Background Major Drug-Producing and  Drug-Transit Countries in  the Western Hemisphere The majority of illicit drugs consumed in the United States is produced in  Mexico and South America and enters the United States across the  southwest border or through the Caribbean. Among countries in the  Western Hemisphere, Colombia and Peru are major producers of illicit  drugs, while Bolivia, Jamaica, and Mexico are both major producers and  major transit countries, according to State (see fig. 1). Mexico is a major source and transit country for heroin,  methamphetamine, and marijuana destined for the U.S. market. Jamaica  is likewise the largest Caribbean supplier of marijuana for the U.S.  market. Colombia is the world’s top producer of cocaine and is the major  provider of cocaine available in the United States. While Bolivia and Peru  are also major producers of cocaine, cocaine from these countries is  generally smuggled into other South American countries for domestic  consumption or for shipment to Europe, East Asia, and beyond, according  to State. According to U.S. government estimates, illicit drugs originating in Mexico  enter the United States directly through the southwest border, but virtually  all cocaine from South America and marijuana from Jamaica are  trafficked to the United States through the “Transit Zone”—a 7-million- square-mile area that encompasses Central America, Mexico, the eastern  Pacific Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea. The Transit  Zone has four principal maritime trafficking routes: the Eastern Pacific,  Western Caribbean, Central Caribbean, and Eastern Caribbean. The  Transit Zone land route is funneled north through Central America into  Mexico, where it splits in several directions up to the U.S. southwest  border. Although Canada is not within the Transit Zone, various drugs,  including fentanyl, transit through it before entering the United States,  according to the Department of State. Illicit Drug-Trafficking  Shifts and Related  Challenges In recent years, the production, trafficking, and marketing of various illicit  substances consumed in the United States have undergone significant  shifts. For example, according to the 2016 National Drug Control  Strategy, over the previous 8 years, opioid abuse emerged as the  greatest drug threat to the nation. This development was complicated by  a spike in the supply and purity of heroin, primarily from Mexico, resulting  in a combined epidemic of heroin-opioid overdose deaths. According to  the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, heroin overdose deaths  more than tripled between 2010 and 2015, as powerful synthetic opioids,  notably illicit fentanyl, were often mixed with heroin without the user’s  knowledge. Similarly, in its 2017 International Narcotics Control Strategy  Report, State reported various indicators suggesting a significant increase  in cocaine production and trafficking from Colombia. For example,  according to this report, coca cultivation in Colombia increased by 39  percent in 2014 and by 42 percent in 2015, and the amount of cocaine  trafficked out of Colombia has reached record levels. Consistent with  these reported trends in cocaine production and trafficking, Centers for  Disease Control and Prevention data indicate that, after falling sharply in  the middle of the past decade, overdose deaths related to cocaine have  been gradually rising in the United States. Finally, while a significant  portion of the marijuana consumed in the United States continues to be  smuggled from Western Hemisphere countries, including Canada,  Jamaica, and Mexico, the domestic production and marketing of  marijuana are undergoing important shifts, as several states and the  District of Columbia have passed measures that legalize possession of  limited amounts of the drug and provide for regulation of its production,  processing, and sales. These shifting trends pose challenges for  agencies’ counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere and  domestically, as they strive to respond to changing conditions. Role of ONDCP in U.S.  Counternarcotics Efforts in  the Western Hemisphere ONDCP coordinates the National Drug Control Program and develops a  5-year National Drug Control Strategy, which it updates annually, as well  as a number of companion strategies that focus on various geographical  areas and emerging threats, to articulate the administration’s drug control  policy. ONDCP was established by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 to,  among other things, enhance national drug control planning and  coordination and represent the drug policies of the executive branch  before Congress. In this role, ONDCP is responsible for (1) developing a  national drug control policy, (2) developing and applying specific goals  and performance measurements to evaluate the effectiveness of national  drug control policy and National Drug Control Program agencies’  programs, (3) overseeing and coordinating the implementation of the  national drug control policy, and (4) assessing and certifying the  adequacy of the budget for national drug control programs. ONDCP requires National Drug Control Program agencies to submit an  annual drug control budget, categorized into 10 federal drug control  program areas. One program area is international efforts, which ONDCP  defines as activities focused on regions outside the United States that are  intended to reduce illegal drug availability in the United States or abroad.  Three additional ONDCP drug control program areas—intelligence,  interdiction, and investigations—include domestic as well as international  efforts, as interdictions may occur at or outside U.S. borders, and  intelligence and investigative efforts may target drug organizations  operating outside the United States. Key Agencies Involved in  International Efforts to  Combat Illicit Drugs  Entering the United States In addition to ONDCP, eight agencies are involved in the four program  areas that support counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere to  stop the production and transshipment of illicit drugs or their precursors  destined for the United States. These activities include the following:  interdictions at U.S. borders; maritime drug interdictions in international waters and in international  interdictions in concert with partner nations in international and  territorial waters;  intelligence gathering to support drug interdictions, investigations, and  international activities;  investigations of drug organizations based in countries outside the  United States; eradication support and efforts; and building foreign partner capacity to conduct counternarcotics activities. Table 1 shows the eight U.S. government agencies that allocate  resources in one or more of the four ONDCP program areas— counternarcotics intelligence, interdiction, international activities, and  investigations—that we included in our review. For a detailed description  of ONDCP’s program areas, more information on the roles of these  agencies, and the countries in which they operate, see appendixes I, II,  and III, respectively. U.S. Agencies  Identified Billions of  Dollars in Spending  Primarily or Partially  for Western  Hemisphere  Counternarcotics  Efforts for 2010  through 2015 Some Agencies Track  Counternarcotics  Spending by Region and  Identified $5 Billion in  Obligations for Activities in  the Western Hemisphere Of the agencies included in our review, DOD, ICE, INL, and USAID track  counternarcotics spending on a regional basis and provided data on  funds obligated for counternarcotics activities in the Western  Hemisphere. As table 2 shows, these agencies obligated more than $5  billion for counternarcotics activities in the Western Hemisphere during  fiscal years 2010 through 2015. (See app. III for the agencies’ regional or  country-level counternarcotics obligations, as available). DOD obligated a total of more than $2.8 billion for counternarcotics  activities in the Western Hemisphere for fiscal years 2010 through 2015.  According to DOD documents, these activities support U.S. domestic and  foreign government efforts to combat drug trafficking and drug-related  terrorist activities through detection and monitoring of illicit drug  smuggling, information and intelligence sharing, and capacity building.  DOD generally tracks its counternarcotics spending by geographic  combatant command and various functional areas. A significant portion of  DOD’s counternarcotics activities in the Western Hemisphere are  conducted by U.S. Northern Command and U.S. Southern Command.  These resources fund DOD’s training and equipment provided to foreign  partners conducting counternarcotics activities, surveillance and  communications systems, aircraft patrolling the transit zone, and costs  associated with operating DOD’s Joint Interagency Task Force South.  However, the obligations for counternarcotics activities that DOD reported  for fiscal years 2010 through 2015 underrepresent its overall obligations  for such activities because the reported amounts do not include U.S.  Northern Command’s and U.S. Southern Command’s salaries and  expenses of its personnel and counternarcotics-related intelligence  activities. It also does not include DOD’s agency-wide intelligence  gathering and training, as well as aircraft flight hours and ship days in  support of counternarcotics activities. ICE expended a total of about $212 million for salaries and expenses of  Homeland Security Investigations’ (HSI) agents and analysts working on  drug cases in various countries in the Western Hemisphere during fiscal  years 2010 through 2015. ICE made these expenditures for the  following three HSI programs: The Domestic Investigations program covers enforcement efforts to  disrupt cross-border criminal activity related to contraband smuggling  and the dismantling of the transnational criminal organizations  responsible for these activities. International Operations covers HSI’s international investigations  involving transnational criminal organizations and serves as ICE’s  liaison to foreign law enforcement counterparts overseas. The Office of Intelligence provides intelligence services for Domestic  Investigations and International Operations to support criminal  investigations to disrupt and dismantle criminal organizations involved  in the transnational drug trade and associated money-laundering  crimes. INL obligated a total of more than $1.5 billion for counternarcotics  activities in the Western Hemisphere in fiscal years 2010 through 2015.  