Stand by Colombia's Victims of Violence

Trade and Development in Colombia: Through a Human Rights Lens

Lisa Haugaard, Latin America Working Group Education Fund

At Lutheran World Relief’s Forum on "Conflict, Trade and Development in Colombia"

Colombia’s conflict has led to more than 3.8 million people fleeing their homes from violence in recent years, and has caught the civilian population in the crossfire. Given this context, policymakers and donors should ask the following questions as they make decisions about rural development projects or trade agreements with Colombia. This may seem obvious, but too often trade and development decisions are not examined in a “human rights and conflict-resolution” light.

Some key questions for any major development or trade decision in Colombia today are:

How will it affect human rights?
Will it help to reduce tensions or aggravate the conflict?
How will it affect the rural population living in poverty in the conflict zones?
How will it affect the livelihoods of farmers susceptible to growing coca and poppy? Will it undercut their food crops, leading them to shift towards or revert to illicit drug production, or become more vulnerable to recruitment by guerrilla, paramilitary or other illegal groups?
What guarantees are included to ensure this project does not favor criminal networks?
How will it benefit or harm the population—rural, poor, Afro-Colombian, indigenous, internally displaced—already most victimized by the conflict?
We can not assume that any development project or trade agreement, even if it looks to have an overall positive economic impact, will necessarily ease the conflict. We have to examine the different impacts on particular sectors and geographic regions.

To take the most controversial first…

The pending free trade agreement. Even the most vehemently pro-free trade advocate will acknowledge that some sectors may suffer impacts from trade agreements while other sectors benefit. Which sectors are least likely to benefit from the Colombian FTA, at least initially? A good guess would be, areas of the country without the infrastructure for successful exporting, and sectors of the population least prepared to take advantage of opportunities to export crops and goods favored by a trade agreement—and in particular, small farmers whose crops will not be able to compete domestically with U.S. exports. And these potential losers are likely to be located in Colombia’s conflict zones, and be the population already most victimized by the war, and most likely to be pressed into service by illegal armed groups or lured into illicit drug production.

After pouring so much energy and money into counternarcotics efforts in Colombia, including into the controversial aerial spraying program—have the U.S. and Colombian governments really considered carefully the potential impact the FTA would have on illegal drug production in the conflict zones?

And then there is the question of labor rights. Colombia is not by coincidence the country where more trade unionists are killed than in the rest of the world combined. Often trade unionists are targeted by those who believe trade union activity is illegitimate, by those who equate organizing with insurgency. In some cases, members of the army and security agency have collaborated directly in anti-union violence. Because of this climate, trade negotiations must be linked to measurable improvements in respect for labor rights, reduction in anti-union threats and violence, and an end to impunity in such cases.

Development projects. Those preparing development projects obviously should consider projects aimed at improving livelihoods in Colombia’s conflict zones. Development projects, designed in careful consultation with beneficiaries, should be benefit the population most victimized. This would include Colombia’s enormous internally displaced population, as well as Afro-Colombian, indigenous and other population living in the conflict zones.

But beyond this general aim, the following human rights guarantees would be helpful:

Ensure that the project not be carried out on land obtained by violence. Substantial numbers of the over 30,000 paramilitaries demobilized still possess the land they stole by violence—yet a serious discussion of return of land to the displaced has yet to take place in Colombia. As paramilitary leaders demobilize under the Justice and Peace law, which in theory obligates them to disclose their illegally gotten gains, including land, most are turning out to be mysteriously impoverished. Little is being turned over to the national reparations commission. The Colombian government should revoke benefits for paramilitary leaders who refuse to disclose their assets, especially land, and should take steps to identify stolen land and plan for voluntary, safe returns where desired by internally displaced persons. But in the meantime, international donors should avoid investing in land obtained by violence. And this is not just a matter of checking title, since many titles have been obtained through threats and corruption. Special attention should be paid to protecting collective lands of Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities.
Ensure that the project not largely benefit criminal networks. This seems obvious, but is trickier than it appears. Paramilitary or criminal networks are reported to have taken over health sector activities in certain areas, for example. Threats and violence have often been alleged to have accompanied the expansion of African palm plantations, used for biofuel. Where there is a "gold rush" factor, as in biofuel or extractive industries, those seeking to dominate the business have all too often turned to violence to reach their goals. Even otherwise legitimate businesses may be making payoffs to guerrilla or paramilitary groups that contribute to violence.
Ensure that any industry or agroindustry invested in or supported respects labor rights, does not collude with illegal armed actors in anti-union violence, and upholds freedom of association.
Avoid resorting to "militarized development." The expansion of Colombia’s civilian government institutions into conflict zones is urgently needed. Funding militarized development, with civic action activities carried out by the army or military-led development projects, may be tempting where donors are concerned about security risks. But this is not a healthy development strategy, and will not win the support of the civilian population in the conflict zones in the way that can be accomplished by civilian-led development projects with community consultation.

Given the complex scenario of violence in the countryside, and in particular the reports of paramilitary or mafia-like ex-paramilitary networks increasing their control over local economic activities and political institutions, donors like USAID should ensure that even rural development contractors and subcontractors are fully briefed on the local human rights situation in the areas they consider for projects.

All of these caveats do not mean the international community shouldn’t provide aid and invest in development projects in Colombia. To the contrary. The United States in particular has an obligation to assist Colombia, given that our demand for illegal drugs helps to fuel their violence. The U.S. Congress’s increased interest in rural development programs in Colombia takes the U.S. aid program in a more promising direction. The right kind of rural investment—participatory and aimed at the population victimized by the conflict—is absolutely central to help resolve the conflict and stem the production of illegal drugs. However, the context of violence means that major trade or development decisions in Colombia must be viewed through this human rights and conflict-resolution lens.

Winds of Change for Colombia in Congress

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. See below on how you can take action.

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.”

Take Action! Contact your senators by early September and urge them to support this new approach in aid to Colombia. Encourage them to provide greater assistance to help Colombia's victims of violence, to strengthen the justice system, to provide real economic alternatives to small farmers, and to cut military aid. We do not expect there to be a specific amendment when the bill goes to the Senate floor in September, but senators should hear what their constituents care about when it comes to aid for Colombia.

:Advocate Articles

House Cuts Military Aid, Increases Social Aid to Colombia

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.”

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

House Sends Letter on Politically-Motivated Attacks against Human Rights Organizations

"We write today to express our deep concern regarding what appear to be politically-motivated burglaries targeting human rights and peace organizations. We recognize the many difficult challenges you face in strengthening the rule of law in your country during an ongoing conflict and were encouraged after your recent visit to Washington, D.C., where you reiterated your commitment to human rights. In light of your stance, we are taking this opportunity to call on your government to act on these serious allegations." Read the full letter (PDF).

Reps. McGovern and Pitts Sponsor Letter Expressing Support for Victims' Movement Leader Ivan Cepeda

"We are writing to express our deep concern about criminal charges against Dr. Ivan Cepeda. Dr. Cepeda is a courageous human rights defender who has selflessly promoted the rights of victims of Colombia's civil war and created a national social movement to call for justice." Read the full letter (PDF).

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Colombians Fight for the Rights of Displaced Persons

The LAWG Education Fund (LAWGEF), Catholic Relief Services and other partners hosted a delegation from Colombia in the spring of this year that focused on the humanitarian crisis of internal displacement. With 3.8 million people internally displaced in the last two decades, Colombia’s ongoing crisis of displacement is second only to Sudan’s.

:Photo Galleries of LAWGEF Tours

Congress Should Support Efforts to Identify Bodies Found in Mass Graves in Colombia

To: Foreign Policy Aides
From: Jennifer Trowbridge

As the paramilitary demobilization process in Colombia unfolds, there has been a surge in the unearthing of mass graves. Paramilitary leaders have not, to date, fulfilled their obligation under the demobilization law (Law 975, or the Law of Justice and Peace) to disclose all information they have on abuses – including the exact locations of mass graves. However, some lower-level demobilized combatants have come forward with information on clandestine grave sites that contain the remains of people murdered or “disappeared” by paramilitary groups, attempting to obtain procedural benefits in the demobilization process. Other grave sites are being revealed by survivors of violence. While the revelation of grave sites is positive, little progress has been made in investigating and prosecuting even the most severe human rights violations. Moreover, multiple problems exist within the forensic investigation process which limit the ability of Colombian officials to identify victims and implement justice.

The United States, as a major donor to Colombian judicial institutions and to the paramilitary demobilization process itself, should take steps to ensure that exhumations of mass graves follow proper investigative procedure with the ultimate purpose of positively identifying victims. (See page 3 for detailed recommendations for U.S. policy).

The Unit of Justice and Peace under the Attorney General’s Office (Fiscalía) was created through Law 975, and is in charge of exhuming mass grave sites that are revealed by demobilizing combatants. It works in conjunction with the Human Rights Unit of the Fiscalía, which handles the investigations of forensic cases revealed by anyone other than a demobilizing combatant. To date, the Unit of Justice and Peace has received information about the location of 3,710 grave sites. Forensic investigations of mass graves in Colombia have been plagued with the following problems:

Despite the exhumations of 553 bodies by the Unit of Justice and Peace, only 13 have been positively identified. Although nearly 200 of the bodies found were reported to have been preliminarily identified by family or community members, only 13 have been identified with 100 percent scientific certainty. Bodies that are not positively identified cannot be returned to the family members of the victims, nor can the forensic findings be used as evidence in judicial proceedings. Unidentified bodies are re-buried in cemeteries as “No Name,” resulting in a “double disappearance” of missing victims. Failure to identify bodies defeats the purpose of forensic investigation, and exhumations that do not lead to identification of bodies should not be viewed as successful.
It is unclear whether or not the exhumations carried out under the Fiscalía consistently follow proper scientific procedure. If improperly exhumed, damage to forensic evidence is often irreversible. This could account for the high number of exhumed bodies that have been left unidentified.
To date there is no functioning registry of disappeared persons, which severely limits the ability of Colombian forensic teams to identify remains. While the National Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences is currently in charge of a registry, it is incomplete and not accessible to the public. Without a list of who is missing, it is extremely difficult to identify who has been found. The existence and consistent use of a database of disappeared persons by investigative bodies would reduce the task of identification to matching missing persons to found bodies, likely resulting in an increase of positive identifications.
The Colombian intelligence agency, the Administrative Security Department (DAS), regularly conducts forensic exhumations. The DAS is Colombia’s intelligence agency, and is involved in counter-insurgency efforts. Neither the Colombian military nor the DAS, as participants in the country’s armed conflict, should participate in the forensic recovery of victims’ bodies. Any group that could be implicated in cases of violence cannot be trusted to collect impartial scientific evidence, nor to turn evidence over to prosecuting authorities.
Regional offices of the Unit of Justice and Peace have run out of safe storage space for all of the exhumed remains. Many remains are placed in inadequate or insecure storage areas, leaving this forensic evidence susceptible to damage, or robbery. A functioning registry of disappeared persons would greatly reduce the surplus of bodies, since it would increase the speed of identification of remains and reduce the processing time of each case.
At some sites, particularly in the northeast region of Colombia, perpetrators are digging up and re-burying human remains in anticipation of forensic investigations. The Fiscalía and other forensic authorities should prioritize cases in which this problem is anticipated. In cases where it is discovered that remains have been removed, a thorough investigation of the burial site should be conducted anyway. It is often possible to find traces of human remains left behind unknowingly by perpetrators that could help to identify the victims and/or prosecute the case.
There is not always adequate protection for forensic workers and others involved in the exhumation process. In addition to the security threat that this poses directly to forensic investigators, inadequate protection often causes forensic teams to speed up their work. This may cause them to leave behind remains, and could contribute to the lack of identification of bodies.
Families are not allowed to be present for exhumations carried out by the Unit of Justice and Peace. Families, who frequently request the exhumations to try to find the remains of their loved ones, should have the right to participate at each stage of the forensic investigation. They should be kept informed of the findings in a timely and accurate manner.

Recommendations for U.S. Policy

The United States should take steps to ensure that mass graves in Colombia are properly exhumed, bodies are positively identified and forensic evidence is available for the prosecution of criminals.

Congress should:

—Fund, through the Colombian government agency the Defensoría, the newly formed National Search Plan (Plan Nacional de Búsqueda), and insist that exhumations adhere to the procedures laid out in the plan. The Search Commission for the Disappeared – composed of Colombian governmental and non-governmental institutions – authored the National Search Plan in September 2006. The plan states that all forensic investigations should follow, in order, these procedures: a) Document missing persons; b) Search for missing persons or bodies; c) Recover human remains through exhumation; and d) Analyze and identify remains.

