FIGHT WAR ON DRUGS IN U.S., NOT IN COLOMBIA President Clinton's objective in helping Colombia fight its war on drugs is a noble one: to stem the flow of cocaine and heroin to the United States. After all, Colombian drug traffickers supply 90% of the cocaine that reaches American soil and nearly all of the heroin. The problem, however, is that doing so may get the United States caught up in a civil war, and if the violence spreads -- as it often does -- maybe regional conflict. Clinton is in the process of sending $1.3 billion in aid for Colombian President Andres Pastrana's $7.5 billion "Colombia Plan," a program to eradicate the countryside of coca crops, run traffickers out of Colombia or into jail and rebuild the criminal justice system. It's a bold plan, but warning signs were posted all over the map to limit U.S. involvement, and Clinton and Congress pushed forward in spite of them. Much of the U.S. aid is defense-related, including 60 attack helicopters and military training to Colombian troops by U.S. advisers. Military support of any form could be dangerous for civilians as well as the drug traffickers in Colombia. Human rights groups have accused the Colombian army and paramilitary allies of human rights violations, including civilian massacres. Congress had stipulated that the aid be conditional upon Pastrana taking action to prosecute military abuse and sever the ties between the military and paramilitary groups, but Clinton waived the stipulation. Then there's Colombia's general instability. The country is dealing with a 20% unemployment rate, low support for Pastrana and little or no economic growth -- not to mention a 36-year-old civil war. And to make things worse, the army has conceded nearly a third of the southern portion of the country to leftist rebels, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), the largest guerrilla group. Clinton can't even be sure that Pastrana will remain in power in the coming weeks, much less ensure that the money the United States sends is used effectively. FARC and other rebels and even the paramilitary groups now work to protect the drug traffickers' crops in exchange for millions, inextricably linking the problems of leftist violence to drug trafficking in Colombia. That means that when Clinton assures us that the United States is not getting involved in a shooting war, don't be too quick to believe him. Neighboring Central and South American leaders are concerned that U.S. military assistance might lead guerrillas and traffickers to push the war across borders. Some say spillovers already have begun over Panama's border. Ecuador and Brazil have responded by bolstering defense at their borders, and relations with Peru and Venezuela have been strained. Venezuela's President Huga Chevez even warned that Colombia's war could spark a regional conflict. Also, officials are concerned that last week's kidnapping of 10 foreigners in Ecuador was a sign of an escalation. Former supporters of the Colombia Plan also are turning away. Europeans, once committed to Pastrana's plan, are backing away for fear of getting entangled in a civil war. They're also not thrilled with the nature of the U.S. aid package; they say it's too militaristic. Now Colombian officials are no longer sure they'll be able to come up with their end of the commitment: $4 billion. And Pastrana has done little to garner Colombian support for the campaign. If the Colombians themselves can't help fight their own battles, why should we? Another reason the United States should have said no to Plan Colombia is that previous aid has been less than effective. According to a report released by the General Accounting Office this week: "(U.S.) assistance has not been used to the extent possible to help counter the illegal drug activities in Colombia. If these past problems continue, the dramatic increase in U.S. support for Plan Colombia will not be used in the most effective way." From 1996 to 2000, the Clinton administration sent Colombia an estimated $765 million to assist its war on drugs. But, as the report also notes, "coca cultivation and cocaine production in Colombia more than doubled" from 1995 to 1999. You'd think Pastrana would stop asking for our help. The GAO recommends that the State and Defense departments get their act together in a few areas before moving forward. But I say keep the money here at home. If the Clinton administration can't think of anything better to waste $1.3 billion on, I'm sure I can: We could tackle drug addiction for starters. Reducing the demand for drugs such as cocaine and heroin here in the United States could go a long way toward freeing Colombia of its drug lords and well-funded rebels.
No member comments available...
|