Pubdate: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 Source: Inside the Pentagon Copyright: 1999 Inside the Pentagon Page: 13 Contact: 1225 Jefferson Davis Hwy #1400, Arlington, VA. Website: http://insidedefense.com/ Author: Keith J. Costa GAO: DOD'S SUPPORT ROLE IN DRUG CONTROL EFFORTS HAS DECLINED The Defense Department's efforts to support the national drug control strategy have declined "significantly" since 1992 because of a higher priority placed by the Clinton administration on peacekeeping missions and overall reductions to the defense budget, the General Accounting Office concludes in a recently released report. The drug control strategy calls on the Pentagon to detect, monitor and interdict maritime and aerial shipments of illegal drugs to the United States, as well provide assistance to other countries to "stop drugs at their source." DOD spent up to $635 million on such supply-reduction efforts in 1998. But from 1992 to 1999, "the number of flight hours dedicated to detecting and monitoring illicit drug shipments declined from approximately 46,000 to 15,000, or 68 percent," the Dec. 21 report states. "Likewise, the number of ship days declined from about 4,800 to 1,800, or 62 percent, over the same period. "Some of the decline in air and maritime support has been partially offset by increased support provided by the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs Service," it adds. "Nevertheless, DOD officials have stated that coverage in key, high-threat drug-trafficking areas in the Caribbean and in cocaine-producing countries is limited." GAO produced the study, "Assets DOD Contributes to Reducing the Illegal Drug Supply Have Declined," at the behest of Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), chairman of the caucus on international narcotics control, and Rep. John Mica (R-FL), Government Reform subcommittee on criminal justice, drug policy and human resources chairman. The report identifies two reasons for the decline in DOD assets used to support the counterdrug mission: * "The lower priority assigned to the counterdrug mission compared with that assigned to other military missions that might involve contact with hostile forces such as peacekeeping; and * "Overall reductions in defense budgets and force levels." The Pentagon has maintained that the decline in assets used has been partially offset by increased efficiencies in counterdrug operations. "Because of a lack of data, however, the impact of the reduced level of DOD support on drug trafficking is unknown," the report states. Drug prices in the 1990s have been "relatively stable," it adds. GAO also looked at challenges the Pentagon faces in providing counterdrug assistance to foreign governments. "These [countries] often lack the capability to operate and repair equipment and effectively utilize training provided by the United States," the report says. "In addition, DOD faces restrictions on providing training support to some foreign military units and sharing intelligence information with certain host-nation counterdrug operations because of past evidence of human rights violations and corruption within these organizations." The GAO report recommends that DOD "develop measures to assess the effectiveness" of its efforts in support of the national strategy for reducing illegal drugs in the United States. "DOD has not yet developed a set of performance measures to assess its effectiveness in contributing to this goal but has taken some initial steps to develop such measures," the report states. "These steps include the development of a database to capture information that can be used to assess the relative performance of DOD's detection and monitoring assets." DOD could also "determine how often [it] detects known cocaine shipments and the percentage of detected shipments successfully handed off to law enforcement organizations. Analyzing trends in such measures could help DOD better evaluate the effectiveness of its contribution to the national drug control effort." The Pentagon agreed with GAO that it needs to continue developing ways to measure performance in the counterdrug mission, and stressed the department's "aggressive action" taken to meet detection and monitoring requirements despite a reduction in available resources. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake