On International Cooperation and Security: A Conversation with Ronald K. Noble

Ronald K. Noble ’82 knows something about uphill battles.

The son of a German mother and an African-American father, he was raised in a working-class suburb of New Jersey—often spending weekends and evenings helping his father with the family’s office cleaning company. A bright student, he was encouraged by his parents to pursue higher education and he excelled at Stanford Law School. He was elected Law Association president following his 1L year, became a notes editor for Stanford Law Review, and clerked for A. Leon Higginbotham Jr. on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit during and immediately after his legal studies. But it wasn’t easy. “Most of the students I met the first couple of days seemed to have come from backgrounds so different from mine—even the black students,” he said in a 2002 profile in Stanford Lawyer.

Everything he did after law school graduation seems to have been deliberate preparation for the role he would assume in November 2000 as secretary general of INTERPOL, the world’s largest police organization. By then, he had served as a federal prosecutor and had held a senior position with the Justice Department’s criminal division. He had been under secretary for enforcement at the Treasury Department, where he wrote the report on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ siege of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, and a tenured professor at NYU School of Law. And Noble had impressed some key high-ranking U.S. officials along the way—including Clinton administration Attorney General Janet Reno who lobbied for his appointment to INTERPOL, as the first non-European to head the international organization.

That Noble wanted the INTERPOL position at all says something about him. INTERPOL is not a traditional, gun-toting police unit. Its main focus is information gathering and dissemination, and its key functions include managing INTERPOL’s vast array of information on criminals and crime trends and efficient coordination of national police forces and information sharing across borders. But Noble arrived in 2000 to discover a bureaucratic dinosaur, where employees clocked out by 6 p.m. and the organization shut down on weekends. Worst of all, its technology was dated and the Internet age had passed it by. In the same 2002 Stanford Lawyer article Professor Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar put it this way: “INTERPOL has been viewed as a joke, an opportunity for people to travel and get together for a nice dinner.”

Not one to shy away from a good challenge, Noble saw both the potential and the need for INTERPOL’s data and services and quickly introduced changes to its culture and its uses of technology. Under his leadership the INTERPOL budget rose by more than 50 percent between 2000 and 2008—and the number of notices issued for wanted persons nearly tripled. He created the Command and Co-ordination Centre at the General Secretariat headquarters in Lyon, France, which operates around the clock to serve as the first point of contact for any member country faced with a terrorist attack or crisis. Today, INTERPOL is a 24/7 organization at the cutting edge of technology, with new programs such as an automated DNA database, a global database for stolen and lost travel documents, a police communications system aptly named I-24/7 that gives police agencies in the 188 member countries access to key INTERPOL data, and much more.

Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar (MA ’96, PhD ’00), professor of law and Deane F. Johnson Faculty Scholar, has a lot in common with Noble—both are legal scholars who have answered the call to public service. And their paths have almost, though not quite, crossed. When Cuéllar was appointed senior advisor to the under secretary for enforcement at the Department of the Treasury during the second term of the Clinton administration—he just missed working with Noble, who was then leaving the same department. While at Treasury, Cuéllar’s focus mirrored Noble’s with its emphasis on countering financial crime, improving border coordination, and enhancing anticorruption measures. Both law professors, they bring the discipline of the academy to their public positions, with a keen eye for analyzing problems and thinking through solutions.

A member of the Stanford Law School faculty since 2001, Cuéllar is a leading expert in administrative law, executive power, and how organizations implement critical regulatory, public safety, migration, and international security priorities in a changing world. After serving in the Obama administration as special assistant to the president for justice and regulatory policy, he had just returned to campus—when duty called again. In July, the president once more turned to Cuéllar, this time with an appointment to the Council of the Administrative Conference of the United States, an independent agency charged with recommending improvements in the efficiency and fairness of federal regulatory programs. Prior to working in the Obama administration, Cuéllar co-chaired the Obama-Biden transition team’s immigration policy working group.

– BY SHARON DRISCOLL

Cuéllar: You’ve served as a federal prosecutor, an official in the Justice and Treasury departments, and a law professor. How did these and other experiences prepare you for your leadership position at INTERPOL?

Noble: I take from my time as a prosecutor an obsessive attention to the facts and the development of a coherent theme—a “theory of the case”—to move forward. I learned the importance of negotiation, compromise, and consensus building as a senior government official. And as a law professor, I know that we must keep learning, because the law is always changing and so is every field of endeavor. We need to re-question the answers always. INTERPOL is completely unique as an international organization that unites 188 countries—large and small, wealthy and less so, with vastly different police cultures, legal systems, and security concerns—to fight crime. Our impact on the lives of the people we serve is immediate and direct. There is not always a precedent for how we should handle something. We have invented and reinvented as we’ve gone along.

Illustration of a paneled sphere, with alternating images of eyes, padlocks, stars, and circles.
Illustration by Greg Mably

During the Clinton administration, you served as under secretary of the Treasury for enforcement, leading a part of the Treasury that I came to know well after I joined the office of enforcement just a few months after you left. Based on your experience at Treasury and since then, what is the appropriate role of financial regulators in combating transnational crime, and what are the limits of that role?

Almost any form of transnational crime comes down to dollars. We know terrorist groups like the Taliban and FARC profit from the drug trade, either directly or through the collection of “protection money” for passage through areas they control. We know organized crime networks lie behind numerous types of criminal activity, ranging from trafficking to intellectual property crime, all of which generate large amounts of profit for what generally are low-risk crimes to the gangs themselves. Part of effectively fighting these activities is in following the money trail. But at the same time, effective regulation must keep in mind the pivotal role played by a financial system: allocating resources to where they are needed and where they can be best used. The true challenge is to make formal channels both secure and appealing to the legitimate user.

How can criminal activity threaten domestic and international security?

We cannot foster sustainable security in the absence of the rule of law. Even the distinction between domestic and international security is a theoretical one more than a practical one. Take post-conflict areas, where organized crime is both a product of and contributor to instability. Unstable countries can become terrorist safe havens or virtual narco-states. Instability undermines fledgling police institutions and the rule of law. Profits from organized crime can corrupt politicians, in turn threatening governance and making governments unreliable partners. It is a vicious cycle and it immediately cancels out any gains we make. This instability spills over to neighboring countries, threatening whole regions and potentially the globe. We are seeing this now in some fragile states in West Africa, which South American drug cartels are exploiting to move cocaine into Europe. A failed state allowed al-Qaeda to plan and implement the most spectacular terrorist attack mankind ever saw. This is the reality in the age of globalization.

What is the role of law enforcement in addressing national and international security challenges?

No matter how well-designed a national or international security strategy is, its success will depend on those operating on the ground. And when it comes to security, long-term results are firmly linked to law enforcement. Take terrorism, for example. I have long advocated that the military alone cannot address effectively this threat, particularly where the enemy is unseen, operating in our cities and our streets. Just look at the issue of radicalization. The military can tackle the training camps, but what about the stages leading to that point, or those following it? Law enforcement has knowledge on the ground and better human intelligence. It deals with the multiple, seemingly small daily threats to security that, if unchecked, build up to undermine a political or economic system. Effective law enforcement is also a sure return on investments. A study by the University of Texas demonstrated that “INTERPOL gets about $200 in gain for every $1 it spends on the fight against terrorism”—this is real value for money in assisting countries to address security challenges during a financial crisis.

What is the role of civil society in addressing transnational crime?

Security is a shared responsibility. We work closely with various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in areas as diverse as child sexual exploitation, wildlife poaching, counterfeiting, human trafficking, and corruption. Civil society has expertise that law enforcement does not always have. Moreover, international crime is not eradicated simply when a criminal is caught, because another can take his or her place. The rule of law must take hold and NGOs are well situated to help populations move to the rule of law once law enforcement has done its job. The same applies to the general public. The law is enforced best when the average citizen responds to the call of duty. Let us not forget the vigilant member of the public who alerted the police after noticing a suspicious vehicle parked in Times Square, New York, only a few months ago. INTERPOL has resorted in select occasions to the public’s help, especially when dealing with fugitives. In one instance, in 48 hours we went from a nameless image of a child abuser to an international pedophile standing in handcuffs.

