Good evening.

In a press release you must have seen, the situation in Afghanistan is much improved in 2005 with a very significant reduction in the extent of opium cultivation in Afghanistan which declined 21%, with respect to 2004, declining from 131,000 hectares to 104,000 hectares.

This is a very good accomplishment. And I would like to pay tribute to the people of Afghanistan, to the farmers of Afghanistan, and to the President of Afghanistan for their commitment to addressing an issue which has been a drama for the country and for those suffering from such an addiction around the world.

What about the tons and production? Well, we have a problem here, which has nothing to do with human beings but with the almighty. It looks like the almighty was looking through other lenses and didn’t pay much attention to opium cultivation during the winter and spring. Good rain conditions and good snow conditions did indeed increase the productivity of agriculture throughout Afghanistan for all crops and not just for opium.

In the case of opium specifically, the report shows a very major increase in productivity, or the yield, as it is called technically. The number of kilos per hectare last year was estimated at 32. In 2005 it went up to 39 kilos – an increase of 22%. That had an impact on the tons. If you now multiply the hectares, 104,000 times 39 kilos per hectare, you get a pretty large number, 4,100 tons of opium produced potentially in Afghanistan this year which is less than last year so there is an improvement. But still it is a very large amount. But again, we cannot blame the government of Afghanistan or the Coalition partners for the weather conditions. You can blame them for lots of things but not for the weather conditions. This is indeed nothing more than the results of productivity in agriculture.

A couple of words as to why this has happened and what we expect for the future. In terms of why this has happened, we have submitted a number of reasons, or factors. One, the decision of farmers to reduce the cultivation - self-restraint is indeed the main reason. Whether the self-restraint was induced by President Karzai’s exultation, “I’m ashamed for a country which is the scourge of the world,” - you remember his statement in December - or whether the restraint was introduced by religious leaders launching a fatwa against poppy cultivation. Or whether indeed there were other factors at play, farmers indeed restrained themselves. One farmer out of five, this year, did not cultivate opium as against what they did last year.

Second reason: Eradication. The government committed a lot of political capital. Foreign partners committed a lot of resources to eradicate fields. That was widely publicized. Public opinion was aware, farmers were aware that cultivation could be at risk and as a consequence the revenue for this year would be at risk. That indeed was, according to our surveys, ISAF surveys I looked at this morning, the field of eradication played a very major part.

Point number three, obviously market correction. We know that a very large amount of crops during the last few years created stocks, which put downward pressure on the price. Prices are now below $100 a kilo, and that per se, could be called a natural market correction which is in the right direction obviously.

If I want to summarize the changes with respect to last year, I would say there has been a decrease of 20% or more countrywide, but there has also been a shift within the country, away from the traditional regions and provinces into new provinces. This is a matter which I brought to the attention of the President, and I insisted on the importance of taking measures so that the infestation of the opium does not expand into new provinces which potentially could be highly problematic, because they are highly productive in terms of agriculture. The north, the west, Balkh, and so forth.

So we see an average decline, but some provinces which did not behave, Bagdhis, and of course Balkh, Kandahar, Nimroz (a 1000% increase), Samangan (237% increase) and so forth (statistical annex).

I have invited the President to take stern measures against the governors in this land. I think that indeed the game in town should not only be moving governors around, but more like removing governors from their positions.

What else for the future? You may like to focus on the final page of the report (on opium cultivation). I stress personally, not only in writing, but also to the President, the need to remove provincial governors who are corrupted or involved in trafficking. I insisted on the removal of officials, military or civilian or police officials, if they are found to be involved and there is plenty of evidence of plenty of corruption around. We have insisted on making sure that the new Parliament does not become a hideout of traffickers seeking impunity via parliamentary immunity. We have been asking for strong judicial reform just to be able to indict and indeed prosecute and indeed jail traffickers and those who have been involved in the opium economy, or in the elements outside, but affected by the opium economy. And also I have been asking for stronger measures, which the President has agreed, and I can say so to the press of stronger measures to facilitate extradition and issuing of international arrest warrants.

This is all I wanted to tell you. I am available for questions.

Question: Last year the government and UN institutions committed very strongly for the elimination of poppy cultivation, but the survey does not show a strong decrease – just 21%. If it continues like this it will take many years. Do you think that countries will fund such a slow process for the elimination of poppy cultivation?

Antonio Maria Costa: I can only offer a view on the first part of your question; the second part should be addressed to the donor countries. Our office has been involved in counter narcotics for about 25 years. We have dealt with similar situations in about a couple of dozen countries. In the past it has been Thailand, Pakistan and Turkey, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Morocco and so forth. It has taken 15, 20, or 25 years in Thailand, Pakistan and so forth, to control the problem. There is no reason to believe it will be much faster here. This is for a number of reasons - the complexity of the situation, the police force, the judicial system, and the weak government presence countrywide. We know that. Insurgency, threat etc. Historically, I know of only one case where better results have been obtained in one year – 2001 in Columbia, where there was a massive effort to eradicate by spraying the Coca cultivations from air. It cost a tremendous amount of money; several hundred million dollars and they reduced the cultivation by 31%. That is the only example I have. So in a historical perspective, we consider this a significant result. Indeed it will take years. I think it would be simple-minded to claim or hope that this would be brought under control faster. The international community is committed. Obviously the international community was waiting for some good news, after a few years of bad news. I think that this result, at least in terms of cultivation being reduced, will stimulate the international community to proceed and support the efforts of the government.

Question: Does that mean Afghanistan continues to be the leading opium producer in the world? You said that the international community invested more in eradication, but on the ground the farmers were not satisfied and many of them, just prior to your visit, demonstrated in Kandahar over government promises for alternative livelihoods. Are you satisfied about what happened in terms of alternative livelihoods?

Antonio Maria Costa: Regarding the very unhappy record that Afghanistan accumulated last year – I have said that Afghanistan last year hit the double record - top producer and last year record production in the history of Afghanistan. It remains the top producer of narcotics in the world, not only of opium, but of cannabis. Regarding alternative livelihoods. I think the farmers of Kandahar, and especially the Governor of Kandahar, should shut up. Rather than reducing the cultivation as happened in many other provinces, in Kandahar they increased it by 162%, from 5,000 last year to 13,000 this year. There is no evidence of doing more to get more money. Actually what we have seen is that in three provinces, a significant amount of money was poured – Badakhshan, Nangarhar, and Helmand. In Badakhshan the international community put in USD $45 Million, in Nangarhar, USD $77 Million, and in Helmand USD $55 Million – in these three provinces the cultivation declined; In Badakhshan by 53%, Nangarhar by 93% and in Helmand by 10% - but in overall terms this was an enormous amount as Helmand was traditionally the largest producer.

Question: How authentic or realistic is your report? How would you prove to the international community that it’s based on information from the field and not just ‘cut and paste’? Why 20% and why not 40%.

Antonio Maria Costa: On the methodology – you are insulting not me, but the gentleman behind you, who has been running this project with great dedication. I think this is a magnificent exercise involving hundreds of pictures over time from spot and satellite. There have also been a much larger number of surveyors than before – two years ago we deployed 97 surveyors, last year 110 and this years 306 – visiting a large number of villagers. Some 2,200 villages were visited and over 8,300 farmers interviewed about cultivation, etc. I know of no other institution that has done as much or as thorough exercise as this one. I believe the numbers are solid. Last year the standard deviation was 8%.

Regarding the second question, the decline in poppy cultivation is a result of thousands of farmers deciding not to cultivate. This is the difference with respect to Colombia. They go with planes at four to eight metres above the ground for the spraying activities. There [in Colombia] only a few people are involved and the decision is only taken by those few people. Here [in Afghanistan] it was taken by thousands of farmers, who individually and independently decided not to cultivate opium.

_______________