Beginning with the passage of Plan Colombia in 2000, we have watched U.S. involvement in the South American nation grow at an alarming rate. Billions of our taxpayer dollars have funded an inhumane war against drugs that has proven a dismal failure; White House statistics through the end of last year document stable levels of cocaine availability in the United States since Plan Colombia began.

Colombia’s inclusion in 2002 as a front in the war on terrorism pulled the United States further into the quagmire of a long and brutal war that has taken thousands of Colombian lives since the 1960s. While U.S. financial backing for this war has grown each year, funding for important social and economic programs, including alternative development in drug-growing regions, has flattened or even declined.

The Bush Administration’s recent request to increase the number of U.S. troops and contractors in Colombia signals yet another step deeper into the quagmire. Already, since 1995, fifteen U.S. contractors have been killed in Colombia, and three more taken hostage. The current bid to raise the troop cap is unlikely to be the last; Congress was assured repeatedly between 2000 and 2003 that no troop increase would be necessary, yet now the story has changed. Particularly given the vast number of U.S. troop commitments around the globe at this moment, the administration’s request is irresponsible and short-sighted.

The proposal puts the United States more firmly on the side of a military with a dismal human rights record and a history of collaboration with paramilitary groups. According to the State Department’s February 2004 human rights report on Colombia, “Some members of the security forces collaborated with the [paramilitary] terrorist group that committed serious abuses…. [T]he authorities rarely brought high-ranking officers of the security forces charged with human rights offenses to trial.” Why are rewarding this record with expanded support?

We were glad to see the House Armed Services Committee pass the Taylor amendment to keep U.S. troop presence in Colombia limited, and disturbed by the narrow defeat that the Byrd amendment suffered in the Senate. Congress enacted the personnel caps four years ago as a prudent safeguard against rapid escalation of U.S. involvement in Colombia’s internal armed conflict. There is no reason now for a less vigilant stance, and many reasons to rethink the policy. We urge you to accept the House version of the Colombia troop cap when the 2005 defense authorization bill reaches the conference committee later this year. We would appreciate a written response outlining your stance on this important issue.

Sincerely,