The State Department on September 15, 2011, certified that Colombia had met the human rights conditions attached to U.S. assistance. No surprise there—the State Department always certifies Colombia meets the conditions, no matter what is happening on the ground. To be fair, this time, with the year-old Santos Administration, there’s somewhat more reason to certify than during countless rounds of certification during the Uribe Administration. The certification document cites the Santos Administration's successful passage of a victims' reparations and land restitution bill; a “disarming of words” initiative in which it abandoned the inflammatory anti-NGO language used by Uribe and his top officials, which had endangered human rights defenders and journalists; progress on some historic human rights cases; and a variety of directives and policy initiatives, at least on paper, to support human rights and labor rights.
But the 118- page document contains a wealth of information that shows why we should still be deeply concerned.
In 2005, I visited the community of San José de Apartadó, Colombia. A group of poor farmers who had been repeatedly displaced from their homes by violence, they had decided to call themselves a “peace community” and reject violence from all sides—paramilitaries, guerrillas and the army. Yet the community was subjected to ever more harassment and violence, including by the local 17th army brigade. Some 170 members of the peace community have been assassinated since 1997. My visit came soon after seven members of the peace community, including three children, and a local farmer had been massacred and dismembered. The community members had left their army-occupied town to construct a bare-bones, dirt-floor village down the road.
With over 4.9 million Colombians forcibly displaced from their homes by a debilitating war, Colombia is now the second worst internal displacement crisis in the world. Between now and April 30, tens of thousands across the U.S. and Colombia will participate in this year’s National Days of Action for Colombia to call for a much-needed shift in U.S. policies toward the war-torn country. Please join us! Click here for photos, stories, instructions, factsheets, and more!
This year, the National Days of Action will focus on the displacement crisis, but in a different way than last year when we made thousands of paper dolls to symbolize the number of IDPs in Colombia. This year we’re asking you to go a step further than just understanding what is happening, and start talking about why in a campaign we’re calling “Face the Displaced – Colombia: Our Hemisphere’s Hidden Humanitarian Crisis.”
The art project: Our partners in Colombia have helped us gather over 40 faces of forcibly displaced people in Colombia and their stories. As a way to make our legislators and communities face up to the human reality of this crisis, we’re going to make large posters displaying these people and their words, and will frame them with a message to President Obama asking for U.S. policies towards Colombia that will support internally displaced people and help alleviate the crisis.
Take a look at the example we made on the right. Now, imagine how powerful thousands of posters like these would be!
Community action: Once we’ve made these posters, we’re going to need your help organizing public events and church services all over the country where we can display these faces and teach about the displacement crisis in Colombia. Even if you can’t do a poster making party, if you can join the hundreds of grassroots groups and churches both in the United States and in Colombia that will be educating their communities throughout April and praying for peace in Colombia on the weekend of April 16-19th, it will make a huge difference.Click here for more information on organizing a demonstration.
Legislative change: We’ll work with you during April and beyond to ensure that Washington feels the force of the movement calling for change in U.S. policies towards Colombia. First, they’ll hear from you on the National Call-In Day on April 19th. Then, once you’ve displayed these faces in your cities, send the materials to Washington in May where we’ll be doing some last big displays before taking the faces with to Congress and the Administration to deliver your message. We’ll post more info on these actions soon!
by Adam Isacson, Center for International Policyon November 10, 2009
On Friday, November 6th, the U.S. government finally released itsestimate of how much coca was cultivated in Colombia in 2008. The result is the first reduction in coca-growing since 2002-2003, a significant drop from 167,000 hectares measured in 2007 to 119,000 hectares in 2008. (A hectare is equal to 2.47 acres.) This brings the U.S. government’s coca cultivation estimate to its lowest level since 2004. (The U.S. government has not yet released 2008 coca data for Peru and Bolivia.)
This matches a downward 2007-2008 trend – though not the number of hectares – that the UN Office on Drugs and Crime announced (PDF) back in June.
