Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XXV, Organization of Foreign Policy; Information Policy; United Nations; Scientific Matters

345. Report of the U.S. Delegation to the Eighteenth Session of the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs ¹

Washington, June 28, 1963.

[Here follow Section 1, Background of Conference; Section 2, Agenda for Conference; Section 3, Participation in Conference; Section 4, United States Delegation; and Section 5, Organization of the Conference.]

6. Work of the Committee on Illicit Traffic:

The Far East and South-East Asia were the most important areas under discussion because of the enormous traffic involving Burma, Thailand, and Hong Kong. The United States representative particularly urged the governments of the Far East to ascertain the source of “999” morphine blocks which caused a substantial part of the illicit traffic. It was evident that they were all dragging their feet in locating the source.

Hong Kong sent its chief of the Narcotics Bureau, who painted a picture of gravity but in no case mentioned Communist China as a source.

The observer of Thailand for the first time presented a case of increased and vigorous enforcement, which brought commendation from the Commission.

The observer of Burma showed that his country was in the throes of helplessness in dealing with the hill tribes in the Shan State. He presented a resolution for technical cooperation in the nature of a survey of opium-producing regions in Burma with the idea of crop substitution. He stated that the situation was practically out of control of the Central Government.

Thailand, Turkey, France, and Mexico commended the United States for its cooperative effort in dealing with illicit trafficking.

The United States representative commended the Governments of Thailand, Turkey, France, Mexico, Lebanon, Italy, and Japan for efforts put forth to suppress the illicit narcotic traffic and for the excellent cooperation extended to our U.S. Bureau of Narcotics by their police authorities. Illicit trafficking in synthetic drugs presented no problem.

The USSR representative stated that there was no illicit traffic in her country. The United States representative presented three press clippings with Moscow datelines reporting illicit trafficking whereupon the USSR representative admitted there had been cases of hashish trafficking but stated that they had been dealt with severely.

Cannabis was the subject of considerable discussion, as this traffic is growing throughout the world and very little can be done at this time except increased police measures.

A proposal some years ago by the United States representative to bring the clandestine heroin manufacture under control by watching the trade in acetic anhydride and acetyl chloride was producing results in some countries.

There were sharp exchanges among the representatives of the Near and Middle East, with charges and counter charges. The situation in that area is not one where there is close cooperation, in spite of the Middle East Regional Conferences. Each time one of the countries was mentioned as a source of illicit narcotics the representative of that country would go on the defensive and attempt to obscure the problem. This is one of the unfortunate situations prevailing in the Commission, where most of the countries try to conceal the traffic by making long statements that there is no illicit trafficking.

The United States representative gave incontrovertible evidence of large illicit cocaine trafficking from Cuba to the United States. The Cuban observer stated in his reply that there was no illicit trafficking and that the Revolutionary Government of Cuba brought about social reforms and preventive measures against drug addiction. He launched into a long political tirade against the United States, whereupon the United States representative called a point of order and the Chairman insisted that the Cuban observer confine his remarks strictly to technical matters.

The Cuban observer made serious allegations about the smuggling of narcotic drugs to Cuba which he stated were sent along with other medicines from the United States in exchange for prisoners from Cuba. The United States representative replied that these drugs had been requested by the Cuban Red Cross and that the Cuban Ministry of Health had given a receipt for them; that these drugs were desperately needed for the sick in Cuba, and that no smuggling was involved. The Cuban observer also stated that these narcotics had been returned to the United States. This is not true, with the exception of a small amount of codeine compound which had deteriorated.

The United States representative stated that a list of fifty traffickers, against whom cases had been made some years ago by agents of the U.S. Bureau of Narcotics in cooperation with the Cuban police authorities, had been sent to the Revolutionary Government of Cuba and that nothing had been heard about the action taken. The Cuban observer stated that all of these traffickers had been expelled to the United States.

