COCA FIELDS: HALF-EMPTY OR HALF-FULL?

More Land In Colombia Is Under Coca Cultivation, The U.S. Says, But
Cultivation Is Down. It Depends On How You Look.

No one likes to trumpet failure. But was the White House drug czar's
office trying to hide something this month?

For the second year in a row, the office released its annual survey
of coca cultivation (the plant used to make cocaine) using what
skeptics might call a touch of creative accounting.

Oddly, the survey found 26 percent more land under coca cultivation
last year than in 2004. This comes after Washington has spent more
than $4-billion since 2000 on an antidrug program known as Plan
Colombia, which was supposed to cut coca cultivation in half within six years.

But that's not what the government chose to emphasize. In a press
release, the Office of National Drug Control Policy argued that coca
cultivation in Colombia declined in 2005 by 8 percent, from 281,694
acres to 260,443 acres. To reach this conclusion the government
limited its analysis only to "those areas surveyed by the U.S.
government in 2004 when compared to the same areas in 2005."

In fact, government satellites used for the survey detected a far
larger area under cultivation - a total of 355,824 acres.

Confused?

Officials say the discrepancy results from an expansion of the
geographical area in this year's survey, which is 81 percent larger
than in 2004. There isn't necessarily more coca, they explain, we're
just seeing more of it.

Critics of U.S. policy have long argued that official estimates of
coca cultivation were way off, precisely because federal agencies
were not looking in all the right places.

Sure enough, when the 2005 survey expanded its range to include more
of the northern part of the country, it discovered 96,369 additional
acres of coca. But don't assume this means cultivation is rising, the
government says, because "it is impossible to determine" how long
these newly detected coca plants have existed.

Officials recognize the cultivation figures do not look good. Maybe
that's why they were released at 5 p.m. on Good Friday. But the news
isn't as bad as it seems, officials add. In areas where crops are
being sprayed, they report at least a 10 percent reduction in coca.
Most of the expansion in cultivation is occurring in areas not sprayed before.

Drug policy critics cheer the wider survey. But they're quick to note
that Washington previously insisted its cultivation estimates were solid.

"When it's convenient they will plug their figures, and now when it's
not convenient they say take it with a grain of salt. They can't have
it both ways," said John Walsh, who monitors the drug war for the
Washington Office on Latin America, which is critical of the aerial
eradication strategy.

Critics are calling for a fundamental reassessment of current policy.
The figure of 355,824 acres in 2005 actually exceeds the U.S.
government's estimate of Colombian coca-growing before Plan Colombia
began, says Adam Isacson, a drug policy watchdog at the Center for
International Policy.

Also, much of the reduction in areas surveyed was not due to aerial
fumigation, but to manual eradication, deemed preferable by some who
say the spray program (which accounts for more than a quarter of the
annual $750-million budget) also damages other legitimate crops.

The bottom line, say critics, is that there is more coca being
produced than officials have recognized. This would explain one of
the more puzzling aspects of the drug war in recent years: Despite
intense spraying of coca crops, the price and availability of cocaine
on U.S. streets stayed virtually unchanged.

The drug czar's office says that's no longer true. Prices are pushing
upward, and purity is degrading, they say.

"We are seeing signs of stress on the market," said David Murray, a
policy analyst in the drug czar's office. "We are not declaring
victory," Murray cautions. "It's going to be a continuing long, hard fight."

But focusing on the coca bush is a bad idea, critics say. That's not
where the big profits are made in the cocaine trade. In fact, the
coca leaves, which are mixed with chemicals to obtain coca paste for
processing into cocaine powder, are the least valuable part of the
chain. The real money is made by organized criminals at the export
and retail stage, where the smuggling risks are greater.

Peasant coca growers have proved themselves to be ingenious.
Increasingly, coca plants are grown in the shade, hiding them from
satellite detection.

U.S. officials insist that spraying, if conducted on a massive scale,
can work. If anything, they say, the program needs to be expanded.
Growers will capitulate under sufficient pressure. Officials plan to
provide three additional crop-spraying planes to Colombia this year
to add to its existing fleet of 21 aircraft.

A few more spray planes won't make any difference, counters Isacson.
"Fumigating an area is no substitute for governing it," he said,
highlighting the weak state presence in the affected areas, havens
for left-wing guerrillas and rival paramilitary forces. Instead, he
said, more effort should go into promoting alternative development to
encourage coca farmers to plant other crops. In addition, critics
say, crop substitution has been woefully underfunded.

Even if spraying does make a significant impact, critics say
cultivation will simply move to another country, just as happened in
the past. Before Colombia entered the market in the 1990s, coca was
grown mostly in Bolivia and Peru.

The government's latest figures already show a 38 percent increase in
cultivation in Peru and modest gains in Bolivia. In a slap at U.S.
policy, voters in Bolivia last year elected the head of a coca
growers union as president.

The front-runner in elections in Peru next month, Ollanta Humala,
also has vowed to put a stop to coca eradication.

For years drug war critics say the government has ignored their warnings.

"Now, will you listen to us?" Isacson asks.