A reduction in coca cultivation is good news. But what caused it?
by Adam Isacson, Center for International Policyon May 21, 2009
The Obama administration’s State Department has released a “Summary and Highlights” document for its 2010 foreign assistance request, which offers some significant clues about where future aid is headed.
Many of the changes in aid to Colombia that you contacted your members of Congress about in 2007 became law when the president signed the all-rolled-into-one spending bill on December 26. While still very far from the perfect world we dream about, the law makes some positive changes in U.S. aid and policy towards Colombia.
The Colombia package in the foreign aid bill includes:
cuts military and police aid in the foreign operations bill
by $141.5 million below what the President asked for, a 31 percent cut.
increases economic and social aid by $97.4 million, a 70 percent increase.
aid
that we called for to strengthen human rights and protect victims of
violence, including funding for investigation and prosecution of human
rights abuses; witness protection for victims; investigation of mass
graves; funding for legal representation of victims; and contributions
to the UN Human Rights office in Colombia.
cuts
aid for the inhumane and environmentally damaging aerial spraying
program, and increases aid for alternative development programs.
ties the human rights conditions to 30%, not just 25%, of military aid in the foreign operations bill.
$15 million for development aid for Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities
in
the human rights conditions that the Army must respect the rights and
territories of Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities
restrictions on investment in oil palm development if it causes people to be displaced or environmental damage.
What wasn't achieved? Among other things, we were not able to affect
funding in the less transparent and less accountable defense bill,
which also includes funding for counternarcotics programs, and we would
have liked the human rights conditions to apply to all military aid—and
for more military and aerial spraying funding to be cut.
But this is a real step forward! It would not have been possible without all of your actions in support of peace and human rights in Colombia.
Our voices are finally being heard on U.S. policy towards Colombia! In
June, a new positive direction for Colombia was approved by the full
House of Representatives. With all of your calls to Congress,
supporters of the old approach did not have the votes to reinstate
military aid and turn back the clock. Just a few weeks after the
foreign aid bill was approved, House Resolution 426 on the crisis of
internal displacement in Colombia passed the full House by voice vote,
with many members of Congress giving impassioned speeches in support.
In the Senate, the Appropriations Committee has approved an aid package
with increased support for human rights, rural development and
humanitarian needs. The Latin America Working Group this year brought
together diverse groups to present recommendations for the Congress
that helped to turn the tide. But these recent victories reflect our
all our collective hard work over the past several years to shift aid
for war to aid for development and peace.
Since Plan Colombia began, 80 percent of the annual aid package has
gone to the security forces, with only 20 percent going towards social
and economic programs. By reducing military aid to 55 percent of the
aid package, while simultaneously approving over $100 million more in
economic and judicial aid than President Bush requested, the House
version of the foreign aid bill marks a very significant shift in the
U.S. role in Colombia. Aid is increased for rural development and
internally displaced persons. Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities
are slated to receive $15 million in development aid, to be used in
consultation with these communities.
The aid package aims to strengthen respect for human rights by providing judicial
institutions with the resources they need to investigate abuses and collaboration with
paramilitaries, and includes funding for witness protection as well as
to increase victims’ access to justice. Human rights conditions would
apply to 40 percent, not just 25 percent, of military aid in the bill.
For several years, proponents of Plan Colombia have claimed that aerial
spraying would diminish coca cultivation and thus decrease the
availability of cocaine on U.S. streets. However, according to the
House report accompanying the bill, “…the perennial goal of reducing
Colombia’s cultivation, processing and distribution [of coca] to
restrict supplies enough to drive up prices and diminish purity has not
worked and the drug economy continues to grow—further weakening the
fabric of Colombian society.” Given this failure, the House foreign aid
bill sensibly reduces funding for spray planes used to fumigate farms
and increases aid for small farmers.
