure, resources and assessments, respond to questions from reporters about the department's fiscal year 2015 budget request at the Pentagon, March 4, 2014. Wormuth also discussed the 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review. DOD photo by Glenn Fawcett.  

Quadrennial Defense Review Charts Strategy Evolution
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Mar. 4, 2014 – The 2014 version of the Quadrennial Defense Review takes the defense strategic guidance formulated in 2012 and evolves it through the future, a senior Pentagon official said.

Christine E. Wormuth, deputy undersecretary of defense for strategy, plans and force development, said the congressionally mandated QDR is an opportunity for Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to lay out his vision and for the department, to refine defense strategy and to tell how the Defense Department will adapt the joint force to support it.

“This QDR is an evolution in the defense strategy process we’ve had,” said Wormuth, who has been nominated to be undersecretary of defense for policy. “Having come out of Iraq and beginning the process of transitioning in Afghanistan, this QDR looks to the future and talks about how the strategy needs to evolve and how the department needs to rebalance in an era of fiscal restraint.”
The review lays out a complex and rapidly evolving security environment that includes changes in technology, demographic trends and other factors. The review stresses the importance of the Asia-Pacific region to the United States while acknowledging there are still many “friction points” in the Middle East, Wormuth said. “Terrorism remains a continuing, evolving, metastasizing threat,” she added.
The three “three muscle movements” for the department are protecting the homeland, building security globally, and projecting power and winning decisively, Wormuth noted, and another piece of the strategy is an increased emphasis on innovation and adaptability, particularly in a fiscally constrained environment.

“The review will tick through things we are looking at in terms of new paradigms for forward presence: How can we get more bang for our buck from our forward-deployed forces, and how can we work more closely with allies and partners?” she said. “The innovation piece will also talk about the department protecting its seed corn in science and technology to maintain our technological edge.”
The review says that at the funding level in President Barack Obama’s budget request, DOD can execute this strategy. “There will be some increased risk in some areas,” Wormuth said. In the near term, she added, there is concern about readiness, and in the long term, there is “a lot of uncertainty in a security environment as dynamic as the one we face with a smaller force.”
The QDR will cover balancing the force holistically, and will discuss the rationale behind reducing the size of the Army and Marine Corps. It also will lay out things the department is doing to protect investments and will put forward initiatives in key capability areas that support the strategy, she said. These include cyber, space, precision strike and special operations forces.

Another important piece of the review is the discussion about reforming and rebalancing the department itself. The QDR discusses the 20-percent reduction in DOD staffs, why the department needs a new round of base realignment and closure, what acquisition reform can bring to DOD and why the department needs to slow the growth of manpower costs.

The review also looks at what the implications are for the department if there is no relief from sequestration, Wormuth said. “If we return to sequester-level cuts in fiscal 2016, we will see significantly higher levels of risk across the board,” she added. The Army will be forced to pare another 20,000 to 40,000 soldiers. The Marine Corps would drop to 175,000. The Air Force would have to eliminate other platforms, and the Navy would eliminate an aircraft carrier.

Sequestration cuts would make the bedrock DOD strategy of fighting and winning two nearly simultaneous wars unworkable, Wormuth said.

“A smaller force cannot be as present around the world,” she said. “We would have to be very selective in the engagement and partner-building activities we would take.”

Readiness challenges would grow under sequestration, Wormuth added, virtually guaranteeing a hollow force.

The current strategy is the right one for the country, she said. “The additional resources the president has asked for above sequestration, we think, is sufficient to get the job done,” she said.

(Follow Jim Garamone on Twitter: @GaramoneAFPS)

Sunday, March 2, 2014

SECRETARY OF STATE KERRY'S RECENT STATEMENT ON UKRAINE SITUATION

Situation in Ukraine

Press Statement
John Kerry
Secretary of State
Washington, DC
March 1, 2014


The United States condemns the Russian Federation's invasion and occupation of Ukrainian territory, and its violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity in full contravention of Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, its 1997 military basing agreement with Ukraine, and the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. This action is a threat to the peace and security of Ukraine, and the wider region.

I spoke with President Turchynov this morning to assure him he had the strong support of the United States and commend the new government for showing the utmost restraint in the face of the clear and present danger to the integrity of their state, and the assaults on their sovereignty. We also urge that the Government of Ukraine continue to make clear, as it has from throughout this crisis, its commitment to protect the rights of all Ukrainians and uphold its international obligations.

