Analysis: Losing the War on Drugs

It has been four decades since President Nixon declared a war on drugs. But by conventional standards, the effort has failed. In fact, the Justice Department’s 2011 National Drug Threat Assessment noted “the overall availability of illicit drugs in the United States is increasing.”

During the Nixon era, the importance of following the money became apparent in the drug war. The 1970 Bank Secrecy Act was designed to give criminal investigators better tools to identify proceeds from the sale of illicit narcotics. But while drug interdiction continues to receive recognition and scrutiny, the asymmetric financial battles receive surprisingly little attention.

Criminals traffic in narcotics as a means to an end -- money. The collective federal, state, local and international record on following dirty money, stopping illicit proceeds and punishing money launderers is abysmal.

Government data on illicit financial networks have been notoriously imprecise and lacking, but startling nonetheless. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime estimates that $1.6 trillion -- 2.7 percent of global gross domestic product -- was laundered in 2009. Financial flows related to drug trafficking and other related transnational organized crime have been pegged at $580 billion.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy estimates that Americans spend $65 billion per year on illegal drugs. Others believe the number is more than $100 billion. This insatiable appetite for narcotics coupled with a sizable economy makes the United States the most prolific money laundering country in the world.

National drug control officials estimate that law enforcement agencies seize $1 billion per year. That’s a success rate of only 1.5 percent. The United Nations office reports less than 1 percent of illicit global financial flows are being seized and frozen.

The Government Accountability Office estimates $39 billion in drug money is smuggled across the United States’ southern border each year. Of every $100 that goes south, U.S. law enforcement officers intercept only 25 cents. Particularly shocking is that smuggling illicit proceeds into another country or jurisdiction is arguably the simplest laundering methodology.

This failure of enforcement has consequences. In addition to the human and societal devastation caused by drugs, the tens of billions of dollars smuggled fuels international drug cartels.

Conviction rates are spotty and difficult to obtain, but the interagency National Money Laundering Strategy, released in 2007, reported only 1,575 money laundering convictions at the federal level in fiscal 2004. This encompasses prosecutions related to all serious crimes, not just drug trafficking. Analysts also have reported that the risk of conviction for money launderers in the United States is less than 5 percent.

Some believe eye-catching actions against major banks can force change. In a recent case, HSBC, one of the world’s largest financial institutions, was fined $1.9 billion for failing to pursue anti-money laundering within its branches. But actions such as these are regulatory. The $1.9 billion will be taken from HSBC shareholders, not from drug traffickers, and no one will be prosecuted.

Despite the disappointments, there are ready countermeasures. The National Money Laundering Strategy provides an excellent roadmap. Signed by the secretaries of the Homeland Security, Justice and Treasury departments, the document identifies threats and lays out comprehensive action plans.

Unfortunately, little progress has been made since the strategy was published. Congressional oversight committees should call hearings or send letters of inquiry to the agencies involved. Lawmakers should ask for an accounting of enforcement actions and insist on a renewed commitment to stamping out money laundering.

In November 2012, David Cohen, Treasury’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, announced the Obama administration will conduct an assessment of anti-money laundering efforts and the effectiveness of regulations. The Senate Drug Caucus is similarly engaged.

There will never be enough criminal investigators in the fight against international money laundering, but better use of data and technology can be a modern day force multiplier. There have been tremendous advances in the amount and variety of data collected. Financial intelligence, travel and trade records are just a few examples of the big data available to law enforcement agencies. Data warehousing, predictive analytics, financial fraud frameworks and social network analytics are new capabilities that can help agencies derive meaningful operational intelligence.

It’s time for government to recognize the collective shortcomings in the war against drug-money laundering and rededicate its resources to enforcement.

John A. Cassara, a former intelligence officer and Treasury Department special agent, is author of several books on money laundering and terror finance and is an industry adviser to SAS Federal LLC.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.