During this period, INL funded projects that were designed to improve  foreign law enforcement and intelligence-gathering capabilities; enhance  the effectiveness of criminal justice sectors to allow foreign governments  to increase drug shipment interdictions; investigate, prosecute, and  convict narcotics criminals; and break up major drug-trafficking  organizations. INL also used U.S. federal law enforcement entities to  provide technical assistance to its counterparts overseas. Examples of  INL’s technical assistance include the following:  In Mexico, INL’s efforts focused on enhancing the Mexican  government’s capacity to interdict illegal narcotics while not impeding  the flow of legitimate goods. This included providing detection dogs,  equipment, and training to the Mexican Federal Police, Customs,  Army, and Navy. In Colombia, INL’s program focused on aerial eradication of coca  plants, land and maritime interdictions, and capacity building for  counternarcotics forces. In Peru, INL programs included support for manual eradication of  coca plants, interdiction efforts, and drug demand reduction activities. In Central America, INL efforts included building interdiction capacities  such as funding vetted units sponsored by federal law enforcement  partners and providing technical assistance and equipment for air and  maritime interdiction. In the Caribbean, INL efforts focused on building partner nation  interdiction capacity, providing support for vetted units, and enhancing  information sharing among partner nations. USAID obligated a total of about $638 million for Western Hemisphere  counternarcotics activities in fiscal years 2010 through 2015, supporting  alternative development projects in Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and  Peru. According to agency officials, the USAID mission in Colombia is  working to create licit alternatives to coca production, including holistic  support to viable and lucrative agricultural value chains, such as cacao,  specialty coffee, and other products that can be sold on domestic and  export markets; provision of rural financial services and credits for licit  opportunities; efforts to attract private sector investment into rural regions;  and, to a lesser degree, helping communities build infrastructure, such as  roads, to help licit products reach markets. USAID’s alternative  development program in Peru aims to promote licit incomes and improved  governance to sustain coca reductions achieved through forced  eradication. In partnership with the Peruvian national drug commission,  the USAID mission in Peru facilitates the implementation of alternative  development programs in the country, including improving the drug  commission’s ability to monitor and evaluate these programs. The  mission has also partnered with the private sector to improve processes  involved in preparing cacao crops for the market. Agencies That Do Not  Track Counternarcotics  Spending by Region  Reported About $34 Billion  for Activities Focused on  the Western Hemisphere While the other agencies in our review—CBP, Coast Guard, DEA, and  OCDETF—do not track spending specific to their counternarcotics  activities in the Western Hemisphere, they conduct most of their  counternarcotics activities in the Western Hemisphere or target threats  originating in Western Hemisphere countries, according to agency  officials. Thus, while the agencies’ overall counternarcotics obligations  overstate spending for such activities in the Western Hemisphere, these  obligations approximate the Coast Guard’s, CBP’s, and OCDETF’s  spending on activities that were primarily for these purposes in the region.  However, DEA was not able to identify spending levels for  counternarcotics activities in the Western Hemisphere, and the  obligations it provided included spending for some domestic and other  international counternarcotics activities. These four agencies had total  obligations of nearly $34 billion for their overall counternarcotics activities  during fiscal years 2010 through 2015 (see table 3). The Coast Guard obligated a total of almost $5.3 billion for its drug- interdiction activities for fiscal years 2010 through 2015. As the nation’s  principal federal agency for maritime safety, security, and stewardship,  the Coast Guard has a drug interdiction objective to reduce the flow of  illegal drugs entering the United States by denying smugglers access to  maritime routes. The Coast Guard’s counternarcotics obligations in fiscal  years 2010 through 2015 covered the agency’s operating expenses,  which include costs associated with operating Coast Guard facilities,  maintaining capital equipment, improving management effectiveness, and  maintaining an active duty military and civilian workforce. These funds  also supported reserve training and acquisition, construction, and  improvement of capital assets and facilities. The Coast Guard does not  maintain data on the portion of the agency’s drug resources that are used  for the interdiction of drugs trafficked to or from countries outside the  Western Hemisphere. However, according to Coast Guard officials,  because the agency’s counternarcotics efforts take place around U.S.  maritime borders and in transit zones in the Western Hemisphere, the  agency’s drug resources are generally expended in the Western  Hemisphere. CBP obligated a total of more than $13 billion for its counternarcotics  activities in fiscal years 2010 through 2015. According to the agency’s  budget documents, CBP used its counternarcotics spending to carry out  its border security mission at and between all ports of entry and to  conduct air and marine operations in source, transit, and arrival zones in  the Western Hemisphere. The agency also obligated funds to invest in  border security technology and infrastructure to detect and monitor  suspicious air, maritime, and land traffic. CBP’s counternarcotics funds  also were used for training and information technology to support its  activities. CBP officials indicated that, because CBP’s mission is to  protect U.S. borders, the agency’s counternarcotics spending should  generally be considered resources spent in the Western Hemisphere.  However, CBP’s reported obligations also include resources dedicated to  border protection measures to interdict shipments of drugs and precursor  chemicals from countries outside the Western Hemisphere. DEA obligated a total of almost $13 billion for its domestic and  international enforcement activities in fiscal years 2010 through 2015.  DEA is the lead U.S. agency responsible for the development of the  overall federal drug enforcement strategy, programs, planning, and  evaluation. DEA’s budget includes categories for domestic enforcement,  international enforcement, and state and local support. While domestic  enforcement accounts for the majority of DEA’s resources, DEA  coordinates its domestic and international enforcement activities (i.e.,  DEA’s foreign offices) to pursue, at the highest level, multinational drug  organizations and, at the lowest level, independent drug cells, according  to documents. With regard to international enforcement, DEA tracks  regional spending for salaries and expenses associated with agents and  intelligence analysts posted in countries overseas. DEA’s international  enforcement includes more than $1 billion in obligations for salaries and  expenses for personnel posted in Western Hemisphere countries in fiscal  years 2010 through 2015. OCDETF obligated a total of about $2.1 billion for counternarcotics- related efforts in fiscal years 2010 through 2015. According to OCDETF  reports, this funding supported investigations targeting the highest priority  drug-related transnational crime organizations. OCDETF’s funds were  used to reimburse a number of DOJ components—DEA, the FBI, and the  OCDETF Fusion Center, a multiagency intelligence center—for their  support of OCDETF investigations of high-priority targets. According to  a senior OCDETF official, although the agency’s financial system does  not contain information that would allow us to ascertain the amounts  obligated for investigations of international targets located in the Western  Hemisphere, very few OCDETF cases involve drugs coming into the  United States from outside the Western Hemisphere. Most OCDETF  investigations target drugs coming into the United States from other  Western Hemisphere countries. Agencies Reported  Collecting and  Disseminating Best  Practices and  Lessons Learned  Related to  Counternarcotics  Efforts ONDCP Facilitates  Sharing of  Counternarcotics Best  Practices and Lessons  Learned ONDCP facilitates the sharing of best practices and lessons learned with  interagency and foreign partners by including the topic on the agendas of  key meetings, according to ONDCP officials. For example, ONDCP  officials described the sharing of best practices and lessons learned with  stakeholders from Canada, Mexico, and the United States at technical  workshops of the North American Drug Dialogue held in March 2017. At  these workshops, the Department of State shared with its Mexican  partners lessons learned pertaining to Colombia and Peru, including the  following: Eradication of coca alone is not sufficient. A whole-of-government  approach that provides security, the incentive of alternative  development, the disincentive of eradication, and intelligence-led  interdiction efforts that deny harvesters or traffickers the ability to  profit from the product is essential. Results take time. For example, the 90-percent reduction in coca  production in San Martin, Peru, took 12 years. Efforts should be geographically targeted and driven by information  and intelligence, given scarce resources. For example, data can be  used to allow for planning targeted eradication operations, based on  intelligence or other information, and for the planning of  complementary interventions, such as rural development or target  eradication goals. According to ONDCP officials, best practices and lessons learned are  also described in the National Drug Control Strategy as well as  companion strategies such as the Southwest Border and Caribbean  Counternarcotics strategies. For example, according to the 2010 National  Drug Control Strategy, lessons learned such as the following can be  drawn from Colombia’s experience that might be useful elsewhere: Host-government ownership. For example, although Plan Colombia  required extensive U.S. financial support, the Colombian government  demonstrated that it was fully committed to the initiative under  consecutive administrations. Government-wide approach. Eradication can be an effective deterrent  to illicit cultivation and can provide an incentive to move to licit crops.  However, eradication must be accompanied by a government  presence in rural areas; alternative development to preclude  replanting or dispersal of plots; and a focus on rule of law and human  rights, humanitarian needs, and social and economic reform to reduce  the incentive to revert to illicit crops. Security. Security is a precondition for the successful expansion of  social services and developmental assistance. Security must be  maintained to allow the expansion of legal economic activities and the  delivery of civilian services, including justice, education, and health, to  a population unaccustomed to a significant government presence. Flexibility. Programs must adapt to changing circumstances, including  adjusting programs that are not working as expected and adding new  initiatives, if necessary. Long-term approach. Major counternarcotics programs designed to  address complex and long-standing challenges require a multiyear  investment in terms of financial resources and political commitment. ONDCP has also promoted best practices through other efforts. For  example, the 2015 National Drug Control Strategy included an action item  to work with the Organization of American States’ Inter-American Drug  Abuse Control Commission to strengthen counterdrug Institutions in the  Western Hemisphere. As part of this effort, ONDCP and the Department  of State participated in the Demand Reduction and the Alternatives to  Incarceration meetings, which focused on promoting best practices and  expanding host-nation capacity. Reflecting this effort, Organization of  American States’ officials cited as a best practice the training of 300  Colombian and Argentinian judges and chief justices, who learned about  the Alternatives to Incarceration model, in November 2016. Most Agencies Reported  Collecting Best Practices  and Lessons Learned from  Counternarcotics Efforts Officials at 7 of the 10 agencies included in our review reported having  processes for identifying and collecting best practices and lessons  learned from counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere.  