The Senate Appropriations Committee has passed its version of the bill,
although the bill won’t go to the Senate floor until September. While
the Senate version is not as dramatic a change as in the House, it
continues a positive direction in aid to Colombia, increasing aid for
rural development and manual eradication. It greatly strengthens aid
for the rule of law and for victims, including funding to increase
victims’ access to justice and to investigate mass graves.
We can’t rest yet! The final version must be passed by the Senate and approved in the House-Senate conference.
These gains were achieved despite unrelenting pressure from the
Colombian government, its many highly-paid lobbyists and the Bush
Administration to keep military funding in place and to pry loose
approval of the pending U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement. After an
unproductive visit to Washington this spring, Colombian President
Álvaro Uribe returned after just a few weeks, vowing to win over the
Democratic Congress. LAWG joined with the Washington Office on Latin
America, labor and human rights groups to organize a press conference
during which members of Congress pointed to the targeted killing of 72
trade unionists last year in explaining their opposition to a trade
pact with Colombia. Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL), a new member and former
union leader, put his concerns bluntly: “If I had been born in
Colombia, there is a strong possibility I would not be here with you
today. I could be dead.” Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) underscored the
impact of the trade agreement on small farmers: “Many farmers will be
forced to choose between leaving their farms for crowded factories or
growing lucrative drug crops.” New member Betty Sutton (D-OH) and
staunch human rights advocate Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) also spoke. Rep.
Jim McGovern (D-MA) delivered the basic message to President Uribe: “He
keeps coming back, time and again, because he doesn’t like the message
he’s hearing: human rights, human rights, human rights… We want to see
real change, real action, not just hear more endless talk.”
Last week, the House of Representatives authorized more foreign aid for Colombia in FY07 than in previous years, approving an aid package that even exceeded President Bush's request by $39 million. Members voted down an amendment to the foreign aid bill which would have transferred $30 million from failed aerial drug spraying efforts in Colombia to emergency relief aid for refugees worldwide. The Colombian military carries out the country's aerial fumigation programs, and while the amendment would have transferred only a relatively small portion of the overall aid package to Colombia, the debate sent a message to the Colombian government that U.S. aid cannot be taken for granted, and that we demand accountability from the recipients of U.S. funds. The House amendment was struck down by a vote of 174-229.
The vote on the House amendment was preceded by an intense, hour-long debate on the House floor. Members of Congress in favor of the amendment laid out strong arguments on the ineffectiveness of drug policy and spoke adamantly about human rights problems in Colombia. They insisted that the United States should not give Colombia a blank check.
The heated debate in the Capitol was led by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA), the initial sponsor of the legislation, who spoke passionately about our approach to Colombia in recent years. "[Drug policy] has been a miserable failure," he stated, "and the Colombian military continues to commit heinous acts with impunity." Rep. McGovern cited grave human rights abuses by the Colombian military, including the recent massacre of an entire anti-narcotics police unit. "We're not a cheap date that you can take advantage of," said Mr. McGovern. "…We're watching and we demand accountability." Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services C ommittee, reinforced the idea. "This amendment, which I support, shows Colombia that assistance is not unlimited and should not go unchecked." Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA), a co-sponsor of the amendment, voiced his overall concern about the U.S. role in Colombia's internal conflict. "I don't support the amendment out of a conviction it is an answer to a real dilemma between both the Colombian and American people, but out of a belief that a military emphasis of this kind carries many counterproductive consequences."
Representatives also focused on the total lack of success of the drug policy. Rep. Leach mentioned that "[t]he priority debate today is not about whether stemming the drug trade is appropriate, but the methodology of going about it." The opposition insisted that hundreds of thousands of hectares of coca have been sprayed during Plan Colombia, to which Rep. McGovern rebutted, "[y]es, eradication has dramatically increased, but it has changed nothing." Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) agreed, asserting that alternative development programs for small far mers are far more effective than aerial spraying. "You can't wipe out a crop by bombing it."
