U.S. Aid to Colombia

House Votes Down Military Aid Cut to Colombia

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.


 To see how your representative voted, go to: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll329.xml.

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.

Read more »  
 

Passionate Debate in House Over Impunity and Amendment to Cut Military Aid to Colombia

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.

Read more »  
 

Colombia Funding in the President's 2003 Request for Supplemental Appropriations

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.

Read more »  
 
Page 3 of 3

Latin America Working Group
424 C Street NE
Washington DC 20002
Phone: (202) 546-7010
Email: lawg@lawg.org

© 2009 Latin America Working Group