—Fund the establishment of an independent forensic lab at the University of the Andes in Bogotá.

—Support the creation and active use of a registry of missing and “disappeared” persons. If used by all Colombian agencies conducting exhumations, the registry would help to reduce the number of unidentified bodies found in mass graves and resolve storage problems.
The U.S. State Department and the U.S. Embassy in Colombia should:

—Insist that neither the DAS nor any branch of Colombia’s military conduct forensic investigations of mass graves.

—Urge the Colombian government to provide adequate security for forensic investigation teams. The government should also provide increased protection for witnesses who testify in judicial proceedings for demobilizing combatants.

—Encourage the Unit of Justice and Peace to allow participation by family members of victims at every stage of the investigative process.

Sources:

1. “Colombia busca a 10.000 muertos,” El Tiempo, April 24, 2007.
2. “Colombia busca a 10.000 muertos,” El Tiempo, April 24, 2007; “Este año se han exhumado 95 cadáveres de fosas comunes de victimas de paramilitares,” El Tiempo, July 27, 2006, and; “Cada cuatro días desentierran una fosa de paramilitares,” El Tiempo, November 20, 2006.
3. “Apreciaciones a las exhumaciones e investigaciones forenses realizadas por la Unidad Nacional de Justicia y Paz de la Fiscalía General de la Nación,” Equipo Colombiano Interdisciplinario de Trabajo Forense y Asistencia Psicosocial (EQUITAS), August 2006.
4. “Apreciaciones a las exhumaciones e investigaciones forenses realizadas por la Unidad Nacional de Justicia y Paz de la Fiscalia General de la Nación,” Equipo Colombiano Interdisciplinario de Trabajo Forense y Asistencia Psicosocial (EQUITAS), August 2006.
5. “Colombia busca a 10.000 muertos,” El Tiempo, April 24, 2007.
6. “Fosas comunes: secretos dolorosos,” Diario El Pais, January 7, 2007, and; “Descubren fosas comunes en antigua zona de ubicación de las Auc,” El Tiempo, March 17, 2007. “Los rostros de las fosas comunes,” La Semana, June 15, 2006.
7. “Trasteo de cadáveres” El Tiempo, July 17, 2006, and; “Mass graves unearthed in Colombia” BBC News, February 15, 2006.
8. “Plan Nacional de Búsqueda,” Comisión Nacional de Búsqueda de Personas Desaparecidas, September 2006.

Click here to read the memo.

LAWGEF Memo on UNHCHR's 2006 Report on Human Rights in Colombia

:Photo Galleries of LAWGEF Tours

Ruta Pacifica: Women Working for Peace in Colombia

The US Office on Colombia (USOC) and the LAWG Education Fund (LAWGEF) brought a delegation of women to Washington in December 2006 from the Ruta Pacifica de las Mujeres, a coalition of women working for peace in Colombia. The women of "la Ruta" declare themselves "pacifist, feminist, and anti-militaristic." They routinely organize protests and large demonstrations in Colombia against the war and gender-based violence.

House Sends Letter to Sec. Rice in Support of Human Rights Defenders

"As you are well aware, strengthening human rights, democracy, and the rule of law are principle bipartisan goals of U.S. foreign policy towards Colombia. We are therefore greatly concerned about increased threats and continued attacks against Colombian human rights defenders and other leaders of civil society." Read the full letter (PDF).

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

House Shows Support for UNHCHR Office in Colombia

"We write to urge you to express your strong support for the United Nations High Comissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR) Office in Colombia and the full renewal of its existing mandate. We believe the UNHCHR Office in Bogotá, Colombia plays a highly credible and invaluable role in the promotion of human rights in the country." Read the full letter (PDF).

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

LAWG and Other NGOs Stand in Solidarity with Colombia's Victims of Violence

Nosotros apoyamos a las víctimas de violaciones de derechos humanos en Colombia por el valiente trabajo que realizan en búsqueda de la verdad, la justicia y las reparaciones integrales. Damos la bienvenida a la Tercera Asamblea del Movimiento de Víctimas de Crímenes de Estado y sus valiosos esfuerzos por contribuir a la construcción de una sociedad más justa. La verdad y la justicia no son obstáculos para el camino de la paz. Más bien, son la base fundamental para una paz duradera en Colombia. Estamos juntos a las víctimas de la violencia en su reclamo por descubrir la verdad, consolidar el Estado de Derecho y decir, “Nunca mas”.

Heather Hanson
Executive Director
U.S. Office on Colombia

Gimena Sanchez-Garzoli
Senior Associate for Colombia and Haiti
Washington Office on Latin America

Rev. James R. Stormes, SJ
Secretary for Social and International Ministries
Jesuit Conference

Lisa Haugaard
Executive Director
Latin America Working Group

Adam Isacson
Director of Programs
Center for International Policy

Rev. T. Michael McNulty, SJ
Justice and Peace Director
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

Susana Pimiento-Chamorro
Colombia Program Coordinator
Fellowship of Reconciliation, Task Force on Latin America and the Caribbean

Stephen Coats
Executive Director
U.S./Labor Education in the Americas Project

Barbara Gerlach
Colombia Liaison
United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries

Rev. John L. McCullough
Executive Director and CEO
Church World Service

John I. Laun
President
Colombia Support Network

Kristele Younes
Advocate
Refugees International

Erik Cooke
Program Associate
Witness for Peace

Anne Barstow
Coordinator of Colombia Programs
Presbyterian Peace Fellowship

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

Reps. Farr and McGovern Co-Sponsor Letter Critical of Aerial Fumigations

Last week, Reps. Sam Farr and Jim McGovern circulated a letter to Colombia’s President Uribe on drug crop fumigations. In a recent, post-reelection visit to Washington D.C., President Uribe asked the U.S. government to provide additional helicopters and spray planes to Colombia, in order to intensify the aerial fumigation program. Recent State Department figures, however, make clear that aerial fumigation has failed to reduce coca cultivation. In fact, the amount of coca produced in 2005 was greater than the amount of coca produced in 2000, the year Plan Colombia was initiated.

The letter urged President Uribe to support proven alternative development programs, in order to provide Colombians the means to stop growing illicit crops. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has reported that when eradication efforts are combined with assistance for farmers to plant licit—and economically viable—crops, coca production decreases. 35 members of Congress signed on to the letter, sending a strong message to Colombia’s President Uribe. If your representative signed this letter, make sure to call him/her and express your appreciation.

Here's a list of co-signers:

Rep. R. Andrews
Rep. Baldwin
Rep. Clay
Rep. Sherrod Brown
Rep. Fattah
Rep. Frank
Rep. Charles Gonzalez
Rep. Grijalva
Rep. Gutierrez
Rep. Honda
Rep. EB Johnson
Rep. Kilpatrick
Rep. Kind
Rep. Kucinich
Rep. Langevin
Rep. Rick Larsen
Rep. McCollum
Rep. McDermott
Rep. Brad Miller
Rep. Gwen Moore
Rep. Oberstar
Rep. Payne
Rep. Bobby Rush
Rep. Tierny
Rep. Linda Sanchez
Rep. Schakowsky
Rep. Serrano
Rep. Stark
Rep. Waters
Rep. Watson
Rep. Waxman
Rep. Wexler
Rep. Woolsey

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

LAWG and Other NGOs Express Support for Human Rights Defenders in Colombia

Declaración de apoyo a los Defensores de Derechos Humanos de Colombia

En los últimos meses, se ha registrado un alarmante incremento en los ataques y amenazas en contra de los defensores de derechos humanos y líderes de la sociedad civil colombiana. Las organizaciones de derechos humanos, asociaciones de víctimas, grupos indígenas, defensores de los derechos laborales y periodistas y medios independientes, todos ellos de prestigio internacional, han sido víctimas de asesinato y de amenazas de muerte a través de correo electrónico y de robos tanto en sus oficinas como en sus hogares aparentemente para encontrar información. Estamos sumamente preocupados por la seguridad de todos aquellos que están siendo acosados y amenazados. También nos preocupa la posibilidad de que esta ola de ataques contra la libertad de expresión coarte la capacidad de la sociedad civil colombiana de trabajar por la paz y lograr un mayor respeto por los derechos humanos. Instamos al gobierno colombiano y a nuestro propio gobierno en sus niveles más altos a unirse a nuestra preocupación por tales amenazas y a reconocer el trabajo que emprenden esos líderes civiles y sus organizaciones hacia la construcción y protección de una sociedad democrática.

Adam Isacson
Director of Programs
Center for International Policy

Viviana Krsticevic
Executive Director
Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL)

Heather Hanson
Executive Director
U.S. Office on Colombia

T. Michael McNulty, SJ
Justice and Peace Director
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

James R. Stormes SJ
Secretary for Social and International Ministries
Jesuit Conference

Mark L. Schneider
Sr. Vice President
International Crisis Group

Neil Hicks
Director of International Programs
Human Rights Defenders Program

Kristele Younes
Advocate
Refugees International

Lisa Haugaard
Executive Director
Latin America Working Group

Stephen Coats
Executive Director
U.S./Labor Education in the Americas Project

Barbara Gerlach
Colombia Liaison
United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries

Gimena Sanchez-Garzoli
Senior Associate for Colombia and Haiti
Washington Office on Latin America

Susana Pimiento-Chamorro
Colombia Program Coordinator
Fellowship of Reconciliation, Task Force on Latin America and the Caribbean

Rev. John L. McCullough
Executive Director and CEO
Church World Service

John I. Laun
President
Colombia Support Network

Erik Cooke
Program Associate
Witness for Peace

Anne Barstow
Coordinator of Colombia Programs
Presbyterian Peace Fellowship

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

Lisa Haugaard Speaks at Colombian Victims' Movement Assembly

Palabras del Latin America Working Group en la apertura de la Tercera Asamblea del Movimiento de Víctimas de Crímenes de Estado

Gracias por esta invitación, es un gran honor estar aquí con Uds. en esta importante evento. Me gustaría leer una breve declaración de organizaciones de derechos humanos, iglesias, agencias humanitarias y organizaciones no-gubernamentales de los Estados Unidos:

Quería añadir que para nosotros, organizaciones de la sociedad civil estadounidense, es particularmente importante ofrecer nuestra solidaridad porque nuestro gobierno con demasiado frecuencia piensa que el camino a la paz está através de la guerra y que el camino a la verdad está a través de la historia oficial.

Pero no voy a decir mas, porque estoy aquí para escuchar a Uds., y si me atrevo a comentarlo, este bello pais de Colombia no necesita tanto más palabras. Necesita urgentemente gente escuchando – escuchando al dolor de las víctimas, escuchando a sus familias, escuchando a sus propuestas para descubrir la verdad – por que sólo escuchando así se puede escuchar el sonido callado del nacimiento de una sociedad más sana, más tolerante, menos violento y más justa.

Justice for All: The Struggle for Worker Rights in Colombia

Comments by Lisa Haugaard, Executive Director of the Latin America Working Group Education Fund

Many thanks to Bob Perillo for his excellent report on an issue that has received far less than the attention it is due.

No group in Colombia has been more specifically singled out for threats and assassination than organized labor, and no group has shown a more daring tenacity in continuing to operate under threat. Here today we are not only condemning these attacks but celebrating the Colombian union movement’s bravery and persistence.

House Increases Aid to Colombia Before Uribe Visit, Senate Freezes Funds Over Human Rights Concerns

House vote on Colombia drug policy

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.

Click here to read the letter.

LAWG and Other NGOs Ask for Action Regarding Threats against Colombian Human Rights Groups

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

LAWGEF Memo: Prioritize Alternative Development and Humanitarian Aid to Colombia

Click here to view a PDF version.

To: Foreign Operations staffers
From: Lisa Haugaard

As you consider assistance for Colombia in the foreign operations appropriations bill for FY07, we hope the following information is useful. We strongly support continued assistance for Colombia, but believe it is imperative to readjust the aid package that has been primarily focused on military aid and aerial spraying (82% of U.S. aid since 2000 has been military/police aid).