Officials at each of these seven agencies also reported having  mechanisms to share best practices and lessons learned, including  through web-enabled systems, and sharing these best practices and  lessons learned with other U.S. agencies and foreign partners. In  addition, officials at six of the seven agencies reported having a formal  review process for determining best practices and lessons learned. USAID and DOD guidance and officials described comprehensive  processes for collecting and sharing information about best practices and  lessons learned. For example, according to USAID guidance, its Country  Development Cooperation Strategy “should include a summary of lessons  learned from the implementation of the previous Country Development  Cooperation Strategy or other strategic plans (if applicable) and from  previous experiences (e.g., projects and activities).” The guidance  states that at least once during the course of implementing the Country  Development Cooperation Strategy, USAID missions must collect  information by conducting reviews of ongoing efforts and of options for  better aligning their programs with changes in the context, agency  direction, and lessons learned. In addition, according to USAID officials,  other levels of program planning incorporate lessons learned and good  programming, such as portfolio reviews and other processes involving the  periodic assessment of a particular aspect of a mission or a Washington  operating unit’s strategy, projects, or activities. USAID evaluations of its  alternative development projects in Colombia include examples of best  practices and lessons learned, such as the following: The success of a project depends on reducing the appeal of coca by  improving the social and economic value of legal alternatives. Robust licit economies fueled by productive associations, local and  regional market integration, and improved transportation networks can  reduce coca cultivation. A necessary precondition for successful alternative development is  the allocation of resources and personnel to rural areas where coca is  cultivated. Only those strategies that can be accomplished within predetermined  time frames and resource parameters and that have a proven track  record of reducing coca cultivation should be implemented. Reinforcing local community institutions and providing youth-focused  programming can help insulate vulnerable communities against the  allure of drug trafficking and coca cultivation. DOD reported using a formal process for identifying and collecting best  practices and lessons learned through its Joint Lessons Learned  Program, which consists of five phases: discovery, validation, resolution,  evaluation, and dissemination. According to DOD officials, the collection  of best practices and lessons learned relating to counternarcotics in the  Western Hemisphere through this program is intended to enhance  readiness and effectiveness. DOD officials noted that the effort to collect  best practices and lessons learned is routine and helps inform policy and  budget proceedings. Annual conferences, such as the Counternarcotics  and Global Threats Coordination Conference and the Program Objective  Memoranda Conference, also offer an opportunity to identify, collect, and  disseminate best practices and lessons learned as they relate to DOD’s  counterdrug and counter-transnational-organized-crime operations.  According to DOD officials, such conferences provide a forum for  participants to learn how other relevant DOD components working on  counternarcotics efforts are approaching counterdrug, transnational  organized crime, and related issues. DOD officials also noted that they  intend to use an interagency-agency-task-forces approach to  counternarcotics interdiction that the U.S. Southern Command developed  in Guatemala as a model for sharing best practices and lessons learned  in the region. According to DOD officials, the U.S. Southern Command’s  support included training in interdiction tactics, techniques, and  procedures, and maintenance of provided equipment such as intercept  boats, tactical vehicles, communications gear, and night vision devices.  DOD officials reported that lessons learned include establishing the  interagency legal framework early, clearly defining interagency  relationships, developing the task force’s intelligence capability,  implementing police authority and leadership, identifying measures of  success, communicating the task force’s purpose and success to the  public, and maintaining equipment. DOD officials said that they plan to  use the Guatemalan interagency task force as a model with other foreign  partners and new counterdrug units in Guatemala and in the region. State’s report, “Lessons Learned from the Mérida Initiative and Plan  Colombia with Regard to Judicial Reform Efforts,” provides specific  examples of operational and tactical lessons, as follows: Political will is critical. According to State, one of the clearest symbols  of political will was Mexico’s and Colombia’s dedication of additional  resources (to initiatives under the Mérida Initiative and Plan  Colombia). In addition, according to State, the governments of El  Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras created a joint regional plan, the  Plan of Alliance for Prosperity, underscoring their political will and  significant commitment to improve economic opportunities,  governance, and public safety. For example, these governments  identified $2.6 billion in their 2016 budgets to, among other things,  target criminal networks, tackle corruption, and strengthen  government institutions. No lasting security without enhanced access to justice. The  governments of Colombia and Mexico have undertaken efforts to  expand access to justice in their countries. Since 2008, the  government of Mexico has been working to improve the transparency  and efficiency of its judicial system by implementing an oral-based  accusatorial system. Partnership across agencies is critical. Plan Colombia represented a  whole-of-government approach, with a broad U.S. interagency  presence to work across the breadth of the Colombian government.  This U.S. interagency presence built linkages at all levels and ensured  continuity of vision through leadership transitions in the U.S. and  Colombian governments. U.S. Agencies Use  Various Mechanisms  to Address Changing  Counternarcotics  Conditions in the  Western Hemisphere ONDCP Strategies Lay  Out Key Efforts to  Respond to Emerging  Counternarcotics Threats ONDCP works with agencies to coordinate responses to changing  conditions in a variety of ways. ONDCP is responsible for developing (1)  the National Drug Control Strategy, which sets forth a comprehensive  plan to reduce illicit drug use through programs intended to prevent or  treat drug use or reduce the availability of illegal drugs; and (2) several  associated companion strategies, which target government efforts to  respond to emerging counternarcotics threats for key geographic areas. The Strategy issued in 2010 laid out the administration’s 5-year blueprint  for combatting drug use and included a section on counternarcotics  efforts in the Western Hemisphere. The 2010 Strategy described an  approach that reflected two core focus areas: (1) disrupting domestic drug  trafficking and production and (2) strengthening international partnerships  to reduce the availability of foreign-produced drugs in the United States.  The Strategy, including the portions associated with counternarcotics  efforts in the Western Hemisphere, is updated annually to reflect current  priorities and conditions. According to ONDCP officials, an example of a  key change since 2010 is the developing focus on the opioid crisis. In  2010, the President’s first National Drug Control Strategy emphasized the  need for action to address opioid use disorders and overdose, while  ensuring that individuals with pain receive safe, effective treatment. On  April 19, 2011, the White House released its national Prescription Drug  Abuse Prevention Plan, which outlined its goals for addressing  prescription drug abuse and overdose. The 2016 Strategy continued the previous administration’s focus on the  opioid crisis but recognized the growing threats from drug-trafficking  organizations involved in manufacturing and distributing cocaine and  synthetic drugs, including novel psychoactive substances such as  synthetic cannabinoids. To address these efforts, the Strategy described  U.S. agencies’ interdiction activities, and DEA led efforts to disrupt  synthetic drug production and trafficking. The 2016 Strategy also noted  U.S. collaboration with China to limit the export of precursor chemicals  associated with the production of psychoactive substances. ONDCP also develops companion strategies with a geographic focus,  such as the National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy, the  Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy, and the Caribbean Border  Counternarcotics Strategy. The 2015 Strategy acknowledges the  companion strategies and indicates that the efforts they describe will be  carried out. These strategies include objectives such as enhancing  intelligence, interdicting drugs and drug proceeds, ensuring prosecution,  disrupting and dismantling drug-trafficking organizations, and improving  cooperation with international partners. The companion strategies have provided opportunities for more targeted  responses to address emerging threats in specific geographic areas,  which include the following:  National Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy focused  primarily on U.S. government efforts to prevent the trafficking of illicit  drugs—heroin, methamphetamine, cocaine, and foreign-produced  marijuana—across the U.S.-Mexican border. The strategy also  addressed the illegal outbound movement of weapons and bulk  currency from the United States, both of which are associated with  activities of narcotics traffickers. As an example of the growing threat  posed by the trafficking of heroin from Mexico, the quantity seized on  the southwest border nearly tripled, from 1,080 kilograms in 2010 to  3,158 kilograms in 2015. To address these threats, ONDCP  expanded the focus of the 2011 National Southwest Border  Counternarcotics Strategy to provide border communities with  enhanced prevention and drug treatment assistance, in the context of  maintaining strong and resilient communities. The 2013 strategy  stressed the same basic goals and objectives: substantially reduce  the flow of illicit drugs, drug proceeds, and associated instruments of  violence across the southwest border as well as maintain strong and  resilient communities. This strategy also included indicators related to  seizures of drugs at the border. The 2016 strategy differed slightly  from the 2013 strategy by elaborating on the threats of various illicit  drugs. It also noted that “anything that affects one part of the border  affects the entire border” and noted that, for this reason, the National  Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy must be synchronized  with the other companion strategies, and the Heroin Availability  Reduction Plan. National Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy. The 2012  National Northern Border Counternarcotics Strategy, which ONDCP  first issued that year, parallels the National Southwest  Counternarcotics Border Strategy and focuses on ongoing efforts to  reduce transnational organized crime threats on both sides of the  border between the United States and Canada, specifically the  movement of illicit drugs such as marijuana, ecstasy,  methamphetamine, and cocaine, and the proceeds from the sale of  those drugs. The 2014 strategy emphasizes enhanced federal  collaboration with state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies.  