The Failure of Plan Colombia
Last fall, Adam Isaacson wondered what we're actually getting for the $4.7 billion dollars we've spent over the past six years fighting drug wars in Colombia. Not a whole lot, it seems.
Advertisement
Advertisement
As a policy to curtail the drug supply, "Plan Colombia" has been a total failure. Cocaine and heroin are as cheap and pure as ever in the United States, and coca production in Colombia has been holding steady over the past two years, despite the fact that the government has been dumping herbicides anywhere it can reach. Coca growers, who depend on the crop for their livelihood, have become more innovative in response to the aerial sprayingcultivating smaller, harder-to-detect plots; developing new strains that grow more quickly; and planting in the shade.
And so long as the growers have no other optionsalternative development programs are under-funded and reach only a small fraction of rural Colombiansthey'll keep on innovating. Not to mention the fact that all that constant spraying makes growers more sympathetic to guerilla groups. Seeing as how the United States is currently in the middle of following a similar strategy to fight opium production in Afghanistan, these seem like lessons worth learning. Doubtful it will happen, though.
Now in 2002, the Bush administration expanded military aid to the Bogota government to help it fight FARC, one of the two leftist insurgency groups. Colombia has seen a few crucial security improvements over the past few yearsunder President Uribe, kidnappings have dropped by 57 percent, massacres by 71 percent, and murders by 31 percent (at least according to "official" figures). On the other hand, this can't count as an American success; most U.S. military and police aid simply doesn't go towards protecting civilians, so it's hard to credit "Plan Colombia" here. (Isaacson instead credits President Uribe's decisions both to redeploy troops in population centers and to induce the right-leaning paramilitaries to agree to a ceasefire.) And then there's the downside to all that military aid:
Since Plan Colombia's inception, Colombia's attorney general has demonstrated markedly less will to prosecute cases of human rights abuse by the military. The State Department's last human rights certification memo named only thirty-one military personnel currently under indictment for human rights abuses or support of paramilitaries. This impunity undercuts much of the well-publicized improvements that the Colombian armed forces have made to their human rights training. If a soldier knows he stands almost no chance of punishment for committing an abuse, will the mere knowledge that the crime is wrong consistently prevent him from committing it.
Some numbers suggest that the Colombian government really is acting with more impunity. The share of abuses committed by the Colombian security forces rose from 5 percent in the late 1990s to 7.8 percent in 2003. Killings and disappearances of human rights activists rose from 29 in 2001 and 2002 to 33 in 2003. 340 people were tortured in 2002-03, up from 242 in the previous twelve months.
Nor has Plan Colombia improved the prospects for peace talks; indeed, there's some evidence that the specter of U.S. military aid may have helped scuttle the moderately promising negotiations in 2000 between the government and FARC and ELN by fostering mistrust among the guerrilla groups. And the counterinsurgency campaign isn't proving very effective either: in part because over 80 percent of the U.S. aid is of a military nature, the Colombian government has had the same trouble that coalition forces have had in Iraqthey can seize rebel-held territories, but they can't hold them once they withdraw. Not only that, but should the conflict in Colombia start escalating rapidly, the U.S. could find itself committing more and more resources to a major war in its backyard. Already some American policymakers have been linking FARC to Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, which should make for fun times.
Here's one comprehensive suggestion for a change in strategy in Colombia, which would involve: Less military aid; more support for institutions that bolster human rights. An end to crop spraying; more support for alternative development strategies in neglected rural areas. At home, drug treatment programs would be a much cheaper and actually effective means of reducing the demand for drugs; but this fraction of the $12 billion that the federal government spends each year on the "war on drugs" hasn't changed for a long while. Budget cuts this year focused on hacking up health care for the poor rather than taking even the slightest look at a billion dollar foreign policy adventure that doesn't seem to be achieving much of anything.
Comments
There are plenty of reasons to continue the War on [Some] Drugs; somehow, measurable reduction in drug abuse (a term often conflated with drug use) isn't on the list.
Conversely, inverse availability to minors relative to adults?and community-rending enforcement of drug laws against minorities and the poor?is key. Why?
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and those who frequent DrugWarRant?along with some of the brightest, most politically sober minds in the world?seem to have it figured out.
There are plenty of reasons to continue the War on [Some] Drugs; somehow, measurable reduction in drug abuse (a term often conflated with drug use) isn't on the list.
Conversely, inverse availability to minors relative to adults?and community-rending enforcement of drug laws against minorities and the poor?is key. Why?
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and those who frequent DrugWarRant?along with some of the brightest, most politically sober minds in the world?seem to have it figured out.
Gee, what prey tell do we get for our money?
It's easy to find out...just do what I did, google Colombia & miltary bases, and you come up with nuggets such as " In the past three years, a string of small military bases of some 100 troops each have been established on the Peruvian side of the river to cut off FARC escape into Peru as counterinsurgency zones are established on the Colombian side."
Of course, this is a resource-rich area that's primarily inhabited by indigenous tribes, and we legally have no right to be there...but I suppose 4.7 bil over 6 years makes a lot of those issues go away, doesn't it?
As Mr. Spock of Star Trek fame once said, "Even in this corner of the galaxy, 2 + 2 still equals 4".
There are plenty of reasons to continue the War on [Some] Drugs; somehow, measurable reduction in drug abuse (a term often conflated with drug use) isn't on the list.
Conversely, inverse availability to minors relative to adultsand community-rending enforcement of drug laws against minorities and the pooris key. Why?
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, and those who frequent DrugWarRantalong with some of the brightest, most politically sober minds in the worldseem to have it figured out.
دردشة
دردشة شامية كتابية
دردشة سعودية
دردشة عربية
دردشة كويتية
دردشة بحرينية
دردشة عراقية
دردشة يمنية
دردشة قطرية
دردشة اماراتية
دردشة مغربية
دردشة لبنانية
دردشة جزائرية
دردشة سورية
دردشة فلسطينية
دردشة مصرية
دردشة سودانية
دردشة صوتية يمنية
دردشة صوتية عمانية
دردشة صوتية اماراتية
دردشة صوتية قطرية
دردشة صوتية بحرينية
دردشة صوتية كويتية
دردشة صوتية سعودية
دردشة صوتية خليجية
دردشة صوتية سودانية
دردشة صوتية مصرية
دردشة صوتية فلسطينية
دردشة صوتية سورية
دردشة صوتية لبنانية
دردشة صوتية اردنية
دردشة صوتية شامية
دردشة صوتية عربية
دليل دردشة
دردشة الخليج شات روعة الكون
دردشة روعة الكون
روعة الكون
روعة
شات
دردشة
منتديات روعة الكون
شات الخليج
منتديات
دردشة
دردشة
دردشة
شات الخليج شات الخليج
دردشة
شات دردشة
شات ميرنا
دردشة ميرنا
شات خليجي
دردشة الخليج استضافه
استضافة دردشة كتابية
شات كتابي شات كتابي
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.