Despite $4.7 billion invested by the United States in Colombia, the amount of coca planted in Colombia in 2005 was more than when funding began in 2000 (136,200 hectares at the start of Plan Colombia in 2000; 144,000 hectares at the end of 2005, according to the State Department International Narcotics Control Strategy Report for 2005). Farmers whose crops are sprayed by aerial eradication who are not given adequate economic alternatives are replanting, and coca production is spreading all over the countryside. Coca production in 2005 increased in Bolivia, Peru and Colombia. If the goal is to reduce drug abuse at home, resources must be redirected to treatment and prevention at home, and sustainable development alternatives abroad.
Human rights violations remain grave. While there is some reduction in violence due to the demobilization of paramilitary forces, human rights violations continue to be severe in Colombia. The number of people fleeing their homes from political violence increased 8 percent from 2004 to 2005, estimated at 318,387 people displaced in 2005 by the Consultancy on Displacement and Human Rights (CODHES). Moreover, in 2005 more grave violations than in previous years were committed directly by Colombia’s security forces, according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ office in Colombia. The office reported “an upward trend” in allegations of extrajudicial executions of civilians and alteration of crime scenes by members of the army.

Cases were denounced of coordinated actions in which the victims were allegedly handed over by paramilitaries, subsequently executed by members of the military, and then presented as members of armed groups killed in combat, particularly in the metropolitan area of Medellín (Antioquia). Another modality was observed in allegations regarding victims executed by paramilitaries and presented by members of the army as killed in combat, in Putumayo and in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. (United Nations’ Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Colombia, January 20, 2006, covering the year 2005, Part I, point 29)
Paramilitaries’ criminal and drug-trafficking structures remain largely intact. The demobilization of Colombia’s abusive paramilitary forces if permanent would be a very positive development, but these forces are far from completely dismantled. The OAS monitoring mission has documented the formation of new paramilitary groups and the participation of demobilizing paramilitaries in violent activities in five Colombian provinces, including committing massacres, forming new criminal bands and offering security services to drug traffickers. Paramilitary leaders have penetrated some local and national government structures; the former head of Colombia’s civilian intelligence agency, for example, is facing allegations that he colluded with a paramilitary mob boss in assassinations of civic leaders. Human rights groups and victims’ representatives have had their offices broken into and computer databases stolen, and some have received threatening messages from self-proclaimed new paramilitary groupings. The José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers’ Collective, for example, which litigates high-profile human rights cases such as the Mapiripán massacre, received this message recently: “This is an invitation to join our crusade against terrorism or your staff will suffer the full weight of our presence, we have the support of the government’s armed forces who always supported us… And to everyone who received a copy of this message I warn you if you don’t align yourselves with this reality it is better for you to take your humanitarian ideas and go to some other place outside of our sacred Colombian territory…”In another recent example, fifteen students, employees and teaching staff at the University of Antioquia just received a death threat from the Autodefensas Unidas de Antioquia, believed to be operating since 1999 (Amnesty International alert 23/023/2006, 16 May 2006).

How should U.S. policy and aid be improved?

In FY07, US assistance should prioritize alternative development and humanitarian aid:

increase focus on alternative development for a more sustainable impact on drug production, rather than pouring resources into expensive, ineffective and inhumane aerial eradication campaigns
increase focus on the victims of violence: humanitarian aid for internally displaced persons and Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities
channel assistance to efforts to strengthen justice, including funding for the Colombia office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and for the Colombian government’s ombudsman’s office, inspector general’s office, and the Attorney General’s human rights unit and unit to implement prosecutions under the paramilitary demobilization law.

In addition, U.S. policy should get tougher in insisting that the Colombian government end impunity and thoroughly dismantle paramilitary and drug trafficking structures:

enforce the human rights conditions in law, requiring the Colombian government to make much greater efforts to investigate and prosecute members of the security forces credibly alleged to have committed human rights violations, and greater efforts to sever all links between the armed forces and illegal armed groups; and
insist that the Colombian government make much more vigorous efforts to fully dismantle paramilitary groups and their financial, criminal and drug trafficking structures; confiscate their financial assets and, particularly, the vast areas of land which they have obtained through violence; return lands to Colombia’s internally displaced persons; and investigate and prosecute new illegal paramilitary groups that are being created.

Additional assistance for expensive helicopters or more military training beyond the enormous investment Colombia already receives will only drain resources from these important goals and will not help Colombia reduce drug production or provide the necessary support to the justice system to strengthen the rule of law.

For more detailed recommendations, see Blueprint for a New Colombia Policywe published with the Center for International Policy, the Washington Office on Latin America, and the U.S. Office on Colombia, with input from Colombian civil society organizations.

View the roll call for the vote on Rep. Burton's amendment.

Congress Sends Mixed Signals on Colombia Military Aid

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.

Also, thank your member of Congress if they signed the Farr-McGovern letter and/or voted NO on Rep. Burton’s amendment.

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Members of Congress Ask State Department Not to Certify Aid to Colombia

"We are writing to ask you to refrain from certifying that the Colombian government meets human rights conditions...until the Colombian Army's 17th Brigade improves its human rights practices. We also believe that certification requires more substantial progress in prosecuting a number of other outstanding cases involving allegations of gross human rights violations." Read the full letter (PDF).

Senator Leahy Speaks Out on the Massacre in San José de Apartadó

"I want to speak about a matter that I suspect few Senators are aware of, but which should concern each of us. On February 21, 2005, in the small Colombian community of San Jose de Apartado, 8 people, including 3 children, were brutally murdered. Several of the bodies were mutilated and left to be eaten by wild animals. This, unfortunately, was not unusual, as some 150 people, overwhelmingly civilians caught in the midst of Colombia's conflict, have been killed by paramilitaries, rebels, and Colombian soldiers in that same community since 1997. None of those crimes has resulted in effective investigations or prosecutions. No one has been punished. That is an astonishing fact. Think of 150 murders, including massacres of groups of people, in a single rural community, and no one punished." Read the full statement.

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Statement Regarding the Disappearance of Orlando Valencia

Click here to read the statement.

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

Colombian Victims' Tour

LAWG-EF invited four members of Colombian victims' organizations to the U.S. in October to speak directly with policymakers in Washington and New York. They also received training from international experts on truth, memory, reparations and international justice from the International Center for Transitional Justice. The four represented victims of violence by all sides in the conflict - paramilitaries, guerrillas and the army.

:Photo Galleries of LAWGEF Tours

Colombian President Uribe visits Crawford Ranch: U.S. should ask some tough questions

Washington, DC – This Thursday, Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe will meet with President Bush at his Texas ranch. On Uribe's agenda will be firming up support for billions of dollars in future aid from the United States and his request for millions more to support his plans to demobilize up to 20,000 paramilitary fighters.

"The United States should not be such a pushover in its dealings with the Colombia government," commented Latin America Working Group Education Fund director Lisa Haugaard. "We should get some real progress in strengthening the rule of law in exchange for our billions of dollars in assistance."

Military aid on hold. The White House will be lauding Colombian President Uribe’s accomplishments. But a little-known story is that 12.5% of last year’s military aid was frozen for half the year over lack of progress in cases involving extrajudicial executions and other abuses by Colombia’s military. Under pressure from the U.S. embassy, two cases slowly advanced – on July 12, formal charges were brought against soldiers of the U.S.- funded 18th Brigade for the extrajudicial execution of three trade union leaders in August 2004, and on June 30, arrest warrants were issued for soldiers in the shooting deaths of five members of a family, aged 6 months to 24 years old, in Cajamarca in April 2004. However, this is slow progress, made reluctantly after the Colombian government initially said the unionists died in combat and the family was killed accidentally. Many other cases go nowhere. For example, little progress has been made in investigating the case of two families in San José de Apartadó who were murdered and their bodies dismembered in February 2005, with evidence, according to witness, pointing to soldiers, and the high-profile Mapiripán massacre case is still dragging through the courts.The State Department’s decision to certify that Colombia meets the human rights conditions for the remaining FY04 military aid and 12.5% of FY05 military aid will be controversial. (75% of U.S. military aid through the foreign aid bill is sent without conditions; the remaining 25% is subject to the human rights conditions in law, requiring that the Colombian government make progress in investigating and prosecuting security force members engaged in gross violations of human rights or collaboration with paramilitary forces.)A letter sent by 22 Senators on July 1st called for Secretary Rice “to refrain from certifying that the Colombian government meets the human rights conditions… until further progress is demonstrated.” Click here to see the letter.

"The State Department should use the leverage it has—not give away the store," said Lisa Haugaard. "The price of U.S. assistance should be respect for human rights."

Demobilization funding. President Uribe will also likely be asking for U.S. funding for a controversial plan to demobilize paramilitary fighters. Since 2002, the Colombian government has been engaged in negotiations with illegal paramilitary organizations under the umbrella of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, the AUC. The AUC is a major drug trafficking organization, and is also on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations.

In June, the Colombian congress approved a “justice and peace” law that will serve as the legal framework for the ongoing negotiations. The law virtually ensures impunity for paramilitary leaders who have committed human rights and drug trafficking crimes. It provides generous benefits for paramilitary leaders who demobilize, without requiring that they fully dismantle their organizations. Prosecutors will have only 60 days to investigate and charge demobilizing commanders for the atrocious crimes they are alleged to have committed. In Colombia, similar investigations routinely take a year or two before charges are formally filed. Commanders who fail to fully confess their crimes or turn over illegally obtained assets will still enjoy minimal sentences. Commanders do not have to ensure that the men under their command demobilize.

"Of course we support a just and lasting peace in Colombia. That is precisely why, with regret, we have to urge our government not to provide support for the paramilitary demobilization under the current conditions," said Lisa Haugaard. "Where is an honest balance between peace and justice? Where is the truth commission, as in most serious peace processes, or a role for victims in justice and reparations? Most importantly, where is there a guarantee that the paramilitary leaders and drug traffickers will not retain, or even strengthen, their hold over Colombian society? This demobilization is a series of disturbing, unanswered questions. Under these conditions, we should not foot the bill."

Recommendations. The Latin America Working Group Education Fund, Center for International Policy, Washington Office on Latin America and U.S. Office on Colombia produced a Blueprint for a New Colombia Policy that makes ten recommendations for improving U.S. policy to the country.

For more information, contact: Lisa Haugaard, 202-546-7010.

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Congress Sends Letter to Secretary Rice in Defense of Colombian Journalists

"We are confident that you share our admiration for journalists who risk their lives to bring us the news each day. Over the last ten years, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Colombia has been the third most dangerous country in the world for journalists to work. Thirty journalists have been killed since 1995, and many more have been threatened and forced into exile." Read the full letter (PDF).

Good News, Bad News: Congress Votes to Finalize 2006 Appropriations

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.

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.

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Senate Urges Secretary Rice to Refrain from Certifying Military Aid to Colombia

"We are writing to ask you to refrain from certifying that the Colombian government meets the human rights conditions included in the foreign operations appropriations act until further progress is demonstrated. The U.S. law requiring certification is vital. In appropriating funds to the Colombian military, we have a responsibility to ensure that the Colombian government upholds the rule of law and will hold those accountable when abuses occur." Read the full letter (PDF).

The Human Rights Situation in Colombia: Afro-Colombian and Indigenous People

Click here to view a PDF version of the statement.

Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Members’ Briefing
Statement by Lisa Haugaard, Latin America Working Group Education Fund

Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you about this important issue. It is wonderful to have the chance to have the problems affecting Afro-Colombian and indigenous peoples discussed in depth by the caucus. In particular, thanks to Mr. Payne for your leadership on this issue.

It is encouraging to hear from USAID about their efforts to include Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities in our development programs, and about the projects specifically directed to these communities. We are very supportive of such programs.

However, it is also important to consider how overall policies by the US and Colombian governments affect Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities. My colleagues have given a good account of the impact, and I would like to stress three recommendations for improving U.S. policy to Colombia. These are part of our Blueprint for a New Colombia Policy, which was written with input from some thirty humanitarian agencies and nongovernmental groups working on Colombia issues, including two networks of human rights groups within Colombia. (In English: http://www.lawg.org/docs/Blueprint.pdf ; in Spanish: http://www.lawg.org/docs/LAWGColombiaSP.pdf )

1. We need a tougher human rights policy. There has been very little progress in terms of investigating and prosecuting army officials implicated in human rights violations and collusion with abusive paramilitary forces. The Attorney General last year dismissed charges against General Rito Alejo del Río for allegedly aiding and abetting paramilitary groups and in 2005 the Supreme Court dismissed the case against Admiral Rodrigo Quiñonez regarding his leadership during the Chengue massacre—and these are only a couple of the most high-profile cases. There are countless other stalled cases, including ones involving direct violations by the military. Army-paramilitary collusion continues, including in areas like Chocó, with its substantial Afro-Colombian population. We need to be tougher, more willing to criticize. Our embassy must talk about human rights issues publicly, and the State Department must be willing to hold up military aid based on the human rights conditions in the law, and demand real progress on cases and on ending collusion with paramilitary forces. We’re not helping Colombia by pretending that everything’s getting better.

