Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume E–11, Part 2, Documents on South America, 1973–1976

273. Telegram 40131 From the Department of State to the Embassy in Colombia¹

Bogota, February 19, 1976, 1748Z.

40131. Bogota for Ambassador, Geneva for Vance. Subject: GOC Narcotics Reorganization and Associated Assistance Request. Ref: (A) Bogota 0981, (B) Bogota 1176, (C) Bogota 1414, (D) Bogota 1671, (E) Bogota A–105, August 25, 1975.

1. Your reports of GOC plans to reorganize its national narcotics control effort have been welcomed here as indication of substantially increased GOC commitment to international narcotics control program. While we are confident Embassy has not implied any commitment on specific aspects of GOC request for increased assistance, proposals outlined in Bogota 1671 underscore need for cautious approach to entire assistance question. In sum, we are prepared to provide increased narcotics-related assistance to GOC provided: (A) GOC develops a realistic control program which proposes to attack specific problems in specific ways; (B) Successful implementation requires commodity assistance using narcotics funds; and (C) Funds made available by Congress. End summary.

2. We do regard Colombia as a high cocaine priority country and consider it appropriate to augment our assistance considerably beyond prior levels, if this is required to diminish its middleman role in the substantial cocaine traffic from Latin America to the United States, as noted in your NCAP (Ref. E). We also welcome your assessment that a reorganization of the Colombian effort as outlined in Refs A and C is appropriate to the situation and that it augurs more effective efforts. We note your estimate of the ability of the military to perform in this area. We understand the role of the military for command and coordinating purposes as well as maintaining and operating of aircraft, but assume the people doing most of the actual gathering of intelligence, interdicting and enforcing would essentially be national police, DAS and customs trained and experienced in those functions.

3. With respect to further U.S. assistance, we regard the citation of an overall dollar amount and specification of equipment (Ref D) to be premature. A reasonable rationale for and justification of an enlarged program must be based on a full analysis and definition of the nature, scope and incidence of the narcotics traffic problem to be attacked, together with carefully planned and described approaches to meet it at the most feasible points at which suppression efforts could be applied. While money is a function of program, and there is a “chicken and egg” aspect as far as that goes, the program itself must be a function of elaborated need.

4. Thus, while Ref D is a good summary of what we might rpt might do, we would be hard pressed at this point to sell it to Congress. Much staff work on both sides remains to be done if we and the GOC are to develop a realistic outline of a workable narcotics control effort. Once it has been agreed that certain types of actions will be required (and that, if undertaken, they have reasonable chance of success), we can then jointly determine what equipment will be needed, how much of this need can be met from existing GOC inventory, and how much and what types should be provided under narcotics assistance rubric. At this point, however, we do not wish in any way encourage unrealistic GOC expectations which, if not met, would lead to a diminution of the Colombian effort.

5. FYI only: At this time we can plan rpt plan on a program in the range of eight to ten million dollars, the maximum that would be available in our FY 76 and FY 77 programs combined, assuming Congressional appropriations for both years reach levels requested by executive branch. End FYI.

6. Further, several considerations must bear heavily on our approach. First, cocaine ranks after heroin in the prioritization of drugs of abuse made in the domestic council white paper. Second, we have heavy and increasing assistance commitments to other countries, certain of which must be given higher priority. Third, our entire FY 1976 narcotics assistance request is for but 42.5 million dollars, and this has yet to be acted upon by the Congress. Fourth, we must be absolutely assured that equipment provided by assistance funds will be used for narcotics control purposes and not diverted to general support of military or general law enforcement entities. Should this ever not be the case, our program would be placed in grave jeopardy in the Congress.

7. We suggest it appropriate in the circumstances for a small number of Washington-based specialists to join with key members of the Embassy’s narcotics control committee, at a suitable time soon after the Secretary’s visit, for an up-to-date analysis of the detailed nature of the interdiction problem in Colombia. This would be followed by careful development of a program with the Colombians into which can be fitted appropriate amounts and types of available U.S. grant equipment. We have in mind from Washington, for example, a representative of S/NM for overall programming, one each specialists in aviation, communications and general drug enforcement. In our approach we would give priority to developing and equipping units having drug control as their specific charge over those that would have it as one among other responsibilities.

Ingersoll

1. Summary: The Department informed the Embassy that it was willing to provide increased anti-narcotics funding if Colombia developed a realistic control program and implemented commodity assistance programs.

   Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, [no film number]. Confidential; Immediate. Repeated to the Mission in Geneva. Drafted by Ernst and McLaughlin; cleared by Kranz, Grown, Wampler, and Mantonelli; approved by Ernst. In telegram 1176 from Bogotá, February 3, the Embassy informed the Department that López had tapped the Ministry of Defense as the executive authority responsible for coordinating the drug enforcement effort in Colombia. (Ibid., D760043–0056) In telegram 1671 from Bogotá, February 13, the Embassy recommended specific levels and types of assistance to be offered to the Colombian Government to support its anti-narcotics efforts. (Ibid., D760058–0436)