WAR'S NEW TARGET: DRUGS

MIAMI -- A year ago, the idea of expanding U.S. military aid to Colombia
might have had little chance of success.

After Sept. 11, political violence in Colombia has a new ring to it in
Washington.

That became evident last week when U.S. officials unveiled the 2003 budget
with new money for Colombia -- and a new role for U.S. military trainers.

The news was welcomed by Colombians. But here in the United States, the
proposed aid package will have to overcome concerns over deepening U.S.
involvement and what some see as a worsening human rights situation in
war-torn Colombia.

At issue is some $538-million included in the Bush administration's 2003
budget, including $98-million to train a Colombian army brigade to protect
a vital oil pipeline from guerrilla attacks.

Until now, American policy has focused narrowly on a counternarcotics
strategy designed to undermine the drug trade, which is widely considered
to be a major source of finance for left-wing guerrillas and rival
right-wing paramilitaries. Because of human rights concerns over the
performance of the Colombian military, Congress has also imposed tough
conditions on U.S. assistance.

But the Bush administration now appears convinced that existing policy
needs to change toward broader military support. Senior State Department
officials visiting Bogota last week spoke of the need for "an additional
step" to help Colombia protect itself.

"There is a change of policy, there's no doubt about that," said Michael
Shifter, a Colombia analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue, a
Washington-based think tank.

Shifter, who privately briefed 20 members of Congress last week, described
the pipeline protection proposal as a "trial balloon" to test public
opinion and the will of Congress. The 483-mile-long Cano Limon pipeline
pumps oil drilled by a California company, Occidental Petroleum, to the
port of Covenas.

U.S. officials say the pipeline was shut down for 266 days last year due to
some 170 rebel bomb attacks, costing the company and the state oil giant,
Ecopetrol, about $500-million in lost production.

"There's a lot of people in this post-Sept. 11 climate who would like to
see what the possibility is of going down another path," Shifter said.
"This is the opening for something deeper."

But, he cautioned, "There's real questions about what going beyond the
counternarcotics focus really means. Is this a slippery slope? A pipeline
here, and something else there, and pretty soon you are in real deep."

Experts point out that peace talks between the Colombian government and two
left-wing rebel groups -- the 18,000-strong FARC (Revolutionary Armed
=46orces of Colombia) and the smaller ELN (National Liberation Army) --
have failed to make any substantial headway.

Despite the peace talks, in recent weeks FARC has launched a series of
bloody attacks. The rebels now appear to be focusing their strategy
increasingly on urban targets, greatly increasing domestic pressure on the
government for a tougher military response.

The Colombian government has for some time pressed Washington to broaden
the permitted uses of U.S. aid. Until now the funds, including $1.3-billion
allotted by Congress 18 months ago, have been almost entirely channeled
through State Department programs aimed at interrupting drug production.
Most of that money has gone to training three Colombian counternarcotics
battalions, as well as new military helicopters and an intensified aerial
spraying operation to destroy drug crops.

But the U.S. Embassy in Bogota is under strict instructions by Congress to
ensure that the aid is used for its intended purpose, and not for direct
counterinsurgency operations.

When Colombian President Andres Pastrana visited the White House in
November, diplomats say, he made a personal appeal to President Bush. He
asked that the Colombian military be allowed to use its new U.S.-supplied
hardware for broader military operations.

The plea may not have fallen on deaf ears.

According to military sources, the new pipeline protection plan came
directly from the White House. It was initially greeted with some
reservations in the Pentagon. There was concern about the military
vulnerability of trying to defend fixed installations, a strategy abandoned
in Colombia five years ago in favor of a more mobile, rapid response
approach that has proven far more effective.

But when it was explained that the plan was part of an attempt to expand
the military's role in Colombia, Pentagon officials were soon won over.
Since the beginning of the drug war, some in the military have privately
expressed discomfort with their counter-drug role, regarding it as a
departure from the military's traditional combat function.

But others worry this could escalate the war, with tragic consequences for
human rights.

In a joint report released this week, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty
International and the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) accused the
Pastrana government of failing to meet Congress' human rights conditions
for continued funding.

The groups called on Secretary of State Colin Powell to "decertify"
Colombia, effectively cutting off aid, when he reports to Congress later
this month.

The report alleges that the Colombian government has failed to take action
against military officers accused of collaborating with illegal right-wing
paramilitary groups, in violation of the conditions set by Congress.

"Certain military units and police detachments continued to work with,
support, profit from and tolerate paramilitary groups, treating them as a
force allied to and compatible with their own," the report states.

U.S. and Colombian officials say they are studying the allegations.

"We will take their report seriously," said Undersecretary of State Marc
Grossman, who met Pastrana and senior Colombian military officers in Bogota
last week. "We will make our judgment about how that report corresponds to
the information that our embassy has or what the Colombian government has."

Colombian Ambassador Luis Alberto Moreno defended his country's human
rights record.

"I think the overall situation is improving," he said Friday in a breakfast
meeting with reporters at his residence in Washington.

Moreno cited an increase in the number of paramilitary troops apprehended
or killed by government troops, and tougher laws to guard against human
rights violations.

Human rights advocates reject any suggestion of an improvement in
conditions. On the contrary, political violence has increased in large part
because of a climate of impunity, the report states.

"Not only is the situation bad, but there were steps taken to make it
worse," said Alexandra Arriaga, director of government relations for
Amnesty International. "The evidence is overwhelming."

Arriaga said that while the government has removed some officers, none has
been prosecuted, in what she described as a circumvention of judicial
procedure. Others accused of abuses remain on active duty or have been
promoted, she said.

But some analysts, including those critical of U.S. policy, believe the
human rights groups may be asking too much of Colombia, given the brutal
nature of the four-decades-old conflict.

"I admire their (human rights) work enormously, but who is going to rein in
the paramilitaries?" asked Shifter, who sits on the board of both Human
Rights Watch and WOLA.

While the Colombian military needs to make "a lot more progress," he said,
a cutoff of U.S. aid might pull the rug from under the Pastrana government.
"The paramilitary will have a field day and the tragedy will be compounded
and magnified," he said.

But Shifter and others say the White House still may have a tough job
winning Congressional approval for expanded military support.

The debate is likely to split down party lines, although several leading
Democrats are known to support military aid. Florida Sen. Bob Graham said
he was initially "encouraged" by the proposal, but would be reviewing it in
more detail before making up his mind.

The pipeline proposal also has some asking why U.S. taxpayers should have
to provide security for a large private company.

"If it wasn't for the new antiterrorism climate, it would have been easy to
dismiss this as a giveaway to a major oil contributor," said Adam Isacson,
Colombia coordinator for the Center for International Policy, a
Washington-based research and advocacy group.

"If they wanted to take on the guerrillas, they could have done it in many
parts of Colombia. But they chose to do it where the pipeline is. Isn't
that curious?"

Isacson points out that Occidental has spent millions of dollars lobbying
politicians on Colombia policy in recent years, as well as making large
campaign contributions.

On the other hand, a number of observers say Los Angeles-based Occidental
deserves special consideration as it has come under attack by guerrilla
groups officially listed in the United States as terrorist organizations.

There are also powerful economic arguments. Oil is Colombia's largest
export, accounting for a large chunk of government income. Ambassador
Moreno noted that the Colombian government receives 85 percent of the net
revenues generated by the pipeline.

Colombia is also the 10th-biggest supplier of oil to the United States. In
the post-Sept. 11 climate, Occidental's oil may have acquired greater
strategic value to the United States because of the potential to reduce
dependence on oil imports from the Middle East.

Even some critics of an expanded U.S. role acknowledge that arguments like
that might be all the White House needs.