U.S. LAUNCHES COVERT PROGRAM TO AID COLOMBIA

Military, mercenaries hired, sources say

BOGOTA -- A major offensive by leftist guerrillas this month has dealt a
serious blow to U.S. anti-narcotics efforts in the primary cocaineproducing
areas of Colombia, according to participants in U.S.-directed jungle
operations here.

The guerrillas' rapidly expanding military might also is raising difficult
policy problems for Washington about how to bolster the Colombian armed
forces while avoiding the appearance of becoming enmeshed in a
counter-insurgency war.

It remains unclear how extensive the damage is to U.S.
intelligencegathering, anti-narcotics and other operations in southeastern
Colombia, where hundreds of guerrillas overran armed forces bases two weeks
ago. But since the rebel offensive began Aug. 3, a U.S. Embassy spokesman
said, there has been a "strategic redeployment" of all American personnel
working under government contract in the zone of conflict.

The spokesman declined to give specifics, but up to 100 Americans
reportedly had been deployed in the area, mainly at a large armed forces
and police base in San Jose del Guaviare, 180 miles southeast of Bogota.

U.S. intelligence and anti-narcotics sources say the Clinton administration
has responded to the guerrilla threat by launching a multimillion-dollar
covert program --employing mercenaries, private contractors and active-duty
military personnel-- to support the Colombian armed forces. They say the
program, which involves live-combat training among other activities, goes
well beyond the stated U.S. mission of fighting drug traffickers in
Colombia.

Critics in Washington question whether such a program could be designed to
skirt congressional restrictions on aid to Colombia, particularly when U.S.
training, equipment and combat support might be going to army units linked
to human rights abuses.

U.S. Ambassador Curtis Kamman declined an interview request to discuss any
such U.S. activities here.

Several sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that tens of
millions of taxpayer dollars are going into a covert operations across
southern Colombia employing, among others, U.S. Special Forces, former
Green Berets, Gulf War veterans and even a few figures from covert
CIA-backed operations in Central America during the 1980s. Some have been
involved in direct combat with Colombian guerrillas, the sources said.

Financial support

Since 1990, according to a February report by the Government Accounting
Office and other official data, the United States earmarked more than $830
million in counternarcotics support to Colombia. Of that, however, only
one-third went directly to anti-narcotics assistance, while the remaining
two-thirds went for military-related expenditures, the GAO report said.
Colombia is slated to receive another $208 million starting next year.

By contrast, the U.S. Southern Command estimated that in 1995 alone, the
largest guerrilla group here, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia,
or FARC, earned $647 million from protecting drug labs, airstrips and
illicit-crop plantations.

U.S. officials concede that the increased involvement of guerrillas in
trafficking activities has made the U.S. mission in Colombia more
complicated.

"We would be remiss to not underscore the depth of concern we have," said
White House drug czar Barry McCaffrey during a visit here Aug. 7. "The
facts of the matter are that the FARC is heavily involved in protecting,
transporting and, in some cases, operating drug labs. It's given them such
an enormous source of wealth that, arguably, their firepower, their pay
scales, their intelligence services are more sophisticated than that of the
[government] forces that guard this democracy."

International human rights groups argue that the linkage between the
guerrillas and drug traffickers has allowed Washington to expand covert
counterinsurgency operations in Colombia without having to face public or
congressional scrutiny, particularly on human rights issues.

Since much of the money spent by the U.S. government in Colombia is covert
aid, it does not have to be reported publicly, the rights groups say.

"The lack of transparency really is the key," said Robin Kirk, who monitors
Colombia for Human Rights Watch/Americas. "More or less, the Defense
Department can spend its chunk of money as it sees fit, and it's impossible
to know where it's going. The amount of CIA money being spent in Colombia
is impossible to find out."

Carlos Salinas, of Amnesty International in Washington, said he faced
similar roadblocks in attempting to get an accounting of U.S. military
activities during a recent visit to the U.S. Embassy here.

"We were struck by the adamant refusal to provide any details that would
lead to a transparent view of U.S. military activities in Colombia," he
said. "Of course, the inevitable question that arises is, if indeed nothing
wrong is going on there, what is there to hide?"

