Plan Colombia and its offspring

Narconews' favorite NYTimes reporter, Juan Forero, is up to his usual antics as Washington sets the spin machine on high to promote the increase in aid to Colombia.

Some highlights of the report;
Repeated citation of Colombian guerrillas for the trafficking of cocaine, with no mention of paramilitary drug connections.

Unchallenged claims of incredible success of fumigation with no discussion of harmful effects, going so far as to say they "eliminated" the "industrial" plantations of coca to focus on the smaller plantations. Here's some interesting logic. On my visits to Putumayo I never saw the industrial plantations the embassy described, only the small family plots struck with fumigant. Now they're claiming that since there's no evidence of these large industrial plantations, that they've eliminated them all and now can focus on the family plots.

No mention of the health and environmental effects of fumigating 300,000 acres of rainforest and jungle in one year.
There is some talk of terrorism, but not a single mention of the word "paramilitary" in the entire piece. The piece seems to suggest that more military aid would help the situation.

There can be no doubt we will see numerous additional puff pieces on US aid to Colombia in the coming days.

See for yourselves:
http://nytimes.com/2004/03/23/politics/23DRUG.html

Colombian president Álvaro Uribe is pumping hands in Washington, seeking support for an extension of the disastrous Plan Colombia. He's getting support from both sides of the aisle, as both Democrats and Republicans are falling over themselves to appear tough on drugs and terrorism, a no-brainer, right?

Agence France Presse provides some insight into the position of leading democrats and republicans on the issue of increasing and extending US Military aid to Colombia in the following article:
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/040325/1/3j0sl.html
El Espectador is also detailing the progress of lobbying for the increase,
http://www.elespectador.com/internacional/nota1.ht m

The bill is apparently in the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the reports are showing that it's a feel good session where all parties agree that Plan Colombia needs to continue. There seems to be no discussion in the hallowed halls of the capitol of the risks of continuing and increasing US military aid to Colombia's military. It seems that the vote will happen after the election and Bill Delahunt, according to the AFP, is waiting to pass judgement until after the election, although it seems unlikely that "Bush-Lite" would have a different position on Colombia than the current administration. It seems to be beyond the cognitive capacity of decision-makers in Washinton that getting more deeply embroiled in Colombia's 40-year civil war could have negative results. The fact is that continued and increased US involvement can only result in US casualties and exponentially more Colombian casualties. As in the 1980's, US policy is driven by a need to appear "tough" on the enemy of the moment. As the US entangled itself in Central America, supporting the side of the wealthy and the violent, the United States seems bent on exacerbating the conflict, all to support short term corporate interests.

Floro Tunubala, the first indigenous leader ever to hold a post of Governor in Colombia, will be speaking in the U.S. next month. Noam Chomsky has spoken to this former governor (whose term ended in December 2003) on a visit to Cauca.

This event is scheduled (in spanish) for April 14th at the University of San Francisco, should any of our multi-lingual writers have an opportunity to report to our Narcosphere.