As President Obama has said, we call for Russia to withdraw its forces back to bases, refrain from interference elsewhere in Ukraine, and support international mediation to address any legitimate issues regarding the protection of minority rights or security.
From day one, we've made clear that we recognize and respect Russia’s ties to Ukraine and its concerns about treatment of ethnic Russians. But these concerns can and must be addressed in a way that does not violate Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, by directly engaging the Government of Ukraine.

Unless immediate and concrete steps are taken by Russia to deescalate tensions, the effect on U.S.-Russian relations and on Russia’s international standing will be profound.
I convened a call this afternoon with my counterparts from around the world, to coordinate on next steps. We were unified in our assessment and will work closely together to support Ukraine and its people at this historic hour.

In the coming days, emergency consultations will commence in the UN Security Council, the North Atlantic Council, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in defense of the underlying principles critical to the maintenance of international peace and security. We continue to believe in the importance of an international presence from the UN or OSCE to gather facts, monitor for violations or abuses and help protect rights. As a leading member of both organizations, Russia can actively participate and make sure its interests are taken into account.

The people of Ukraine want nothing more than the right to define their own future – peacefully, politically and in stability. They must have the international community’s full support at this vital moment. The United States stands with them, as we have for 22 years, in seeing their rights restored.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

U.S. OFFICIAL'S REMARKS ON ILLICIT TRAFFICKING ALONG CRIME-TERROR CONTINUUM

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT 

Trans-African Security: Combating Illicit Trafficking Along the Crime-Terror Continuum


Remarks
David M. Luna
Director for Anticrime Programs, Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
AFSEC 14
Casablanca, Morocco
February 26, 2014


Good morning.
Your Excellencies, Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen:
It is an honor to join you today at this important security conference.

I would like to thank IQPC, DefenseIQ, and the conference organizers for their kind invitation to discuss the U.S. government’s diplomatic efforts to confront the major security threats affecting West Africa, the Sahel, and the Maghreb.

I would especially like to thank the Government of Morocco and the Royal Moroccan Navy for their hospitality and for their leadership in working with the international community to combat the security challenges faced by many countries in this part of the world.

Let me also thank all of the representatives from governments, international organizations, and the private sector who are here in Casablanca today.

The United States applauds your continued commitment to defend your collective homeland security and safeguard communities against the threats posed by illicit trafficking networks.

Triple Threat: Corruption, Crime, and Terrorism Pave Illicit Trafficking Corridor
Today’s reality is one in which we live in a world where there is no region, no country and no people who remain untouched by the destabilizing effects and corruptive influence of transnational organized crime and violent terrorism.

Their impact is truly global and their real threat centers in some cases in their convergence. In particular, we must recognize that trans-regional illicit trafficking of drugs, arms, humans, and other illicit trade goods and services, are fuelling greater insecurity and instability across Africa, and in other parts of the world.

In December, the United Nations Security Council expressed concern over the increasing links between cross-border narcotics trafficking and other forms of transnational organized crime in West Africa and the Sahel. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon said:
“West Africa is no longer just a transit route for drug traffickers but a growing destination, with more than a million users of illicit drugs. Rising consumption aggravates an already challenging public health environment and threatens socio-economic development.”
The challenge that drug trafficking poses to peace, stability, and development in the region is compounded by the dramatic social and political changes that have taken place in North Africa and the Middle East over the last few years. The tide of change has not only unleashed forces for justice, but also ignited a fury of violence and insecurity that has emboldened a variety of non-state actors to assert their agendas across the region.

On the governance front, the proceeds of drug trafficking and illicit trade are fueling a dramatic increase in corruption among the very institutions responsible for fighting crime. The collusion and complicity of some government officials have helped carve out a corridor of illicit trafficking that stretches from the West African coast to the Horn of Africa, from North Africa south to the Gulf of Guinea.

Illicit networks continue to move people and products along these routes. From the coca and opium poppy fields of Colombia and Southeast Asia to the coasts of West Africa and its hashish plantations, drug cartels and other criminal networks navigate an illicit superhighway that serves illicit markets across the continent and around the globe. They use commercial jets, fishing vessels, and container ships to move drugs, people, small arms, crude oil, cigarettes, counterfeit medicine, and toxic waste through the region, generating massive profits.
At a time when many are heralding the rise of some of the world’s fastest-growing economies in sub-Saharan Africa, these criminal entrepreneurs are undermining that growth by financing booming illicit markets, turning many vulnerable communities into a corridor of insecurity and instability. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates that terrorist financing, trafficking in arms, drugs, and people, and other transnational forms of organized crime generate approximately $3.34 billion per year.

Cocaine trafficking is among the most lucrative illicit activities. UNODC estimates that approximately 13 percent of the global cocaine traffic moves through West Africa. In the past several years, West Africa has become a key transit route for drug trafficking from the Americas. Large seizures of drugs have been made in and along the coasts of Ghana, Sierra Leone, Cape Verde, Togo, Liberia, Benin, Senegal, and Nigeria. Smugglers and traffickers then transport these drugs through caravans, couriers, and maritime routes to destination markets in Europe and elsewhere.

West Africa is a transit point for heroin destined for the United States. In recent years, the United States disrupted and prosecuted an international cartel that moved heroin from Ghana to Dulles International Airport.

Illicit markets are growing across Africa to meet global demand for arms, counterfeits, cigarettes, diamonds and other precious minerals, wildlife, stolen luxury cars, and other illegal goods. Terrorists also engage in criminal activities, principally kidnapping for ransom and other crimes to fund their violent campaigns such as those that we are witnessing today by al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Boko Haram, and others.

The finances of at least one terrorist networks that is engaged in or linked to illicit trafficking in the region are sometimes wired or transferred from West Africa to financial safe havens such as banks in Lebanon.

For example, the Lebanese Canadian Bank (LCB) case suggested that the terrorist organization Hizballah is actively engaged in money laundering operations in West Africa involving narcotics trafficking and used and stolen car sales.

Maritime crime has also captured the attention of the regional states and international community. The reported number of incidents in the Gulf of Guinea and the level of violence associated with those acts remain a concern. The Economic Communities of West and Central African States, the Gulf of Guinea Commission, and their member states should be commended for the outcomes of the June 2013 Yaoundé Summit. The signed Gulf of Guinea Code of Conduct (GGC) covers not only armed robbery at sea and piracy, but also other illicit maritime activity such as illegal fishing, maritime pollution, and human and drug trafficking.

Artificial Boundaries: Spillover Effects Across the Sahel and Maghreb
Unfortunately, what happens in West Africa no longer stays in West Africa. Illicit trade is feeding destabilization across West Africa, the Sahel, and the Maghreb. Communities here face a complex set of challenges that threaten the security of all nations in the region and beyond.
As the Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper noted a few weeks ago in a statement to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:

“Sub-Saharan Africa…[has seen] the emergence of extremist and rebel groups, which increasingly launch deadly asymmetric attacks, and which government forces often cannot effectively counter due to a lack of capability and sometimes will. Additionally, a youth bulge will grow with unfulfilled economic expectations and political frustrations; conflict will increase for land and water resources; and strengthening transnational criminal networks will disrupt political and economic stability.”

Director Clapper also stressed that limited resources, corruption, illicit markets, smuggling, and poor governance “undercut development and the [Sahel] region’s ability to absorb international assistance and improve stability and security, which would impede terrorists’ freedom of movement.”

Such convergence of actors is further paving the corridor of illicit trafficking and crime-terror continuum across Africa as criminal insurgencies are becoming players themselves in illicit markets and using the proceeds to finance their terror campaigns, secure their training camps, establish safe havens.

We only have to look at some of the current hot spots to clearly comprehend how certain crime-terror dynamics continue to contribute to insecurity and instability.

Mali
The acute crises in Mali and trans-Africa must be understood in the broader context of a deeply strained region, particularly relating to governance, as converging threat vectors come together from all four sides to create regional security hot spots.

Though Mali’s current predicament arises largely from specific internal factors, the country’s challenges are reinforced and exacerbated by a range of transnational dynamics such as region-wide afflictions, adverse ecological changes, underdevelopment, disaffected local populations, and organized criminal networks.

The rise of violent extremism and organized crime across the region is aggravating the situation in Mali. Al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa, and other terrorist groups have launched attacks, fanned suicide bombers, and kidnappings for ransom from northern Mali into neighboring countries. AQIM’s game-plan in the region is to build an Islamic radical caliphate. According to West Point's Combating Terrorism Center, AQIM's objectives include ridding North Africa of Western influence; overthrowing governments deemed apostate, including those of Algeria, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia; and installing fundamentalist regimes based on sharia.

So as illicit goods are trafficked through Mali, the Sahel, and Maghreb, AQIM and its sympathizers are manipulating socio-economic conditions to further advance an illegal economy, and finance their aspirations for a caliphate. For example, prior to losing territorial control after the French intervention in 2013, AQIM was reported to tax drugs passing through their territory.

