Rethinking the War on Drugs

It's time for some realistic conditions on military aid

By Michelle Ciarrocca and Erin Peck

November 15, 2001

NEW YORK -- America’s new war on terrorism may be dominating the discussion in Washington these days, but when Congress meets in the coming days to finalize next year's foreign aid bill, a large portion of the dollars will fund the old war on drugs.

Included in the proposed $15 billion foreign aid bill for 2002 is the Bush administration's Andean Initiative, which seeks $731 million in military and economic assistance to Colombia, Peru, Bolivia and Ecuador to bolster their fight against cocaine production.

For almost two decades, American policy in Colombia has focused on dishing out large sums of money to arm and train the Colombian police and armed forces and to destroy the country’s coca fields.

Yet, despite this militarized approach to fighting the drug war, drugs are more readily available than ever before. A White House report in January showed that coca cultivation in Colombia increased 140 percent during the period 1995-99. In 2000, cultivation increased 11 percent. Meanwhile, Colombia has grown into the third largest recipient of U.S. aid after Israel and Egypt.

The aid does little to address Colombia's most pressing problem: an ongoing 40-year civil war which has killed tens of thousands and displaced millions.

Now, however, things may be changing. In a letter to ranking members of Congress, some 35 U.S. lawmakers are insisting that any future aid to Columbia must include strong human rights provisions.

The lawmakers want the aid to be conditional on Bush administration’s ability to certifiy that Colombia’s armed forces are suspending members credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights. The letter also calls for a certification that the Colombian military is cooperating fully with civilian prosecutors to execute outstanding arrest warrants for paramilitary members.

Some U.S. lawmakers also want to strengthen economic and social components of bill. One amendment aims at ensuring that alternative development programs are in place before coca eradication efforts are expanded, thereby helping Colombian farmers make a living without growing coca. Another amendment would ensure that farmers are compensated for legal crops destroyed during eradication procedures.

Together, these amendments could serve as the first steps in a dramatic shift in U.S. policy towards Colombia. While they do not change the highly militarized response to the drug problems in the Andean Region, they do offer hope for new approaches to an old war.


Michelle Ciarrocca is a Research Associate at the World Policy Institute at the New School in New York. Erin Peck is an intern at the World Policy Institute and a student at Bard College.

Copyright 2001, Global Beat Syndicate, 418 Lafayette Street, Suite 554, New York, NY 10003 http://www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate.