Fumigation-An Attack on the
Ecology and People of Colombia
|
A large constituent of the US borne Plan Colombia
is focused on the eradication of illegal coca crops by aerial
fumigation carried out by the recently bolstered Colombian National
Police (CNP), and the three newly created Counter-Narcotics
Battalions of the Colombian Army. US State Department spray
planes, protected by US Blackhawk ground attack helicopters,
fumigate large areas with poisonous chemicals that destroy the
coca as well as many other crops. However, the implementation
of this part of Plan Colombia has far-reaching consequences
that, so far, have received scandalously little attention. Cultivation
of Illicit Crops
One
of the claimed objectives of the more than one billion dollar
US aid package Plan Colombia, which makes the Andean nation
the third biggest recipient of US aid in the world, is to slash
Colombia’s coca production by 50% before 2005. Yet the
proposed method of aerial fumigation is not new to the jungles
of Colombia, which are home the second highest biodiversity
rate in the world after Brazil. During the `nineties huge areas
of coca plantations were fumigated with the same chemical –
Glyphosate – that is presently being used. Despite these
large-scale operations illegal cultivation tripled in the same
period, and it seems unlikely that the even larger fumigation
programmes of Plan Colombia will prove more effective. The glaring
problem with the whole policy is that very little attention
is given to the economic and social reasons that force Colombian
peasant farmers to grow illicit crops. The Colombian
peasants - known as campesinos
- that grow coca are not, in reality, the wealthy drug-traffickers
that they are sometimes portrayed to be, but rather poor families
desperately trying to provide for themselves. The prevalence
of neo-liberal economic policies over the last decade has greatly
increase the misery of campesinos
in Colombia and it is well documented that the total number
of people now living in poverty in Colombia, and indeed in Latin
America as a whole, has increased during the same period. These
new economic policies have led to the dwindling of traditional
crop prices such as those for coffee, cacao and cassava –
through price agreements, the decrease in trade restrictions,
the abolition of subsidies, and so on – to such an extent
that these crops, in many areas, cannot any longer provide even
basic levels of subsistence. Reports recently out of Peru indicate
that farmers in certain areas of the country receive $2.74 per
kg for coca, but only $1.05 for coffee, $0.11 for cassava and
$0.77 for cacao. The fate
of Colombian coffee producers indicates perfectly the effect
of neo-liberal economics on campesinos. After the International Coffee
Agreement was signed in 1989 (which cut prices by a quarter)
over 350,000 small coffee farmers, as well as a nearly two million
strong workforce, saw a dramatic decrease in their incomes.
As a direct result of this there was subsequently a 92% increase
in opium poppy production in the following 3 years in the worst
affected Colombian departments of Huila, Tolima and Cauca. And
things don’t seem to be improving. Only two weeks ago coffee
prices again fell to a record low. (It is interesting to note
that despite the huge decrease in coffee prices on the world
market, coffee prices in the cafes and supermarkets of the West
have, if anything increased. The savings are not in anyway being
passed on to the consumer as some would like us to believe and
are certainly not being used to benefit the coffee producing
communities of the developing nations).
Decades
of neglect by the governments of the Andean nations, particularly
with regard to infrastructure programmes and social services,
are also a reason for peasant cultivation of coca. The lack
of a developed transport network (roads, bridges, ports, airports,
etc) makes transferring produce very difficult and costly for
peasants. In this respect coca cultivation is obviously more
advantageous than legal crops – the buyers, who bring hard
cash with them, collect the coca leaves directly from the peasant
who in turn does not have to worry about transportation expenses.
The lack
of any kind of social services leaves campesinos
(the majority of whom live below or near the poverty line),
with little or no choice but to turn to coca – especially
when a legitimate income is effectively unavailable, there is
a lack of other employment opportunities or, as regularly happens,
legal crops fail due to climatic conditions, disease, etc. The
absence of an education system and social programmes (providing
loans, advice, local cooperatives, etc) also makes it very hard
for the peasants to drastically change their way of life, and
therefore most remain scratching out an existence in the guaranteed-to-be-commercially-viable
cultivation of coca. Furthermore,
the austerity measures implemented as part of the 1999 IMF-agreed
$2.7 billion dollar loan has only increased the isolation of
rural communities. As a result of the IMF conditions on the
new loan, government farming subsidies were cut back, education
spending was cut by $350 million dollars, and other federal
expenditures on rural departments and municipalities were trimmed.
This has only been detrimental to rural communities – where,
in areas of conflict, the state already fails to provide 2/3
of children with secondary education. This scenario is no doubt
set to worsen with the forth-coming US-imposed Free Trade Area
of the Americas (FTAA) agreement.
Effects
of Fumigation One of the
chemicals used to fumigate in Colombia is Fusarium EN-4, a descendent
of a defoliant used by the US in Vietnam that, even after 30
years, is still leaving babies severely deformed and handicapped.
There is a lack of information available publicly about the
semi-secret research project that the US conducts with EN-4
chemicals and little evidence is available to show exactly what
the effects of such chemicals are on human beings. However,
after a mysterious outbreak of an EN-4 based chemical in Peru
(of which the US government denied all knowledge) campesinos reported widespread sickness
among livestock. On top of this Colombian researchers have shown
that the mortality rate for humans subjected to EN-4 is 76%.
Also, far from attacking the coca plant specifically, and contrary
to reports put out by the White House-based Office of National
Drug Control Policy, there are over 200 other species of plants
whose genus are targeted by EN-4 and are therefore susceptible
to attack. The other
chemical currently being used in Colombia is Glyphosate, which
is promoted as a “mild” herbicide by its producer
Monsanto, but is classified as “extremely poisonous”
by the World Health Organization. In an irresponsible effort
to make Glyphosate more effective, the US have chosen to add
the chemical Cosmo-flux to the Glyphosate, which, according
to Dr Elsa Nivia, the regional director of Colombia’s Pesticide
Action Network, increases its biological activity permitting
improved results with smaller concentrations. Yet reports by
Accion Andina, indicate that the new Glyphosate-Cosmo
mix is being used in concentrations of five times the recommended
level of one litre per acre. The result is a highly concentrated
herbicide, which has increased cohesiveness and stickiness,
making the chemical much harder to breakdown or remove.
The effect
on the health of people living in fumigated areas has been devastating,
particularly among the young and elderly. In areas such as Putumayo
and Bolivar, departments of Colombia where there has already
been widespread fumigation, there have been mass reports of
ill health and sickness following the spray runs by US-piloted
State Department fumigation planes. After a recent visit to
some of the effected areas, the US-based NGO Witness for Peace
reported that peasants became extremely sick after spray planes
had passed overhead, with symptoms including vomiting, nausea,
headaches, diarrhoea, skin rashes and even hair-loss. Edgar
Perea, a doctor at the hospital in the Putumayo village of La
Hormiga, told the visitors, “I have treated people with
skin rashes, stomach aches and diarrhoea caused by the fumigation.
And I have treated five children affected by the fumigation
in the past 25 days.” A journalist investigating the fumigation-induced
illnesses reported that 80% of children fell ill after spraying
in some areas. This evidence
is contrary to the official view that Glyphosate is not harmful
to humans or the environment and its continued use is very worrying.
The long-term consequences of these chemicals on human health
are unknown, and there is fear of sterility of the population
and deformity of children conceived in polluted areas. The effect
on livestock is also severe: pigs and chickens have died in
large numbers and cattle have suffered from hair-loss and, on
occasion, are found dead after contact with contaminated grass
or water. Fish are more vulnerable and there are reports of
the complete extinction of local fish stocks when water is polluted
as a consequence of fumigation. As a direct result of this,
food and economic resources are lost, further isolating and
impoverishing families and rural communities, thus increasing
their reliance on coca. As the governor of Putumayo department,
who recently went to the US with three other governors of affected
departments to call for an end to fumigation, said, “This
is an attack on the people.”
Fumigation
of legal crops, an ever-increasing scenario, is also posing
huge problems to rural communities and, in some areas, is threatening
their very existence. Nearly 100,000 gallons of Glyphosate has
been sprayed over Putumayo alone in the ongoing eradication
program and spray planes regularly release their cargo from
over 100 feet despite Monsanto’s recommendations that it
should not be applied from anywhere above 10 feet. Discharging
the chemical from higher altitudes can lead to what Monsanto
describe as ‘drift’, which in turn contaminates water
and legal crops nearby thus destroying food supplies.
