COLOMBIA'S 'DRUG WAR'

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.

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