Few amendments to the foreign aid bill, which determines U.S. assistance worldwide, received as much attention as did this one. The U.S. approach to Colombia policy, which has undergone little change since the inception of Plan Colombia in 1999, continues to be contentious among legislators. The vote on this amendment occurred on a Friday when some members of Congress travel back to their districts, which could explain the nearly 30 representatives who were absent for the vote. Although the number of votes in favor of the amendment was 174, slightly lower than in past years, the same percentage of representatives voted for a change in policy toward Colombia.
We owe a special thank you to the cosponsors to the Colombia amendment: Representatives McGovern, Leach, Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Donald Payne (D-NJ), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Barbara Lee (D-CA). We are particularly grateful of Rep. McGovern's relentless dedication to this issue. Thanks also to Reps. Skelton and Dave Obey (D-WI) for making strong statements during the debate, and to Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) for her active support of the amendment. We are very appreciative of Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) as well, the top Democrat on the foreign operations subcommittee, who helped to ensure an extra $10 million in economic aid to Colombia, in response to our concerns of the need to help victims of the conflict.
Other amendments to the foreign aid bill affecting Latin America
Representatives in the House also voted on an amendment to the foreign aid bill to cut funds for the School the Americas/ WHINSEC, a U.S. training facility for Latin American military. A number of graduates of the institution have been implicated in mass murders and other grave human rights violations in Latin America in recent decades. The amendment lost by 188-218 but generated a strong debate. "Hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans have been victims of School of the Americas graduates," stated Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Congresswoman Barbara Lee echoed the sentiment, saying that "a positive step to improve relations with Latin America would be to simply eliminate this institute."
In a similar vein, Reps. Leach and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) offered an amendment to transfer $250 million from the Foreign Military Financing account to the Development Assistance account. Funds would have supported investments to reduce severe poverty around the world including for increased access to clean water. "[T] he American people overwhelmingly support these investments to fight against global poverty," said Rep. Blumenauer. "Recently, the Program on International Assistance Policy Attitudes found that 65 percent of the American public would support significant increases in U.S. assistance to fight poverty and disease."
Senate freezes aid to Colombian military
While the House approved increased aid for Colombia in the coming year, the Senate decided in the same week to put a temporary hold on a portion of this year's military assistance to Colombia. The decision was influenced by growing concerns of the human rights' record of the Colombian military, including the massacre of the anti-narcotics police unit just weeks ago.
Supplemental aid for helicopters in Colombia cut in half
The House approved in March an amendment to the Iraq Supplemental spending bill to provide Colombia's armed forces with an additional $26 million. Yet in the final version of the bill this aid was cut down to $13 million. The original amendment, proposed Rep. Burton (IN), indicated that the funds were to be used to purchase new spray planes and helicopters from U.S. companies for drug interdiction efforts. These funds add to the nearly $700 million that Colombian military and police forces receive each year from the United States. Read more on Rep. Burton's amendment at: http://www.lawg.org/countries/colombia/house-mixed_signals.htm.
President Uribe visits Washington; State Department releases military aid in wake of Uribe's reelection
The Colombian leader Alvaro Uribe met with various members of Congress and with President Bush last week in a trip to Washington, D.C. The visit came on the heels of President Uribe's reelection on May 28, which was immediately followed by a State Department decision to release millions of dollars in U.S. aid to Colombia's military. The assistance was released through the human rights certification process, which occurs twice a year and requires the State Department to determine whether or not Colombian security forces are meeting human rights standards. Yet relatively little progress has been made on many cases of abuse by the Colombian military.
In March, the House of Representatives made a strong statement of concern regarding lack of human rights progress in Colombia—and added several aircraft to the Colombian police and navy's drug interdiction efforts. Representatives Sam Farr and James McGovern sent a letter signed by 59 members of Congress to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, urging the secretary to withhold certification that Colombia is meeting the human rights conditions established in law. The letter urged progress on specific cases and improvements in the human rights record of the 17th Brigade of the Colombian army (Reps. Shays and Bean also sent similar letters). The State Department is currently withholding a portion of FY2005 military aid from the Colombian government due to lack of progress in investigating cases of human rights abuses. Your actions asking your members to sign helped make this a significant letter.
