COLOMBIA'S 'DRUG WAR'

----1st LTE----

In the Jan. 12 editorial "Battles in the Drug War," The Post erred in stating
that the decline in coca cultivation in Peru and Bolivia is due in part
to a policy of aerial spraying. Neither Peru nor Bolivia uses aerial spraying
as a means to eradicate illicit coca crops. The only country in the
hemisphere that does is Colombia -- and there, U.S. anti-drug policy has
been a
spectacular failure.

Colombia is by far the largest recipient of U.S. antidrug funding,
totaling almost $1 billion to date. Yet over the past decade, drug
production in Colombia has risen an estimated 260 percent, and coca
production has more than tripled, making Colombia the world's leading
producer. Only five years ago, no heroin was produced in Colombia. The
country now ranks third in the world in poppy cultivation and fourth
in heroin production.

U.S. antidrug policy in Latin America is fundamentally wrong. The
greatest successes occur in countries where the United States invests
the least. Those countries unlucky enough to receive the brunt of U.S.
attention and investment experience dramatic setbacks. The "successes"
of Peru and Bolivia should serve as a wake-up call to U.S. officials
who advocate spending more money and spraying more chemicals in the
fight against drugs.

The Post is correct, however, in arguing that the American approach to
the drug war needs to be reviewed. There is no silver bullet. Reducing
drug abuse in the United States requires long-term solutions,
including promoting respect for human rights and democracy and
strengthening civilian law enforcement and judicial institutions in
source countries.

LAURIE FREEMAN Washington The writer is program assistant for the
Andes in the Washington Office on Latin America.

-------Second LTE------

In the editorial "Battles in the Drug War," The Post suggests that
U.S. policy toward Colombia needs to be reviewed. I hope that the
Clinton administration follows that advice and undertakes a review.
But it should keep in mind that Colombia is home to the largest
humanitarian crisis in the Western Hemisphere.

More than 1.3 million Colombians have become refugees in their own
land,

forced from their homes, farms and villages by a vicious war between
right-wing paramilitary squads, left-wing guerrillas and the Colombian
military.

The Clinton administration's response to this situation has been
paltry.

While we will spend $289 million to assist armed forces with a bad
reputation for abuse of human rights, only $2 million has been
allocated for specific programs to help the "internal refugees" of
Colombia.

Instead of sending more arms, the United States should significantly
increase its development assistance to help farmers grow crops other
than coca. It also should increase humanitarian assistance through
nongovernmental organizations to help the displaced help themselves.

Finally, President Clinton should engage the moral and political force
of the U.S. government to help Colombia's new President Andreas
Pastrana and support his peace efforts. It is a comprehensive strategy
such as this that will help restore Colombia to the peaceful,
democratic country it once was and at the same time reduce the supply
of coca for export.

JOHN FREDRIKSSON Associate Executive Director U.S. Committee for
Refugees Washington