| January
18, 2000 Clinton's Proposed Aid Package The Clinton Administration's proposal of a $1.3 billion aid package to help Colombia combat illegal drugs and corruption can only worsen human rights in a country with one of the worst human rights records in the world. Amnesty International reported an estimated 2,000 Colombians died or "disappeared" in politically motivated killings in 1999. The proposed aid package would grant aid to a military that, with a history of atrocities and alleged links to violent paramilitaries, does not "deserve our support" as Madeleine Albright suggests. The Colombian military has long invoked a 1965 law which grants the army legal authority to arm civilian groups in order to counter guerilla groups. Funding the Colombian military is tantamount to using U.S. taxpayer money to support further human rights violations. Colombia already ranks third in overall U.S. military aid, after Egypt and Israel-two other human rights "successes"--despite the fact that aid was temporarily cut off in 1994 because of human rights concerns. The current aid proposal will only raise U.S. involvement in the region and as the Washington Office on Latin America suggests "will worsen the grave crisis in Colombia, not contribute to its solution." Though the Clinton administration took a positive step by supporting the Leahy Law, which seeks to block aid to foreign military units directly involved in human rights violations, it is too little, too late. Additionally, administration officials continue to erroneously emphasize the role of leftist "narco-guerillas" in the drug trade and related violence, yet virtually ignore the role of right-wing paramilitaries. According to a 1997 U.S. State Department report, 60 percent of armed attacks were attributed to paramilitaries, while 23.5 percent to guerillas and 7.5 percent to the army in the first nine months of that year. No one can call into question the links between the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)--Colombia's largest guerilla insurgency--with the drug trade, but the Clinton administration's exclusive focus on the guerilla groups does nothing towards promoting concrete peace in Colombia. Though at least half of the cocaine that reaches the U.S. market comes through Guatemala--as much as Mexico--the Clinton Administration continues to place Colombia at the center of its counter-narcotics activity. And despite the fact that the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) has been investigating Guatemalan military links to the drug trade since 1990, nothing has been done to sanction individual military personnel involved in drug trafficking. And the aid fails to address the question of U.S. drug consumption. According to the 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, an estimated 13.6 million Americans were current illicit drug users--that's 6.2 percent of the population. Investing a fraction of the money earmarked for Colombia in rehabilitation and alternatives to incarceration would be a dramatic step towards curbing the flow of drugs north. Finally, despite the fact that the aid package is being billed as a humanitarian proposal aimed at supporting the peace process, there are clearly ulterior motives at play. With the loss of the Panama Canal and increased protests over the U.S. military's presence on the Puerto Rican island of Vieques, military strategists have been looking to relocate. Colombia, with its Caribbean and Pacific coasts, proximity to the Panama Canal and Venezuela, is a most important geopolitical location for U.S. interests. General Charles Willhelm, head of the Miami-based U.S. Southern Command has asserted that Colombia now constitutes the principal problem for Western hemispheric security, bolstering the view that an increased U.S. presence in the region is a necessity. With Ecuador's President Jamil Mahuad's recent announcement that the Sucre will be shelved for the U.S. dollar, an increased U.S. presence in the region seems an increasing and likely reality. Bernardo Ruiz is the Associate Editor of NACLA Report on the Americas. This article originally appeared in Colombia Report, an online journal that was published by the Information Network of the Americas (INOTA).
Copyright © 2003 Colombia Journal. All rights reserved. |