Sources here said that the Clinton administration has technically abided by
legal restrictions on the deployment of active-duty military personnel in
zones of conflict by hiring retired Green Berets and other private
contractors to carry out sensitive jungle operations.

"Of course they have to keep it secret," said an intelligence operative
here, who asked not to be identified. "They're up to a lot of things that
they shouldn't be." He did not elaborate.

'Shady past'

Another participant in U.S. operations said he had flown combat missions
over Baghdad during the Gulf War and was involved in covert CIA operations
to assist Nicaraguan Contra guerrillas in the late 1980s. The participant
said he had flown several missions with Eugene Hasenfus, the sole American
survivor of a CIA-backed flight over Nicaragua that was shot down by
Sandinista troops Oct. 5, 1986.

"To get somebody out there to do those operations, you almost have to have
that shady past," said Joe Toft, the former chief of the U.S. Drug
Enforcement Administration in Colombia.

Others working under U.S. contract here have received not only U.S. Special
Forces counterinsurgency training but have attended courses abroad,
including in Russia. There, according to one participant, they were taught
how to use some Russian-made military hardware found in Colombia as well as
counterinsurgency techniques based on Cuban and Russian models of guerrilla
warfare.

Some personnel participating in U.S. operations here are working under a
State Department contract with two private firms based in suburban
Washington: Dyncorp and East Inc. Officials of both companies said they
were not permitted to discuss their operations in Colombia and referred all
questions to the State Department. Officials did not return phone calls.

Both companies officially are providing pilot training and technical
support for Colombian illicit-crop eradication flights, according to U.S.
officials. But one pilot said he had conducted a number of missions that
went well beyond the scope of that definition, including assisting in the
deployment of Colombian counterinsurgency troops.

Shortly before the guerrilla offensive began this month, two East Inc.
pilots were killed near the military base at San Jose del Guaviare. A U.S.
Embassy spokesman said the circumstances of the pilots' deaths were still
under investigation. He could not confirm whether the pilots' bodies or the
plane wreckage had been recovered.

Dyncorp personnel who were based at San Jose del Guaviare before the U.S.
withdrawal said they were under strict orders not to talk to reporters.

The U.S. Embassy has attempted to discourage reporters from delving into
the activities of government-contracted personnel here.

Threats made

One U.S. reporter who attempted to talk to Dyncorp pilots at San Jose del
Guaviare said he was threatened with banishment from the U.S. Embassy if he
ever attempted to approach Dyncorp personnel again. Another reporter said
he was banned from embassy-sponsored briefings after the reporter quoted a
guerrilla leader as saying that U.S. military advisers would now be
targeted for attack.

"I can understand why the embassy would be sensitive to anything appearing
in the press about the civilian group out there," Mr. Toft said. "It's for
the safety of those people. If the guerrillas become aware of them, they
[the Americans] could be targeted."

Ms. Kirk and Mr. Salinas, the human rights activists, said the use of
covert aid and privately contracted personnel is troublesome because it may
permit the U.S. Embassy to circumvent restrictions imposed by Congress on
aid to Colombian military units linked to human rights abuses.

"If we found that the Department of Defense was using private contractors
in ways that are contrary to the intent of the law, that would be cause
for great concern," said Tim Rieser, an aide to Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
"If the administration wants to shift its policy to support
counter-insurgency activities, then it should come to the Congress, and
Congress should debate it."

Under congressional foreign-aid restrictions sponsored by Sen. Leahy,
military units must be "vetted" of officers with spotty human rights
records before those units can receive assistance, such as training and
equipment, administered by the State Department.

Mr. Rieser said previous Pentagon attempts to avoid applying those
restrictions prompted Sen. Leahy earlier this month to draft legislation
requiring compliance. Although the Defense Department has said it would
agree to the proposed law, he said, the CIA rejects such restrictions.

Some U.S. Special Forces troops currently are allowed to participate in
training exercises with Colombian soldiers, both from vetted and unvetted
units, under a Pentagon exchange program in existence since 1991. U.S.
officials said those American troops have not been assigned to combat
roles, although they are authorized to fight if fired upon.

Copyright 1998 The Dallas Morning News

Checked-by: Joel W. Johnson