You have led INTERPOL during a time of considerable technological change. How have the organization’s priorities shifted in order to address technological change?

In a way, technology is both among our best allies and our worst foes. It allows crime to move faster, with anonymity and a wide reach. But to counter this, we had to fully embrace innovation. We were the first police organization to exchange information securely through a Web-based communication system called I-24/7. In only four years, all our member countries were connected and able to exchange police information in real time. Our databases have been expanded and improved. We have developed technical solutions that give officers in the field instant access to our databases, bringing INTERPOL literally to the front lines. One of our most powerful tools in tracking international fugitives, INTERPOL notices, can now be published immediately electronically by any member country thanks to our I-link system.

Photo of Noble, speaking at a podium labeled "INTERPOL"
“September 11, 2001, was a moment of reckoning for the policing and intelligence communities. INTERPOL was forced to completely re-think itself and its role in global security.” Ronald K. Noble ’82

Changes in Russia and China over the last two decades are striking examples of how much the world has changed. How has INTERPOL approached the challenges in these regions?

China and the Russian Federation are two of our most valuable and active members. Russia joined INTERPOL in 1990, when it was still the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. China is a founding member of INTERPOL. We take a very pragmatic and non-political approach to fighting crime as demanded by our constitution. Both countries have taken leading roles in fighting crimes as diverse as drug trafficking, pharmaceutical counterfeiting, illegal soccer gambling, child sex tourism, and human trafficking. Officers from both countries have been seconded to our General Secretariat in Lyon. Russia plays a pivotal role in our regional intelligence-sharing initiatives against terrorism and organized crime, while standing as the single most active user of our stolen motor vehicle database. In working with China, we developed during the 2008 Summer Olympic Games what are probably the highest security standards for major events.

How does INTERPOL address cyber security, both for the defense of its own valuable data and as a priority for addressing transnational crime and protecting security?

This is a primary concern for INTERPOL due to the sensitive criminal information, including names, photos, fingerprints, and DNA profiles, stored in our databases and exchanged through our channels. We have a directorate solely dedicated to information security, and we constantly update our protocols and tools to protect our infrastructure. Due to global digitization, criminals and victims are increasingly located in different jurisdictions, often even different continents. A trusted global platform for cooperation on cybercrime is vital, and INTERPOL is ready to answer this call.

We established a network of investigators embedded in national computer crime units to act as National Central Reference Points (NCRPs), which allowed us to exchange information quickly in several investigations. In 2008, our independent forensic experts examined laptops seized from a FARC camp to certify that they had not been tampered with. Every two years, we gather experts from our member countries, the private sector, and academia to discuss the latest developments in this realm and work on shared solutions.

On nuclear proliferation, we play a role when it comes to trafficking in nuclear and radiological material, which can become a major step toward a successful WMD terrorist attack. We have specific initiatives, like Project Geiger, which target this phenomenon and monitor incidents worldwide to analyze and share intelligence to prevent the acquisition of nuclear and radiological capacity by terrorist groups.

You began your tenure in your current position just one year before the September 11 terrorist attacks. What progress has INTERPOL made since then on counter-terrorism issues, and what further improvements in international cooperation on counter-terrorism should be prioritized?

September 11, 2001, was a moment of reckoning for the policing and intelligence communities. INTERPOL was forced to completely re-think itself and its role in global security. Simply put, we wanted to be at the side of our member countries 24/7.