See the letters and signers at: http://www.lawg.org/docs/RiceCertification03-06.pdf
See LAWGEF memo on certification at: http://www.lawg.org/countries/colombia/certification2006.htm
"Certification is our only congressional oversight tool for urging the Colombian government to comply with international human rights norms," stated Congressmen Farr and McGovern. The certification process mandates that in order for the Colombian military to receive 25 percent of each year's military aid budget, the State Department must certify that significant progress is being made on cases of human rights abuses by Colombian security forces. Currently, the Department of State is withholding 12.5 percent of the approximately $640 million in police and military aid from FY2005.
The House of Representatives approved $26 million in additional assistance for Colombia's police and military last week in an amendment to the Iraq supplemental bill. Proposed by Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN), the sudden amendment was passed in the House by a margin of 250 – 172. The funds will add to the approximately $600 million in aid that Colombian security forces are already scheduled to receive this year from the United States.The amendment will fund marine patrol aircraft for the Colombian navy and helicopters for the Colombian national police. While intended for drug interdiction, these aircraft could be used for protecting spray planes and for the war effort more generally.
The original version of the amendment intended to send nearly $100 million to Colombian security forces, but Rep. Burton reduced it to $26 million in an effort to gain support. The final version of Rep. Burton's amendment was especially difficult to oppose because it did not simply add $26 million to the Iraq supplemental bill, but took the money from a program to construct more prisons in Iraq. Members were forced to choose between sending money to the Colombian security forces or sending it to Iraq for building prisons—neither a very attractive option.
Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY), ranking member on the foreign operations subcommittee, spoke on the House floor just before the vote. Ms. Lowey had recently returned from a trip to Colombia and called for a new approach to U.S.-Colombia policy focusing on alternative development in lieu of drug crop eradication. "I think it is time that we look at a different mix for funding for Colombia, one that boosts spending on alternate development and interdiction programs and reduces funding for eradication programs which I think are ineffective at best," Lowey stated.
The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) reported that despite the largest drug crop spraying campaign ever in Colombia in 2004, there was no change in the amount of coca produced, and similar figures are expected for 2005. The drug problem is fundamentally one of supply and demand, and in order to stop it money should be put into drug prevention and treatment programs at home in order to reduce demand, and into alternative development abroad in order to reduce supply.
This skirmish was not the major vote for aid to Colombia this year, which will still take place as the FY 2007 foreign operations appropriations bill comes to the House floor in May or June. Congress is expected to request that Plan Colombia continue as it has for the past six years, with 80 percent of the aid going directly to Colombian security forces. We support amendments to this bill that transfer aid from military assistance to humanitarian needs; we would like to see the United States prioritize aid for those most negatively affected by Colombia's conflict, including internally displaced persons, Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities, and the rural poor.
As the Congress wrapped up the FY06 foreign operations bill, there’s some good news and bad news for Latin America. Latin America Working Group and coalition groups won some of what we had called for in this bill, which funds US aid programs worldwide. The Congress decided to maintain the ban on military aid to Guatemala, in place since 1990. The Bush Administration pushed harder than usual to lift the ban, arguing that Guatemala had made sufficient progress, and the House lifted the ban in its version of the bill. Grassroots activists, LAWG, NISGUA, Guatemala Human Rights Commission, WOLA and other groups called on Congress to keep the ban due to continued threats and attacks against human rights and social activists and lack of progress in implementing military reforms contained in the 1996 Peace Accords. The final bill also contained $3 million in DNA analysis and support for forensic investigations in Guatemala, Mexico, Argentina and other parts of Latin America. It contained a provision we supported to stop the erosion of aid to Central America, by mandating that aid to the region not drop below 2005 levels.
