[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 23 (Wednesday, March 6, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H710-H715]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF COLOMBIA
AND ITS EFFORTS TO COUNTER THREATS FROM U.S.-DESIGNATED FOREIGN
TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution (H. Res. 358) expressing support for the democratically
elected Government of Colombia and its efforts to counter threats from
United States-designated foreign terrorist organizations.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Res. 358
Whereas the democratically elected Government of Colombia,
led by President Andres Pastrana, is the legitimate authority
in the oldest representative democracy in South America;
Whereas the Secretary of State, in consultation with the
Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury, is
required to designate as foreign terrorist organizations
those groups whose activities threaten the security of United
States nationals or the national security interests of the
United States pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and
Nationality Act;
Whereas the Secretary of State has designated three
Colombian terrorist groups as foreign terrorist
organizations, including the Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia (FARC), the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia
(AUC), and the National Liberation Army (ELN);
Whereas all three United States-designated foreign
terrorist organizations regularly engage in criminal acts,
including murder, kidnapping, and extortion perpetrated
against Colombian civilians, government officials, security
forces, and against foreign nationals, including United
States citizens;
Whereas the FARC is holding five Colombian legislators, a
presidential candidate, and Colombian police and army
officers and soldiers as hostages and has recently escalated
bombings against civilian targets, including a foiled attempt
to destroy the city of Bogota's principal water reservoir;
Whereas, according to the Colombian Government, the FARC
has received training in terrorist techniques and technology
from foreign nationals;
Whereas, since 1992, United States-designated foreign
terrorist organizations in Colombia have committed serious
crimes against United States citizens, kidnapping more than
50 Americans and murdering at least ten Americans;
Whereas the Drug Enforcement Administration believes that
members of the FARC and the AUC directly engage in narcotics
trafficking;
Whereas individual members of Colombia's security forces
have collaborated with illegal paramilitary organizations by,
inter alia, in some instances allowing such organizations to
pass through roadblocks, sharing tactical information with
such organizations, and providing such organizations with
supplies and ammunition;
Whereas while the Colombian Government has made progress in
its efforts to combat and capture members of illegal
paramilitary organizations and taken positive steps to break
links between individual members of the security forces and
such organizations, further steps by the Colombian Government
are warranted;
Whereas in 1998 Colombian President Andres Pastrana began
exhaustive efforts to negotiate a peace agreement with the
FARC and implemented extraordinary confidence-building
measures to advance these negotiations, including
establishing a 16,000-square-mile safe haven for the FARC;
Whereas the Government of Colombia has also undertaken
substantial efforts to negotiate a peace agreement with the
ELN;
Whereas the United States has consistently supported the
Government of Colombia's protracted efforts to negotiate a
peace agreement with the FARC and supports the Government of
Colombia in its continuing efforts to reach a negotiated
agreement with the ELN;
Whereas the United States would welcome a negotiated,
political solution to end the violence in Colombia;
Whereas, after the FARC hijacked a commercial airplane and
took Colombian Senator Jorge Eduardo Gechem Turbay as a
hostage into the government-created safe haven, President
Pastrana ended his government's sponsorship of the peace
negotiations with the FARC and ordered Colombia's security
forces to re-establish legitimate governmental control in the
safe haven;
Whereas President Pastrana has received strong expressions
of support from foreign governments and international
organizations for his decision to end the peace talks and
dissolve the FARC's safe haven; and
Whereas the Government of Colombia's negotiations with the
ELN are continuing despite the end of the negotiations with
the FARC: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That--
(1) the House of Representatives--
(A) expresses its support for the democratically elected
Government of Colombia and the Colombian people as they
strive to protect their democracy from terrorism and the
scourge of illicit narcotics; and
(B) deplores the continuing criminal terrorist acts of
murder, abduction, and extortion carried out by all United
States-designated foreign terrorist organizations in Colombia
against United States citizens, the civilian population of
Colombia, and Colombian authorities; and
(2) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that
the President, without undue delay, should transmit to
Congress for its consideration proposed legislation,
consistent with United States law regarding the protection of
human rights, to assist the Government of Colombia protect
its democracy from United States-designated foreign terrorist
organizations and the scourge of illicit narcotics; and
(3) it is the sense of the House of Representatives that
the Secretary of State should designate a high-ranking
official to coordinate all United States assistance to the
Government of Colombia to ensure clarity of United States
policy and the effective delivery of United States support.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde).