We created our Command and Co-ordination Centre at the INTERPOL General Secretariat in Lyon, which now provides round-the-clock, immediate assistance to our member countries in any of the organization’s four official languages—Arabic, English, French, and Spanish. We connected all our members to our communication network to allow real-time alerts and intelligence sharing. We developed the concept of incident response teams (IRTs), which can be deployed immediately anywhere in the world at the request of a member country following a serious crime or terrorist attack. Since the 2002 Bali bombing, more than 20 terrorism-related IRTs have been deployed worldwide. We also joined efforts with the U.N. Security Council, creating a special alert on entities subject to U.N. sanctions against al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Furthermore, we overcame widespread skepticism launching the Fusion Task Force project, which aimed at sharing terrorism-related intelligence within a network of counter-terrorism officers across the world. Today, we have 123 countries on board and almost 13,000 profiles accessible in our database.

Of course, we could always benefit from even more systematic and widespread transnational sharing of information. The same applies to our global database of stolen and lost travel documents. At the time, as incredible as it may seem, there was no global repository for stolen and lost travel documents. The database today contains more than 22 million records shared by 153 INTERPOL member countries. But a lot still needs to be done to ensure that every single port of entry in the world can access this wealth of information.

How would you describe INTERPOL’s strengths and weaknesses?

Our biggest strength is our global network, made up of national central bureaus (NCBs) in each of our 188 member countries. We stretch across the globe, but at the same time we are able to reach field units accessing our network. This, 24 hours a day. We abide by strict neutrality principles in our action, and we make sure our staff represents all regions served, with almost 90 nationalities represented in Lyon. We are a trusted third party that can bring together countries that may not enjoy diplomatic relationships, but whose police forces want to achieve results on the ground.

As to our constraints, I would not refer to “weaknesses” but to challenges. Among them are the limited resources we can access despite our ambitious mandate. To me, this is the vital missing ingredient standing between what our organization is today and what it should be. Our budget is smaller than not only many national agencies but even several local police departments. That said, this has taught us to be efficient in our action. The study I mentioned above shows that while our financial resources are limited, our benefits are not. Investing in INTERPOL is a sure bet on better national and international security.

How is INTERPOL organized and funded?

INTERPOL is an independent international organization. Its institutional framework is based on a General Assembly, where all members have equal voting rights, and an Executive Committee, which oversees the work of the General Secretariat, headed by the secretary general. We have six regional bureaus across the Americas and Africa, and a liaison office in Asia. Two offices represent INTERPOL at the European Union and at the United Nations.

The General Secretariat, which is the heart of all our activities with approximately 600 staff, works closely with our NCBs in every member country. They not only provide the indispensable link with national law enforcement and authorities but they also cooperate on cross-border operations and arrests. In a nutshell, NCBs are the backbone of the organization.

INTERPOL is primarily funded by member countries, whose governments pay annual statutory contributions calculated using a framework agreed on by members. In 2010, INTERPOL’s budget amounted to $66 million, which remains extremely low when considering the challenges faced by the international law enforcement community. Select projects and initiatives can be funded by external partners with which we share common objectives, such as the U.N., the EU, the Sloan Foundation, and others.

What were INTERPOL’s greatest challenges when you became the organization’s secretary general and how did you address those challenges?

When I first got elected secretary general of INTERPOL in 2000, the organization was generally perceived as slow, bureaucratic, and unresponsive. Consequently, only marginally relevant to police forces. The General Secretariat in Lyon was open and was answering messages from member countries only during normal office hours. INTERPOL’s notices were published on paper and mailed by post. There was an urgent need to turn INTERPOL into a modern, effective global police organization. This was the main challenge I faced at the beginning of my first term.

Changes to INTERPOL were guided by three imperatives. First, INTERPOL had to be present and respond immediately to members’ requests for support. Hence, the shift to a 24/7 approach with the Command and Co-ordination Centre and a secure online global communication network. Second, we had to be sure that our NCBs could act promptly based on the information made available by INTERPOL—that led to the creation of digital records and our new databases, ranging from stolen travel documents to DNA profiles—and directly accessible by member police forces, in some cases by field units. Third, INTERPOL had to become a more relevant player on the international scene. This led us to forge new alliances with major players such as the United Nations, the European Union, and Europol, the African Union, and the International Criminal Court. In total, over the past 10 years more than 30 cooperation agreements have been signed with international entities across the globe. While much remains to be done to achieve our vision, we can safely say today INTERPOL is a more effective, more relevant, and more visible police organization.