The legislation mandating that ONDCP publish the National Northern  Border Counternarcotics Strategy requires that this document be  released biannually; as of June 2017, the 2016 version had not  been released. Caribbean Border Counternarcotics Strategy. The Caribbean Border  Counternarcotics Strategy, issued in January 2015, is substantially  equivalent to the national counternarcotics strategies for the  southwest and northern borders, according to ONDCP. The strategy  identifies cocaine as the principal drug threat and a source of  associated violence in the Caribbean region and notes that the  documented cocaine flow via the Caribbean to the United States more  than doubled from 2011 to 2013, rising from 38 metric tons to 91  metric tons. According to DEA, over 90 metric tons of cocaine was  trafficked from South America using sea routes through the Caribbean  corridor, primarily toward the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico, in  2014. Interagency Groups, Task  Forces, and Committees  Coordinate Government  Response to Emerging  Counternarcotics Threats Interagency Working Groups ONDCP facilitates a number of interagency working groups to address  emerging threats. According to ONDCP’s 2016 National Southwest  Border Counternarcotics Strategy, interagency working groups relevant to  counternarcotics efforts allow agencies with different authorities and  resources to address common concerns, create a common operating  picture, identify resource and capability gaps, and leverage resources.  ONCDP has created working groups, such as groups focused on heroin  and cocaine, to develop actions, goals, and measures to reduce the  supply of those drugs in the U.S. market as a part of the overall effort to  address treatment and demand, as noted in the following examples:  In November 2015, ONDCP established the National Heroin  Coordination Group in coordination with the National Security  Council to provide guidance on interagency activities aimed at  reducing the supply of heroin and illicit fentanyl in the U.S market.  The working group includes agencies with federal law enforcement  responsibilities and their components, select High Intensity Drug  Trafficking Areas (HIDTA), the U.S. embassy in Mexico, and other  federal agencies and state entities. In June 2016, the group produced  the 5-year Heroin Availability Reduction Plan as part of the  administration’s effort to prevent and treat heroin abuse. In January 2016, ONDCP created an internal working group on  methamphetamine and synthetic drugs to coordinate efforts across  drug control agencies. The group’s priorities included working in  concert with federal partners, with source and transit countries to  reduce the availability of illicit methamphetamine in the United States,  and multilaterally to reduce the global trafficking of illicit  methamphetamine and precursor chemicals coming primarily from  Mexico. In September 2016, ONDCP created a National Cocaine Coordination  Group to address emerging threats from cocaine brought on by the  spike in coca cultivation and production as well as the associated  increase in its trafficking and use in the United States. In addition to  employing three permanent staff, the interagency group draws from  expertise in intelligence, public health, and international demand  reduction at DOJ, the FBI, other federal partners, and various parts of  ONDCP. Interagency Task Forces Agencies use task forces to enhance the interagency coordination  needed to respond to emerging threats, according to officials. For  example, to address the smuggling of illicit drugs over the southwest  border, in May 2014 DHS established three new joint task forces—Joint  Task Force–East, Joint Task Force–West, and the Joint Task Force for  Investigations—in support of its Southern Border and Approaches  Campaign. The task forces coordinate operations to combat transnational  criminal organizations and counter illegal drug flows at maritime  approaches and in between ports of entry. All three joint task forces  incorporate elements of the Coast Guard, CBP, and ICE as well as DHS’s  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Joint Task Force–East is  responsible for the southern maritime border and approaches, Joint Task  Force–West is responsible for the southern land border and the West  Coast, and the Joint Task Force for Investigations focuses on  investigations in support of the geographic task forces. Task forces also enhance coordination, deconfliction, and information  sharing by colocating representatives from different entities, which  facilitates interaction and enables information sharing, as we previously  reported. For example, Joint Interagency Task Force South includes 26  agencies and 20 foreign partners that work together to detect and monitor  illicit trafficking in the air and maritime domains, facilitating international  and interagency interdiction and apprehension. Information sharing is a  critical aspect of the Joint Interagency Task Force South’s strategic  approach in supporting national and foreign partner nation law  enforcement and promoting regional stability in the Western Hemisphere.  As part of this effort, Joint Interagency Task Force South uses a tool  known as the Cooperative Situational Information Integration system to  share strategic communications and information with foreign partner  nations, according to Joint Interagency Task Force South officials. In  addition, U.S. Tactical Analysis Teams, which are posted at U.S. missions  overseas, and liaison officers from foreign partner nations, provide for a  high level of integrated information, according to officials at Joint  Interagency Task Force South. Officials indicated that Tactical Analysis  Teams and liaison officers provide the information that results in 60 to 70  percent of all task force cases, directly contributing to 50 to 60 percent of  all Joint Interagency Task Force South drug seizures. The task force  reported that its efforts resulted in 80 percent of total U.S. cocaine  seizures (282 of 338 metric tons) in fiscal year 2016. According to Joint Interagency Task Force South, the advantages of  working as a task force include the ability to use the participants’ various  legal authorities (see the text box for an example): DOD brings detection and monitoring authorities. DOJ and DHS bring anticrime authorities. The Coast Guard brings its maritime law enforcement authorities. DEA, the FBI, and HSI bring drug and finance laws enforcement  authorities. CBP and HSI bring customs and immigration authorities. Partner nations bring multiple authorities from their countries. A typical case that illustrates how the various authorities of component agencies  work together in the Joint Interagency Task Force South could start with receipt  of actionable law enforcement information from the Drug Enforcement  Administration. This information prompts the deployment of a Customs and  Border Protection or Coast Guard plane that subsequently detects and monitors  a suspect vessel until Joint Interagency Task Force South can deploy a Coast  Guard, U.S. Navy, or allied government’s ship with an on-board law enforcement  detachment to investigate. When the deployed ship arrives at the vessel’s  location, the Coast Guard assumes control of the investigation. If the suspect  vessel is not registered in the United States, the Coast Guard commander  implements a bilateral agreement with the vessel’s country of registration to  confirm the vessel’s nationality and to stop, board, and search the vessel for  drugs. If drugs are found, the State Department, Department of Justice, and the  vessel’s country of registry coordinate jurisdiction over, and disposition of, the  vessel, drugs, and crew. OCDETF has also established multiagency Strike Forces (i.e., a type of  task force) in 12 key cities around the country. According to OCDETF’s  fiscal year 2017 report to Congress, the Strike Forces aggressively target  the highest-level trafficking organizations and function as central points of  contact for OCDETF agents and federal prosecutors nationwide,  gathering intelligence and disseminating investigative leads throughout  neighboring areas. The report states that Strike Force members are  colocated in offices separate from their parent agencies and interact with  each other on a daily basis using the resources and support of their  parent agencies. According to OCEDTF’s report, Strike Force efforts help  further counternarcotics investigations by combining the resources and  expertise of all OCDETF participating investigators and prosecutors. The  report also states that, in recognition of the nationwide heroin threat,  OCDETF adjusted its resources to target heroin investigations and that  when heroin use was rising in 2014 and 2015, the percentage of  indictments with heroin charges likewise increased over the same time  frame. According to OCDETF’s report, Strike Force effectiveness is  reflected in the caseload of active investigations linked to OCDETF’s  Consolidated Priority Organization Targets. OCDETF reported that, in  fiscal year 2015, 45 percent of Strike Forces’ active investigations were  linked to OCDETF Consolidated Priority Organization Targets; in contrast,  22 percent of all OCDETF investigations addressing transnational  organized crime were linked to these targets. Interagency Policy Committees The National Security Council has a number of interagency policy  committees that prioritize counternarcotics, including changing conditions,  in the Western Hemisphere. National Security interagency policy  committees are the primary day-to-day forums for interagency  coordination of national security policy, according to Presidential Decision  Directive 1. National Security Presidential Directive 25 directs U.S.  government agencies to attack the vulnerabilities of drug-trafficking  organizations and disrupt key business sectors and weaken the economic  basis of the drug trade. For example, the Transborder Security and  Western Hemisphere Directorates interagency policy committee on  Mexico Security Priorities directed ONDCP to establish the National  Heroin Coordination Group. The agencies represented on the interagency  policy committees vary, but the core group involved in addressing heroin  and fentanyl include ONDCP, State, DOJ, DOD, DHS, the Department of  Health and Human Services, the Office of the Director of National  Intelligence, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (as appropriate), and the  Office of Management and Budget. Several interagency policy committees related to addressing heroin  include (1) Transborder Security and Western Hemisphere, (2) Fentanyl  Surge, and (3) the Heroin Availability Reduction Plan. Among the topics  discussed at the committee meetings were the formation of the National  Heroin Coordination Group, which created the Heroin Availability  Reduction Plan, as well as approval of the plan, and deliberate and  tangible actions the interagency policy committees could take under the  Heroin Availability Reduction Plan to visibly disrupt the fentanyl supply  chain coming into the United States. There were also various efforts set  up to address common issues related to illicit opioids among the United  States, Mexico, and Canada, which were addressed in forums such as  the North American Drug Dialogue or the U.S.-Mexico Security  Cooperation Group. Subinteragency policy committees include the U.S.