The United States Government’s decision to send narcotic drugs along with other medicines to Cuba in exchange for prisoners was unfortunate. As a result it enabled the Cuban Government to make charges to the Permanent Central Opium Board claiming that our action in doing so was in violation of narcotic treaties to which both Governments are parties. The narcotic drugs in question were sent at the urgent request of the Cuban Red Cross that they were desperately needed. In a spirit of cooperation and as a matter of expediency the United States Government authorized shipment of the narcotics only after being assured that an official Cuban import permit had been issued which would be delivered to an American Red Cross representative when the narcotics arrived in Cuba. This permit had, in fact, not been issued but a receipt was given by the Cuban Minister of Health for the narcotic drugs.

7. Work of the Conference:

Election of Officers

The United States representative placed in nomination as Chairman the name of Dr. J.F. Mabileau of France, who was elected by acclamation.

The Yugoslav representative proposed Dr. I. Vertes of Hungary as First Vice-Chairman. He was evidently a popular choice, as his nomination was supported by the representatives of Turkey, USSR, Poland, India, Iran, France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, Mexico, Switzerland, the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Arab Republic.

The United Kingdom representative nominated Mr. B.N. Banerji of India as Second Vice-Chairman. His nomination was supported by the representatives of the United States and many other countries.

The representative of Canada, supported by the representatives of the United States and many other countries, proposed Dr. M. Dadgar of Iran as Rapporteur.

Question of Chinese Representation

The representative of the USSR, supported by the representatives of Poland and Hungary, said the right to represent China in the Commission belonged exclusively to the Government of the People’s Republic of China.

The representative of China, supported by the representative of the United States, regretted that the question had been raised, as it had already been settled by the General Assembly in October 1962.

The representative of India maintained that the People’s Republic of China should obtain its rightful place in the United Nations but considered that the question should not be voted upon or decided in the Commission.

Report of the Permanent Central Opium Board to the Economic and Social Council on the work of the Board in 1962

The consumption of codeine was increasing in keeping with the increase in population. The United States representative pointed out that since there were three generations of medical practitioners and one generation in the medical schools, it would not be likely during the next ten years that consumption of codeine, a drug with little addiction liability, would decrease to any marked extent.

The USSR representative made an interesting statement that in her country they had been working with some chemicals to produce a codeine synthetic and that results were promising.

The considerable increase in the manufacture of morphine from poppy straw was of concern, as it would tend to bring about overproduction of opium. So far no illicit traffic has been reported, as the countries manufacturing morphine from poppy straw had shown proper control.

The United States representative pointed out that manufacture of morphine from poppy straw was not economically advantageous; also, that many useful alkaloids from opium could not be obtained from poppy straw.

Statement of the Drug Supervisory Body on estimated world requirements of narcotic drugs in 1963

The Hungarian representative challenged the right of the Nationalist Chinese Government to submit estimates for narcotic drugs for Communist China. It is incredible that the Nationalist Chinese Government would make an estimate for 800,000,000 people for a total of about 290 kilograms of codeine. Countries like Denmark and Sweden consume this amount. The Soviet Bloc missed a big opening here to show the stupidity of the Nationalist Chinese Government for making such a ridiculous estimate.

Appointment of a member of the Drug Supervisory Body

There had been considerable doubt that the Indian Government would permit Mr. E.S. Krishnamoorthy of the Permanent Central Opium Board to represent the Commission on the Drug Supervisory Body. One high Indian official pointed out to the United States representative that if another Indian was appointed to a prominent position in the United Nations there would be strong voices of disapproval. However, at the last moment the Indian Government decided to allow his name to be placed in nomination. In the meantime the representative of France made a strong plea for the United States representative to place the name of Mr. Charles Vaille in nomination, even though this was not consistent with the resolution of the Economic and Social Council that there should be a personal union in the membership of the Permanent Central Opium Board and the Drug Supervisory Body. As the Bureau of Narcotics now has a man stationed in Paris and one in Marseille who are assisting in making large cases of illicit heroin trafficking which is aimed at the United States, it was strongly felt by both the French and United States representatives that not to follow the wishes of the French Government might result in a lessening of cooperation which had been laboriously built up for many years. The United States representative placed the name of Mr. Charles Vaille in nomination. The vote was 14 for Mr. Krishnamoorthy and 6 for Mr. Vaille, with one abstention. However, it should be pointed out that the 4 votes which swung the election were from the Soviet Bloc.

Mr. Vaille’s election would have been of great importance to the world, as he was the author of the 1953 Opium Protocol and he unquestionably is one of the world’s outstanding experts on every phase of narcotics outside of the illicit traffic.

Illicit Traffic

The Commission adopted a resolution on the illicit traffic in the Far East, sponsored by Canada, India, and the United Kingdom, urging that the Governments concerned take all necessary measures to deal with the situation, in particular by

(i) obtaining more precise information about the areas in which the opium poppy is illicitly cultivated and about the location of illicit laboratories for the manufacture of morphine and heroin;

(ii) registering opium smokers, where such smoking is still permitted, with a view to the eventual elimination of the practice;

(iii) strengthening wherever necessary their enforcement services and improving the training and methods of operation of those services so that they may be able to deal more effectively with the illicit cultivation of the opium poppy, the illicit manufacture of morphine and heroin, and illicit traffic in these drugs;

(iv) controlling to the extent necessary and practicable the import and internal distribution of acetic anhydride and acetyle chloride;

(v) studying the problem of eliminating the cultivation of the opium poppy by hill tribes or other less-developed groups as a means of livelihood, and taking any necessary measures to achieve that end.

(vi) cooperating closely with other countries in the area in the direct and coordinated exchange of information useful in countering the illicit traffic;

(vii) including in their applications for technical assistance provision for appropriate assistance which may be required with a view to facilitating the implementation of plans for countering the illicit traffic, whether by way of training personnel, obtaining expert advice, or for any other purpose.

The vote on this resolution was 18 for, 1 abstention (China), 2 absent.

Abuse of drugs (drug addiction)

Government reports showed great variations in form and substance and indicated that many countries are now submitting more extensive information.

No developments were reported in progress toward finding a cure for addiction as for alcoholism. Some governments felt that the approach should be psychiatric. The United States representative said that there should be both treatment and rehabilitation and prevention by way of heavy penalties for trafficking, which was supported by several delegations.

In referring to the quasi-medical use of opium in India, the United States representative pointed out that one of the most remarkable developments in the history of narcotics was the reduction in opium consumption in India for smoking and eating purposes from 500 tons twenty years ago to some 2 tons in 1961.

Heroin addiction in Hong Kong was regarded as being of a serious nature.

Addiction among the medical profession was considered of great concern but no decision was reached as to how this was to be approached.

Program of scientific research on opium

The United Nations Laboratory continues to produce excellent reports on determination of opium origin which are always challenged by the country of origin.

The coordination of the scientific research in many laboratories throughout the world was particularly gratifying. The United States representative, however, pointed out that now is the time to begin work on the source identification of heroin and that the Oak Ridge Laboratory has already produced some interesting data.

The question of the coca leaf

The work of the Consultative Group on Coca Leaf Problems which met at Lima, Peru, in November–December 1962 was reviewed.

The Bolivian observer made a strong statement that chewing of the coca leaf was harmless. The United States representative pointed out that the Bolivian Minister of Health and all of the Bolivian officials present at the Lima conference had condemned its use. The United States representative apologized for having brought this division of opinion within the Bolivian Government to the attention of the Commission. The decision of the Commission was unanimous that coca leaf chewing was dangerous and should be eliminated. Accordingly, the Commission adopted a resolution (sponsored by Brazil, Mexico, Peru, and the United States) addressed to the Economic and Social Council which recommends to the General Assembly the exceptional appropriation, if necessary for 1964, of sufficient funds for an Inter-American Seminar on the Coca Leaf in 1964.

The question of cannabis

An article entitled “The Cannabis Habit” by Dr. H.B.M. Murphy of Ottawa, Canada, in Volume XV, No. 1, of the Bulletin on Narcotics drew criticism from the United States representative because it placed too much emphasis on the supposedly harmless effects of cannabis. After discussion, which included reference to an opinion of the World Health Organization that cannabis is harmful and addicting, the Commission decided that the drug is dangerous.