2. We should be emphasizing alternative development programs, not aerial spraying. After the massive spraying campaign in Putumayo province, coca cultivation began spreading to neighboring provinces and increasingly into areas with greater Afro-Colombian and indigenous populations. As frankly cruel as the policy of aerial spraying without alternative development is for all populations of small farm families, it is even more problematic for indigenous and Afro-Colombian communities. Already targeted by all sides in the war and feeling the brunt of internal displacement by violence, if forced into displacement from aerial spraying these populations would lose access to the collective land titles which have allowed their communities a certain cohesion. Indigenous communities are in particular rooted to a given piece of land and geography. We need to ask AID and INL to give small farmers in the areas targeted for fumigation a chance to first eradicate manually, with development assistance. Congress should examine these plans carefully and insist that serious alternative development programs be offered to not just a small subset of farmers but, working with the Colombian government and other international donors, ensure that aid is available for the majority of small farm families willing to eradicate.

3. We need to increase and improve assistance for the internally displaced. We need to be offering more aid, more rapid disbursement, and greater protection to prevent displacement. This is Colombia’s most pervasive human tragedy, and Afro-Colombian and indigenous people are disproportionately affected. This kind of humanitarian aid is our best program in Colombia, but it is still a tiny portion of the overall total aid package and far from serving the needs. The Colombian government must be asked to shoulder its share of the burden – its efforts are inadequate – but we should also increase U.S. funding.

We must encourage greater protection of communities from attack from all armed actors. It is important to understand that protection doesn’t come in any automatic way from arming and equipping the Colombian army. The army itself has to be rid of officials and soldiers who are colluding with paramilitaries or committing direct violations. There has to be far greater attention to civilian state agencies helping communities – the Attorney General’s office, the Inspector General’s office, the Ombudsman’s office. Protection comes not only from armed presence but from investigating crimes and ending impunity. If you have armed presence without an accompanying justice system that functions, you are not protecting communities, and indeed you can be putting them at risk.

There must be space for communities who wish to not to participate in the war, including by rejecting the presence of security forces they see as colluding with paramilitary forces in their communities. This is particularly important with indigenous communities, some of which have a traditional culture of nonviolence. These efforts should be respected where possible and certainly should not be seen as a threat to state authority – they are no threat to the state but rather a desperate means of self-preservation that stems in part from lack of trust in government security forces. Finally, the early warning system, designed to protect communities and funded largely by the U.S., must be improved. One of the areas where this system has worked least is in Chocó, with its Afro-Colombian population. The government agencies dealing with security are playing the lead role in determining when alerts are sent out, rather than the judicial agencies, and as a result threats against communities are being downplayed. Responses to alerts that are sent out can help but are inadequate. The system of alerts needs to be made public and transparent.

Thank you so much for your interest in helping Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities in Colombia.

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

NGOs Send Secretary Rice Letter on the San Jose de Apartado Massacre

The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
U.S. State Department
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary of State Rice,

We, the undersigned non-governmental organizations, write to express our profound concern and deepest condemnation of the recent massacre of eight civilians, including three children, in the hamlets of Mulatos and Resbalosa, a few miles from the peace community of San José de Apartadó, Colombia. In light of allegations of involvement by members of the Colombian military, it is essential that the U.S. government send a strong signal by insisting that an effective investigation be conducted by civilian authorities. The State Department must include this case in its evaluation of Colombian compliance with U.S. human rights conditions, and must refrain from certification until a credible investigation has been completed.

According to information received from the field, between February 21 and 22 Luis Eduardo Guerra, a well-known leader of the San José de Apartadó Peace Community, his eleven-year-old son and his companion were detained by armed men who identified themselves as belonging to the Colombian military. Alfonso Bolivar Tuberquía, a member of the Peace Council of the hamlet in Mulatos, and his family also disappeared. Several local people later discovered blood and human remains in two sites in the area.

On February 25, the Peace Community organized a fact-finding mission to the hamlets of Mulatos and Resbalosa. At the same time, a governmental judicial commission carried out an exhumation of the grave found on the farm of Mr. Tuberquía and found mutilated bodies (three adults and two children, aged six and two years old). In La Resbalosa, members of the community recognized the bodies of Luis Eduardo Guerra and his family. It is shocking that a community which is the recipient of provisional protection measures from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and for which the Colombian Constitutional Court requested effective protection measures in March 2004, would be subjected to such a brutal and cruel attack.
The judicial commission itself came under attack, resulting in the death of one policeman. Police sources allege that the attack on the commission was carried out by the FARC. We vigorously condemn the attack upon judicial authorities and call for a thorough investigation into this incident as well.

In light of the allegations of military involvement in the killing of members of the San Jose de Apartadó community, we ask that your office not certify Colombian compliance with the human rights conditions, until such time as the Colombian government has conducted a transparent, impartial, effective investigation into the massacre, and is proceeding to prosecute those responsible. Given the nature of the crimes, prosecution must take place within the civilian justice system.

In addition, the Department of State should undertake the following actions:

- Direct the U.S. Embassy to release a public statement condemning the massacre, expressing concern for the safety of the residents of the community and calling on the Colombian government to ensure that civilian judicial authorities conduct a full and impartial investigation into the killings of these eight persons;

--Insist that the Colombian Government take effective measures to ensure the safety of the residents of San José de Apartadó community and the Colombian non-governmental organizations who have denounced the crimes. Protective actions should be fully consulted with the community, as required by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights' provisional measures.

-Encourage the U.S. Ambassador to visit the community to express condolences on behalf of the people of the United States for the losses suffered, and to show support for the safety of the community.

Colombian and international human rights organizations have repeatedly opposed the certification of the human rights conditions because of continuing evidence of collaboration between sectors of the armed forces and paramilitaries, and because of evidence of human rights violations directly committed by members of the armed forces. Effective, impartial investigation and prosecution by civilian authorities in this new case is a minimally necessary step, but it should not be considered sufficient to justify compliance. The Department of State should thoroughly review the requirements for vigorous investigation and prosecution, and the severing of ties with paramilitaries, before again certifying compliance.

In closing, we ask that your office inform us as to the actions taken to ensure justice for Luis Eduardo Guerra, his family and colleagues.

Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,

Alexandra Arriaga
Director for Government Relations
Amnesty International USA

Joy Olson
Executive Director
Washington Office on Latin America

José Miguel Vivanco
Executive Director for the Americas
Human Rights Watch

James R. Stormes SJ
Secretary, Social and International Ministries
Jesuit Conference

Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory
Director, Washington Office
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Pat Clark
Executive Director
Fellowship of Reconciliation

Cristina Espinel and Kelleen Corrigan
Co-Chairs
Colombia Human Rights Committee

Adam Isacson
Program Director
Center for International Policy

Krisanne Vaillancourt Murphy
Executive Director
Witness for Peace

Mary Ellen McNish
General Secretary
American Friends Service Committee

Todd Howland
Director
Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights

Kenneth H. Bacon
President
Refugees International

Patricia Burkhardt
Legislative Officer
Church Women United

Neil Jeffery
Executive Director
U.S. Office on Colombia

Saul Murcia
Co-Director Latin America & Caribbean
Mennonite Central Committee

Shannon Lockhart
Administrator
Sister Parish, Inc.

Barbara Gerlach
Colombia Liaison
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

Kathryn Wolford
President
Lutheran World Relief

Max L. Gimbel
Director of Research
Guatemala Human Rights Commission

Phil Jones
Director
Church of the Brethren Witness/Washington Office

Gary L. Cozette
Director
Chicago Religious Leadership Network on Latin America

Martha Pierce
Director
Chicago Metropolitan Sanctuary Alliance

Ted Lewis
Human Rights Program Director
Global Exchange

Bob Schwartz
Executive Director
Disarm Education Fund

Tom Bamat
Representative for Colombia
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns

Marino Córdoba
Executive Director
Afrodes–USA

Pam Bowman
Legislative Coordinator
School of the Americas Watch

Terry Collingsworth
Executive Director
International Labor Rights Fund

Peter Laarman
Executive Director
Progressive Christians Uniting

Dr. Rita Nakashima Brock
Director
Faith Voices for the Common Good

To reply to this letter, respond to: Lisa Haugaard, Executive Director, Latin America Working Group, 424 C Street NE, Washington, DC 20002.

Cc: Ambassador William Burns, Acting Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs
Roger Noriega, Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs
Ambassador Michael Kozak, Acting Assistant Secretary of State,
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
Danika Walters, Program Officer, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor
Lisa Bobby Hughes Schreiber, Director, Office of Andean Affairs
Heather Merritt, Colombia Desk Officer

Blueprint for a New Colombia Policy

Blueprint for a New Colombia Policy presents a positive set of recommendations on how to improve U.S. policy towards Colombia. At the expiration of the original six-year Plan Colombia, Blueprint urges the U.S. government to take a tougher stance on human rights, prioritize social aid rather than limitless military assistance, and urge peace negotiations with truth, justice, and reparations for victims.

Read our report Blueprint for a New Colombia Policy (PDF)
Lea neustra publicación Propuesta para una nueva política hacia Colombia (PDF)

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Reps. McGovern and Smith Co-Sponsor Letter Condemning the Massace at San Jose de Apartado

"We write to express our strongest condemnation of the murders of Luis Eduardo Guerra, a leader of the San Jose de Apartado community in Antioquia who was personally known to some of us, and seven other people, among them women and children as young as ages two and six. We also wish to express our great concern for the safety of the inhabitants of the San Jose de Apartado Peace Community." Read the full letter (PDF).

Letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from 11 U.S. NGOs regard

The Honorable Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
The State Department
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Rice,

We the undersigned non-governmental organizations of the United States wish to express our support for the donor conference in Cartagena. We consider the process initiated in London to be an extraordinary opportunity for the international community to support the Colombian people and institutions in their efforts to develop solutions to the country's severe problems, exacerbated by more that 40 years of armed conflict. In particular feel it is important to recognize the critical role of Colombian civil society in shaping the process, and the support that they have received from the G-24 group of international governments.

We welcome the possibility of new economic and social aid for Colombia to address the impact of the internal armed conflict. However we believe strongly that U.S. support to Colombia should be more than just financial aid; rather it should improve the security of all Colombians, strengthen the rule of law, increase respect for human rights and international humanitarian law and assist in the search for a negotiated settlement to the conflict. We feel that support for the recommendations of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights as set out in the London declaration is the most appropriate and effective way to achieve these goals.

While we look favorably on any advance in the peace process, we are seriously concerned that without a legal framework in place the present demobilization plans are effectively granting impunity to AUC members responsible for gross human rights violations and failing to dismantle paramilitary structures. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in a recent report confirmed that the "demobilisation mechanisms have not been accompanied by comprehensive measures to provide relief to the victims of the violence or to clarify the many criminal acts that remain in impunity...therefore the factors generating the conflict in large measure persist"

In particular, we urge that the final declaration

1) recognize the process established in London in July 2003;

2) recognize the critical role of civil society in shaping the future of Colombia, and provide mechanisms by which the G-24 group can continue to support dialogue between the Colombian authorities and civil society;

3) recognize the fundamental contribution of the United Nations in developing solutions to the conflict, particularly through the work of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the Secretary General's Special Representative;

4) urge the Colombian Government to make demonstrable and timely progress in complying with the recommendations of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights;

5) establish as a fundamental prerequisite to any international funding for the paramilitary demobilization process the inclusion of a legal framework finalized by the Colombian Congress, that satisfies requirements for truth, justice and reparation in compliance with standards and principles of international law, accompanied by an appropriate mechanism for effective implementation and verification;

6) explicitly recognize the existence of an armed conflict in Colombia, requiring full observance of international humanitarian law.