Despite the transnational impacts, long-term solutions must directly address the internal factors that have made these countries so vulnerable. For example, during the 2012 rebellion, extremists were able to maintain control over cities in the north in part because they provided some semblance of security.

Mali’s civilian security services must develop the capability to provide visible, relevant, and accountable citizen security. Improving citizen participation, trust, and ownership of the national government is a key ingredient to ending the cycle of instability.

Libya
Libya also continues to be challenged with the threat of violence and insecurity.
Libya’s transitional government has been struggling to stabilize the country since a revolution led to dictator Muammar Ghaddafi’s ouster in October 2011. As in other parts of this continent in ungoverned spaces and pockets of insecurity, a proliferation of threat actors and networks including extremists and violent groups are further destabilizing Libya.

AQIM continues to forge alliances with violent extremist networks in Libya and across the Maghreb, Sahel, and West Africa.

After 42 years of dictatorship, Libya suffers from instability and poor governance due to weak institutions, wide, porous borders, huge stockpiles of loose conventional weapons, and the presence of militias, some of whom have extremist ties.

Without capable police and national security forces that work with communities, security and justice sector institutions struggle to fulfill their mandate, and rule of law is undermined, enabling criminality, illicit trade, and frustration to grow.

Border security is also a critical U.S. and international concern in Libya. Libya’s uncontrolled borders permit the flow not only of destabilizing Qadhafi-era conventional weapons, but also violent extremists throughout North Africa, the Middle East, and the Sahel.

As noted earlier, the flow of these foreign fighters has increased since the fall of Qadhafi and was highlighted by the January 2013 attack near In Amenas, Algeria.

The United States is in the process of beginning to implement a Global Security Contingency Fund (GSCF) border security program to provide technical expertise, training, and limited equipment to build Libya’s inter-ministerial border security capacity to address security along its southern land border.

This program includes training and equipment programming for Libya’s neighbors – Chad, Niger, and Algeria – to improve border security cooperation with Libya. In addition, we have a GSCF training and equipment program to build special operations forces capacity.

Nigeria
Nigerian organized criminal networks remain a major factor in moving cocaine and heroin worldwide, and have begun to produce and traffic methamphetamine to and around Southeast Asia.

In addition to drug trafficking, some of these criminal organizations also engage in other forms of trafficking and fraud targeting citizens of the United States, Europe, and globally.
Widespread corruption in Nigeria further facilitates criminal activity, and, combined with Nigeria’s central location along major trafficking routes, enables criminal groups to flourish and make Nigeria an important trafficking hub.

Nigeria is also having to confront the Boko Haram insurgency in the country’s northeast and has suffered a spate of significant terrorist attacks in recent years.

These terrorist acts are the primary reason that the United States formally designated Boko Haram and Ansaru as foreign terrorist organizations, blocking financial transactions in the United States and making it a crime for U.S. persons to provide them with material support.
The close proximity of terrorist and criminal networks in Nigeria raise the potential for illicit collaboration that will negatively influence the current state of affairs across Africa, and the spigot that is financing insecurity and instability.

Impacts on Morocco and Beyond
But the narrative is not all dire and doom. Take Morocco for example.
While Morocco remains a leading source country for cannabis, trailing only Afghanistan in hashish (cannabis resin) production, its relative importance as a source country may be waning, according to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), with Afghanistan and India gaining prominence as suppliers for the that market.

And while it also continues to serve as a transshipment zone for cocaine originating in Latin America that is smuggled via West Africa to Europe, international cooperation is being strengthened with our partners.

For example, the United States has good cooperation with the Moroccan Navy, the Gendarmerie, and Moroccan Customs as they continue to maintain an aggressive maritime interdiction effort against smugglers and traffickers.

On our overall bilateral relationship, we continue to enjoy a very strong partnership with Morocco, focused on promoting regional stability, supporting democratic reform efforts, countering violent extremism, and strengthening trade and cultural ties.

Sustainable Security: Climate Change and Illicit Networks
But terrorism, crime, and corruption are not the only threats we need to consider when we look at the African context.

Threats to the environment from climate change and other factors add a layer of complexity. Whether through the slaughter of wildlife, theft of natural resources, illegal logging and fishing, or other environmental challenges, Africa is losing its biodiversity and cultural heritage.
On top of all this, the changing climate in the Sahel and West Africa, and throughout Africa, can have profound security implications for the region, in the context of other destabilizing factors and existing vulnerabilities. As climate change contributes to hotter temperatures, rising coastal sea levels, desertification, natural disasters, rapid urbanization, and deforestation, greater pressure will be placed on food supplies, water levels, fisheries, and other critical resources. We must continue to work together to address global climate change, reducing our emissions and building resilience to its impacts.