What is the role of the United States in managing transnational law enforcement and security issues?

As one of the founding countries of INTERPOL, the United States has always been a strategic member and has shown its support to INTERPOL in many ways across the years. It stands as the main contributor to the INTERPOL budget. In addition, there are many officers seconded from U.S. agencies to our General Secretariat, together with contracted U.S. citizens, working in key areas such as terrorism, criminal intelligence analysis, financial crimes, and human trafficking. The U.S. government has also voiced internationally its support of many INTERPOL initiatives. For instance, it was among the G8 countries that sponsored the creation of the International Child Sexual Exploitation database, allowing specialized officers all over the world to share, compare, and analyze pictures of abused children on the Internet, in order to crack down on pedophile rings and to rescue child victims.

At the same time, the United States was among the first to understand the full potential of INTERPOL tools. It is the member country conducting the highest number of searches against our database of persons of interest. In 2009 alone, it carried out more than 33 million searches and was the second largest user of our stolen and lost travel documents database. Every time you enter or transit in the United States, at all international airports and seaports, passports are checked against this database. In 2009 alone, more than 78 million passengers were checked this way, generating close to 4,000 hits. If this approach was followed by all member countries, global border security would be greatly enhanced.

What prospects exist for addressing long-term problems involving illegal drugs over the next few decades?

If the total worldwide cocaine production is falling and the North American market is stabilized (or is shrinking), a shift in the market to Europe because of the decline in prices would induce a change in trafficking routes via Africa to Europe and a rise in drug consumption in transit countries. Production and smuggling of synthetic drugs is also on the rise, due to the higher capacity of former underdeveloped countries to produce chemical substances, the globalization of markets, and related increase in the demand. Moreover, new drug trafficking trends are emerging due to the development of the transportation industry and the Internet. To identify these traffickers and disrupt these trafficking routes, INTERPOL is working in close cooperation with national drug enforcement agencies and international organizations involved in drug-control activities such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and World Customs Organization.

Where will INTERPOL and its law enforcement partners be in 20 years?

We must continue along the path we have been following over the past decade, but we need to do so at a higher speed, just as the environment around us is evolving more rapidly. Our vision is that of a world where each and every police officer in the field has on his or her belt—together with a gun and handcuffs—access to INTERPOL, its global membership, and its wealth of information. I do not know whether we will achieve this in 20 years, but we are certainly closer to this aim now than we were 10 years ago.

At the same time, we need to become better at what we do best. This will need extended operational reach, even more attention dedicated to new technologies and innovation, and enhanced capacity building for all our member countries.

How can law schools and universities address problems involving crime, corruption, and the rule of law?

Abraham Lincoln said the agenda of the classroom in this generation is the agenda of government in the next. To enhance the rule of law we must teach the rule of law. Law schools and universities should teach ethics. Indeed, elementary schools should teach ethics. Solid grammar, mathematics, and ethics skills. This should be the basic package of new generations if we want their world to be even better than ours.

What are your plans for the next few years?

In November, I will celebrate my 10th anniversary as secretary general of INTERPOL. Substantial achievements have been made in the past 10 years, but the path ahead remains long and difficult. They say it can be fairly easy to rise, but you need to work even harder to stay ahead and consolidate your lead. Any graduate student knows this. This is one of the new and great challenges awaiting INTERPOL, and it is one I am certainly willing to face. If next November the General Assembly agrees to appoint me for a third term, after the endorsement by INTERPOL’s Executive Committee last year, I will be honored to serve as secretary general of INTERPOL for the coming years.