However,
there are also reports that legal crops and water sources have
been purposely sprayed, and in an article printed in the Washington
Post on January 7th 2001, entitled ‘Aerial Attack Killing
More Than Coca’, several witnesses reported that their
town itself was sprayed. In the same article inhabitants of
the village of La Hormiga said that legitimate crops had been
targeted even more than coca. The results of crop destruction
are so severe that Flover Edmundo Meza, the mayor of one of
Putumayo’s municipalities (whose own farm was fumigated),
foresees widespread hunger throughout the area as a consequence.
The mayor predicted that up to 35,000 people in his municipality
alone could be effected. Hunger will
ultimately lead to a large increase in the numbers of displaced
people in Colombia – adding to the over 2 million that
already exist. Yet both the US and Colombian authorities have
denied the claims, even when backed up with irrefutable evidence,
of the fumigation of legal crops. In an interview with the Dutch
journalist Marjon van Royen, General Socha, head of the Colombian
police’s anti-narcotics unit, when asked to look at photos
of the destruction (due to fumigation) of the Indian reservation
of Aponte in southern Colombia, responded, “It is false.
The proof you want to hand over to me is false”. This sentiment
seems to be the official government line as Dr. Josi Tordecilla,
who works in the reservation, found when he asked for more medicine
from central government to treat symptoms of spraying. He was
refused on grounds that spraying-related illnesses were all
“lies”. Displacement The displacement
of thousands of people and the immense suffering that this causes,
as a direct result of the US fumigation program, has already
occurred and the numbers can be expected to increase as the
fumigation effort is stepped up. Exact figures are very hard
to calculate although the State Department itself has estimated
that the number of people displaced by the actions of the Counter-Narcotics
Battalions in Putumayo will be in the tens of thousands and,
logically, this estimate is obviously going to be an extremely
conservative one. It is believed that approximately 10,000 Colombians
have already crossed into Ecuador and a much larger number than
that into the departments of Narino and Caqueta which border
Putumayo. Very little
financing has been allocated to help these displaced people
and only a minuscule amount of what has been promised has actually
materialised. This leaves the majority to fend for themselves,
or else to rely on small and under-financed local NGOs and charities,
which, as Putumayo farmer Senor Livardo explains, far from solves
the problem, “If they fumigate here, I will go elsewhere,
Ecuador or wherever. We have to do what we can to bring our
kids up.” Officials in neighbouring countries, particularly
those in Ecuador and Peru, worry that the concerted push against
Putumayo’s coca farmers will force thousands more refugees
into their territory, and regionalise many of Colombia's problems.
In the last seven months alone an estimated 3,000 Colombian
refugees have arrived in Ecuador and recently the Ecuadorian
army have found at least two cocaine processing plants in the
northern province of Sucumbios that borders Putumayo. There is
also evidence that Colombian paramilitaries have begun operating
over the border in Ecuador and last year there was actually
combat in northern Ecuador when guerrillas interrupted a paramilitary
death squad that was committing a massacre in Putumayo and subsequently
pursued them over the border into Ecuador and attacked. However
this appears to be the objective of the US, as the Secretary
of State Colin Powell stated in March this year “The new
administration will try to regionalise the Colombian conflict.”
The political ramifications of regionalisation will give the
US a precedent to involve themselves more closely in the internal
affairs of other Andean nations. The effects
of the fumigation, and particularly the government’s broken
promises to aid the victims, have further soured the already
stretched relations between the authorities and the campesinos.
Families that agreed to join voluntary manual eradication programs,
pulling up their coca and replacing it with other food crops,
have, according to Lisa Haugaard of the US-based Latin American
Working Group “not received a penny of the promised subsidies”.
Indeed, hardly any aid has actually reached those who have been
affected most severely by the fumigation part of Plan Colombia
and many are doubtful if it will ever appear. As one campesino leader in Putumayo put it, “They were quick to come
up the massive amount needed for the planes, the helicopters,
the troops and the chemicals but when it comes to the money
for helping people, which costs much less, they just seem to
have forgotten about it. Nobody here really believes they are
ever going to come up with it. It was all just empty promises.”
Environmental
Destruction The environmental
implications of the fumigation also represent a serious attack
on the people, as well as the biodiversity and ecology of Colombia.
The chemicals used to fumigate indiscriminately destroy flora
and fauna and pollute the already fragile rainforests of Colombia
– rainforests that contain approximately 10% of the world’s
terrestrial plant and animal species. Of
major concern are the Canangucha Palm trees, which form strange
oasis-like growths sustaining other plants and an array of different
animals and are a unique part of the Amazonian ecosystem. The
Palms also support local indigenous people, providing fibre
for clothes and roofing, as well as food and water. Clouds and
rainwater containing Glyphosate have contaminated the Palms
leaving them without their useful sponge-like properties, which
in turn causes them to dry out and destroy the surrounding eco-system
that depends on them. The indigenous people that are reliant
on the oases created by the tress are subsequently forced to
abandon their lands only adding to environmental the damage
when they move on to other areas of the forest. The chemicals
used contaminate sprayed areas for at least 6 months rendering
the terrain infertile and turning it into land that is of no
use to the campesino. As described above, without a livelihood the campesino is forced from the land, and
in many cases will then use the ‘slash and burn’ technique
to create new land for cultivation – deeper and deeper
into the rainforest. This is a hugely destructive influence
on the forests of Colombia as July 1999 statistics from the
Colombian Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicate, “The cultivation
of the coca plant alone has since its inception destroyed between
160,000 and 240,000 hectares of tropical jungle in the Orinoco
and Amazon basins; and…[is responsible for] 30% of annual
deforestation estimated in Colombia.” This rate of deforestation
is surely set to increase rapidly alongside the massive increase
that is projected in the US fumigation program in coming years. Even more
worrying is that the deforestation of land in Colombia, as a
result of fumigation, is a repetitive cycle. As fumigation reaches
further into the forest to destroy coca cultivation and pollutes
ever-greater areas, the campesinos will be forced to search for new land even deeper in the
jungles. The fumigation planes will no doubt eventually find
them there too and the process will be continued. This pattern
is threatening already endangered plants and animals as many
wildlife and environmental pressure groups have already pointed
out. The environmental
effects of the fumigation programme in Colombia have also been
reported in Ecuador and it can be safely assumed that Peru and
Brazil are already, or will in the near future, face similar
scenarios. The transport of chemicals by waterways is a particular
worry for regional contamination, especially as much of the
spraying goes on near rivers that flow down into Brazil, Ecuador
and Peru. Accion Ecologica, an Ecuadorian environmental
organisation, stated that crops and livestock are suffering
negative effects in northern Ecuador as Glyphosate, moving in
water and the wind, reaches soil in the departments bordering
Colombia. Reality
of US Motivations The US-administered
fumigation programs in Latin America are backed by sophisticated
satellite and targeting equipment that makes, as Ricardo Vargas
(a fumigation expert at Accion Andina) agrees, the possibility
of a “mistake” very slim. Yet the effects of the opening
stages of aerial spraying (as indicated above) have had devastating
consequences on humans, livestock, and the ecology of Colombia
and the surrounding regions. Towns, legitimate crops, and water
sources have been repeatedly sprayed, with the unpleasant conclusion,
as Ricardo Vargas stated in an interview with the Dutch journalist
van Royen, that “spraying” could be being used “as
a strategy to consciously affect the survival of communities”.
