| Roadblocks Cited
in Efforts to Trace bin Laden's Money
By
Tim Weiner and David Cay Johnston
The
six-year struggle to uncover Osama bin Laden's financial network failed
because American officials did not skillfully use the legal tools they
had, did not realize they needed stronger weapons, and faced resistance
at home and abroad, officials involved in the effort say.
Federal
officials say they have not persuaded foreign banks to open their books
to investigators and that in this country, a law that would have allowed
the United States to penalize foreign banks that did not cooperate was
blocked last year by a single United States senator.
Current
laws and regulations give the government less authority to seize the assets
of terrorists than of drug cartels, one federal investigator said; it may
seize only assets that are the direct proceeds of terrorist violence. For
drug cartels or organized crime gangs, it can seize any assets used to
support their activities.
Investigators
also attribute their inability to pierce Mr. bin Laden's financial network
to an ancient system of cash transfers based on trust, not detailed records,
that they say has spread from countries like Pakistan into the United States.
Since
last week's attacks, proposals to curb money laundering by terrorists have
suddenly gained support among old opponents — including the Bush administration
— after languishing for two years. The White House says it now wants an
aggressive attack on money laundering, including stepped-up seizure of
assets.
The
bin Laden organization operates in 35 countries and needs to move money
to its members, American intelligence officials say. Tracing the money
could reveal not only terrorists' sources of support, but their intentions.
But
present and former government officials say that since the mid- 1990's,
they did not fully use the legal tools they had to wage this difficult
fight. "We could have starved the organization if we put our minds to it,"
said Richard Palmer, who gained experience in money laundering as the Central
Intelligence Agency's station chief in Moscow during the 1990's.
"The
government has had the ability to track these accounts for some time."
Congress is now reviving a proposal killed last year by Senator Phil Gramm,
the Texas Republican who was then chairman of the Senate Banking Committee.
The
bill, introduced by the Clinton administration, would give the Treasury
Secretary broad power to bar foreign countries and banks from access to
the American financial market unless they cooperated with money-laundering
investigations. It was strongly opposed by the banking industry and Mr.
Gramm.
"I
was right then and I am right now" in opposing the bill, Mr. Gramm said
yesterday. He called the bill "totalitarian" and added, "The way to deal
with terrorists is to hunt them down and kill them."
But
the bill is gathering support from both parties. "I would be amazed if
there is not a sea change," said Senator John Kerry, the Massachusetts
Democrat, who is sponsoring the bill with Senator Charles E. Grassley,
Republican of Iowa. He said the opposition was based on "ridiculously phony"
arguments.
Even
after the attacks last week, the banking industry continues to doubt the
need for new rules to combat money laundering, a lobbyist said.
Most
experts say the funds used to finance the attacks here probably came into
this country in small amounts either through wire transfers or through
the use of brokers that belong to a paperless underground banking system.
That
system of brokers is often referred to by its Hindi name, "hawala," meaning
"in trust." It enables individuals to transfer sizable sums of cash from
their country to recipients in another country without the funds ever crossing
borders. The system, which has spread to the United States, is particularly
popular in countries like Pakistan and India where people want to avoid
paying taxes or bribes to officials when transferring money across borders,
experts said.
"Somebody
will come into the office of a hawala broker in Pakistan and say, `I want
$100,000 to get to somebody in Vero Beach who is going to come in and identify
themselves as Cupid,' " said Jonathan M. Winer, who led the State Department's
international law enforcement efforts from 1994 to 1999 and now practices
law in Washington.
The
Pakistani broker, Mr. Winer explained, will contact a counterpart in the
United States, often using the Internet, then mail him a chit or agree
on a code word to complete the transaction.
Mr.
Winer said such brokers might have been used to transfer sizable sums of
money destined for terrorists in this country because carrying large amounts
of cash posed too many risks.
"The
two brokers have absolute trust in each other," said Rowan Bosworth-Davies,
an expert on money laundering at the Control Risks Group. "They often come
from the same clan and that is why nothing is written down or records kept."
Congress
passed a law in 1993 requiring check-cashing businesses and informal financial
enterprises like hawalas to register with the government and report transactions
over $3,000. But the Clinton administration did not publish all the regulations
until 1999. The Bush administration ordered a further delay until June
30, 2002. Jimmy Gurule, the Treasury under secretary for enforcement, said
yesterday that the administration, in light of last week's attack, might
move up the date.
The
effort to track the bin Laden group's money began in earnest when
President
Bill Clinton signed a classified presidential order on Oct. 21, 1995. The
secret order, Presidential Decision Directive 42, ordered the Departments
of Justice, State and Treasury, the National Security Council, the CIA
and other intelligence agencies to increase and integrate their efforts
against international money laundering by terrorists and criminals.
The
government agencies joined together to try to penetrate the bin Laden network
of businesses, charities, banks and front companies. They failed. The ball
was handed to people who were generally incompetent to handle the intricate
task, said one Clinton administration official directly involved in the
effort to drain or divert the money flowing in and out of the bin Laden
organization.
The
government agencies given the job suffered from "a lack of institutional
knowledge, a lack of expertise," said William Wechsler, a National Security
Council staff member under Mr. Clinton. "We could have been doing much
more earlier. It didn't happen." Then attackers blew up two American embassies
in Africa in August 1998.
Richard
A. Clarke, the government's counter terrorism coordinator, set up a
new
government team. He ordered it to find out how much money the bin Laden
organization had, where it came from, how it moved around the world — and
to stop it.
"We
had only marginal successes," said Mr. Wechsler, who led the new team in
1998 and 1999. The United Arab Emirates imposed money-laundering laws and
China banned flights by the Afghan state airline, Ariana, at the United
States' urging, officials said.
The
lack of great success was "mostly due to the limited assistance we received
from key countries abroad," Mr. Wechsler said. He blamed "their lack of
political will or weaknesses in their laws, which fail to effectively regulate
their financial institutions and charities."
Until
last week's attacks, the Bush administration was not much more enthusiastic
about new money laundering laws than Mr. Gramm. Led by its chief economic
adviser, Lawrence B. Lindsey, the administration did not want to pressure
international banks in the United States and elsewhere to open their books.
Now
the White House is setting up a new agency, called the Foreign Terrorist
Asset Tracking Center, run by the Treasury Department with help from law
enforcement and intelligence services, to try anew to track bin Laden's
finances.
The
financial architecture of the bin Laden organization has not changed radically
since he set up operations near the Khyber Pass in the mid-1980's and worked
side by side with the CIA to support the rebels fighting Soviet forces
in Afghanistan, United States officials said.
"The
money movement and fund-raising system is the same," Mr. Wechsler said. |