THROWING MONEY AT COLOMBIA WILL ONLY MAKE THINGS WORSE

President Clinton faces a major human rights challenge this week on
the issue of counternarcotics aid to Colombia. Will his administration
certify that the Colombian government has met the human rights
requirements set by Congress as a precondition to releasing a
$1.3-billion U.S. military aid package to the country, or will he
suspend the aid until the requirements are met? Will Clinton waive the
human rights conditions-an admission that the human rights situation
in Colombia remains a disaster-and release the funds regardless?

Whatever his decision, it will help define his legacy and our
country's international standing and foreign policy for years to come.

As the president considers his decision, the Colombian government
pledged to investigate a recent Colombian army operation that left
dead six schoolchildren who had been on a hiking trip. Over the past
weekend, authorities reported that paramilitaries, often working
closely with the Colombian military, killed 10 farmhands in two
villages in northeastern Antioquia province.

Next week, President Clinton makes a one-day visit to Colombia to
spotlight the administration's assistance package, the bulk of which
will be used to train and equip special counternarcotics battalions
for the Colombian army and to supply them with at least 60 Huey and
Blackhawk helicopters.

Releasing these funds, either by certification or by waiver, will do
harm to the American claim of leadership on the issue of international
human rights.

Many members of Congress expressed concern about human rights abuses
in Colombia but reluctantly supported the package because they trusted
the certification process to ensure no aid would be delivered to an
abusive military.

After an honest and objective assessment of the human rights situation
in Colombia, it should be clear to all that certifying Colombia today
is impossible: The military maintains links to the paramilitaries; the
government of Colombia has not vigorously pursued members of
paramilitaries; many members of the armed forces who are credibly
accused of human rights violations have not been suspended; the
military continues to challenge the jurisdiction of civilian courts;
and the president of Colombia has not issued a written order for human
rights cases to be tried in civilian courts.

The only responsible alternative for the administration is to deny the
military aid to Colombia. Waiving the human rights conditions would be
a profound mistake. It would send a dangerous message to the Colombian
army and to the civilian leadership that the U.S. commitment to human
rights does not go beyond rhetoric.

Instead of throwing taxpayers' dollars at a war neither side can win
and aligning ourselves with a questionable military, I believe that
the U.S. should play a more effective role by helping create genuine
economic alternatives for the peasant farmers and others involved in
the Andean drug trade. And it should better combat drug abuse here at
home by funding drug treatment and education programs.

A landmark study of cocaine markets by the Rand Corp. found that,
dollar for dollar, providing treatment to cocaine users is 10 times
more effective than drug interdiction schemes and 23 times more cost
effective than eradicating coca at its source. We must make a
commitment to reducing demand in the United States.

Since 1989, virtually all U.S. assistance to Colombia has been related
to counternarcotics efforts, helping the police and military fight
illicit drug cultivation, production and trafficking. But the
administration's own estimates show a 140% increase in Colombian coca
cultivation over the past five years. Given this record, had the drug
war been evaluated like most other federal programs, I believe that we
would have tried a different strategy long ago.