TERROR FIGHT REDEFINES U.S. ROLE IN COLOMBIA

Officials Want To Loosen Restrictions On Military Assistance So Items Used
In The War On Drugs Can Be Used To Fight Insurgents.

WASHINGTON -- For years, the ghosts of Vietnam and El Salvador have kept
Washington from joining the fight against Marxist rebels in Colombia.

It looks like that is about to change.

While U.S. troops probably won't be engaged in combat in Colombia any time
soon, the White House and Congress are moving toward giving Bogota the
green light to go after the rebels with U.S.-supplied helicopters,
intelligence and training.

Secretary of State Colin Powell told a Senate subcommittee on Tuesday that
the administration will "in the not too distant future" send Congress
legislation that would loosen restrictions on U.S. military assistance to
Colombia.

Colombia can use U.S. helicopters and intelligence to fight narcotics
production but not to fight the rebels that have been waging war on the
government since 1964.

It's a line that has been often blurred in practice. And now, with the
collapse of peace talks a few weeks ago and an escalation of the conflict,
the White House is conducting "intense discussions" on how to respond,
Powell said.

"They are not asking for U.S. troops -- nor do I see U.S. troops going to
Colombia," Powell said. "But we do believe we should help this democracy
that is being threatened by narcotraffickers and terrorists."

Powell had similar words for a House subcommittee last week. "It may be
necessary for us to give the government of Colombia additional support that
is outside of the counternarcotics basket," he said, "in order that they
are able to deal with this threat to their survival as a nation."

Adjusting the fight to counterinsurgency wouldn't take a big leap. U.S.
Special Forces have trained three antidrug battalions in Colombia. American
military advisers acknowledge that the training, which includes sniper
training, can easily be shifted to fighting the guerrillas.

In a reflection of the changing strategy, the Bush administration is
requesting $98-million in 2003 to help the Colombian army protect a vital
oil pipeline against repeated sabotage. Overall, the White House is asking
for $658-million in new aid for Colombia.

Congress seems willing to go along with the broader mission. Last week, the
House passed a nonbinding resolution calling on President Bush to fashion
legislation that would allow Washington to help Colombia fight the rebels.
Sens. Bob Graham, D-Fla., Jesse Helms, R-N.C., and Mike DeWine, R-Ohio,
sponsored the resolution in the Senate, which has yet to vote on it.

Graham, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, says Americans should start
seeing the conflict as a regional security threat.

"Colombia is the oldest functioning democracy in South America and is a
country which has been a good friend and ally of the United States," he said.

"Colombia is under assault by one of the most violent terrorist groups on
the planet, and now is the time for this good neighbor to step forward and
do what is right."

What has emboldened Washington are several factors: Sept. 11, the collapse
of the peace talks, a sputtering drug war and increased rebel violence.

Before Sept. 11, the suggestion of helping Colombia fight the rebels would
have been met with cries of Vietnam and El Salvador.

As the war on terrorism expands beyond Afghanistan, however, administration
officials and lawmakers are clumping Colombia together with Georgia, Yemen
and the Philippines.

During his appearance before the House subcommittee, Powell said, "It's
terrorism that threatens stability in Colombia."

The State Department has designated the two main rebel groups in Colombia,
the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, and the National
Liberation Army, or ELN, as terrorist organizations. It also has also
designated right wing paramilitary groups with links to the Colombian
military as terrorists.

U.S. officials say FARC has about 17,000 rebels and ELN about 3,500 rebels.
The paramilitaries, meanwhile, total about 15,000. While the Colombian
military is 140,000 strong, the vast majority protect the nation's
vulnerable infrastructure, including oil pipelines and power stations.

About 45,000 soldiers are deployed in the fight against the guerrillas.

Adam Isacson, a Colombia expert at the Center for International Policy,
which opposes expanded U.S. military aid to Colombia, said the terrorist
argument is playing well in Washington. "They're going to call this
counterterrorism," Isacson said. "You're never going to hear
counterinsurgency."

Rep. Janice Schakowsky, D-Ill., said Washington is making a mistake.

A longtime opponent of U.S. military aid to Colombia, Schakowsky said that
the drug war has been a miserable failure and that backing the guerrilla
war would yield similar results.

She pointed to a White House report released last week saying that coca
production in Colombia increased last year. The assessment contradicted
earlier estimates by the Colombian government.

Schakowsky said she had nothing good to say about U.S. efforts in Colombia.
"I think what we found is we helped increase the violence in Colombia," she
said.

What Washington should focus on, she said, is helping Colombia reach a
peaceful settlement with the rebels. "We have to be more careful about our
approach, or else we're just going to be part of the problem," she said.

By contrast, retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey, drug czar during the Clinton
administration, said he applauded "the new thinking" in Washington.

He said U.S. law banning U.S. aid to Colombia from being used in the rebel
war was based on "artificial fiction."

He cited this example: "You have a counternarcotics battalion in a fierce
battle with (the rebels) in a coca field, and one town over, the rebels are
torturing and killing the mayor of the town. And the counternarcotics
battalion can't use the helicopter to get over to the village because of
the restrictions.

"That made no sense at all," he said.

During his tenure as drug czar, McCaffrey said, the line between
counternarcotics and counterinsurgency was blurred because of the role the
rebels play in the drug trade.

The nation's rebel and right wing paramilitary organizations are said to
rake in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in drug taxes.

What McCaffrey and others say Colombia needs to fight the rebels is better
intelligence, better training and military equipment.

"The key to Colombia's armed forces is not making it bigger, but more
professional, making sure it can move around the country and protect the
people," McCaffrey said.

Myles Frechette, a former U.S. ambassador to Colombia, said what opened the
door to the shift in policy was Colombian President Andres Pastrana's
declaration that the peace talks had failed.

Washington, he said, had been waiting for his cue. "Pastrana said the
emperor has no clothes," Frechette said. "And now everybody can say what
everybody already knew."

Expansion of the U.S. military role in Colombia probably won't come until
after Colombia elects a new president May 26 or in a runoff, Frechette
said. Pastrana is not eligible to run again.

Frechette said he expects a high-level U.S. official to visit the new
president and present him with a counterinsurgency plan.

The Bush administration will then make its argument to the American people.

"You talk about democracy, a democracy under fire," Frechette said. "You
talk about the strategic importance to the United States.

"You sort of say, "There are people who are in trouble. Let's not kid
ourselves. If we don't help them now, the cost of helping them later will
be greater.' "