We appreciate your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Neil Jeffery
Executive Director
U.S. Office on Colombia

Joy Olson
Executive Director
Washington Office on Latin America

Adam Isacson
Director of Programs
Center for International Policy

Lisa Haugaard
Executive Director
Latin America Working Group *

Stephen Coats
Executive Director
U.S./Labor Education in the Americas Project

Krisanne Vaillancourt
Executive Director
Witness for Peace

British Robinson
National Director of Social and International Ministries
Jesuit Conference USA

Cristina Espinel and Kelleen Corrigan
Co-Chairs
Colombia Human Rights Committee

Barbara Gerlach
Colombia Liaison
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

Jacqueline Baker
Legislative Coordinator
School of the Americas Watch

Sr. Marta Inés Toro, OP
Justice and Peace Coordinator
Dominican Sisters of the Presentation

* Organization designated for identification purposes only

Cc
Andrew Natsios, Administrator, United States Agency for International Development
Michael Kozak, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, United States Department of State
Danika Walters, Program Officer, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, United States Department of State
Heather Merritt, Colombia Desk Officer, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, United States Department of State

Senator Christopher Dodd
Senator Russell Feingold
Senator Patrick Leahy
Senator Mitch McConnell

Representative Jim Kolbe
Representative Nita M. Lowey
Representative James P. McGovern

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

25 Heads of U.S. Faith Communities Call on Candidates Bush and Kerry to Change Colombia Policy

Dear President Bush and Senator Kerry:

As representatives of a broad range of U.S. churches and faith communities we are calling upon you as a presidential candidate to commit to a serious reassessment of current U.S. policy towards Colombia. We believe it is time to envision a new strategy to respond to the needs of both nations and to work for the peace and security of our respective peoples.

Colombia is one of the most dangerous places on earth to be a religious leader, a promoter of peace, or human rights defender. The danger is consistently brought to light as astonishing numbers of religious and civil society leaders are assassinated, threatened and detained. The suffering of the Colombian churches and their call to us for assistance and solidarity compel us to appeal to you to seriously consider recommendations for a new U.S. policy toward Colombia that are outlined below.

We believe it is of great importance for the United States to remain engaged with the government of Colombia and Colombian civil society organizations, but to do so in a manner that will support aspirations for a just and sustainable peace as well as effectively address our shared concerns about drug production and consumption.

In this light, we respectfully urge you to include the following recommendations in a new vision for U.S. policy towards Colombia:

I. A greater commitment to a negotiated, political path towards peace.

After forty years of an ever-escalating armed conflict that has claimed the lives of tens of thousands, Colombian Catholic and Protestant church representatives have been clear that a negotiated political process, though difficult and contentious, is essential to the resolution of the current conflict. Every effort should be made to achieve a politically negotiated peace process inclusive of civil society participation, and based upon verification of ‘truth, justice and the provision of reparations for the victims of war.’

We call upon both Presidential campaigns to make a greater commitment to support Colombian and international efforts towards a negotiated resolution of the conflict in Colombia.

II. Increased attention to social concerns as a preferred long-term strategy to sustainable peace.

The conflict in Colombia and involvement of peasant farmers in coca production is deeply rooted in social and economic exclusion of many of its citizens. Many of the areas most in conflict have little or no social infrastructure or viable economic options. Strategies that rely primarily on military aid or fumigation, and provide only limited social investment in local communities, will not create lasting change.

The United States can make a significant positive contribution to long-term peace and stability in Colombia by shifting the focus of its foreign aid towards a much greater emphasis on effective social development. There are an increasing number of initiatives throughout the country of local governments, churches, and civil society coming together to create lasting alternatives to overt violence and the inequality and poverty that have sustained it. These initiatives, and the communities they serve, could greatly benefit from development funding – with long-term benefit for thousands of people.

The situation of internal displacement in Colombia is a crisis of staggering proportions – and one of the most serious in the world. Almost three million people have been displaced from their homes since 1985. Churches locally and internationally are responding to the great needs of Colombia’s internally displaced, a group that most aptly represents the human face of suffering in the country. We are grateful for the attention provided to refugees and internally displaced persons through U.S. aid, and see this as a positive contribution of U.S. policy toward Colombia. Yet much more remains to be done.

We call for a greater proportion of the U.S. aid to Colombia to be dedicated to investment in sustainable development, humanitarian aid and the defense of human rights.

III. Humane drug policies that meet the needs of those most directly impacted.

We share a deep concern about the consumption and production of illicit drugs. Billions of dollars have been spent on fumigation and interdiction yet, drug consumption continues unabated in our communities, drug offenses have exploded the prison populations, and treatment programs go under funded. This approach is not working.

The churches and faith communities in the U.S. and Colombia are painfully aware of the devastation of drugs in the lives of individuals, families and our communities. We see the end results every day and minister to affected families. It is precisely because we are so well versed in the human costs of the drug crisis that we are well placed to call for effective drug policies that will have lasting impact in all of our communities.

As the Office of National Drug Control Policy’s January 2004 Pulse Check Study of drug abuse in 25 U.S. cities states: powder and crack cocaine remains readily available and there are no clear positive trends on price and purity. As church organizations, we do not claim expertise on the best demand reduction strategies, but we urge you to shift the focus of current drug policy.

We call for increased drug treatment programs and realistic, pragmatic prevention strategies as a much more sustainable and humane way to achieve the goal of reducing drug abuse in the United States.

Thank you for your attention to the great courage and great needs of our Colombian brothers and sisters. We hope to work with you as we seek durable solutions for all affected communities.

Signed,

National Heads of Communion and Faith-Based Organizations

Rev. John L. McCullough
Executive Director and CEO
Church World Service

Rev. Dr. Robert Edgar
General Secretary
National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA

Rev. Ronald D. Witherup, S.S.
President
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

Kathryn Wolford
President
Lutheran World Relief

Bruce Wilkinson
Senior Vice President
International Programs Group
World Vision

Rev. John Thomas
General Minister and President
United Church of Christ

The Reverend Mark S. Hanson
Presiding Bishop
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

James Winkler
General Secretary
General Board of Church and Society of The United Methodist Church

The Most Rev. Frank T. Griswold
Presiding Bishop and Primate
The Episcopal Church, USA

Rev. Dr. Clifton Kirkpatrick
Stated Clerk
Presbyterian Church (USA)

Rosanne Rustemeyer, SSND
Executive Director
U.S. Catholic Mission Association

Ken Hackett
President
Catholic Relief Services

Rev. Kenneth Gavin, S.J.
National Director
Jesuit Refugee Service/USA

Gail E. Mengel
National Board Minister
Church Women United

Carolyn Krebs, OP
President
Dominican Leadership

Marie Dennis
Director
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns

Joe Volk
Executive Secretary
Friends Committee on National Legislation

Jim Wallis
Editor
Sojourners Magazine

Arlene DiMarco
Vice President
National Council of Catholic Women
Harrisburg, PA

Maureen Fenlon, OP
National Coordinator
NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby

Rev. Ron Stief
Minister and Team Leader
Washington Office
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

J. Daryl Byler
Director
Mennonite Central Committee, Washington Office

Bishop Thomas J. Gumbleton
Auxiliary Bishop,
Archdiocese of Detroit
Detroit, MI

Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory
Director
Washington Office
Presbyterian Church, (USA)

US Jesuit Conference

Richard Parkins
Director
Episcopal Migration Ministries

Executive Council, Sisters of St. Francis

Brian Terrell
Executive Director
Catholic Peace Ministry
Des Moines, IA

Krisanne Vaillencourt
Executive Director
Witness for Peace

Patricia Clark
Executive Director
Fellowship of Reconciliation USA

Jim Atwood
Presbyterian Peace Fellowship

Sister Mary M McGlone
Executive Director,
FUVIRESE USA

Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet
Denver, CO

Dr. Monika K. Hellwig
President
Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities
Washington, DC

Phil Reed, M.Afr.
Coordinator, Justice and Peace Office
North American Province
Society of Missionaries of Africa

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

U.S. NGOs and Labor Unions Ask President Uribe to Ensure Fair Trial for Killlers of Labor Leaders

Click here to view the letter.

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

Senate Speaks Out against Human Rights Violations and Expresses Support for the Work of UNHCHR

"We are encouraged by the decline in the level of homicides, massacres, kidnappings, and forced displacement. However, we remain deeply concerned about the continued levels of violence directed at the civilian population. We believe that adherence to UNHCHR's recommendations will help to establish the "democratic security" for all Colombians..." Read the full letter (PDF).

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

LAWG and Other U.S. NGOs Condemn La Gabarra Massacre

We, the undersigned organizations, are appalled by the June 15th massacre in La Gabarra, Colombia. Reports indicate that this was an unjustifiable attack targeting civilians, killing 34 and wounding 7. Although there is an ongoing investigation, witnesses and the Colombian authorities allege that Front 33 of the FARC is responsible for what the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Bogotá has called a war crime.

We join with Colombian civil society organizations, the Colombian government, the United Nations and others in denouncing this attack in the strongest possible terms. Our deep-felt sympathies go out to the survivors and the families of the victims of this inexcusable violation of international humanitarian law.

We call on the Colombian government to carry out a thorough investigation to determine who is responsible and to bring the guilty parties to justice. We repeat our previous calls for all armed actors in Colombia to respect civilians in compliance with international humanitarian law. No political or social demands justify the targeting of civilians, which has become all too common in Colombia’s brutal internal conflict.

At the same time we reiterate our call on President Uribe to respect the vital role of national and international human rights groups in Colombia. Our work is essential to documenting human rights and international humanitarian law violations such as the La Gabarra massacre, and to ensuring justice for victims of human rights abuses.

Neil Jeffery
Executive Director
U.S. Office on Colombia

Kimberly Stanton
Deputy Director
Washington Office on Latin America

Sarah Ford
Director, Office of Public Policy
Lutheran World Relief

Saul Murcia
Co-Director
Latin America and Caribbean Programs
Mennonite Central Committee

Cristina Espinel and Barbara Gerlach
Co-Chairs
Colombia Human Rights Committee

Rev. Dr. Leonard B. Bjorkman
Co-Moderator
Presbyterian Peace Fellowship

Jacqueline Baker
Legislative Coordinator
School of the Americas Watch

Alexandra Arriaga
Director for Government Relations
Amnesty International-USA

Lisa Haugaard
Executive Director
Latin America Working Group *

Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory
Director, Washington Office
Presbyterian Church, (USA)

J. Gary Campbell
Parish Associate Minister
New York Ave. Presbyterian Church
Washington, D.C.

John Lindsay-Poland
Director
Task Force on Latin America and the Caribbean
Fellowship of Reconciliation

James E. Atwood
National Capital Presbytery

* Organization designated for identification purposes only

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

Going to Extremes

Going to Extremes: The Aerial Spraying Program in Colombia examines the U.S.-funded aerial spraying program to eradicate coca production in Colombia. The report concurs that addressing drug abuse in the United States is a laudable goal. However, it suggests that this controversial strategy has harsh human and environmental costs, while doing little to curb drug abuse in the United States.

Read our publication Going to Extremes (PDF)

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

74 Members of Congress Call on Uribe to Stop Denigrating Human Rights Groups

The Honorable Alvaro Uribe Velez
President of Colombia
Palacio de Nariño
Carrera 8, No. 7-26
Bogotá, Colombia

Dear President Uribe:

Please let us take this opportunity at the beginning of the New Year to extend our regards and best wishes for 2004. We write in acknowledgment of the difficult ongoing conflict in your country and in appreciation of your efforts to promote security and stability in Colombia. We also recognize the troubling human rights crisis that is the product of such a protracted and bloody conflict. It is in this context that we express our continuing support for the human rights and civil society groups who daily work to protect the innocent and to strengthen democracy in Colombia.

The work of human rights defenders is critical in a democratic society that respects the rights of all people. This work is legitimate and necessary—not just in giving a voice to the victims of human rights violations, but also in supporting and strengthening democratic and judicial institutions. As you are well aware, human rights defenders in Colombia are at great risk because of their work, suffering intimidation, death threats, forced exile, disappearances and even murder. According to international human rights organizations, last year in Colombia, 13 human rights defenders were murdered or disappeared, while countless others lived under the threat of violence. Other members of civil society, such as trade unionists, teachers, journalists, church leaders, lawyers and local elected leaders, experience similar threats and attacks as a result of their work. We write in concern for the safety of these people, a concern heightened by the recent trend in the public debate to discredit their work.

Mr. President, we trust that your government shares our belief in the importance of human rights work and our conviction that democratic governments allow for a plurality of viewpoints, including criticism. Therefore, we encourage you to take actions that will underscore the legitimacy of human rights defenders and other civil society actors and enable them to continue in safety. In particular, we encourage you to engage in meaningful dialogue with human rights groups so that they can voice their concerns and hear serious responses. We also encourage you to consider, commensurate with the March 2003 recommendation by the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, the adoption of a Presidential Directive prohibiting the defamation by public officials of human rights groups, with sanctions for its violation, in order to clarify the government’s support for such work.

Thank you for your serious consideration of these suggestions. We look forward to your response and to working with you throughout the coming year.

Sincerely,

The Honorable James P. McGovern (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Christopher Smith (New Jersey)
The Honorable George Miller (California)
The Honorable Maxine Waters (California)
The Honorable Amo Houghton (New York)
The Honorable Martin O. Sabo (Minnesota)
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi (California)
The Honorable Carolyn B. Maloney (New York)
The Honorable Luis V. Gutierrez (Illinois)
The Honorable Nita Lowey (New York)
The Honorable Marcy Kaptur (Ohio)
The Honorable Nick Rahall (West Virginia)
The Honorable Jim Oberstar (Minnesota)
The Honorable Chaka Fattah (Pennsylvania)
The Honorable Bobby Rush (Illinois)
The Honorable Tim Holden (Pennsylvania)
The Honorable John Conyers, Jr. (Michigan)
The Honorable Bob Filner (California)
The Honorable Maurice Hinchey (New York)
The Honorable Eliot L. Engel (New York)
The Honorable Rosa DeLauro (Connecticut)
The Honorable Donald M. Payne (New Jersey)
The Honorable Lane Evans (Illinois)
The Honorable Howard L. Berman (California)
The Honorable Marty Meehan (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Edolphus Towns (New York)
The Honorable Bernie Sanders (Vermont)
The Honorable Richard Neal (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Peter DeFazio (Oregon)
The Honorable William O. Lipinski (Illinois)
The Honorable Jim Leach (Iowa)
The Honorable David Price (North Carolina)
The Honorable Sherrod Brown (Ohio)
The Honorable Alcee L. Hastings (Florida)
The Honorable Dennis J. Kucinich (Ohio)
The Honorable Barbara Lee (California)
The Honorable Mike Honda (California)
The Honorable Gregory W. Meeks (New York)
The Honorable Donna M. Christian-Christensen (Virgin Islands)
The Honorable Rahm Emanuel (Illinois)
The Honorable Raul M. Grijalva (Arizona)
The Honorable Hilda L. Solis (California)
The Honorable Karen McCarthy (Missouri)
The Honorable Trent Franks (Arizona)
The Honorable Danny K. Davis (Illinois)
The Honorable Sam Farr (California)
The Honorable Christopher Shays (Connecticut)
The Honorable William Delahunt (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Rush Holt (New Jersey)
The Honorable Tammy Baldwin (Wisconsin)
The Honorable Tom Lantos (California)
The Honorable Jim McDermott (Washington)
The Honorable Brad Sherman (California)
The Honorable Betty McCollum (Minnesota)
The Honorable John Olver (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Stephanie Tubbs Jones (Ohio)
The Honorable Elijah Cummings (Maryland)
The Honorable Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (Michigan)
The Honorable James R. Langevin (Rhode Island)
The Honorable John Tierney (Massachusetts)
The Honorable Eleanor Holmes Norton (District of Columbia)
The Honorable Jose Serrano (New York)
The Honorable William L. Clay, Jr. (Missouri)
The Honorable Pete Stark (California)
The Honorable Chris Bell (Texas)
The Honorable Robert I. Wexler (Florida)
The Honorable Charles A. Gonzalez (Texas)
The Honorable Jay Inslee (Washington)
The Honorable Jan Schakowsky (Illinois)
The Honorable Dennis Cardoza (California)
The Honorable Shelley Berkley (Nevada)
The Honorable Dennis Moore (Kansas)
The Honorable Lynn Woolsey (California)

The Honorable Ike Skelton (Missouri)

Rep. Schakowsky Sponsors Letter to Secretary Powell on Human Rights Defenders

Dear Secretary Powell:

During your trip to Bogota, Colombia last year, you remarked upon the Colombian government's national security strategy as a "comprehensive plan to build a healthy democracy." We strongly concur with the goal of fostering a "healthy democracy" in Colombia today. We are alarmed, however, by a recent speech by Colombian President Alvaro Uribe which would weaken, not strengthen, his country's democratic values.

Speaking on September 8th before the assembled armed forces' leadership at the inauguration ceremony for the new head of the air force, President Uribe devoted a major portion of his address to accusing members of the human rights community in Colombia of acting in the service of terrorism. He suggested that some human rights defenders were "spokespeople for terrorists" and called others "traffickers for human rights." He called upon these human rights defenders to "take off their masks" and end "this cowardice of hiding their ideas behind human rights." President Uribe pointedly did not mention specific human rights groups and also referred generally to "NGOs"; thus, his remarks put at risk the entire community of human rights, humanitarian and service organizations in Colombia.

Ties between some members of the military and paramilitary forces have been extensively documented by the State Department and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Bogota, as well as by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Moreover, paramilitary forces have specifically targeted, threatened and killed human rights defenders and community and labor union activists. Thus, this broad accusation associating human rights defenders with terrorists before the assembled armed forces' leadership can be read as an endorsement of the view that human rights defenders are entitled to less protection from paramilitary aggression-- and could be heard by some as a green light for collaboration with paramilitary abuses.

Mr. Uribe's remarks cast a chill over the already tense climate for human rights defenders in Colombia. Many already are living in exile; others continue to carry out their critical work despite regular threats, in some cases with bodyguards, metal detectors and other protective measures the United States has helped to finance. These activists merit and need protection from the government; they do not deserve to be placed in further peril.

We urge you to make a strong public statement dissociating the United States from President Uribe's remarks, indicating strong US concern with these statements, and asking him to protect, by his words and by his actions, human rights defenders and the broader nongovernmental community in Colombia.

As we all know, a "healthy democracy" includes civil society, dissent and public debate.

Sincerely,

Representatives
McGovern
Grijalva
DeFazio
Evans
Holmes Norton
Farr
Olver
Payne
C. Maloney
Hinchey
Cummings
Kucinich
Oberstar
Clyburn
George Miller
Skelton
Towns
Tubbs-Jones

Waters

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Rep. Lantos and 52 Other Reps. Write Letter on Ties between Colombian Miilitary and Paramilitaries

H.E. Álvaro Uribe Vélez
President
Republic of Colombia
Casa de Nariño
Bogota, Colombia

Dear Mr. President:

In recognition of the tremendous challenges which your country faces in its war against terrorism and narcotics trafficking, we write to commend you for your government’s stated commitment to helping to ensure greater security for all Colombians, but also to express our deep concerns about continuing links between segments of the Colombian security forces and paramilitary terrorist organizations.

Several actions by your government have served to promote human rights in Colombia. Most notably, we welcomed your government’s invitation to the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to extend its mandate in Colombia through 2006, and your stated commitment to implement fully the recommendations of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in his February 2003 report. Of particular interest to us are the recommendations which address the need for: a sustained government security presence in rehabilitated or consolidated zones where many vulnerable populations, like Afro-Colombians and indigenous peoples, reside; the security forces to learn and adhere systematically to international human rights and humanitarian norms; the establishment of a task force within the Attorney General’s Office which would specialize on investigating possible links between members of the security forces and paramilitary groups; and the immediate suspension from duty of any member of the security forces who has been involved in serious human rights violations.

We highlight these recommendations because we are deeply troubled by continuing credible reports of persistent links between members of the Colombian security forces and paramilitary terrorist organizations. In the latest Country Report on Human Rights Practices in Colombia, the U.S. Department of State found credible allegations of passive support and direct collaboration by members of the public security forces, particularly the army, and paramilitary groups. The State Department also found evidence suggesting that there were “tacit arrangements between local military commanders and paramilitary groups in some regions,” where “members of the security forces actively collaborated with members of paramilitary groups — passing them through roadblocks, sharing intelligence, providing them with ammunition, and allegedly even joining their ranks while off duty.”

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights made similar findings. In his February 2003 report on the human rights situation in Colombia, the High Commissioner revealed that the UN Office in Colombia had received reports of “security forces themselves announcing the impending arrival of pa
ramilitary groups, and even of cases where local inhabitants recognized members of military forces among paramilitary contingents.” The High Commissioner also noted that the impression of direct links between members of the security forces and the paramilitary was fueled by reports of the direct involvement of security forces in paramilitary activities, including massacres, theft, and organizational meetings.

Mr. President, these reports are troubling not only because of the humanitarian toll inflicted by this collaboration on vulnerable populations who are caught in the cross-hairs of the conflict, but also because we simply cannot condone any cooperation with known terrorists, such as the paramilitaries, whether that cooperation comes from private individuals, firms, or governments.

As we continue to work with you and your government on a broad range of initiatives of mutual concern, certain actions by your government would greatly ameliorate our concerns, including the immediate suspension of officers against whom there is credible evidence of paramilitary collaboration. We also would welcome increased funding and high-level support for the Public Advocate’s office (Defensoria del Pueblo) and the Inspector General’s office (Procuraduría). Finally, a clear sign of your government’s commitment to shattering the links between members of the security forces and the terrorist paramilitaries would be the aggressive prosecution of high-ranking officers, such as former Navy Admiral Rodrigo Quiñones, who have reportedly been involved in serious human rights abuses with the paramilitaries.

Lastly, although we applaud your courage and commitment to securing a lasting peace with the umbrella organization for the paramilitaries, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (known by the Spanish acronym, the “AUC”), we have doubts about your government’s willingness to prosecute AUC members, including Carlos Castaño and Salvatore Mancuso, for their gross violations of human rights and drug trafficking in Colombia. Recent public statements made by Colombia’s High Commissioner for Peace Luis Carlos Restrepo indicate that your government may consider allowing these criminals to receive suspended sentences and pay reparations in lieu of jail time. We believe that such an exchange would amount to impunity for serious human rights violations and would erode the rule of law in Colombia, encourage further violence, and establish an undesirable template for future negotiations with the guerrillas. Instead, we encourage you to ensure that an eventual peace agreement with the AUC includes accountability for human rights violations, excludes the possibility of cash-for-justice swaps, provides for the rapid disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of the AUC combatants, and requires that your government control disarmament and demobilization zones.

Mr. President, we recognize our nation’s responsibility to help Colombia and look forward to working with you and your government towards our shared objective of a peaceful, secure, and prosperous Colombia.

Most Cordially,

Representatives

Ackerman, Gary L.
Abercrombie, Neil
Baldwin, Tammy
Becerra, Xavier
Bell, Chris
Berman, Howard L.
Brown, Sherrod
Clyburn, James E.
Conyers, John Jr.
Crowley, Joseph
Cummings, Elijah E.
DeLauro, Rosa L.
Emanuel, Rahm
Engel, Eliot L.
Evans, Lane
Farr, Sam
Frank, Barney
Grijalva, Raúl M.
Gutierrez, Luis V.
Harris, Katherine
Hinchey, Maurice D.
Honda, Michael M.
Jones, Stephanie Tubbs
Kucinich, Dennis J.
Langevin, James R.
Lantos, Tom
Leach, James A.
Lee, Barbara
Levin, Sander M.
Lipinski, William O.
Lowey, Nita M.
Maloney, Carolyn B.
McCarthy, Karen
McCollum, Betty
McGovern, James P.
Meeks, Gregory W.
Miller, George
Nadler, Jerrold
Oberstar, James L.
Payne, Donald M.
Rangel, Charles B.
Rush, Bobby L.
Ryan, Timothy J.
Schakowsky, Janice D.
Shays, Christopher
Skelton, Ike
Solis, Hilda L.
Tierney, John F.
Towns, Edolphus
Udall, Tom
Van Hollen, Chris
Waters, Maxine
Watson, Diane E.
Weiner, Anthony D.
Wexler, Robert

Woolsey, Lynn C.

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

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.

The Wrong Road

The Wrong Road outlines Colombian President Alvaro Uribe's controversial security policies. These include permitting police and army to search homes and offices, tap phones and detain people without warrants, suspending basic civil liberties in war zones, and employing armed civilians as soldiers and informants.

Read our publication The Wrong Road (PDF)

:Nongovernmental Letters on Human Rights and U.S. Aid to Colombia

LAWG and 40 Other NGOs Urge Congress to Make Substantive Changes in U.S. Policy towards Colombia

Dear Member of Congress,

As you act upon the President’s foreign aid request, we ask you to consider carefully the direction of Colombia policy. It is not the time to turn away, as Colombia is in the midst of a tremendous social, political and economic crisis. But three years after initial passage of Plan Colombia, it is time to assess the impact of US aid, and understand that significant changes are essential.