The United States has committed more than a billion dollars since 2009 to humanitarian assistance for drought-affected and conflict-displaced communities in the Sahel, but we face a long road ahead that must include stemming the terrorist threat, uprooting safe havens and sanctuaries, fighting organized crime, and controlling the proliferation of weapons.
Above all, we must work with Africans to protect children from being exploited, trafficked, or recruited to become child soldiers.

U.S. Diplomatic Efforts and International Cooperation
The United States strongly supports the great strides many African countries have made to improve security, good governance, rule of law, and sustainable economic development.
As President Barack Obama highlighted in the U.S. Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime, the United States will continue to assist our partners to strengthen their security footprint and capabilities to combat today’s threat networks.

A key pillar of the Strategy is to enhance international cooperation with key partners to combat threats posed by organized crime, narco-trafficking, and terrorism, and to protect our communities from the violence, harm, and exploitation wrought by transnational threat networks.
The Strategy also challenges the U.S. government and our international partners to work together to combat transnational illicit networks and converging threats, and take that fight to the next level by breaking their corruptive power, attacking their financial underpinnings, stripping them of their illicit wealth, and severing their access to the financial system.
Throughout this conference, you will have heard presentations about the breadth of U.S. technical assistance from my colleagues from the U.S. Department of Defense, AFRICOM, U.S. law enforcement, and other agencies.

I would like to outline what the Department of State is doing, and in particular to outline some of the programs of the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL). In May 2011, my boss, Ambassador William Brownfield, led a delegation of senior U.S. officials to West Africa to begin formulating a strategic approach to undermine transnational criminal networks in West Africa and to reduce their ability to operate illicit criminal enterprises.
Through consultations with partners in the region, our U.S. government team developed a plan called the West Africa Cooperative Security Initiative, or WACSI. WACSI is built around five objectives designed to respond to the underlying factors that allow transnational crime to flourish in West Africa.

Drawing on lessons learned from the law enforcement, development, and military perspectives, as well as the conditions on the ground unique to West Africa, WACSI offers the first comprehensive U.S. government approach to drug trafficking in West Africa.
The U.S. government has identified existing and new U.S. assistance to support this initiative and it is anticipated that additional U.S. government resources will be dedicated to support it in the future. Programming under WACSI will be aligned with the five pillars to focus on efforts such as:
  1. Technical assistance and capacity building to help governments and civil societies develop the skills to combat impunity;
  2. Technical assistance drafting anti-TOC laws and policies, assisting in the process of getting these laws enacted, and creating awareness about the laws and policies on anti-TOC;
  3. Investing in elite counternarcotics units, operational training and equipping of accountable institutions, and technical assistance to build basic law enforcement skills and institutional capacity;
  4. Technical assistance to build the capacity of prosecutors and judges to prosecute and adjudicate complex TOC cases; and
  5. Drug demand reduction and raising public awareness of TOC.
West Africa Cooperative Security Initiative (WACSI) in Action
Within the WACSI framework, INL is revamping our assistance programs to create a regional effect, maximize our impact, and coordinate with international partners, including West Africans, other donors, and international organizations.

In 2011 and 2012, the U.S. government provided approximately $95 million for WACSI programs. With this funding, we have undertaken several new projects that help Africans build skills and abilities to fight transnational crime, including maritime crime.

For example, we opened the West Africa Regional Training Center (RTC) in Accra, Ghana, in January 2013. The RTC brings together law enforcement, security, and judicial officials from multiple countries, creating relationships across the region, and building knowledge and skills on topics ranging from investigative analysis to anti-corruption to counternarcotics. In 2013, we conducted 19 courses and trained more than 675 officials from 17 countries.

To address maritime security, we supported a series of three regional workshops focused on maritime criminal justice for ECOWAS member states.

We continue to explore future areas of assistance to include strengthening capabilities to preserve crime scenes for complex investigations, create strong case packages, and build more effective, evidence-based trials.

Trans-Saharan Counter-Terrorism Partnership

The Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership (TSCTP) is a multi-faceted U.S. strategy aimed at disrupting terrorist organizations by strengthening regional counterterrorism capabilities, and enhancing and institutionalizing cooperation among the region’s security forces. This effort has taken an increasingly holistic view of counter-terrorism, focusing on the drivers of extremism, and the importance of effective, resilient, and accountable security and justice institutions.