Program of scientific research on cannabis

Little or no progress was reported in this field. The United States representative pointed out that it was of urgent importance that a cannabis test be developed for field law enforcement use and that present identification was not satisfactory. Also, in relation to road accidents, in contradistinction to the possibility for police to determine that a driver was under the influence of alcohol, their only means of determining that a driver was under the influence of cannabis would be for the driver to admit his use of it. With the growing increase in cannabis abuse throughout the world and increase in road accidents, it was necessary to have scientific research pointed in that direction.

The question of synthetic and other new narcotic drugs

The United States representative raised the question of Hexalgon, a substance developed many years ago in Germany, which had been distributed in Hungary, Argentina, and other countries and had not been placed under international control. He pointed out that there had been cases of addiction; that this could be a mad dog run loose in the world, and it was up to the Commission to take the necessary action. It was decided to have the drug tested for addiction liability so that the proper control action could be instituted on recommendation of the World Health Organization. It is evident that in this instance the international control machinery did not function properly.

Barbiturates and Amphetamines

While the discussion on these items was rather brief, it was decided not to take any action but to keep these problems under constant surveillance.

The United States representative stated that in its interim report the committee of experts appointed after the White House Conference on Narcotic and Drug Abuse had advised against subjecting the manufacture, sale and distribution of barbiturates and amphetamines to the narcotic laws; if they were so subjected, the medical use of those drugs would be seriously hampered. Legislation had been introduced for their control, but the controls applicable to dangerous drugs were not so strict as those applicable to narcotics. There was no illicit traffic in barbiturates, and the establishment of international control would place enormous additional administrative burdens on governments as well as on the Permanent Central Opium Board and the Drug Supervisory Body.

Technical Cooperation in Narcotics Control

In addition to the resolution on technical cooperation in the field of the coca leaf, the Commission adopted a resolution (sponsored by India, United Kingdom, and Yugoslavia), addressed to the Economic and Social Council, calling for a survey of economic and social requirements of an opium-producing region in Burma to see whether any progress could be made in substituting other crops for opium cultivation among the hill tribes.

The 1961 Single Convention

At the time of the Eighteenth Session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs seventeen nations had ratified the 1961 Single Convention. All of these, with the exception of Canada and Thailand, are small nations of minor importance in respect to narcotic problems.

An Administrative Guide for the 1961 Convention had been prepared by Mr. Bertil A. Renborg, former head of the Opium Section under the League of Nations. His voluminous work was not regarded with favor by any delegation.

The question of preparing a commentary was raised. The task had been offered to Sir Samuel Hoare, the United Kingdom representative on the Economic and Social Council. The fee will be $34,000 and the work will take about four years. Sir Samuel Hoare wisely rejected the task, as he does not have the legal or technical knowledge to produce such a document on the Single Convention. Apparently there is no one in sight who can take on this work.

A number of the delegations announced their intention to ratify the 1961 Single Convention, but evidently with tongue in cheek, as they privately stated that they would await action of the United States Government.

There was very little discussion on the subject, as previously the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom decided to limit the discussion to bare essentials.

The United States representative pointed out that at the last meeting of the Permanent Central Opium Board a comment on the 1961 Single Convention had been prepared by the Secretariat which took a position parallel with that of the United States-that the reservations could have a substantial effect on the success of the Convention. The secretary of the Board declined to disclose the document in question.

The 1953 Opium Protocol

The Government of Turkey announced that ratification of the 1953 Opium Protocol was in process and would soon be accomplished. This caused keen disappointment among proponents of the 1961 Single Convention.

The Yugoslav representative raised the question that the 1953 Opium Protocol might not be legal and asked what proper legal steps could be taken to have a decision handed down by the International Court of Justice.

The question of an international body to administer both the 1953 Opium Protocol and the 1961 Single Convention, if it came into force, caused no difficulty as it was felt that the present two bodies could carry on this work satisfactorily, especially since the 1953 Protocol would have to be in operation for the next five years.

Work of the Commission

The Commission unanimously adopted a resolution (sponsored by Brazil, Canada, India, United Arab Republic, and the United States) requesting the Secretary-General to present to the 20th session of the Commission a report which will cover and evaluate the work done and the results obtained during the preceding 19 years.

8. Future Meetings:

The decision of the Economic and Social Council that the next session of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs last only three weeks was an excellent one. Unquestionably the Commission, if it worked full time, could dispose of all of its work in three weeks without loss of effectiveness. Most of the representatives are experts and little time is lost in arriving at a decision.

A provisional agenda for the Commission’s 19th session was adopted.

It was agreed to invite Afghanistan, Argentina, Bolivia, Burma, Cuba, Cyprus, Greece, Israel, Italy, Laos, Lebanon, Federation of Malaya, Netherlands, Pakistan, Portugal, Spain, Syria, Thailand, and Viet Nam to send observers to the Commission meetings on the illicit traffic and to meetings of the Committee on Illicit Traffic.

It was agreed to invite the following countries to send observers: Argentina, Bolivia, Burma, Greece, Israel, Italy, Lebanon, Netherlands, Pakistan, and Thailand to the Commission meetings on abuse of drugs (drug addiction); Greece, Italy, and the Netherlands to the meetings on opium and scientific research on opium; Argentina, Bolivia, and Colombia to the meetings on the coca leaf; Greece, Lebanon, Nepal, Netherlands, Pakistan, and South Africa to the meetings on cannabis and scientific research on cannabis; Belgium, Ethiopia, Greece, Israel, Italy, Kenya, Netherlands, Somalia, and Yemen to the meetings on questions relating to other substances, including khat; Greece, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, and Poland to the meetings on the 1961 Single Convention.

9. Conclusions:

Mr. Otis E. Mulliken, Adviser from the Department of State, was extremely helpful in guiding the policy of the delegation in accordance with the position papers.

Commissioner of Narcotics Henry L. Giordano represented the United States in the Committee on Illicit Traffic and conducted his debates with force and courtesy.

The Honorable James A. Reed, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, assisted the delegation during the first week of the Commission meetings. He conferred with the delegations of the United Kingdom, Canada, Switzerland, Federal Republic of Germany, Sweden, Finland, China, and others about the undesirability of ratifying the Single Convention of 1961 and urged action to make the Opium Protocol of 1953 a success.

Mr. John T. Cusack, District Supervisor of the Bureau of Narcotics in Rome, Italy, assisted the delegation in the handling of many necessary details.

The entire Eighteenth Session was a modicum of harmony, coordination, and efficiency. With few exceptions there was no acrimony and debate.

The Soviet Bloc behaved particularly well and did not place any technical obstacles to halt the work. It showed every indication of wanting to help and took advantage of the information which was presented by many delegations.

The future work of the Commission will be seriously affected by the following developments:

The departure of Mr. Gilbert E. Yates as Director of the Division of Narcotic Drugs and the transfer of Dr. Adolf Lande to head the secretariat of the Permanent Central Opium Board to succeed Mr. L. Atzenwiler who has retired, left a very serious gap in the Division to maintain the high standards of former years. With the departure of Dr. Lande, no one in the Division is qualified as a legal expert on the nine treaties and protocols and the Single Convention.

Mr. Daniel A. Chapman of Ghana took over the directorship of the Division. Representatives expressed their unanimous wish to support him in his difficult task. Neither Mr. Chapman nor three top assistants recently appointed have the slightest knowledge of narcotics. Thus the quality of the United Nations work on narcotics will be seriously hampered. There is no question that the appointments were of a political nature and without regard to efficiency. At least four of the high officials in the Division have not the slightest knowledge of the many intricate and manifold problems of narcotics. The new director, highly conscious of his disability in staff, is going to take steps to correct the situation.

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1960–63, SOC 11–15 UN. No classification marking. The Commission met in Geneva April 29–May 17. Harry J. Anslinger of the Treasury Department led the U.S. Delegation. His signature on the report, which was submitted to the Secretary of State, appears on the title page. The position papers that the State Department provided to Anslinger are ibid., SOC 11–5 ECOSOC.