We ask the Congress to:

Insist that the Colombian government end collusion between the Colombian armed forces and paramilitary forces responsible for severe human rights violations. Army tolerance for and involvement in paramilitary violations continues—and so does impunity for such crimes, as detailed by the United Nations’ and State Department’s March 2003 human rights reports. According to the State Department, "some members of the security forces actively collaborated with members of paramilitary groups—passing them through roadblocks, sharing intelligence, providing them with ammunition, and allegedly even joining their ranks while off duty." Remarkably little progress has been made since the passage of the first substantial aid package in 2000 to investigate, prosecute and sanction high-level military officials who face credible allegations of collusion with and tolerance of paramilitary forces. Indeed, the current Attorney General has removed diligent prosecutors and investigators from cases involving high-level army officials implicated in corruption and abuse. Moreover, the United Nations’ March 2003 report states that direct violations by the Colombian armed forces increased in 2002.

In an implicit recognition that Colombia was not meeting the human rights conditions Congress established, the FY2003 omnibus appropriations bill removed the conditions from 75% of military aid. This sent a disturbing message: if you perform poorly, we will lower our standards on human rights.
Shift attention to the social side of the equation. As alternative development efforts barely begin to take root and the humanitarian crisis of Colombia’s internally displaced escalates, the administration proposes a decrease in the already inadequate social aid to Colombia (according to the International Affairs budget request summary for FY04, from $164 million requested for FY2003 to $150 million requested for FY2004).* The Congress should:
- Increase alternative development and phase out aerial fumigation. While the welcome drop in coca cultivation in Colombia was cited as an example of success of the aerial spraying program, 44% of the drop in the Putumayo region, the main focus of eradication efforts, was attributed by USAID statistics to manual eradication with alternative development. Many farmers who were fumigated and not provided aid of any kind—either emergency food aid or crop substitution programs—moved to neighboring provinces to grow illicit crops once more. Yet aerial fumigation far outpaces alternative development: the United States sprayed over 122,000 hectares in 2002 alone while promoting alternative development on 24,550 hectares from 2001 to the present. Manual eradication accompanied by alternative development is a more humane and effective response.
- Increase aid to the displaced and insist on better protection and assistance to the displaced by the Colombian government. The number of people displaced by political violence increased dramatically to 412,000 displaced during 2002, with Afro-Colombian and indigenous populations strongly affected, according to the respected Colombian nongovernmental agency CODHES. The Colombian government’s “early warning system” which, with US funding, is supposed to protect communities and prevent displacement, has functioned poorly as a protection mechanism. Although the system issues numerous alerts, it rarely results in effective intervention to protect endangered communities. The Colombian government by law is supposed to provide three months of assistance, which is inadequate for families to rebuild their lives. However, many do not receive even this limited aid. Moreover, the Uribe administration has embarked upon a policy of returning people to their land regardless of risky security conditions. The US government should insist that the Colombian government increase the length and quantity of humanitarian aid to the displaced, adhere to a policy of voluntary returns in consultation with communities, and improve its response to alerts from at-risk communities. In addition, the United States should increase its aid programs for displaced people.
Insist that security measures do not undermine the democracy they seek to protect. The Uribe administration, in its efforts to strengthen security, has introduced measures that reduce democratic rights and constitutional guarantees. These included emergency measures that permitted arrests, searches, and wiretaps without warrants. These expanded powers have already been used in questionable ways to carry out arbitrary detentions and to search the offices of nongovernmental organizations engaged in legitimate civic activity. When these measures were struck down by Colombia’s constitutional court, the Uribe administration introduced a package of constitutional reforms into the Colombian legislature which would grant the military the same powers. The US government should insist that measures to increase security do not undermine basic democratic rights and guarantees.
Call upon the Colombian government to increase efforts to protect threatened labor leaders, religious leaders and human rights defenders. Colombia continues to lead the world in assassinations of labor leaders, while human rights defenders, religious leaders and other civil society leaders are threatened and killed with frightening regularity by paramilitaries and guerrillas. The US government should press the Colombian government for progress in investigating and prosecuting those responsible for such threats and attacks. The US government should continue to fund the Colombian government’s program to protect at-risk labor and human rights leaders, but must insist upon improvements in this program, which has been hampered by bureaucratic delays. Moreover, the US government should insist that the Colombian government take actions to sanction civilian and military officials who endanger civil society leaders by publicly equating nongovernmental organizations with guerrilla forces–as high-level officials have done recently.
Step back from escalating military involvement. US military aid to Colombia has spiraled from $100 million in 1998 to $600 million this year. More US troops are on Colombian soil than ever before (almost 400). Last year, Congress expanded the military-aid mission beyond the drug war, to something resembling Central-America-style counterinsurgency. Yet after $2.5 billion since 2000—80 percent of it for Colombia’s military and police—there has been no change in the availability of drugs in the United States. Colombia’s violence has only intensified, including in Putumayo and Arauca, the areas of greatest US and Colombian security focus. Despite repeated requests from Congress, the administration has been unable to articulate a coherent vision of its goals for Colombia or how it plans to use US resources to achieve them. Before getting more deeply involved without sufficient debate, we urge the Congress to consider the complexity, danger and dimension of Colombia’s conflict. Faced with what could become an enormous, open-ended commitment, Congress should question whether an overwhelmingly military strategy can ever succeed. It is time to shift resources from security assistance toward eliminating the causes of violence by fostering rural development, economic opportunity, and civilian, democratic governance.
Adequately fund effective drug treatment and prevention programs in the United States. US eradication efforts chase drug production from one province of Colombia to another, from one Andean country to the next. Making substance-abuse treatment available for all who seek it will help address the problem of drugs at home and lessen the profits that fuel violence in Colombia.

We urge you to consider taking these important steps to ensure US policy towards Colombia actually accomplishes its stated goals, including combating the problem of drugs and strengthening human rights, the justice system, and democratic institutions in Colombia.

Sincerely,

Kathryn Wolford
President
Lutheran World Relief

Rev. Elenora Giddings Ivory
Director, Washington Office

Presbyterian Church (USA)

Patricia Forner
Advisor, Public Policy and Advocacy for Latin America and the Caribbean
World Vision

Kenneth Hackett
Executive Director
Catholic Relief Services

C. Richard Parkins
Director
Episcopal Migration Ministries

Adam Isacson
Director of Programs
Center for International Policy

Bill Spencer
Executive Director
Washington Office on Latin America

Charles Currie, S.J.
President
Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities

Rev. Ruth Chavez Wallace
Acting Executive & Program Associate for Latin America and the Caribbean
United Church of Christ and Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in the United States and Canada

Rev. Ron Stief
Minister and Team Leader
Washington DC Office
United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

Brenda Girton-Mitchell
Associate General Secretary for Public Policy
National Council of Churches

Neil Jeffrey
Executive Director
US Office on Colombia

Daniel Kovalik
Assistant General Counsel
United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO/CLC

Ed Clark
Executive Vice President
UNITE

Stan DeBoe, O.S.S.T.
Director of Justice & Peace
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

Matthew Wade S.M.
Associate Director
Conference of Major Superiors of Men

Natalia Cardona
Latin America Caribbean Program
American Friends Service Committee

Saul Murcia
Co-Director, Latin America and Caribbean Program
Mennonite Central Committee

Margaret Swedish
Director
Religious Task Force on Central America & Mexico

Stephen Coats
Executive Director
US/Labor Education in the Americas Project

Todd Howland
Director
Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights

Phil Anderson
Director
Guatemala Human Rights Commission-USA

Rev. Jerrye G. Champion
National Board President
Church Women United

Brian R. Hinman
Washington Representative
Church World Service

Marie Dennis
Director
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns

Ellen L. Lutz
Executive Director
Center for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
Tufts University

Joe Volk
Executive Secretary
Friends Committee on National Legislation

Patricia Krommer C.S.J. and Rev. Chris Ponnet
Co-Directors
Pax Christi USA, Los Angeles Chapter

Laura M. Furst
National Organizer
Committee for Inter-American Human Rights

Wes Callender
Director
Voices on the Border

Terry Collingsworth
Executive Director
International Labor Rights Fund

Melinda St. Louis
Advocacy and Campaigns Coordinator
Witness for Peace

School of the Americas Watch

Cristina Espinel and Barbara Gerlach
Co-Chairs
Colombia Human Rights Committee

Kevin Martin
Executive Director
Peace Action

Sanho Tree
Director
Drug Policy Project
Institute for Policy Studies

Rev. James E. Atwood
L. William Yolton
Presbyterian Peace Fellowship

Roberto Pagán
President
Sindicato Puertorriqueño de Trabajadores/SEIU

John Lindsay-Poland
Coordinator
Task Force on Latin America and the Caribbean
Fellowship of Reconciliation

*Note: There is a lack of clarity regarding actual numbers of social aid for Colombia. Almost all social aid for Colombia comes from the Andean Counternarcotics Initiative, under INL, listed as "alternative development/institution building" in the International Affairs budget request summary for FY2004. That document lists a decline from $164 million requested for FY2003 to $150 million requested for FY2004 (p. 68). AID's Colombia request remains nearly constant, from $151 million in FY2003 to $150 million in FY2004. However, since other agencies besides AID draw from the ACI "alternative development/ institution building" account, a decline in that account suggests that the AID request is unlikely to be fully funded. In FY03, for example, ACI funded AID, PRM (which includes important emergency assistance to displaced persons and refugees that supplements AID's longer-term aid to the displaced), DoJ, and INL programs considered "soft aid." It appears that AID Colombia programs were funded at approximately $117 million for FY03. Thus a decline in the ACI "alternative development/institution building" account could lead to less assistance for alternative development, aid to the displaced and other social aid.

The Numbers Game: Coca Cultivation in Colombia

The State Department released findings February 28th showing that the cultivation of coca in Colombia decreased in 2002 from 169,800 hectares to 144,450, for a 15% decline after steadily rising rates for several years (including a 25% increase from 2000-2001). While a decline is positive, these figures are somewhat misleading. They mask shifts in production within Colombia and among Andean nations, do not take into account the humanitarian costs of the controversial aerial fumigation policy, and do not answer the question of long-term sustainability. Moreover, they mean relatively little next to one unbudging statistic: the availability of cocaine in the United States has remained stable despite billions of dollars appropriated for supply-side eradication.

In an important note, the most sustainable successes in eradication may be stemming from manual eradication with development aid. In Putumayo province, the center of the aerial fumigation program and the province with greatest reduction in coca, nearly one-half of the drop in coca production in 2002 was actually accomplished by manual eradication with alternative development. Coca was reduced from 47,170 to 13,725 hectares in 2002, and 14,296 hectares have been eradicated manually with US aid, and 11,520 hectares planted with legal crops (Office of the Governor of Putumayo, “For a Legal Putumayo with Social Justice and Zero Coca,” national coca crop census (SIMSI) figures). The farmers who manually eradicate and receive alternative development aid are obviously less likely to move to other areas to replant. The local government of Putumayo continues to press for community-based manual eradication with alternative development as the most sustainable and effective, as well as most humane, method of eradication.

This should be considered as the Congress reviews the 04 budget request for Colombia. In the request, social aid to Colombia, which includes alternative development assistance, has been cut from $164 million in 2003 to $150 million in 2004.