The Congress approved $734.5 million for the Andean Counternarcotics Initiative, as expected. In a great disappointment, the House rejected what the Senate had done to improve the balance of aid to the Andean countries, especially Colombia – the Senate had for the first time placed a cap on military and police aid to Colombia of $278 million and had increased development funds. The final balance of aid to Colombia from the Andean Counternarcotics Initiative will be $310.8 million in military/police aid and $158.6 million in economic/judicial aid, which is the same quantity of military aid and $6.5 million more in economic aid than the year before. Colombia also receives military aid from other accounts in the foreign operations and defense bills, so that the balance of aid will remain overwhelmingly—probably still 80%—military.
The Congress also approved $20 million in aid to fund the paramilitary demobilization. Colombian human rights groups have criticized the demobilization process for providing minimal punishment to leaders responsible for massacres and assassinations; for having no truth commission; and for failing to ensure that demobilized paramilitaries disclose their crimes, structures and financial assets. The underlying concern is that paramilitary violence will continue in other forms. The Congress fortunately included conditions on the assistance, although not as strong as we would have wished. The conditions require the Secretary of State to certify that demobilized paramilitaries receiving benefits have renounced violence and disclosed their involvement in past crimes and knowledge of the paramilitary structures, financing sources, illegal assets, and the location of kidnapping victims and bodies of the disappeared. They also require State to certify that the Colombian government is providing full cooperation to the United States in extraditing individuals who have been indicted in the United States for murder, drug trafficking and kidnapping. Disturbingly, the administration plans to take the $20 million in aid for the paramilitary demobilization out of the limited existing development funds for Colombia, including alternative development and, possibly, programs for the internally displaced. However, Congress has not specifically agreed to this, and we will work to insist that it comes from other sources.
The human rights conditions for Colombia—which had resulted this year in a seven-month delay in delivering some US military aid—were maintained and a new provision added to reflect concern about the war’s impact on indigenous communities. The State Department will be required to certify that “The Colombian government is taking effective steps to ensure that the Colombian Armed Forces are not violating the land and property rights of Colombia’s indigenous communities.”
The environmental conditions on the aerial spraying program for Colombia were also maintained. The conditions also require compensation for food crops destroyed, in cases where farmers were not growing any coca or poppy. While these conditions have proven extremely difficult to enforce, maintaining them keeps certain minimal limits on the program.
The bill requires the Agency for International Development to appoint a special advisor for indigenous issues worldwide—an effort to ensure greater consultation with indigenous peoples and improve how they are affected by aid programs.
The Congress kept the requirement for the State Department and Defense Department to make public a Foreign Military Training Report on US military training programs around the globe. This report has been essential for monitoring US programs to Latin America, as documented on by Center for International Policy, LAWG and WOLA on http://justf.org/.
Thanks to all of you who worked hard to tell Congress to make aid and policies that supports human rights, denies military aid to human rights abusers, and supports humanitarian and development aid. We wish they’d listened to everything we had to say! But whether they did or not, we’re going to keep calling for the United States to support peace, justice, and human rights, and generous, well-targeted aid for poverty reduction. And we know you will too.
Action: Thank Senator Leahy (D-VT) and Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) for their hard work and dedication to aid for poverty reduction around the globe and policies that support human rights in Colombia and Guatemala in particular. Thank Rep. Kolbe (R-AZ) and Senator McConnell (R-KY) for retaining the ban on military aid to Guatemala. It is most important for members of Congress to hear this from their own constituents.
On June 28, the House of Representatives voted down an amendment that would have cut $100 million in military aid to Colombia. Instead, Plan Colombia will now be extended into 2006, providing the Colombian military with another $742 million of U.S. assistance. The McGovern-McCollum-Moore amendment went to the House floor as part of the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, the legislation that determines the foreign aid budget each year. After a heated, hour-long debate, it was defeated 189-234.
Despite losing the vote, the amendment and the debate are significant in the struggle against Plan Colombia. Colombia was by far the most hotly debated issue on the foreign operations bill. This shows Plan Colombia has become controversial in Congress, and that there is considerable resistance to the current policy. Members spoke passionately about Plan Colombia’s failure as drug policy, lack of improvements in human rights, and the need to have a balanced policy focused on development aid.
Representative Jim McGovern (D-MA) spoke powerfully about the need to reduce the amount of military aid to Colombia. “This policy has failed as an anti-drug policy. It has failed as a human rights policy, and it has failed to have any impact whatsoever in reducing the availability, price or purity of drugs in the streets of America. … It is time that this House stood up and decided to stop sending a blank check to Colombia, year after year. It is time that we demand real progress on human rights as a condition to our aid. It is time that we stop being a cheap date.”
Congressman Sam Farr (D-CA) also expressed his disdain for Plan Colombia on the House floor. “Eighty percent of funds have gone for military assistance [to Colombia] and been eaten up by coca eradication. Only 20 percent of funds have gone to social and economic programs. These programs are what build local economies and communities and provide alternatives to coca production. [The current] distribution of assistance is not a recipe for permanent coca eradication. It's not a recipe for peace. It's a recipe for disaster.”
In spite of these disappointing results in the House, the Senate version of the bill was considerably improved. An additional $25 million in aid to Colombia was shifted from the Andean Counternarcotics Initiative to development and human rights assistance. The bill included conditions on the aerial spraying program and added tough conditions prior to any U.S. assistance for Colombian paramilitary demobilization.
Plan Colombia will indeed be continued 2006 – despite the fact that it was scheduled to end this year – but the exact provisions of the policy depend on negotiations between the House and Senate. A compromise between the House and Senate versions of the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill will be reached in conference committee in the fall, and the final bill will then be sent to the President’s desk for his approval.
After the vote, Congressman McGovern sent this appreciative and enthusiastic message to all those who worked so hard for this amendment:
"I would like to express my deep appreciation and gratitude for the tremendous effort and vitality of the work carried out by the national and grassroots organizations on the McGovern-McCollum-Moore (KS) amendment to cut military aid to Colombia. The breadth of the coalition that collaborated in support of this amendment is a clear demonstration of the increasing awareness among the American people about the failures of our current Colombia policy and the needless waste of billions of US tax dollars over the past six years."
"I encourage your members to continue this important fight to bring sanity back to our foreign policy and to our foreign aid budget - including making sure that Members who voted against this amendment understand the critical mistake they made and taking the time and care to thank those who voted in support of the amendment."
"Once again—my deepest thanks to you all—and I look forward to working with all of you in the weeks and months ahead."
Special thanks go to Reps. McGovern, McCollum and Moore for sponsoring the amendment; to Minority leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi and minority whip Rep. Schakowsky for their active support; to those who spoke passionately in favor of the amendment, including Reps. Farr, Skelton, Obey, Lowey, Honda, Schakowsky, Paul and Meeks; and to the 189 members who voted yes. Reps. Leach and Van Hollen were not able to speak, but submitted comments in favor of the amendment for the record.
On Wednesday, July 23, the US House of Representatives debated the 2004 foreign aid bill, which includes a large package of military and police assistance for Colombia and the Andean region. The aid package contains $731 million for the Andean Counter-Drug Initiative (ACI), of which $456 million is for Colombia. The package also allocates $110 million to Colombia for the training and equipping of a brigade which will guard the Caño-Limón oil pipeline, which is owned in part by Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum. The total amount of aid for Colombia in the 2004 foreign aid bill comes to over $560 million.
An amendment was offered to the bill by Reps. McGovern (D-MA) and Skelton (D-MO) which would have cut a portion of Colombia's military aid for 2004 and transferred the money to global HIV/AIDS programs. While the amendment lost by a vote of 195-226, the strong debate preceding it made it clear that Colombia policy continues to be one of the most contentious US foreign policy issues in Congress.