This, as
a central objective of Plan Colombia, is not as far-fetched
as it sounds especially when one understands the way in which
the US government and various multinational corporations would
benefit from such a policy. Various oil
corporations, for example, including both Occidental Petroleum
and British Petroleum, were fervent supporters of Plan Colombia
whilst it went through Congress and this is without doubt because
they saw it as being favourable to their interests in the region
– Occidental indeed spent $350,000 in the US Congress ensuring
that Plan Colombia was passed. The departments of Putumayo and
Bolivar, both primary targets for fumigation, have huge, and
as yet unexploited mineral and oil deposits. The effects of
fumigation, and the paramilitary activity that preceded it (see
below), have forced thousands off their land – terrain
that is now conveniently open for speculation by multinationals,
free from the annoyance of concerned local environmentalists
and residents. A further, and no doubt intentional effect is
to deprive the guerrilla movements in these areas of their civilian
support bases. This has obvious benefits, as the guerrillas
are generally hostile to both US foreign policy objectives and
the exploitation of Colombia’s natural resources by foreign
companies. When one
looks at the losses taken by companies such as Occidental Petroleum
as a result of guerrilla attacks it is clear to see that the
weakening of the insurgency, by displacing local communities
and thus destroying their base among the civilian population,
is an effort to secure the profits of corporations and create
the conditions for future multinational exploitation in Colombia
– something that is especially important in the light of
the IMF-imposed economic reforms. A fundamental
part of Plan Colombia is to create the image of ‘narco-guerrillas’
being deeply involved in drug trafficking and then use this
as the justification to heavily militarise the region and subsequently
blur the lines between counter-insurgency and counter-narcotics
operations. However, the theory of the ‘narco-guerrilla’
is highly dubious and there is in fact no hard evidence to suggest
that guerrillas are involved in the drugs business at any level
above the taxation of coca cultivation and processing. Even
the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) admits to the fact
that “To date, there is little to indicate the insurgent
groups are trafficking in cocaine themselves, either by producing
cocaine HCL and selling it to Mexican syndicates, or by establishing
their own distribution networks in the United States.”
The north-western
region of Latin America is, however, of strategic interest to
the US – an area that the War-Peace Studies Group (which
consisted of the US State Department and the Council on Foreign
Relations) referred to as a “Grand Area”, meaning
a “region whose economic subordination is necessary for
world domination”. More specifically
at the moment it is the oil of the north-western region that
is of primary interest to the US. The energy debate was high
on the agenda during the US elections and with this in mind,
and as the world’s biggest consumer of petroleum, developments
over the last few years in Latin America must worry the US.
The recent loss of the Panama Canal, and increasingly strong
radical movements in Ecuador and Bolivia, are emerging as firm
threats to the hegemony of the US and the neo-liberal policies
that go it. The nationalist government of Hugo Chavez, in Venezuela
(which is the single largest supplier of oil to the US), is
sympathetic to the Colombian guerrillas, is very anti-imperialist
and, furthermore, is tremendously close to socialist Cuba, with
Chavez calling Fidel Castro his mentor.
On top of
this and of most concern, the Colombian insurgency, especially
the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia – People’s
Army (FARC-EP), continue to strengthen themselves and there
is now serious fear in both the US and among the Colombian elite
that a revolution is in the making. Plan Colombia and the ‘war
on drugs’ is obviously an attempt by the US to ‘pacify’
the region and regain control – a strategy which closely
resembles US operations in Central America in the 1980s when
the alleged Soviet threat was the covering pretext. A closer
look at the destination of much of the US military aid included
in Plan Colombia reveals where other interests of the Clinton
administration lay. The vast majority of the money will never
be seen by Colombia, but instead go straight to the manufacturers
of the military hardware that the US is donating to the Colombian
military. These companies lobbied hard for the passage of Plan
Colombia, with those profiting most including Textron (manufacturers
of Huey military helicopters), Lockheed Martin (manufacturers
of radar systems), United Technologies (manufacturers of Blackhawk
ground attack helicopters), Northrop Grunnman (manufacturers
of airborne reconnaissance aircraft) and the now notorious mercenary
company DynCorp (fumigation and training contracts). It is no
coincidence to note that these five companies between them donated
nearly $4 million to members of the US Congress during the period
that Plan Colombia was being debated in Congress, nor is it
surprising to find that the companies that make the fumigation
chemicals (Monsanto and DuPont) also donated around $600,000
during the same period. It is also no coincidence that the equipment
and services provided to Colombia by these companies will probably
do little to decrease world cocaine production but at the same
time will do much for the economic interests and profits both
of these companies and others that have an involvement in Colombia.
Paramilitary
Death Squad Involvement Another interesting
point with regards to the reality of US motivations in Colombia,
and specifically with regards to fumigation programs, is that
the well-documented involvement of the army-backed paramilitaries
in the drug trade, extending much further than taxation, is
seemingly being ignored. Fumigation has largely excluded paramilitary-controlled
coca plantations and although a few well-publicised operations
have been carried out against alleged paramilitary processing
facilities it is believed that the vast majority of these have
remained untouched. It is no surprise to discover that these
very same paramilitaries have a long history of clandestine
relationships with US covert agencies such as the CIA and DEA
and that they are alleged to be partly financed by various multinationals
operating in Colombia. It is also important to note that these
paramilitaries are violently opposed to any efforts aimed at
slowing or halting the IMF-demanded privatisation programs and
other economic ‘reforms’ that would benefit the multinationals.
And, as a result of this stance, they have killed hundreds of
unionists and other activists that have been involved in anti-privatisation
and other campaigns. Although
it seems logical to suggest that the paramilitary death squads
are being conveniently ignored by the US and Colombian government
as in reality they are relatively supportive of US aims and
objectives, there is much more disturbing evidence that suggests
that the paramilitaries do in fact have a strategic role to
play in Plan Colombia. This is not as fanciful as it may seem
when one takes into account the Thai and Laotian heroin lords
during the Vietnam War, the Mojahedin heroin producers in Afghanistan
during the 1980s, the Contra cocaine smugglers in Nicaragua
also during the 1980s and the heroin trafficking KLA in Kosovo
of the 1990s – all of whom were paramilitary outfits that,
for as long as they fitted in with US foreign policy strategies,
received substantial support and cooperation from US government
agencies In Colombia
the evidence suggests that almost without exception the US fumigation
has been preceded by heavy paramilitary activity in the areas
in question – activity that has resulted in hundreds of
deaths and other human rights abuses. The ex-ombudsman of the
city of Puerto Asis in Putumayo department puts it clearly:
“The paramilitary phenomenon in Putumayo is the spearhead
of Plan Colombia.” This view is corroborate by Commandante
Wilson, a paramilitary commander in Putumayo, who recently told
the Boston Globe newspaper
that “Plan Colombia would be almost impossible without
the help of the [paramilitary] forces...[the military] sprays
where they know we have consolidated zones.”
There is
also, as demonstrated by both the USO oil workers union and
the SINTRAMINERCOL mine workers union, an astoundingly direct
correlation between the location of natural resources and the
intensity of paramilitary activity. Activity by the death squads
in these regions secures the much-coveted resources for multinational
corporations and this too would seem to be evidence in favour
of the argument that the US, if indeed their true objective
is to consolidate control of Colombia’s natural resources,
would be at least covertly willing to allow the paramilitaries
to participate in the ‘pacification’ of Colombia.
It is safe
to say that the US is at the least indirectly responsible for
the recent growth of the death squads in Colombia by aiding
and abetting a military that is clearly linked to the paramilitary
forces. As US Senator Patrick Leahy recently stated, “Since
the human rights waiver [allowing US military aid to start arriving]
was granted the paramilitaries have doubled in size. The numbers
of massacres have also increased.” Furthermore, Amnesty
International has recently filed a lawsuit against the CIA accusing
them of improperly withholding information on their relationship
with national paramilitary death squad commander Carlos Castano.
Should the
CIA be forced to divulge such information, it is highly likely
that it would prove the existence of a much more direct relationship
between the US and the death squads such as those that existed
in El Salvador, Chile and other places. However, it is of course
highly unlikely that, should it exist, the US government would
reveal such information regarding Colombia at such a sensitive
time – it is much more probable that they will choose to
wait (using the pretext of National Security) for twenty-odd
years before allowing their complicity to become public knowledge.
By that time of course, as was the case in the other examples
cited, the media will not be so interested and it will all be
over and done with anyway.
There are
many and cheaper alternatives that the US government is failing
to take into account. One major criticism of the current policy
is that it focuses more on the supply of cocaine rather than
the demand. A study by the RAND institute in Santa Monica, California,
indicates that every $1 dollar spent on rehabilitation and treatment
gives a return of $7 by decreasing the costs of criminal justice,
lost productivity and health care. Experts also regularly call
for a greater emphasis on education of young people – something
that, despite the rhetoric, the US government has still failed
to invest in sufficiently. These alternatives alone are surely
more productive than the $30 billion plus, spent over the last
two decades, on diminishing the supply of cocaine – a policy
that anyone with any knowledge of European or US society can
see has clearly not worked. Conclusion
In conclusion
it is safe to say that despite the US and Colombian governments’
insisting to the contrary, there is definite evidence that fumigation
seriously damages the environment, legal crops and, at least
certain types of animals and fish. It is also highly probable
that fumigation is damaging the health of people, especially
children, in the areas that are being fumigated. Furthermore
it is known that large numbers of people are being displaced
by the spraying, that it is going to lead to further deforestation
and that it will almost certainly regionalise some of Colombia’s
problems. The question
therefore must be asked, why, if alternative policies exist,
is the US insisting on conducting a fumigation campaign in Colombia
that is causing such immense damage to that country and it’s
population? The question is even more important when one takes
into account the fact that many seasoned observers, and indeed
world-renowned experts on anti-narcotics strategies, state that
the present policy of fumigating coca fields will simply not
work. The reality
of the matter is that there are other motives behind the US
‘war on drugs’ in Latin America, motives that benefit
US corporate interests at the expense of the environments, and
the lives of the people, in the countries effected. It is simply
implausible that corporations such as DuPont, Philip Morris
and Occidental Petroleum would donate hundreds of millions of
dollars to see Plan Colombia pass through the US Congress if
they did not believe that they were going to gain something
from the whole affair – they are not charities after all. In short
Plan Colombia, as well as the recently announced Andean Regional
Initiative aid package, is an effort to reassert US control
in the Andean region and the first step towards this objective
is the annihilation of all forms of resistance – the most
potent of which is surely the FARC guerrilla movement. The objective
of fumigation is to remove the grass-root support and recruits
that the peasants of Colombia provide for the guerrillas and
to destroy one of the guerrillas’ sources of income –
taxation on drug production. As part of this policy the Colombian
guerrillas, with the complicity of the corporate media, are
also being vilified (beyond anything that is applied to the
murderous US-backed regimes that function not only in Colombia
but also in such countries as Turkey, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia),
so much so that many people now use the ‘narco-guerrilla’
term and other like it as if they had some factual basis.
It is therefore
also interesting to note that the US mass media – media
outlets which in many cases are owned by the same corporate
interests that are behind much of the US strategy in the Andean
region and Plan Colombia in particular – are noticeably
silent on the whole issue of fumigation never mind the possibility
that there is something more than the ‘war on drugs’
behind the whole thing. The corporate media also neglects to
mention the root causes that drive poor peasant farmers in Latin
America into growing cocaine – unfair trade practices,
IMF fiscal ‘reforms’ and the disgraceful indifference
of the Latin American elite to the plight of their impoverished
rural compatriots. Fumigation
is also employed to clear the land of people for the exploitation
of natural resources by transnational corporation that are predominantly
US-owned. This is achieved through the forced displacement of
people by intentionally poisoning their land, water and livestock.