General Leave
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in strong support of this resolution. In our ongoing war on
terrorism, we have an extremely volatile situation in our own
hemisphere that cannot be ignored any longer: the threat against
democracy in Colombia.
Colombia has been beset by many years of violence that have
culminated in numerous terrorist attacks in the past month. This oldest
representative democracy in South America is under attack as we speak
by terrorists known as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia,
otherwise known as the FARC, another violent left-wing group, the
National Liberation Army, known also by its Spanish acronym ELN, and
illegal right-wing paramilitary groups. The Secretary of State has
designated all three groups as foreign terrorist organizations that
threaten the security of the United States and our citizens.
{time} 1330
These groups regularly engage in criminal acts, such as murder,
kidnapping, extortion and narcotics trafficking. They are currently
holding captive dozens of Colombian security force officers, soldiers
and civilians. The FARC and the ELN have kidnapped more than 50
Americans and have murdered 10 of our citizens.
Colombian President Pastrana invested his presidency, indeed his
entire political fortune, in an attempt to negotiate peace with the
FARC for the past 4 years. This protracted peace process ended February
20 when the FARC hijacked a commercial airliner and kidnapped a
prominent Colombian senator, the leader of the Colombian Senate Peace
Commission. The senator is now the fifth legislator being held captive
by the FARC.
On that same day, President Pastrana ordered the Colombian military
into the 16,000 square mile demilitarized zone that he ceded to the
FARC in his efforts to negotiate peace. Since that time, the FARC has
waged even more bloody terrorism against the Colombian Government, its
democratic
[[Page H711]]
institutions, and its civilian population.
In fact, in the past 5 weeks or so, there have been more than 120
separate terrorist attacks committed by the FARC, including numerous
bombings, the kidnapping of a presidential candidate, and a foiled
attempt to destroy the city of Bogota's principal water reservoir.
Colombia's elected representatives have been targeted by these
terrorists. Seven members of the Colombian Congress have been killed in
the past 4 years. This past weekend, yet another legislator, Senator
Martha Catalina Daniel, was tortured and murdered.
The FARC and the paramilitary forces are destabilizing democracy in
Colombia. Legislative elections are this month. Presidential elections
are in May. Colombia is calling on the United States for help in
defending itself against terrorism by providing intelligence-sharing,
spare parts for equipment, and the unburdening of restrictions on
equipment currently being used in counter-narcotics operations. The
administration has decided to move forward to respond to some of these
concerns. The administration must now quickly complete this policy
review and work with Congress to help Colombia save itself from
terrorism.
The global war against terrorism is our administration's highest
priority. We are training troops in the Philippines, the former Soviet
Republic of Georgia, and Yemen all in the name of fighting this global
war. However, in the meantime, a conflagration is burning at the foot
of the land bridge that joins North and South America.
It is imperative that we recognize the dire consequences of inaction
in this horrific situation, not just for Colombians, but for the rest
of the hemisphere. It is time to help the Colombian people defend
themselves. As a major defender of democracy, we must try to bolster it
wherever we see it seriously threatened, especially in our own
hemisphere. Passing this resolution is an important first step. I urge
my colleagues to join me in supporting this measure.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger) and ask unanimous consent that he be
permitted to control that time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution. I commend
the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), the chairman of the Committee
on International Relations, for bringing forth this measure in such a
calibrated and thoughtful fashion. I would also like to express my
appreciation to our colleague on the Committee on International
Relations, the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), for his
enormous contributions to this effort.
Mr. Speaker, Colombia has entered a new and brutal phase in its
history. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the United
Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, better known by their Spanish
acronyms, the FARC and the AUC respectively, and other illegal
paramilitary groups have launched unprecedented campaigns of terror
against the people and the democratically elected Government of
Colombia.
I strongly deplore these criminal acts of murder, abduction, and
extortion that the terrorist organizations have inflicted upon the
people of Colombia and which the resolution and the gentleman from
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) so richly describe. I wish to extend our friendship
and our support to President Pastrana and his administration as they
confront this menace.
Mr. Speaker, the resolution also calls upon the President to submit
his legislative proposals for addressing the crisis in Colombia to
Congress for our consideration and deliberation. Let me be clear with
regard to this point. While I appreciate the horror of the vile acts
which the FARC and the AUC are committing almost on a daily basis in
Colombia, I believe that any substantial change in U.S. policy toward
Colombia must occur only after we in Congress have had an opportunity
to add our voices and our concerns.
Thus, while we have not made any ultimate conclusions on how to
assist the Colombian Government better to deal with terrorism and
narcotics, we certainly look forward to an active and spirited debate
on this floor.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that future U.S. policy toward Colombia should
be conditioned upon the Government of Colombia dealing with two very
stubborn issues: first, the Colombian Government must decisively break
all links with illegal paramilitary organizations, and it must launch a
serious effort to combat them. According to the Colombian Commission of
Jurists and international human rights groups, the paramilitaries
account for over 75 percent of all concombatant killings in Colombia.
The just-released human rights report of our State Department echoes
this fact and states: ``Members of the security forces sometimes
illegally collaborated with paramilitary forces last year.'' This link
must be completely severed.
Second, the Government of Colombia must dramatically increase its own
contribution to both the war and the peace effort. By most estimates,
the army would need to at least triple in size to take on the FARC and
the AUC effectively. Currently, the Colombian Army has about 130,000
members, but only 40,000 of them can be deployed into battle. The rest
are at desk jobs or tied down to guarding static infrastructure like
pipelines and power lines. The United States cannot fill this need
alone, and we would be foolish to try.
Complicating matters, there are reasons to doubt the commitment of
some of Colombia's political and economic elite to sacrifice for the
war effort. For example, currently Colombian law excludes high school
graduates, meaning all but the poor, from serving in combat units. I
think that is an outrage.
Furthermore, U.S. policy toward Colombia should include more than
counternarcotics and, potentially, counterterrorism support. Colombia's
long-running war is deeply rooted in historical, social, and economic
causes that must also be addressed if any sustainable peace is to be
achieved. Here, dramatic expansion of support to the provision of basic
services to the Colombian people, but particularly in the long
neglected rural areas, is absolutely paramount.
Mr. Speaker, Colombia and U.S. policy toward that country is at a
crossroads. How we choose to help the people of Colombia confront not
only terrorism but its sources as well will determine the quality of
the lasting peace we hope will be able to help them build in the
region. I urge all my colleagues to support this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution. The gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) and I have been to Colombia many times on
many occasions since I became chairman of the Subcommittee on Western
Hemisphere. I have seen a terrible situation unfold in that troubled
nation. On my last trip in January, we met with President Andres
Pastrana as he was forced to issue an ultimatum to the FARC in a last-
ditch effort to get them to come back to the negotiating table.
No one has done more to hold the door open to a negotiated, political
solution to end the violence in Colombia than President Pastrana. His
perseverance and forbearance have made one thing clear: it is the
FARC's willful disregard for the rule of law and human rights that led
President Pastrana to make the decision to end the safe haven and send
in Colombia's security forces to reestablish legitimate government
authority.
Colombia today is a nation under siege by three terrorist
organizations. Two of these terrorist organizations, the FARC and the
ELN, have kidnapped over 50 Americans and murdered at least 10
Americans. The third, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, is a
vicious, violent terrorist organization that indiscriminately murders
Colombians. Individuals who aid those terrorists dishonor and discredit
themselves and the institutions that they represent.
All three of these terrorist groups have been designated by the
Secretary of State as foreign terrorist organizations because it has
been determined that they are a threat to our Nation's
[[Page H712]]
security. Terrorism in Colombia is financed by illegal trafficking in
narcotics that kill and destroy the lives of our young people in the
United States.
The FARC has, in essence, declared war on the Colombian people. This
group is attacking Colombia's democratic institutions. Five Colombian
legislators are being held hostage by the FARC. The FARC has been
attacking the infrastructure. It attacks police stations with propane
gas cylinder mortars that indiscriminately kill innocent people.
The Colombian Government is continuing its efforts to negotiate a
peace agreement with the ELN, and we should support those efforts.
It is time, however, that we reassess our policy towards Colombia.
This resolution expresses the sense of the House that the President,
without undue delay, should transmit to Congress for its consideration
proposed legislation, consistent with United States law regarding
protection of human rights, to assist the Government of Colombia
protect its democracy from United States-designated foreign terrorist
organizations and the scourge of illicit narcotics.
We cannot afford to fail to help the people of Colombia in their
darkest hour. Colombia is a democracy and an ally of the United States,
and it is under attack by terrorist organizations funded by illegal
drugs. Colombia is not asking us to send troops. The democratically
elected Government of Colombia is asking that we make it possible for
us to help them defend their democracy from these terrorists. I urge my
colleagues to join me in supporting this reasonable, bipartisan
resolution.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt), who has worked tirelessly
on this issue and is one of the nationally recognized authorities on
Colombia.
{time} 1345
Mr. DELAHUNT. I thank the gentleman for his generous words and for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, as others have alluded to, almost 4 years ago, President
Andres Pastrana embarked on what was truly a courageous effort to bring
peace to his nation. He began negotiations with the FARC and the ELN,
the country's two main guerilla groups. He did so because he realized
that, after almost 40 years of conflict, a negotiated agreement was the
only answer to end the violence.
These efforts focused world attention on Colombia. For the first
time, the international community was brought directly into the
negotiations. Hope prevailed that the brutal violence that has plagued
that nation for decades would at long last end. I shared that hope. At
President Pastrana's request, I myself went to the so-called
demilitarized zone. I met with the FARC, which is the largest party to
this conflict.
I left, hopeful that the FARC was genuinely serious about the search
for peace. They claimed that they were prepared to work to create a new
Colombia that would embrace social and economic justice and bring peace
to a population exhausted by violence.
Sadly, they have proven they were not serious. At great political
cost, President Pastrana gave the FARC every opportunity to prove their
good faith. But they, the FARC, could not summon the political resolve,
the will, the courage, if you may, to choose peace. Sadly, they were
not serious.
From an insurgency that once based its legitimacy on a promise of
social and economic justice for all Colombians, the FARC have
degenerated into criminal syndicates that traffic in drugs, that
extort, that kidnap and that murder civilians. The FARC have failed to
meet the challenge of peace. They have failed the Colombian people. So
now I share what I know to be the profound disappointment felt by
President Pastrana and the people of Colombia.
But, fortunately, the peace process with the ELN is still continuing.
Like the FARC, the ELN claim to want to address the social inequities
that are at the root of the conflict. But the ELN have actually
proposed how to do that; and, at least at this point in time, they
appear to have the will to make peace. However, tragically, even while
negotiating, the ELN also continue their armed campaign of kidnapping
and sabotage.
But what disturbs me most profoundly is the recent rapid growth of
right-wing paramilitary groups, commonly referred to as the AUC. They
commit more than 70 percent of the massacres in the course of the
Colombian conflict, and their brutality knows no bounds of human
decency. Their leadership readily admits to deriving most of their
funding from drug trafficking. Klaus Nyholm, the head of the U.N. drug
control program in Colombia, says that they are substantially more
involved in the drug trade than the FARC.
Most significantly for U.S. policy, the AUC, as mentioned by the
gentleman from California, the ranking member, have extensive links
with the Colombian military, according to our own Department of State
report that was issued this week. That explains the reluctance of so
many of us in this body to provide unconditional military assistance to
the Colombian armed forces.
While President Pastrana and Colombian armed forces chief Fernando
Tapias deserve credit for taking steps to professionalize the military,
unfortunately, far too many of these unsavory links remain. Until all
relationships, at every level, between the military and the AUC are
ended, the U.S. can and should condition its assistance.
Unbelievably, these paramilitary groups rationalize their acts of
terrorism as what is needed to fight the guerillas. They say they
traffic in drugs only to support that fight. They say that what they
really want is peace. They even claim that they are the Northern
Alliance of Colombia, ready to help the United States fight the FARC.
They are not Colombia's Northern Alliance. They are Colombia's al
Qaeda.
Let us be clear. There is no place for an AUC in a democracy. In a
democratic society, it is the exclusive role of the armed forces and
the police, working under the legitimate government, to maintain public
order, to defend the nation, and protect individual civil liberties.
And there is a legitimate government in Colombia duly elected by the
Colombian people. The AUC are not the answer to Colombia's problems. In
a very real way, the AUC are cooperating with the FARC and the ELN in
sending Colombia into chaos and more bloodshed.
We know what the FARC's position is. We have learned it the hard way.
Now it is very important for us to be clear with both the ELN and the
AUC. Let me say to them, now is the time to reveal your true selves, to
show the world what you really want for your nation. You say you want
peace. You put it on your websites. You make these public statements.
Prove it. Declare an immediate, unilateral cease-fire and an immediate
suspension of all criminal activities. Lay down your arms. You can do
it today. Now.
That way, the Colombian military can concentrate its efforts on the
FARC; and the world can see that the other parties to the conflict are
willing to act for peace, not just talk about it.
So Senor Gabino, who is the leader of the ELN, and Carlos Castano,
the leader of the AUC, now is the time, now, to decide which side you
are on. Are you with the Colombian people who desperately want to end
40 years of horror? Or are you with those who would drown your nation
in the blood of its own citizens?
This resolution today makes clear which side the United States is on.
This is just the beginning of our debate. We still must have an
extensive review, including hearings, on the details of any U.S.
assistance, just as there should be a peaceful debate inside Colombia
on how to address that country's very real problems, particularly its
glaring social and economic inequities.
But there should be no doubt as to which side the United States is
on. We are with the Colombian people.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Osborne).
Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Speaker, 6 weeks ago, I went with members of the
Committee on Agriculture to Colombia. We were fortunate enough to have
dinner one evening with President Pastrana at
[[Page H713]]
his version of Camp David, which is in Cartagena. During that evening,
we were able to get well acquainted. He described his being kidnapped
by guerillas a few years ago and all that he went through and the
general lay of the land down there and his struggles with the FARC and
the ELN and the AUC.
In the progress of that evening, what we learned is that there are
roughly 600,000 acres of coca plants under cultivation in the country
of Colombia. This allows them to provide roughly 90 percent of the
cocaine that comes into the United States. As a result, FARC and these
other vigilante groups are very well funded. I would imagine that their
funding may exceed that of other legitimate enterprises within the
country of Colombia. And so the people in Colombia have paid a great
price.
Last year, we were told that 29,000 civilians lost their lives in
this conflict. They are caught in between the various groups. In many
cases, they have no place to go and no place to hide. As has been
mentioned earlier, seven members of Congress have been killed in the
last 4 years, and five lawmakers are currently hostages in that
country.
So the present negotiations, or the negotiations that have gone on
for the last 3 or 4 years, have broken down and now Colombia is
basically under a reign of terror, where some of the things that we
have seen around the world are now being perpetrated on the Colombian
people. We have seen bridges blown up, water supplies such as in Bogota
have been damaged and threatened.
So it appears at this time that the only solution is that the United
States provide help. We already have provided quite a bit. But the big
issue is helicopters, because the pilots that are doing the spraying of
the coca to try to eliminate it are certainly under a great deal of
duress.
So we need also some commitment from Colombia, but they need our aid.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 4 minutes to the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), an indefatigable fighter
for social justice in the hemisphere.
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time and
appreciate all his work on behalf of human rights.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose this resolution. I want to be very
clear about my concerns regarding this bill and the critical crossroads
confronting U.S. policy in Colombia.
Like every Member of this House, I support the democratically elected
government of Colombia. I have met with President Pastrana, including
in Colombia, and I am a strong supporter of his efforts for social and
economic reform. Having traveled to Colombia, I know how very complex
the society and the conflict are. I have seen the harm done to the
Colombian people by the guerillas, by paramilitary groups and by the
Colombian army. I believe very strongly that Congress should not rush
to signal support that would increase our involvement in Colombia's
escalating civil war.
The Colombian civil war has been going on for nearly 40 years. The
armed actors remain nearly unchanged. Leftist guerilla groups battle
the Colombian army for control of the territory, while right-wing
paramilitaries increase their own involvement in the war and violence
against civilians. All of these armed actors, including the Colombian
military, have been involved in drug trafficking. All have a history of
human rights abuses. Human rights groups continue to document the close
ties between the Colombian army and the paramilitaries who commit the
majority of human rights abuses in Colombia.
Colombia is hardly a new front in the war on terrorism. Terrible acts
of terror, assassinations, kidnappings, bombings and disappearances,
are part and parcel of their 40-year civil war. But Colombia is not
part of the internationally supported campaign to dismantle and destroy
al Qaeda and other international terrorist networks.
So let us not hide behind euphemisms. A so-called war on terrorism in
Colombia is simply a set of code words to become even more deeply
engaged in a counterinsurgency war that has been going on for nearly 40
years.
Mr. Speaker, I have been a strong supporter of President Pastrana,
but the message we send today will be heard and acted upon more by his
successor when elections take place in the coming months. The leading
presidential candidate has long rejected any type of negotiations
process, and he has the support of the right-wing paramilitary groups,
the very groups we rightly are condemning today.
In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, our current policy in Colombia has been a
failure. It has not stemmed the production of coca. It has not provided
peasant farmers with alternatives to growing coca. It has not lessened
the number of internally displaced people. It has not broken the ties
between the Colombian army and the paramilitaries. It has not decreased
the number of civilians who are victims of human rights abuses and
violence. And it has not promoted the administration of justice.
The current attorney general, unlike his predecessors, is not an
advocate for human rights. He has dismissed or stopped investigations
on many of the cases involving high-level military and government
officials. As a result, most of the key officers and prosecutors in the
Justice Ministry responsible for investigating and prosecuting human
rights and corruption cases have resigned or been forced out of office.
For our part, Mr. Speaker, and I say this sadly, the United States
demonstrates its commitment to human rights by consistently waiving the
conditions on our aid every 6 months because the Colombian military
continues to fail to comply.
{time} 1400
Now, in my view, Mr. Speaker, this resolution wants to give a green
light to involve the U.S. more deeply and directly in Colombia's
escalating civil war, and I simply cannot support this.
I have high regard for the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde);
the ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos); and the
gentleman from North Carolina (Chairman Ballenger). These Members have
done a great deal to focus attention on human rights challenges in
Latin America. But I must dissent, and I urge my colleagues to join
with me in opposing this resolution.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Kolbe).
Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 358, which
expresses support for the Government of Colombia.
There were many in Colombia that criticized President Pastrana for
making the peace process a priority above almost any other issue that
faced the Colombian people, but none I think would criticize the
commitment that he made to bringing peace to that troubled country.
Now, rightly, in my opinion, he has called off the negotiations. He has
moved troops into the demilitarized zone. He is facing a long struggle
against a renewed urban terrorism campaign that is targeting the
country's most important infrastructure assets.
But we are proceeding as nothing has changed, as if Colombia is only
fighting a counternarcotics war. I believe we have to face several
realities and counter with a clear U.S. policy in response.
