>Sender: >To: >X-Original-Message-ID: <04fc01bf2539$7bb7f440$9acf69cf@pacbell.net> >From: "Peter McWilliams" >Subject: How McCaffrey is covered by an objective press >Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 05:52:20 -0800 >X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 >X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 > > >FINANCIAL TIMES [London] > >Monday, 1 November 1999 > >General loses out in the war of words > >It was billed as a UK-US drug summit, but British officials claim it >didn't turn out quite that way. A three-day visit to London by General >Barry McCaffrey, the US "drug tsar", provoked embarrassment and tension >in equal doses. > >According to UK officials, the visit to London as part of a European tour >that ended yesterday in Paris appears to have been arranged by Gen >McCaffrey with one eye firmly based on a pre-election US audience. > >In 1996, he was chosen by President Bill Clinton as director of the White >House Office of National Drug Control Policy. To Republicans, Gen >McCaffrey hasn't been tough enough on drugs, while "legalisers" have >argued that the US continues to ignore the underlying social causes of >addiction by putting too much emphasis on law enforcement. > >His European agenda was arranged in an effort to show that this Vietnam >and Gulf War veteran-turned-social-policy-crusader could be all things to >all men. > >Yet many British observers were struck more by his military demeanour and >that of some of his entourage. In a press briefing at a US embassy >residence last Sunday, Gen McCaffrey tried to eschew such military >metaphors as "war on drugs", instead describing drug abuse by one in 17 >Americans as a "cancer". > >When questioned he used less diplomatic language, confirming his belief >in the need for more military assistance to Colombia where "vital US >interests are at stake", and implying European governments needed to do >more in fighting drugs. Gen McCaffrey presented officials charts claiming >that the Colombians were increasingly redirecting their cocaine from the >US and towards Europe. > >The rest of his time in London was taken up with hastily rearranged >schedules partly due to threats of demonstrations by "legalisers" and >partly the absence of government ministers. > >Some British officials found themselves trying to smooth over the results >of the heavy-handed tactics sometimes adopted by the McCaffrey entourage. > >On Monday, a visit to Goldsmith's College to mark the inauguration of a >new drug information web site had the McCaffrey bandwagon unsettled by a >student demonstration and by the statement of a leading academic expert >on drug prevention who told him that UK schools had nothing to learn from >an educational programme Britain had imported from the US. "Our research >shows that it simply is not working here," said Louise O'Connor, head of >the drugs research unit at Roehampton University. > >The following day, British and US officials issued a joint statement that >both sides had "exchanged views and experiences on a wide range of drug >policy issues" at a press conference where tension simmered. While the >official spin was on co-operation, the trip served to underline the >differences in personalities and the policies involved in both countries. > >The government has borrowed the term "drug tsar" from the US to boost the >profile of Keith Hellawell, the former senior policeman given the job of >national drugs co-ordinator. He has tried recently to redefine himself in >the public eye as a conciliator between government departments. > >Unlike his US counterpart, the UK drugs co-ordinator has no ministerial >status or obvious executive powers. But in an interview on the eve of the >McCaffrey visit, Mr Hellawell argued that this put him at an advantage >compared to the general. > >"I have a direct line to those involved in drugs programmes on the >ground. My job is to co-ordinate between ministries, not to fight for my >own budget. I'm not seen as a threat by other ministers," he said >conscious of Gen McCaffrey's struggles in dealing with other departments >of state and Congress. > > >================================================================ > >This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . >To unsubscribe, E-mail to: