The George Will column your newspaper carried Sept. 10 ("U.S.'s
Colombia policy `barren of historical sense'") is one of the most
interesting exercises in political journalism I have ever seen. Will's
primary target is Bill Clinton's dissembling on behalf of "Plan
Colombia." The plan itself, Will tells us, is patently absurd: "peace
through herbicides." He derides Clinton for having us believe that
American military helicopters will be used "as farm
implements."

Although Will goes into detail to develop his premise, he stops short
of stating that U.S. drug policy - which Clinton insists is the major
reason for our intervention - is equally absurd. Although that idea is
strongly implied, Will carefully avoids saying so directly, perhaps
because so many of the most ardent supporters of that policy - and
advocates for Plan Colombia - are themselves staunch
Republicans.

Will ends by relating an early '70s exchange in which George Schultz
(long a critic of drug prohibition) twitted Patrick Moynihan for
assuming heroin supply could be "controlled" by governmental
agreements and repeating Sir Lewis Namier's admonition that the study
of history should provide us with a sense of "how things do not work."
The most obvious conclusion from these examples is not simply that
U.S. policy in Colombia is wrong; it's that American drug prohibition
is also wrong.

It's too bad Will just couldn't bring himself to say
so.

Tom O'Connell,
San Mateo, Calif.