Yet it is not only the fumigation that is displacing people
in Colombia. By far and away the largest cause of displacement
in the country is paramilitary death squad violence against
rural civilian populations and it is here that we find the most
worrying aspect of US policy in Colombia. The US, whatever the
State Department and White House claim to the contrary, is silently
complicit As Doug Stokes,
a Colombia expert at Bristol University Politics Department
in Britain says, the relationship is based on “the mutual
desire to increase access to Colombia’s markets (and thus
increasing US power in the region), but also in eliminating
the rebels… whose very presence destabilises this crucial
oil region.” The only real debate is how deeply the US
government, and in particular its covert agencies, are involved
with the paramilitaries. It appears
that Jesus Gonzalez, the head of the human rights department
at the CUT trade union federation and one of Colombia’s
most high-profile human rights activists, is right when he says
that “Plan Colombia is a plan for death”. However,
this is secondary to the concerns of the US and its multinational
allies, whose Plan Colombia and ‘war on drugs’ has
done a great deal, according to the Economist magazine, to “undermine
democracy, human rights and the environment in much of Latin
America”. The authors, Liam Craig-Best and Rowan Shingler, are freelance journalists based in Colombia
and specialising in human rights issues. Send a message to liamcraigbest@yahoo.com if
you would like to be
added to their Colombia News
free mailing list. Liam
and Rowan have asked Spectre to pass on a request specifically
to activists in the US to send the following letter to their
local Senator: Senator ___________ United States
Senate Washington,
DC 20510 Dear Senator, I am writing
to express my horror at the U.S. supported aerial fumigations
in Southern Colombia. The herbicide sprayings are now well documented
to be harming the people who live there, their animals and food
crops, and the surrounding Colombian Amazon rainforest. Although the U. S. State Department recently
claimed that the herbicides being used are "less harmful
than aspirin," this disingenuous statement ignores the
fact that in Colombia the herbicide glyphosate is sprayed from
the air, mixed with other chemicals to make it more powerful
and toxic, sprayed at higher concentrations than the recommended
dose, and is sprayed over rivers and lakes where it enters the
water supply. The fumigations
are harmful for the following reasons: They are
targeting the forests of a country that is number two in the
world for biodiversity. They create
more deforestation as peasants either in Colombia or in other
countries are simply going further into the rainforest to continue
to grow the one crop that they have a ready market for. They are
causing more displacement in a country with almost two million
displaced people. They are
causing serious health problems, especially among children.
Doctors are reporting skin problems, eye irritations, breathing
problems and other conditions, after an area is sprayed.
There are reports of miscarriages and birth defects.
They include
a form of glyphosate, Roundup Ultra, which is mixed with the
surfactant polyoxyethylamine (POEA) and the he antifoaming Cosmo-In-D,
and the adjuvant Cosmo-Flux 411F, substances whose health effects
have not been tested. Glyphosate
is water-soluble, so it is contaminating rivers and lakes in
the forests and has already destroyed fish farms and other alternative
development projects. Instead of
supporting further fumigations, I urge you to listen to the
four governors from Southern Colombia who recently traveled
to the U.S. on behalf of their beleaguered constituents.
The governors asked for a halt to aerial fumigations,
and for the Colombian government to reign in the paramilitaries
who have descended on Southern Colombia in the wake of the U.
S. sponsored Plan Colombia. The governors urged support for
alternative crop programs and for the peace process.
Only these positive steps will improve the lives of the
civilians of Southern Colombia, an area heavily affected by
the U.S. sponsored military aid. In
turn we suggest that citizens of other countries write either
to their own governments, protesting any involvement in the
plan, or to their own elected representatives. EU member state
citizens might also write to the European Commission, which,
although it has been asked by an almost unanimous vote of the
European Parliament not to support Plan Colombia, has the power
to ignore this request. |
SPECTREZINE
Homepage
Weblog
Spectremail
Contact
LATEST
FEATURES
The
Last War of the 20th Century - Part Eleven - by Jan Marijnissen and Karel
Glastra van Loon
The
End of Democracy - by Steve McGiffen
Gene
seeks Farmer - by Kartika Liotard MEP
EU-India
Free Trade Talks: In Whose Interest? by Christa Wichterich
Water
Thieves - by Steve McGiffen
Global
security: too vital an issue to be left to NATO and the Right - by Tiny
Kox
Flexicurity,
false promises, and the EU's renamed Constitution
LATEST
NEWS FROM
THE WEBLOG
Weblog-
Homepage
Macedonia and EU membership
Turbulent times for Eurozone
Left Euro-MPs Attack
Turkish condemnation of Human Rights Campaigner
France Breached Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty
“The hope for the reunification
of Cyprus is back”
Call of La Via Campesina
for April 17th, International Day of Peasant Struggle
CATEGORIES
Africa
Book Reviews
Corporate Crime
Current Issues
Economy and Society
East Asia
Editorial
Environment
Europe
Global Resistance
Latin America/Caribbean
Middle East
North America
Progressive Press
War
ARCHIVES
News
Review 2001-04
Features
2001
Features 2002
Features 2003-04
