Augustin Jimenez, who serves
on a committee for political prisoners, said human rights workers have
collected evidence that paramilitary forces, working in conjunction the
military, have killed many civilians. "It would be very strange and difficult
for anyone in the world to understand why the United States would support
an army that is committing such atrocities against its population," Jimenez
said.
BOSTON GLOBE
Sunday, 17 October 1999
Lobbyists war over billions in antidrug aid to Colombia
By John Donnelly
WASHINGTON - A request to spend up to $2 billion on Colombia's drug
war has become one of America's most closely watched and contentious foreign
aid issues, prompting a run of Colombian generals and human rights advocates
to argue their cases with the Congress.
But after the swirl of lobbyists and weeks of White House meetings,
the Clinton administration may postpone the request until next year, fearful
that any proposal now would siphon funds from other foreign aid programs.
If approved, the Colombian aid package would rank as the United States'
third largest to any country, behind Israel and Jordan.
Many, like White House drug policy director Barry McCaffrey, argue that
Colombia faces a drug-induced emergency and desperately needs the assistance
now. Others express concern that a huge US military package would move
America toward a Vietnam-like swamp. And still others, such as Representative
William Delahunt of Massachusetts, believe in an assistance package, but
one that addresses vast social and economic inequities that have helped
fuel more than three decades of civil war in Colombia.
Congressional supporters for a hefty military aid package may still
push for a decision in the coming weeks, a move backed by McCaffrey, who
recently testified before Congress that the administration would request
this fall a $1 billion to $2 billion-plus three-year assistance bill to
fight drugs.
"This is an emergency situation," McCaffrey told the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee. "The Colombian democracy has to see a long-term commitment
to them - three years minimum."
He predicted that coca production, which jumped by 50 percent from 1990
to 1998 despite more than $600 million in US antidrug assistance, again
would show an increase this year.
He and others have argued that the situation is especially tenuous in
Colombia because peace talks between President Andres Pastrana and two
leftist guerrilla organizations are foundering, and the guerrillas control
nearly 40 percent of the country.
As narcotraffickers step up production, benefiting from the latest in
European equipment and a move into the dense jungle of southern Colombia,
the leftist guerrillas are said by US intelligence to be reaping about
$1 billion a year in skimmed-off drug profits.
Still, said two US officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity,
raising the issue of Colombian funds now may create other problems for
the administration's fight to get money for other foreign programs.
Already, the administration is having great difficulty in prying foreign
assistance out of Congress. Congress cut the administration's budget for
foreign operations from $14.6 billion to $12.7 billion, and another request
for $1.7 billion in United Nations arrears languishes in the Senate. President
Clinton will veto the foreign operations bill today or tomorrow, National
Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer said.
"It doesn't seem the right time to put the Colombian piece before Congress,"
said one US official, speaking on condition of anonymity. The official
continued, referring to the Israeli-Palestinian peace accord of 1993, "It
doesn't move us in the right direction, especially when we can't get money
for the Wye peace plan in the foreign operations bill."
Colombia, which suffers from what President Andres Pastrana calls the
"plague of drugs," has made an extraordinary lobbying effort in Washington
over the last several months.
Upon the urging of senior US officials, Pastrana presented a comprehensive
plan for fighting the drug war and rebuilding the country's economic foundation,
totaling $7.5 billion over three years. Of that, he asked for $3.5 billion
from the United States and other countries.
In Washington recently, Colombian generals have argued their case in
the White House for more military equipment and training, spent hours in
the offices of congressmen, and hosted American journalists over breakfast
at the Colombian ambassador's residence.
They have not been the only Colombian visitors to Washington. Five human
rights advocates spoke Friday at a conference on victims in their country.
All argued against assistance to the Colombian military.
Augustin Jimenez, who serves on a committee for political prisoners,
said human rights workers have collected evidence that paramilitary forces,
working in conjunction the military, have killed many civilians.
"It would be very strange and difficult for anyone in the world to understand
why the United States would support an army that is committing such atrocities
against its population," Jimenez said.
Others, including Colombian Senator Francisco Rojas Birry, argued the
money should be spent on social assistance programs such as crop substitution.
"Even if the guerrillas surrender and all their weapons are burned, the
fight will still continue," he said.
Delahunt, a former Massachusetts prosecutor who has quietly traveled
twice to Colombia this year to talk with the guerrillas and Pastrana, said
Friday that any solution to Colombia's problems must include a range of
social programs.
"Let's get realistic. You simply cannot have a country for haves and
have-nots," he said in an interview. "The infrastructure has to be extended
to rural areas. They eradicated a record number of hectares of coca this
year, and overall production is up 30 percent. That says it. . . . Those
who think the solution is with helicopters and guns are pushing a recipe
for disaster."
|