Problems with the coca cultivation figures:

The policy impact must be measured regionally or globally, not country by country. The State Department=s figures show coca cultivation moving back into Peru and Bolivia, to the tune of some 2,000-3,000 hectares apiece—indicating an 8% drop in coca production regionally, not 15% as in Colombia.
The policy impact must be measured over a longer time period. Coca cultivation in the Andes fluctuates from year to year, but has hovered around 200,000 hectares since 1988, according to the State Department figures. Since 1996, when large-scale US-supported fumigation began in Colombia, only four departments had more than 1,000 hectares of coca. Today, at least thirteen have that much coca—despite one million acres being sprayed since.
Availability of cocaine in the United States, the rationale for the policy, remained steady. According to the Office of National Drug Policy’s “Pulse Check: Trends in Drug Abuse,” November 2002, the availability of crack cocaine and powder cocaine “remained stable” from fall 2001 – spring 2002, the latest period covered by Pulse Check.
Moreover, while cocaine and crack use may be leveling off after a period of expansion, use of methamphetamine, a synthetic drug manufactured in the United States and Mexico, is increasing, according to Pulse Check (November 2002). Methamphetamine, which competes for the same users as cocaine, is especially problematic in western states and is on the increase in rural areas.
The figures may not measure the replanting of coca in all areas outside of the target areas that were fumigated. According to the GAO, they are a representative sample of the target country’s known or suspected drug-growing areas (“Drug Control: Coca Cultivation and Eradication Estimates in Colombia,” January 8, 2003). Historically, coca has been moved from one area of Colombia to another as eradication efforts forced farmers to pull up stakes. UN Drug Control Programme director for Colombia, Klaus Nyholm, notes that coca-growing is rising in regions bordering Putumayo province (Ibon Villelabeita, “Colombia’s New Coca Assault Hits Crops, Peasants,” Reuters, 2/26/03). Moreover, the satellite pictures upon which the estimate is based were taken directly after the largest spraying campaign ever seen in Colombia, before there was time for replanting. Cultivation may unfortunately bounce back somewhat in a short period.
Measuring success in terms of hectares planted/eradicated does not take into account the increase in coca yield per hectare as higher-yield coca varieties are employed.Social, political & environmental costs:One of the factors behind the movement of coca is the lack of alternatives for coca farmers. US and Colombian-government sponsored alternative development programs lag far behind the spraying program; only a fraction of the areas sprayed are offered alternative development programs. Without alternatives, farmers replant, suffer hunger or pack up and leave, often to replant illicit crops elsewhere. Marc Grossman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, referred in a March 5, 2003 speech in Bogota to 12,000 hectares of licit crops supported by USAID (not clear over what time period). The hectares sprayed in 2002 alone total 122,695, or ten times the figure given for USAID-supported alternative development projects.

Social, political & environmental costs:

One of the factors behind the movement of coca is the lack of alternatives for coca farmers. US and Colombian-government sponsored alternative development programs lag far behind the spraying program; only a fraction of the areas sprayed are offered alternative development programs. Without alternatives, farmers replant, suffer hunger or pack up and leave, often to replant illicit crops elsewhere. Marc Grossman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, referred in a March 5, 2003 speech in Bogota to 12,000 hectares of licit crops supported by USAID (not clear over what time period). The hectares sprayed in 2002 alone total 122,695, or ten times the figure given for USAID-supported alternative development projects.

Many of the areas targeted are farmed not mainly by traffickers, but by family farmers and indigenous communities. They have turned to this illicit living largely out of desperation. They are often migrants from other areas who moved due to economic hardship or political violence. The one source offering them rural credit, unfortunately, are the traffickers.
Among the indicators of the social impact of fumigation is the dropout rate for children in Putumayo province (site of the most intensive spraying), which according to local officials, rose 40% since 2001 as parents could not afford to send their children to school or pulled their children out of school to follow them and grow coca elsewhere. Ibon Villelabeita, “Colombia’s New Coca Assault Hits Crops, Peasants,” Reuters, 2/26/03.
Aerial fumigation with a broad-spectrum herbicide affects all plants, not just coca and poppy. Therefore, it kills the food crops that farmers intersperse with illicit crops. Most people in areas sprayed not only do not receive long-term development assistance, they also do not receive short-term food aid.
Aerial fumigation campaigns have affected farmers who plant only food crops, including a number of alternative development projects, according to the Colombian government’s ombudsman’s office. While there is supposed to be compensation for farmers whose solely legal crops are destroyed, this mechanism does not exist in practice.
Fumigation adds to the problem of displacement. According to the Washington Post, some 9,000 people fled Putumayo between January and November 2002 due to fumigation and a lack of alternative sources of income (Scott Wilson, “Colombia’s Air Assault on Coca Leaves Crop, Farmers in Its Dust,” Washington Post, 11/13/02). In a country where 350,000 people were displaced in 2002 primarily due to political violence, a policy intentionally increases displacement should be controversial.
While the State Department for years brushed aside complaints of impact to human health, the EPA found in September 2002 that the spray mixture being used could cause eye damage, a finding that found echo in the numbers of complaints of eye irritation that had been lodged with local Colombian government personnel. The spray mixture was changed to address this, but there are still many unknowns.
As to environmental impact, according to Anna Cederstav, staff scientist with Earthjustice, “The widespread spraying and drift of a potent herbicide that kills most plants is devastating thousands of acres of important habitat in Colombia. The potential impacts to native flora and wildlife are unknown because the herbicide hasn’t been studied in these tropical ecosystems. Further, most coca and poppy farmers just replant or clear new plots in the forest. Because the State Department only reports on current crop acreage, there is no way to assess how the eradication program is accelerating the loss of Amazonian forests.” (“Coca Cultivation in Colombia: The Story Behind the Numbers,” press statement, 2/27/03)
Eradication without alternatives is pushing farmers into the ranks of the armed groups, which feed on the desperation of rural communities by actively recruiting and offering food and a salary. This development runs counter to the goals of the policy, which included a strengthening of the state in rural areas. To consolidate support in the countryside, the Colombian government needs to make progress in delivering the most basic social services—health, education, roads, agricultural extension services—to extend a positive government presence in marginal areas.

The eradication program in Colombia has two major goals: reducing the flow of cocaine and heroin to the United States, and helping the Colombian government reestablish control over the countryside. Yet despite the 2002 drop in coca production, to date the aerial fumigation policy does not appear to have made much progress towards those two major goals. On the first, cocaine use remains stable, while use of a similar drug, methamphetamine, appears to be on the increase. On the second goal, the policy will cut into the armed groups’ profits on the drug trade, but so far this does not appear to have a substantial impact. Moreover, fumigation without sufficient alternatives undercuts the Colombian government’s legitimacy in the countryside and is likely adding to the armed groups’ supply of recruits.

While the larger aim of limiting drug abuse is laudable, the tactics must be examined. This controversial and costly policy—Colombia is the only country in the world where large-scale aerial fumigation is applied—merits scrutiny. Is this the most effective policy with the least negative side effects? Could another eradication strategy, with greater attention to a sustainable demand reduction strategy through treatment and prevention, be more effective with less damage to people and the environment?

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.

Blunt Instrument

Blunt Instrument: The United States’ Punitive Fumigation Program in Colombia explores the controversial aerial spraying program to destroy drug crops. Using the lens of congressional legislation intended to ensure that the program did not unduly harm small farm families, the study finds that the US and Colombian governments have failed to compensate farmers whose food crops are mistakenly destroyed by fumigation.

Read our publication Blunt Instrument (PDF)

:Congressional Letters, Statements, and Resolutions

Rep. Schakowsky Sponsors Letter on Human Rights to Secretary Powell

Secretary of State Colin Powell
The US State Department
2201 C Street
Washington, DC

Dear Secretary of State Powell,

We are writing to express our concern over the State Department’s decision to certify Colombia’s compliance with section 567 of the FY2002 foreign operations appropriations bill. We are not convinced that the evidence supports the contention that the Colombian military is suspending personnel credibly alleged to have committed serious human rights violations, cooperating with civilian judicial authorities, and taking effective measures to sever links with paramilitary groups. As you consider your decision on the second round of military aid, which we understand may be made in September, please take the following comments into consideration. The Congress included conditions in the FY2002 foreign operations legislation to ensure that the Colombian Armed Forces, which receive the bulk of the funds destined to Colombia through the Andean Regional Initiative, are respecting human rights.

We appreciate the State Department’s efforts to make clear to the Colombian government the importance of improving the human rights situation and meeting the specific requirements of section 567. We are dismayed, however, by the lack of response from the Colombian government. In particular, we are unconvinced that the short list of primarily lower-level soldiers and officers who have been suspended for human rights violations from January 2001 to April 2002 constitutes progress, given the substantial evidence against a number of high-level officers who remain on active duty despite credible evidence that they have tolerated, aided or abetted paramilitary forces. In addition, there is disturbing evidence that the Colombian attorney general lacks the political will to investigate and prosecute army officers implicated in grave violations.

The State Department’s report on the certification decision cited the appointment of General Rodrigo Quiñones to a military attaché position as evidence of progress. But, despite an outstanding decision by the Procuradería concluding that General Quiñones had planned and ordered the murders of at least 57 trade unions, human rights, and community leaders in the Barrancabermeja area in 1991-92, this officer remains on active duty. In 2000, troops under his command were implicated in helping paramilitaries to carry out the El Salado massacre. A year later, those same troops, with Quiñones as commander, allegedly allowed heavily armed paramilitaries to travel past them to Chengue, where paramilitaries committed a massacre. A Navy sergeant under Quiñones’ command was subsequently charged with supplying weapons to paramilitaries and helping coordinate the attack in Chengue. Quiñones was charged with ignoring detailed information received in advance about paramilitary movements near Chengue. The failure to investigate, prosecute, and punish high-level officers like Quiñones, General Gabriel Diaz, and others who are strongly implicated in aiding and abetting paramilitary forces has a profound impact on the attitudes of other members of Colombia’s military.

Events surrounding the Chengue massacre case also demonstrate the Colombian military’s continued resistance to cooperate fully with civilian justice officials. Prosecutor Yolanda Paternina Negrete, who led the Chengue investigation, told her superiors that officers in Colombia’s Marine Infantry failed repeatedly to provide her with the support necessary to search a ranch where witnesses claimed the paramilitaries responsible for the massacre were located. On May 27, 2001, two investigators working on the case were detained by known paramilitaries and are now presumed dead. On August 29, 2001, Prosecutor Paternina herself was killed by unidentified gunmen in Sincelejo, Sucre. The office in Colombia of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights called these killings “a systematic campaign of retaliation and intimidation” by those seeking “total impunity for the most serious crimes committed in the country.”

We are also disturbed by the characterization of army actions in Barrancabermeja as an example of progress in breaking army-paramilitary ties. Despite the high concentration of security forces in Barrancabermeja, the city remains under virtual paramilitary control. Paramilitaries move freely through the city, issue rules of conduct, and exert control over the civilian population, who live in an atmosphere of terror.

We would like to see further evidence of what happens after paramilitary troops are captured. We understand that the numbers of paramilitary captures reported by the Colombian Ministry of Defense has increased. It is important to analyze whether those captured are prosecuted and punished, or released; as well as whether some high-ranking officials are among those captured and prosecuted.

We believe that the Colombian government’s failure to act effectively to sever army-paramilitary ties, despite pressure from the U.S. State Department and the requirements of section 567, bodes ill for the future of U.S.-Colombian military cooperation and for the protection of human rights in Colombia. Moreover, we have been assured that U.S. assistance and training would promote the professionalism of the Colombian military and improve the human rights record of the Colombian military. To date, we believe there has been little progress. Again, we urge you to take our concerns into account when determining whether to approve additional military aid for Colombia this year.

Sincerely,

Jan Schakowsky
Sherrod Brown
Barbara Lee
James McGovern
Lane Evans
Joe Wilson
George Miller
Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Marcy Kaptur
Stephen Lynch
Maurice Hinchey
Lloyd Doggett
William O. Lipinski
James Leach
Rosa DeLauro
Zoe Lofgren
Bobby Rush
Tom Lantos
Lynn Woolsey
Maxine Waters
Tom Sawyer
Jose Serrano
William Coyne
Bernard Sanders
Ciro Rodriguez
Sam Farr
Donald Payne
James Oberstar
Rod Blagojevich
Michael Doyle
Nita Lowey
John Conyers
Cynthia McKinney
Jerry Kleczka
Dennis Kucinich
Elijah Cummings
Patsy Mink
Robert Borski
Tammy Baldwin
David Wu
William Lacy Clay
Ed Markey
Howard Berman
Nick Rahall

Danny Davis

Ten Questions U.S. Policymakers Should Be Asking on Aid to Colombia

The $1.3 billion aid package passed last year, marking a dramatic escalation of US involvement in Colombia, carries with it many risks and involves many unanswered questions. In the months leading up to its passage, the Clinton Administration and congressional backers painted an optimistic picture of the package's potential to help Colombia deal with its complex problems, while critics warned of dire consequences.

Now that the package is a reality, it would be wise to take a more careful look at the risks and uncertainties posed by this policy before appropriating more funding. Frequently, the questions asked about Colombia counternarcotics policy are limited in scope-is the right equipment being delivered on time? How many hectares of coca are being eradicated?

Here are ten unanswered questions policymakers should be asking.