- Mexico Security Group; North American Drug Dialogue; and Fentanyl- Asia, Fentanyl-Cyber, Fentanyl Screening, and Fentanyl Sub-Interagency  Policy Committees. Among the topics discussed were the fentanyl threat  and sources of supply into the United States, tangible actions to disrupt  the fentanyl supply chain, Asia’s role in the fentanyl supply and actions  that could be taken to address it, and an examination of the purchase and  sale of fentanyl over the Internet for shipment through the mail services  and actions taken to detect such shipments. The interagency policy  committees that address cocaine and methamphetamine generally  involve the same agencies that are involved in the interagency policy  committees addressing heroin. Agency Comments We are not making recommendations in this report. We provided a draft  of this report to the DOD, DHS, DOJ, ONDCP, State, and USAID for  review and comment. We received technical comments from DHS, DOJ,  ONDCP, and State, which we incorporated as appropriate. As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 12 days from the  report date.  At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate  congressional committees; the Secretaries of Defense, Homeland  Security, and State; the Attorney General of the United States; and the  Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy.  In addition, the report will  be available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please  contact me at (202) 512-6991 or farbj@gao.gov. Contact points for our  Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on  the last page of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this  report are listed in appendix VI. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and  Methodology This report examines (1) U.S. agencies’ spending for counternarcotics  efforts in the Western Hemisphere in fiscal years 2010 through 2015, (2)  agencies’ efforts to gather and share best practices and lessons learned  from their counternarcotics efforts both domestically and internationally,  and (3) mechanisms that agencies have used to address changing drug  threats. To examine U.S. agencies’ spending for counternarcotics efforts in the  Western Hemisphere in fiscal years 2010 through 2015—our first  objective—we selected eight U.S. departments and components  (collectively, in this report, “agencies”) that implement aspects of the  National Drug Control Strategy and conduct counternarcotics activities in  the Western Hemisphere: (1) the Department of Defense (DOD); the  Department of Homeland Security’s (2) Customs and Border Protection  (CBP), (3) Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and (4) Coast  Guard; the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) (5) Drug Enforcement  Administration (DEA) and (6) Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task  Forces (OCDETF); the Department of State’s (7) Bureau of International  Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL); and (8) the U.S. Agency for  International Development (USAID). To select these eight agencies, we  used the following two criteria:  1.  Agencies that have international counternarcotics efforts in one or  more of the areas that the Western Hemisphere Drug Policy  Commission has been asked to review. The Office of National Drug  Control Policy (ONDCP), which coordinates the National Drug Control  Program, requires all National Drug Control Program agencies to  submit an annual drug budget identifying the amounts the agencies  plan to spend on counternarcotics efforts for the upcoming fiscal year.  The agencies report spending for such efforts in 10 program areas:  Corrections, Intelligence, Interdiction, International, Investigations,  Prevention, Prosecution, Research and Development, State and Local  and Tribal Law Enforcement Assistance, and Treatment. On the basis  of ONDCP’s definitions of these program areas, we determined that  four of these areas—Intelligence, Interdiction, International, and  Investigations—were relevant to the areas that the Western  Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission has been directed to examine.  2.  Agencies that allocated a combined total of at least $50 million for  their counternarcotics efforts for the Intelligence, Interdiction,  International, and Investigations program areas in fiscal year 2015.  The following summarizes ONDCP’s definitions of these four program  areas:  Intelligence. Intelligence efforts encompass several drug control  intelligence support, including the collection, analysis, and  membership, finances, communications, and activities of drug- areas. Such efforts include providing strategic drug‐related  dissemination of drug‐related information regarding structure,  trafficking organizations and the identification of drug‐related threats. Other activities facilitate the sharing among U.S. agencies of domestic  and foreign intelligence information on the production and trafficking  of drugs in the United States and foreign countries; analysis of the  willingness and ability of partner nation governments to carry out drug  control programs; federal, state, local, and tribal law enforcement  initiatives to gather, analyze, and disseminate information among  domestic law enforcement agencies; and all other activities that  provide intelligence and other information for use by national policy  makers, strategic planners, and local law enforcement. Interdiction. Interdiction activities are intended to reduce the  availability of illegal drugs in the United States or abroad by targeting  transportation links. Interdiction efforts encompass the interception of  shipments of illegal drugs and their precursors and the disruption of  trafficking networks and their proceeds; such efforts may include air  and maritime seizures and deterring transport via air, sea, and land  routes. Other efforts involve accurate assessment and monitoring of  interdiction programs; enhancing the ability of nations that are drug  sources to interdict drugs; interdicting the flow of drugs, weapons, and  bulk currency along borders; and other air and maritime activities that  disrupt illegal drug-trafficking operations. International. International activities are primarily focused on areas  outside the United States and are intended to reduce illegal drug  availability in the United States or abroad. Activities may include  source-country programs designed to help international partners  manage the consequences of drug production, trafficking, and  consumption in their own societies, including programs to train and  equip security forces; efforts to raise awareness of science-based  practices and programs to prevent, treat, and provide recovery from  substance abuse; and support for economic development programs to  help reduce the production or trafficking of illicit drugs. These efforts  may also include assessment and monitoring of international drug  production programs and policies; coordination and promotion of  compliance with international treaties, including those directed at the  eradication of illegal drugs and the production and transportation of  illegal drugs; involvement of other nations in international law  enforcement programs and policies to reduce the supply of drugs; and  all other overseas drug law enforcement efforts to disrupt the flow of  illicit drugs into the United States. Investigations. Investigations activities are designed to develop a  prosecutable case against individuals and organizations responsible  for the production and distribution of illegal drugs, including identifying  seize them; identifying the leaders of illegal drug and other criminal  profits and assets from drug‐related criminal enterprises in order to  organizations; gathering information about drug‐related criminal  activity; ensuring that legitimate controlled substances are handled,  manufactured, and distributed in accordance with federal laws and  regulations; and all other drug law investigative efforts to identify,  disrupt, and dismantle drug smuggling in the United States. We requested and obtained data on spending for counternarcotics  activities from these eight agencies and the Federal Bureau of  Investigation (FBI), which OCDETF reimburses for international  counternarcotics investigations. We also reviewed each agency’s annual  accounting for its counternarcotics budget. In addition, we interviewed  agency officials to understand their counternarcotics budgets as they are  reported in the annual ONDCP budget and performance summary reports  and to determine the extent to which the agencies could identify the  funding they had obligated for counternarcotics activities in the Western  Hemisphere. Our methodology for identifying counternarcotics spending  varied by agency, since some of the agencies—DOD, ICE, INL, and  USAID—track such spending by region, while other agencies—the Coast  Guard, CBP, OCDETF, and DEA—do not. Moreover, with the exception  of DEA’s and OCDETF’s counternarcotics activities, the agencies’  counternarcotics activities represent only one aspect of their larger  missions. On the basis of our review of the data, our review of each  agency’s annual accounting of its drug budget, and interviews with  agency officials, we determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for  our reporting purposes. The following summarizes the Western  Hemisphere counternarcotics activities reflected in the funding data we  present for each agency. (The data we present for OCDETF include its  reimbursements to the FBI.) DOD. All DOD counternarcotics activities under U.S. Northern  Command and U.S. Southern Command. CBP. All CBP counternarcotics spending. Given that the agency’s  jurisdiction is triggered by the illegal movement of criminal goods  across national borders, the agency considers all of its efforts to be  specific to the Western Hemisphere. However, the agency’s spending  also includes interdictions and intelligence gathering to support these  interdictions of drugs coming from all locations outside the United  States. ICE. The portion of ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations’ spending  for investigation of Western Hemisphere drug organizations. Coast Guard. All Coast Guard counternarcotics spending. Given that  the Coast Guard’s interdictions occur in Western Hemisphere waters,  the agency considers all of its counternarcotics efforts to be specific to  the Western Hemisphere. DEA. DEA obligations for Investigations, Intelligence, and  International program areas for domestic and international  enforcement activities. DEA was also able to provide its obligations for  salaries and expenses for investigations and intelligence-gathering  activities conducted by agents posted in overseas locations in the  Western Hemisphere (see app. III). OCDETF. OCDETF reimbursements for drug investigations  conducted by DEA, the FBI, and ICE as well as OCDETF  contributions to the OCDETF fusion center. FBI. OCDETF reimbursements for investigations of transnational  crime organizations with a drug nexus. (App. III details the FBI’s  expenditure of OCDETF funds). INL. International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement funds for  counternarcotics activities for Western Hemisphere countries. USAID. Economic Support Funds and Development Assistance funds  for alternative development activities in Western Hemisphere  countries. To examine how agencies gather and share best practices and lessons  learned from their counternarcotics efforts both domestically and  internationally—our second objective—we reviewed the National Drug  Control Strategy and companion strategies for examples of best practices  as well as other agency documents that identify best practices and  lessons learned. We also sent the eight selected agencies, the FBI, and  ONDCP a standard set of questions. These questions addressed how the  agencies collected and identified best practices and lessons, whether  they had formal definitions of best practices and lessons learned, whether  their efforts to identify and collect this information were routine, whether  they had review processes to assess the information, and whether they  shared these practices with other agencies and with international  partners. In addition, we asked the agencies to identify best practices  related to counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere. Further,  we conducted interviews with agency officials, seeking clarification to  written responses as appropriate and asking whether the agencies had  any policies or strategies regarding best practices, and we reviewed the  documents that were provided to us in response. To identify the mechanisms U.S. agencies have used to address  changing drug threats—our third objective—we reviewed key U.S.  government-wide and agency-specific documents pertaining to U.S.  counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere, including those that  encompass counternarcotics efforts as part of broader national security  areas. These documents include the National Drug Control Strategies,  Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategies, Northern Border  Counternarcotics Strategies, the Caribbean Border Counternarcotics  Strategy, the Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime, and the  National Interdiction Command and Control Plan. Agency-specific  strategic plans included CBP’s Vision and Strategy 2020, Homeland  Security Investigations’ Strategic Plan, ICE’s Strategic Plan, DOJ’s  Strategic Plan, DEA’s Strategic Plan, OCDETF’s Strategic Plan, the  Department of State’s Functional Bureau Strategies and the Western  Hemisphere Affairs and Latin America and the Caribbean Joint Regional  Strategy, and USAID’s Country Development Cooperation Strategies for  Colombia and Peru. We also interviewed ONDCP and agency officials  about the development of these strategies. We interviewed ONDCP  officials about, and obtained documentation describing, the roles of the  National Heroin Coordination Group and the Cocaine Coordination  Group, and we identified the roles of other working groups through  agency interviews and documents. To understand how agencies  coordinated efforts and cooperate with foreign partners, we visited the  U.S. Southern Command and the Joint Interagency Task Force South in  Miami and Key West, Florida, and interviewed officials at both locations.  Additionally, in discussions with officials from the other agencies we  reviewed, we asked whether the agencies cooperated with foreign  partners. We conducted this performance audit from August 2016 to October 2017  in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain  sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our  findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that  the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings based  on our audit objectives. Appendix II: U.S. Agencies That Conduct  Western Hemisphere Counternarcotics  Activities The Office of National Drug Control Policy coordinates the National Drug  Control Program and develops the National Drug Control Strategy, which  is implemented by a number of U.S. government agencies. The following  summarizes the Western Hemisphere counternarcotics activities of key  National Drug Control Program agencies and their components as well as  the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The Department of Defense (DOD) maintains the lead role in  detecting and monitoring aerial and maritime transit of illegal drugs  into the United States and plays a key role in collecting, analyzing,  and sharing intelligence on illegal drugs with U.S. law enforcement  and international security counterparts. DOD supports other  interdiction activities with the use of its assets. DOD also provides  counternarcotics foreign assistance to train, equip, and improve the  counternarcotics capabilities of relevant agencies of foreign  governments. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for  U.S. policies related to interdiction of illegal drugs entering the United  States from abroad. Key agencies within DHS that participate in  counterdrug activities include the following: Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is the lead agency for  border security and is responsible for, among other things,  keeping terrorists and their weapons; criminals and their  contraband, including drugs; and inadmissible aliens out of the  country. CBP is responsible for border security at ports of entry;  the 6,000 miles of land borders between ports of entry; and nearly  2,700 miles of coastal waters surrounding the Florida Peninsula  and Puerto Rico. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) primary mission  is to promote homeland security and public safety through the  enforcement of federal laws governing border control, customs,  trade, and immigration. ICE’s office of Homeland Security  Investigations investigates immigration crime; human rights  violations and human smuggling; smuggling of narcotics,  weapons, and other types of contraband; financial crimes;  cybercrime; and export enforcement issues. The Coast Guard is the lead federal agency for maritime drug  interdiction in the Transit Zone. The Coast Guard provides  resources to the Joint Interagency Task Force South, generally  including major cutters, maritime patrol aircraft, and helicopters  capable of deploying airborne use of force. The Department of Justice (DOJ) is responsible for federal law  enforcement and to ensure public safety against foreign and domestic  threats, including illegal drug trafficking. The following are DOJ’s  primary agencies that focus on international drug control activities: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the nation’s  federal agency dedicated to drug law enforcement and,  accordingly, works to disrupt and dismantle the leadership,  command, control, and financial infrastructure of major drug- trafficking organizations. DEA operates around the world to disrupt  drug-trafficking operations; dismantle criminal organizations;  enforce the drug-related laws of the United States; and bring to  justice those organizations and individuals involved in the growing,  manufacture, or distribution of illicit drugs destined for the United  States. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) conducts its  counternarcotics activities under the agency’s broader strategy to  counter transnational criminal organizations by targeting their  command-and-control structures as well as the support networks  that facilitate the smuggling of illicit goods, including drugs, into  the United States. The Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Forces’  (OCDETF) primary goal is to identify, investigate, and prosecute  the transnational, national, and regional criminal organizations  most responsible for the illegal drug supply in the United States,  the diversion of pharmaceutical drugs, and the violence  associated with the drug trade. It effectively leverages the  resources and expertise of its seven federal agency members. The Department of State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and  Law Enforcement Affairs develops, funds, and manages  counternarcotics and law enforcement assistance programs to help  reduce the entry of illicit drugs into the United States and minimize the  impact of international crime on the United States. The U.S. Agency for International Development supports the U.S.  counternarcotics effort through alternative development programs that  help farmers find legal sources of income through licit crops such as  cacao and coffee and that provide technical assistance, such as  training in modern farming techniques and access to capital for  investment in equipment. Appendix III: Selected Agencies’ Obligations  for Counternarcotics Activities in Fiscal Years  2010-2015 The Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Homeland  Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department  of Justice’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Department of  State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs  (INL), and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)  provided data showing their obligations for counternarcotics activities in  the Western Hemisphere. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)  provided data showing a portion of its counternarcotics obligations for  salaries and expenses associated with DEA agents posted overseas. DOD data show obligations for counternarcotics activities by the U.S.  Northern Command and the U.S. Southern Command, which have  responsibility over the Western Hemisphere. Table 4 contains the  commands’ counternarcotics obligations for fiscal years 2010 through  2015. Table 5 shows the U.S Northern Command’s and U.S. Southern  Command’s counternarcotics obligations in support of foreign partners in  the Western Hemisphere, by country, for fiscal years 2013 through 2015. Table 6 shows ICE expenditures for counternarcotics investigations and  intelligence activities conducted by ICE agents for Western Hemisphere  drug cases, by country, during fiscal years 2010 through 2015. Table 7 shows DEA obligations for salaries, expenses, and administrative  costs for DEA personnel located in 30 Western Hemisphere countries  during fiscal years 2010 through 2015. Table 8 shows OCDETF reimbursements to the FBI for expenditures  related to its investigations of transnational Central American, South  American, Mexican, and Caribbean crime organizations; drug-smuggling  and money-laundering organizations; alien-smuggling organizations; and  drug-related public corruption cases in the Western Hemisphere, as well  as headquarters administration expenses, for fiscal years 2010 through  2015. Table 9 shows INL obligations for counternarcotics activities in 13  Western Hemisphere countries and for two regional programs in the  Western Hemisphere, the Central America Regional Security Initiative,  and the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, during fiscal years 2010  through 2015. Table 10 lists USAID’s obligations for alternative development projects in  four countries in the Western Hemisphere during fiscal years 2010  through 2015. Appendix IV: U.S. Agencies’ Planning for  Western Hemisphere Counternarcotics  Efforts National Drug Control Program agencies’ planning for counternarcotics  efforts in the Western Hemisphere is represented in a variety of strategic  documents, which may be broad or targeted, depending on their mission.  For example, the Department of Defense’s (DOD) 2011 Counternarcotics  and Global Threats Strategy focuses primarily on the department’s efforts  to combat narcotics trafficking and transnational organized crime. DOD  officials indicated that they are currently updating the strategy. Similarly,  the Coast Guard’s 2014 Western Hemisphere Strategy includes  counternarcotics as part of the agency’s broader regional mission.  According to Coast Guard officials, the Coast Guard does not plan to  update its strategy. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has several strategic  documents that relate to its components’ counternarcotics activities, as  described below: Customs and Border Protection’s Vision and Strategy 2020  incorporates counternarcotics efforts as part of its mission to facilitate  legitimate trade and safeguard land, air, and maritime borders. Immigration and Customs Enforcement also has a specific goal,  protecting the homeland against illicit trade, travel, and finance,  including an objective targeting drug-trafficking organizations in its  Homeland Security Investigations’ Strategic Plan Fiscal Years 2012- 2016. The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Fiscal Years 2014-2018 Strategic  Plan includes the Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) goal of  disrupting and dismantling major drug-trafficking organizations within a  much broader set of law enforcement missions. DEA’s Fiscal Years 2009-2014 Strategic Plan indicates the agency  has focused on international and domestic drug-trafficking and  money-laundering organizations identified as having the most  significant impacts internationally and domestically, known as  “Consolidated Priority Organization Targets” and “Priority Targeted  Organizations.” In addition, DEA’s Drug Flow Attack Strategy,  developed in 2009, identifies vulnerable chokepoints to disrupt the  flow of drugs. DEA officials indicated they are updating the strategy. DOJ also released a Strategy for Combating the Mexican Cartels in  January 2010, which was designed to be consistent with the National  Drug Control Strategy and the National Southwest Border  Counternarcotics Strategy. The DOJ strategy’s 10 objectives include  (1) reduce the flow of narcotics and other contraband entering the  United States, (2) strengthen Mexico’s operational capacities and  enhance its law enforcement institutions, (3) increase bilateral  cooperation between Mexico and the United States on fugitive capture  and extradition activities, and (4) increase intelligence and information  sharing among law enforcement agencies in the United States and  Mexico to achieve focused targeting of the most significant criminal  organizations. DOJ’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF)  has a long-term drug enforcement strategy for using its prosecutor- led, multiagency task forces in the field to conduct intelligence-driven,  coordinated, multijurisdictional prosecutions and investigations.  Specifically, OCDETF member agencies focus on Consolidated  Priority Organization Targets—that is, “command and control”  organizations representing the most significant drug-trafficking and  money-laundering organizations threatening the United States.  OCDETF member agencies also pursue organizations identified as  regional priorities because they have a significant impact on the illicit  drug supply within a specific region. Officials in the Department of State’s (State) Bureau of International  Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) stated that the bureau uses  a variety of strategic planning documents in its efforts to address  counternarcotics in the Western Hemisphere. INL’s Functional Bureau Strategy includes the broad objective of  reducing illicit drug production and drug demand, along with other  activities such as working with the United Nations Office of Drug and  Crime. The Western Hemisphere Affairs and Latin America and the  Caribbean Joint Regional Strategy, which focuses on a goal of a  secure and democratic future for all citizens in Latin America and the  Caribbean, includes interdiction goals for specific drugs such as  opium gum (used for producing heroin) and cocaine. Integrated Country Strategies at posts and INL Country Plans are  focused strategies, targeting, for example, the eradication of a specific  number of hectares of coca or the seizure of a certain number of  metric tons of illicit drugs and precursor chemicals. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) does not have a  specific strategy related to counternarcotics and instead relies on the  Office of National Drug Control Policy’s National Drug Control Strategy to  help guide its alternative development activities in countries confronting  illicit drug production and trafficking, according to USAID officials.  USAID’s targeted efforts are described in its Country Development  Cooperation Strategies for Colombia and Peru, where alternative  development efforts are currently underway. The Colombia strategy  describes the U.S. government’s development assistance in support of  Colombian efforts to continue its transition out of conflict. According to the  Colombia strategy, investments under several of its development  objectives would help create conditions for alternative livelihoods and  legal behaviors, contributing to broader U.S. and Colombian efforts to  address drug trafficking. The Peru strategy includes alternatives to illicit  coca cultivation as a development objective in specific regions, supporting  the overall goal of strengthening stability and democracy through  increased social and economic inclusion, reductions in illicit coca  cultivation, and the illegal exploitation of natural resources. USAID  conducted operations focused on alternative development in Bolivia until  May 2013, when the mission closed. Appendix V: U.S. Agencies’ Cooperation with  Foreign Partners to Reduce Drug Trafficking  in the Western Hemisphere Cooperation with foreign partners is a crucial element in addressing  changing narcotics conditions in the Western Hemisphere. For example,  the Department of State’s (State) Bureau of International Narcotics and  Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), the U.S. Agency for International  Development (USAID); the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS)  Coast Guard and Customs and Border Protection (CBP); and the  Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA)  and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) work with host nation  counterparts on a variety of counternarcotics efforts. U.S. assistance programs to disrupt the flow of cocaine and other harmful  products are designed to build capacity of judicial, law enforcement, and  treatment institutions in partner countries, according to INL’s 2017  International Narcotics Control Strategy Report. These programs are  carried out through the Central America Regional Security Initiative, the  Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, and the Mérida Initiative. Key  activities of these programs include drug interdiction cooperation,  especially maritime-based efforts in Central America and the Caribbean;  law enforcement capacity building; anticorruption initiatives and support;  and enhanced prosecution and judicial reform strengthening efforts. For  example:   In Mexico, as of September 2016, Mérida Initiative funding had  supported 238,000 federal, state, and municipal police officers’  standardized training in their role as first responders in the country’s  new criminal justice system, according to INL’s report. The report also  stated that as of 2016, Mexico had seized over 230 metric tons of  illegal drugs and over $50 million in illegal currency with Mérida- funded equipment and training. In Central America, State has provided targeted assistance to help  enhance the ability of local partners to interdict drug shipments,  disrupt trafficking networks, and control domestic production,  according to State officials. For example, State officials reported that  State had partnered with DEA to support local vetted police units to  interdict drug shipments and investigate traffickers. According to the  officials, the 20-officer Maritime Interdiction Vetted Unit in Costa Rica  interdicted 1,151 kilograms of cocaine in April 2017, and similar units  in Guatemala seized 2,532 kilograms of cocaine in June 2017. In  addition, according to State officials, INL assisted the Guatemalan  counternarcotics police in developing an opium poppy eradication  program that resulted in the destruction of 1,000 acres of poppy  cultivation in a 2-month period in the spring of 2017. Moreover, State  officials reported that a State-provided wiretapping system and  associated training allowed Costa Rican prosecutors to convict seven  Sinaloa cartel members in May 2017, shutting down an operation that,  according to State officials, had been sending 14 metric tons of  cocaine per year to the United States. USAID also relies on international partnerships to implement its  alternative development activities. For example, USAID reported that it  plans to continue its mitigation of drug-related security threats in Peru by  replicating successes it had in the country’s San Martin region and in  other coca-growing regions in collaboration with the government of Peru  and other U.S. government agencies, in its Peru Country Development  Cooperation Strategy for 2012 through 2016. Results from the Monzon  Valley in Peru also demonstrate how foreign partnerships can impact the  illicit drugs trade. USAID focused its alternative development assistance  on the coca stronghold of the Monzon Valley, which once supported  about 10,000 hectares of coca, from 2013 to 2015. The average income  was about $1.89 per day per person, well below the national extreme  poverty line of $2.20 per day per person in 2013. Households that  remained under assistance during the strategy period saw a 53-percent  increase in income. Moreover, the percentage of assisted families in  extreme poverty dropped by 25 percent, from 55 percent to 30 percent.  Coca cultivation dropped by more than 91 percent in all areas where  recent coca eradication was followed by sustained alternative  development assistance, according to the United Nations Office on Drugs  and Crime. The Central Intelligence Agency’s Crime and Narcotics Center  recorded a less robust, but still impressive, reduction of 64 percent over  the same period, according to USAID officials. Furthermore, USAID  officials noted that while its resources for alternative development in Peru  diminished, the budget for the National Commission for Development and  Life without Drugs, Peru’s development organization, grew from $15  million in 2011 to $38 million during 2014 and 2015. In Colombia, USAID reported in its 2014-2018 Country Development  Cooperation Strategy that it is trying to address the need for licit  economic opportunities by supporting cocoa, specialty coffee, rubber, and  dairy sectors in former coca-growing areas, which would help create the  conditions for alternative livelihoods and legal behaviors for small  producers in areas vulnerable to coca cultivation and drug production,  contributing to broad U.S. government and Colombian efforts to address  drug trafficking. This alternative development work increased under Plan  Colombia, with USAID and the government of Colombia working together  on several large-scale rural development projects. Three programs  evolved that incorporate public and private partnerships to facilitate  economic growth from 2006 to 2017. The first program reportedly  generated 250,000 new jobs by investing in agricultural sectors such as  rubber, cacao, and African palm enterprises as well as hotels and  tourism. The second program supported the provision of grant subsidies  to agricultural value-chains, linking small farmer associations with national  and international private-sector buyers. In the 2013 selection round, for  example, more than 30 selected projects included crops and products  such as cacao, rubber, fruits, dairy, and meat. In the third program,  USAID carried sustainable development by encouraging private-sector  investment in target areas. For example, USAID focused on developing  alliances with key private-sector leaders in the coffee and cacao sectors  in the former sector by raising yields and quality and addressing  infrastructure needs especially in conflict-prone zones. Today, Colombia  is the world’s largest producer of premium-quality Arabica beans,  according to USAID. Likewise, fine cocoa is a successful crop in  Colombia, with a growing world demand, according to USAID. The  Colombian cocoa industry is relatively small, with 25,000 farmers  producing about 42,000 tons, or 0.2 percent of the global market.  However, about 85 percent of Colombian cocoa is from “fine” species,  giving Colombia a 3-percent share of global fine cocoa exports. USAID  also developed a private investment equity fund, providing capital to  small- and medium-sized enterprises in Colombia. The fund is now an  independent, for-profit enterprise providing small- and medium-sized  Colombian enterprises with capital and operational support. The Coast Guard’s efforts to support foreign partners include its  Multilateral Maritime Counter Drug Summits, where U.S. and foreign  partners meet to discuss operational and legal issues. The summits are  attended by U.S. agencies including, among others, DEA, CBP, the  Department of Defense’s Joint Interagency Task Force South, State, and  DOJ. Representatives from Western Hemisphere countries, including  Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El  Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay,  and Peru, among others, also attend the summits. For example, at a  summit held in May 2016, Mexico briefed about its judicial system’s  transition to an adversarial system, and Honduras briefed about its  successes using increased penalties for money-laundering violations,  when it is proven that the money is from drug trafficking, according to a  Coast Guard document. On the operational side, Panama made  presentations on regional operations, and the U.S. Coast Guard  presented on capacity building for counterdrug operations, among other  efforts. Other issues—such as how to leverage increased maritime  awareness regionally resulting from investments by partner nations in  radar and the linking of vessel-tracking technologies along their coastlines  with the Joint Interagency Task Force South’s Cooperative Situational  Information Integration system—are discussed at these meetings. DHS cooperates with foreign partners in variety of ways to target  emerging counternarcotics threats, as follows:  ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations works with foreign partners to  (1) coordinate criminal investigations, including those related to  counternarcotics; (2) disrupt criminal efforts to smuggle people and  material, including drugs into the United States; and (3) build  international partnerships through outreach and training. In ONDCP’s  fiscal year 2017 Budget and Performance Summary report, ICE  established a target of 29 percent of transnational drug investigations  resulting in the disruption or dismantlement of high-threat,  transnational drug-trafficking organizations or individuals for fiscal  year 2015. According to the report, ICE fell short at 15 percent but  indicated there were several reasons, including a methodology that  allowed double counting; as a result, the methodology was revised. CBP also has a network of attachés and advisors, who serve in U.S.  diplomatic missions and act as liaisons between law enforcement  components such as DEA; the FBI; and DOJ’s Bureau of Alcohol,  Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Attachés and advisors also work  with foreign partners building capacity and provide training, technical  assistance, and mentoring on border security, according to CBP  officials. For example, CBP has trained over 1,000 Panamanian  customs and law enforcement officers since 2014. Also, since  February 2017, CBP helped vet, train, and mentor a unit of Peruvian  intelligence analysts. Twenty tons of cocaine have been seized since  the unit was created, according to CBP officials. CBP’s National Targeting Center hosts representatives from  participating foreign agencies and works with these international  liaisons and other U.S. government agencies to detect and disrupt  narcotic-smuggling operations, drug-trafficking organizations, and  their associates. According to agency officials, in fiscal years 2015  and 2016, the center’s efforts with foreign partners led to results in the  Western Hemisphere such as discovery and seizure of over 100 kilograms of cocaine,  identification of a previously unknown foreign company suspected  of narcotics involvement, and  seizure of counterfeit identification documents destined to the  United States with links for possible bank fraud and the illicit  money laundering. DOJ works with foreign country counterparts to conduct bilateral  investigations and support joint counterdrug operations, among other  things, such as the following: DEA’s special agents, who work at embassies or consulates  overseas, conduct bilateral investigations with their foreign  counterparts. These special agents also carry out institution-building  activities with their counterparts. DEA reported that it provides investigative equipment and training, in  large part through its Sensitive Investigative Units in selected  countries, including Mexico and Colombia. The Sensitive Investigative  Units seek to create focused, well-trained, and vetted drug  investigative and intelligence units, targeting the most significant drug- trafficking organizations affecting the United States. DEA sees the  program’s impact as building international cooperation, facilitating  institution building and professional development, and improving  judicial processes. DEA’s International Drug Enforcement Conference is another venue  for cooperation with foreign partners. The conference brings senior  international drug law enforcement officials together, in regional and  bilateral meetings where, according to DEA, topics such as cross- border coordination of operations, intelligence sharing, and joint  training activities are addressed. According to INL’s 2017  International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, at a meeting in Peru,  in April 2016, geographical regional and multiregional working groups  identified collective targets, agreed upon multilateral counterdrug  enforcement and interdiction operations, and assessed the progress  and evaluated intelligence on existing and emerging targets. The  2015 Caribbean Border Counternarcotics Strategy noted that the  DEA-led International Drug Enforcement Conference is a forum for  building coalitions between U.S. federal law enforcement and foreign  counterparts and that within the Caribbean, law enforcement officials  from over 20 nations participate in the annual meetings to discuss  regional investigative targeting efforts. One measure DEA tracks as contributing to ONDCP’s National Drug  Strategy is the number of international, domestic, and diversion  priority targets linked to consolidated priority organization targets it  disrupts or dismantles. In ONDCP’s fiscal year 2017 Budget and  Performance Summary, DEA reported that in fiscal year 2015, it set a  goal of disrupting or dismantling 440 targets linked to consolidated  priority organization targets and achieved 356 of these targets. DEA  indicated that it did not achieve its goal due to budgetary constraints. FBI legal attachés carry out capacity-building programs, providing  equipment and training to enhance foreign partners’ ability to combat  criminal activity connected to transnational criminal organizations,  according to FBI officials. These officials stated that FBI-trained and - vetted investigative units in Colombia and the Dominican Republic  target the most significant criminal organizations affecting the United  States. The FBI conducts multiple trainings with Mexican law enforcement as  a means of developing contacts and fostering cooperative  relationships with its law enforcement counterparts in Mexico,  according to FBI officials. These officials noted that the FBI’s ability to  advance investigations with a nexus south of the border is greatly  enhanced through these contacts. According to these officials, the FBI  also sponsors numerous trainings throughout Latin America to  enhance its foreign partners’ ability to deal with the increasing  transnational organized crime threat. Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff  Acknowledgments GAO Contact Staff  Acknowledgments In addition to the individual named above, Juan Gobel (Assistant  Director), Julie Hirshen (Analyst-in-Charge), Lynn Cothern, Martin De  Alteriis, Neil Doherty, Mark Dowling, Reid Lowe, and Shirley Min made  key contributions to this report. Dawn Locke and Diana Maurer provided  technical support.
Western Hemisphere nations such as Mexico and Colombia are major sources of illicit drugs such as cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana. Precursor chemicals used in the production of illicit fentanyl and other dangerous synthetic drugs often originate in China but typically enter the United States through Canada and Mexico. U.S. agencies implementing the National Drug Control Strategy conduct several activities to disrupt the flow of illicit drugs and dismantle the organizations that control them (see fig.). In December 2016, Congress established the Western Hemisphere Drug Policy Commission to, among other things, evaluate the U.S.-funded counternarcotics programs in the Western Hemisphere. In this context, GAO was asked to review key issues related to U.S. counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere. This report examines (1) U.S. agencies' spending for counternarcotic efforts in the Western Hemisphere during fiscal years 2010-2015, the most recent data available; (2) how agencies are gathering and sharing best practices and lessons learned from their counternarcotics efforts domestically and internationally; and (3) mechanisms U.S. agencies have used to address changing drug threats. GAO analyzed agencies' data and documents, interviewed agency officials, and conducted fieldwork at the U.S. Southern Command and Joint Interagency Task Force South in Florida. GAO is not making any recommendations in this report. Several agencies provided technical comments on a draft of this report which we incorporated as appropriate. U.S. agencies implementing the National Drug Control Strategy identified billions in spending for Western Hemisphere counternarcotics efforts in fiscal years 2010 through 2015. Agencies that track their counternarcotics spending regionally—the Department of Defense (DOD), the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Department of State, and the U.S. Agency for International Development—reported spending nearly $5 billion for such activities in the region during this period. Agencies that do not track counternarcotics spending regionally—DHS's Customs and Border Protection and Coast Guard; and the Department of Justice's Drug Enforcement Administration and Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces—reported spending about $34 billion for counternarcotics activities in fiscal years 2010 through 2015. According to officials of these four agencies, most of their counternarcotics activities are in the Western Hemisphere. We are not reporting Federal Bureau of Investigation counternarcotics spending separately, since it is included as part of Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), which coordinates the National Drug Control Program, facilitates the sharing of best practices and lessons learned at meetings such as the North American Drug Dialogue workshop, including Canada, Mexico, and the United States. In addition, 7 of the 10 agencies GAO reviewed described processes they have in place for identifying and collecting best practices or lessons learned from counternarcotics efforts in the Western Hemisphere. For example, DOD reported using a process, known as the Joint Lessons Learned Program, that consists of five phases: discovery, validation, resolution, evaluation, and dissemination. U.S. agencies use a variety of mechanisms to address changing narcotics conditions in the Western Hemisphere. ONDCP collaborates with agencies working directly on regional counternarcotics efforts to address emerging threats, as reflected in the annually updated National Drug Control Strategy and the Southwest Border Counternarcotics Strategy. In addition, documentary evidence GAO reviewed showed that a variety of interagency groups, task forces, and committees have been created to coordinate the U.S. government's responses to counternarcotics threats. For example, the National Heroin Coordination Group was established to provide guidance aimed at reducing the growing supply of heroin and illicit fentanyl in the U.S. market.