In 2014, INL will be working with governments in the Maghreb and Sahel to improve the responsiveness of their security institutions to their citizens. In particular, INL will provide mentorship and training to law enforcement and corrections services to help them proactively and accountably provide the valuable citizen security their citizens expect and need. INL is also looking to engage with communities to help them more proactively advocate for their interests and work with law enforcement to find practical solutions to their security concerns.
We are also exploring how regional networks can help improve the sustainability and effectiveness of key security sector reforms, both within the Sahel and the Maghreb.

Conclusion: Partnerships for Sustainable Security
I applaud the organizers of the AFSEC14 conference for focusing on the importance of strengthening international cooperation on sea and on land to effectively disrupt and dismantle transnational organized crime, illicit flows, and terrorism across Africa.
I want to again extend my appreciation on behalf of the United States to our partners in attendance for their commitment to work across borders, improve coordination and information-sharing, and leverage our respective capabilities and capacities to defeat our common adversaries.

Many of our partners, including the European Union, NATO, the African Union, and others, are undertaking multi-dimensional, trans-African strategies, and we must continue to coordinate closely to ensure a common and complementary approach.

The United States will be an active partner in this endeavor and will continue to support the ongoing efforts of the UN Special Envoy for the Sahel, Romano Prodi, to develop an integrated UN strategy for tackling the multiple crises trans Africa. We must continue our efforts to approach the Sahel and the Maghreb’s interconnected problems with a comprehensive inter-regional and international effort.

The United States, China, France, and other countries must work more closely with the international community to better coordinate efforts and resources, build Africa’s sustainable future and work together to combat the threats that undermine the capital and investments that are necessary to sustain economic prosperity throughout Africa.

We must continue to leverage all national economic, intelligence, and diplomatic powers to make it riskier, harder, and costlier for threat networks to do business within Africa.
Illicit trafficking remains the lifeblood of the numerous bad actors and networks, creating vulnerabilities for nations. We must crackdown on corruption at all levels and cut off the ability of kleptocrats, criminals, and terrorists to enjoy the fruits of illicit enterprise and that enable the financial capacity to execute their operations.

By combating the triple threat of corruption, organized crime, and terrorism, we can also shut the door and keep criminals and extremists alike from exploiting vulnerable and corrupt nodes or their grievances to wage jihad. We must prevent narco-corruption from destroying countries like Guinea and Guinea-Bissau.

Finally, just as Al-Qaeda, al-Shabaab, Boko Haram, and other violent extremist groups are determined to spread insecurity and despair, the international community must support governments in the region to offer the better alternative—the option of hope, economic freedom, and sustainable futures that are real investments in peoples’ lives.

To do this, we must support pragmatic partnerships and creative incentives that deter the recruitment of Africa’s marginalized youth and peoples, unemployed, and disenfranchised and invest in developing economic opportunities that help finance their education, health, and on agricultural technologies and other micro-business that augment market growth and investment strategies. Reducing demand for increasingly available illicit drugs is a key part of this puzzle, if we are to give Africa’s youth a fighting chance at stopping the cycle of crime and corruption.
We need to address underlying causes that are contributing to today’s conflicts in Africa: food and water security, poverty, economic integration and development, and other socio-economic areas that empower communities and nurture growth markets, investment frontiers, and resiliency.

With careful, targeted assistance, and smart diplomatic engagement, together we can advance our common objectives and strategic interests.

If we do not act decisively, the region will remain an exporter of terror and a provider of safe havens where terrorists from other conflicts all over the world find refuge, illicit trafficking will continue to expand, arms and weapons will dangerously proliferate, women, men, and children will be trafficked, and drugs and illicit enterprise will corrode the rule of law and the gains of globalization.

The tragic attacks in Abuja, In Amenas, Bamako, Benghazi, Nairobi, and other cities across West Africa, the Sahel, East Africa, and Maghreb are not reasons to retreat. Neither are the greedy and illicit ventures by criminal entrepreneurs that are destroying communities.
An effective response will require more local and regional partners, more cooperation with allies, more resources, and most of all a willingness to accept risk and political courage and commitment to stay the course.

We can only tackle these threats effectively if we work together and synchronize our capabilities and capacities.

If we do this, we can create hope, stability, opportunity, and an enduring peace.
And we must not fail to safeguard all of our security and to protect the blessings for our children to enjoy—a global village that is safer, more secure, prosperous, and at peace.
Thank you.

Search This Blog

Translate

White House.gov Press Office Feed