Nine members of Congress spoke on the floor in support of the amendment: Reps. McGovern (D-MA), Skelton (D-MO), Blumenauer (D-OR), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Schakowsky (D-IL), Obey (D-WI), Kucinich (D-OH), Lowey (D-NY), and DeLauro (D-CT). The members raised serious concerns over the ties between the armed forces and the paramilitaries; the ineffectiveness of US anti-drug policy and fumigation, and the humanitarian crisis that has resulted from fumigation with a lack of alternative development; the continued availability of drugs on US streets; and human rights and impunity concerns surrounding the paramilitary peace process. They also talked about the risky mission creep of US policy and lack of endgame strategy.
An article that ran in Colombia's major newspaper the following morning summarized the message: "For the majority of Democrats, the cut [in military aid] was fully justified; the United States should not continue supporting a military that collaborates with paramilitary groups their own State Department considers terrorists." Although the amendment did not win, the debate sent a clear message that Congress was gravely concerned about Colombia's failure to reform.
Five members of Congress spoke against the amendment, including Reps. Kolbe (R-AZ), Mica (R-FL), Ballenger (R-NC), and Souder (R-IN). Rep. Delahunt (D-MA) also spoke against the amendment. He argued that it was not the right moment to reduce aid given that the Colombian government was engaging in peace talks with the paramilitaries. Rep. McGovern then rebutted, raising strong points about impunity and the risk of paramilitaries infiltrating the peasant soldiers program.
In March, 2003, the Bush Administration presented a special “supplemental” budget request to Congress to fund the war in Iraq. Included in this request was military aid for a number of other countries the administration considers allies in the war on terrorism—including $105 million in military aid for Colombia. Colombia had already received over $500 million in aid from the US for 2003. The memo below was written by LAWG and expresses concerns about this additional request. The bill was passed by the House and Senate on April 12, following an intense debate over the Colombia aid.
The President's March 25th request for supplemental appropriations for the war in Iraq includes a considerable sum for Colombia—$105 million.
The President in his request asked Congress to "refrain from attaching items not directly related to the emergency at hand." The Colombia funding is not directly related to the war in Iraq. Irrespective of one's stance on US Colombia policy, it would seem wiser and more appropriate to provide funding for Colombia through the regular appropriations process. Moreover, Colombia has just received over $500 million for '03 ($400 million in funding through the Andean Counterdrug Initiative in 03 as well as $99 million in foreign military financing). For 04 the President has requested over $700 million for Colombia ($313 million in interdiction, $110 million in foreign military financing, $150 million in social aid, some additional refugee assistance and an estimate of $120 million likely to be in the defense bill if similar to 03's request).
This supplemental funding deepens the involvement of the United States in Colombia's civil war and further tips the already unbalanced US package toward military/police assistance rather than social aid.
The supplemental includes the following funding specifically for Colombia:
$34 million for "Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities" under Department of Defense/Operation and Maintenance," to "fund increased operational tempo in Colombia's unified campaign against narcotics trafficking and terrorist activities."
$34 million under "Department of State/Other" for the Andean Counterdrug Initiative "to support extension of police authority to areas of the country that currently have little or no law enforcement presence, enhanced presidential security, bomb squad equipment, and for the unified campaign against narcotis and terrorism."
An estimated $36-37 million is included as part of the foreign military financing listed under "International Assistance Programs/International Security Assistance." A total of $2.059 billion would be provided for 19 countries, including Colombia.
The supplemental must be approved rapidly. Funding for Colombia should be carefully considered as part of the regular appropriations process.
Legislative change: We’ll work with you during April and beyond to ensure that Washington feels the force of the movement calling for change in U.S. policies towards Colombia. First, they’ll hear from you on the National Call-In Day on April 19th. Then, once you’ve displayed these faces in your cities, send the materials to Washington in May where we’ll be doing some last big displays before taking the faces with to Congress and the Administration to deliver your message. We’ll post more info on these actions soon! 
