U.S. House Hearings on Plan Colombia

By Aaron Mannes

This afternoon the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere will hold hearings on “U.S. Colombia Relations.” For some time Plan Colombia, the multi-billion dollar U.S. aid package to Colombia to aid its fight against narco-terrorists, was seen as a relative success. There is little question that public safety in much of Colombia (particularly the cities) has improved substantially. However, there is a growing scandal alleging ties between the para-militaries and government security forces. The scandal is beginning to reach all the way up to President Alvaro Uribe (particularly from his time as a provincial governor) and dent his previously high popularity. Several of his close allies have been implicated. Army chief of staff, Mario Montoya has also been accused of collaborating with the paramilitaries – who have, unquestionably – been responsible for massive atrocities.

Colombia’s scandal is also reaching Washington. Al Gore snubbed Colombia’s President Uribe by dropping out of an environmental conference in Miami because Uribe was also attending. More substantially, Sen. Pat Leahy has put a hold on $55 million in military aid to Colombia (after dissenting with a State Department decision to certify that Colombia’s human rights record is improving.)

For in-depth, responsible criticism of Plan Colombia see the Center for International Policy’s Colombia Program blog. For a more positive take on Plan Colombia see this op-ed by former asst. Secretary of State for international narcotics and law enforcement Robert Charles.

Much of the discussion in Washington has been about the paramilitary scandal. The paramilitaries (who are officially disbanded under a demobilization scheme – but continue to deal in drugs and violence in some parts of the country) are unquestionably loathsome. But this discussion ignores the primary threat to the Colombian state, the FARC. The FARC has been relatively inactive over the last few years. Under Uribe, the Colombian government began a massive campaign against the FARC and uprooted it out of a sanctuary (the size of Switzerland) it had been granted under a peace process. The FARC, in accord with its Maoist doctrine, did not confront state power directly. Instead, they went to ground in the vast parts of Colombia that are not under state control. While their power has been reduced they remain a formidable and well-funded organization. According to this analysis the recent car-bombing of a Cali police station is one of many ominous sign that the FARC is preparing to renew hostilities – possibly to disrupt the October 2007 local elections.

The FARC could face a favorable international situation in re-launching hostilities. The leftist governments in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia have a certain sympathy for the FARC. It should be emphasized that this sympathy does not necessarily translate into direct support. But these leftist populist regimes are unlikely to consider border security a priority (and even less so if the U.S. insists on it) thus allowing the FARC greater freedom of action. Strains in the US-Colombia relationship, as well as international focus on the Colombian government’s human rights failings will reduce support for the Colombian government’s efforts to counter a FARC offensive.

Colombia’s past needs to be addressed and Plan Colombia could definitely be improved. More focus on economic and social welfare along with improving the rule of law, while moving away from strictly counter-narcotics strategies (which have not significantly reduced the drug supply in the U.S.) might be considered.

While the United States should not be writing blank checks and or turning a blind eye to human rights violations – it is also essential to remain engaged and supportive of the Colombian government’s efforts to establish seguridad y democracia.

TrackBack