The aggressive timetable that Plan Colombia was to follow,
eradicating coca, providing alternative development, cannot be adhered
to during a full scale war with the FARC and the paramilitaries. The
alternative development plans were already failing from a lack of basic
security for non-governmental organization workers and transport of
alternative commodities, thereby putting the entire program at risk.
It is true that Colombia is a source of 90 percent of the cocaine in
the United States; but conversely, the United States is Colombia's
largest trading partner of legal industries. As such, it is in the
interest of the United States to promote better stability in Colombia
by helping it to address these long-standing approximate and more
recent escalations.
I might remind my colleagues in the other body that of all the
requests from the Government of Colombia, at the top of their list is
the renewal of the Andean Trade Pact.
Because it shares borders with five other countries, Brazil, Peru,
Ecuador, Panama, Venezuela, Colombia's instability is a threat to
regional stability.
[[Page H714]]
While only 3 percent of U.S. oil consumed comes from Colombia, 14
percent comes from neighboring Venezuela. Oil imports from South
America play a vital role in our strategy to diversify the sources of
U.S. oil.
The Colombian economy has faced a number of economic shocks that have
limited its ability to contribute to Plan Colombia and the defense of
its own people. Oil pipelines have been bombed, the price of oil has
fallen, the price of coffee has fallen, foreign investment in Colombia
has fallen. The internal shocks are only going to be made worse by the
escalation of war.
Colombians have traditionally shown a long-term tolerance for
violence, but this is changing; and we can see evidence of this in the
popularity of presidential candidates in Colombia that strongly support
countering the FARC guerillas.
The deteriorating economic conditions not only have threatened the
Colombian Government's commitment to Plan Colombia, but the worsening
unemployment only encourages the narcotics industry in Colombia. It has
become a vicious cycle.
I would urge my colleagues to recognize the changed situation in
Colombia and that we must respond by clarifying U.S. policy. Let us
begin an open debate about our role in Colombia and not rely on State
Department lawyers to look for loopholes in current law. This
resolution begins that debate, and I urge my colleagues to vote in
favor of the resolution.
Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge all of my colleagues to support this
carefully crafted and balanced resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to note the Colombian Army has made
progress in this area, and, while not perfect, no one is. At least they
are trying and have made good progress.
I also note that an alternative to a well-trained and respectful
Colombian Army is the AUC, and that right-wing paramilitary respects no
one's rights, engages in terrorism, illicit drugs, and kills innocent
civilians.
No one here is proposing that we repeal the Leahy amendment that
prohibits aid to the units of Colombian military that engage in human
rights abuses. Leahy is existing law. The Leahy restriction will remain
law and has my strong support, and human rights concerns will not be
thrown out the window in a new Colombian policy.
I also note the counter-drug aid that we provided to the Colombian
police, their antinarcotics unit, has been delivered and used in the
last 2 years without even one allegation of a human rights abuse; I
repeat, not even one allegation.
The Colombians can and will respect human rights if we help them and
we train them and we stand shoulder to shoulder next to them in the
fight. The police antinarcotics unit is a case of study for engagement.
Absent a new U.S. policy, the right-wing paramilitaries will fill the
void in Colombia, and the human rights of no one, especially civilians,
will be safe. We can stay on the sidelines or help our neighbor. The
answer is clear, especially since September 11. We need to fight global
terrorism whenever and wherever it raises its ugly head.
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my opposition to
this resolution on Colombia. I am troubled as to why we are voting on
this resolution today. It concerns me that the purpose of this
resolution is for the Congress to give this administration the green
light to become more heavily involved in the civil war in Columbia.
I have the utmost respect for President Pastrana, but at the same
time I am not in favor of expanding our involvement in Columbia by
using our response to the terrorism threat after September 11 as a
justification to participate in Columbia's civil war. The FARC might be
on the terrorist list, but the reasons that have been given for our
involvement in Colombia have been counternarcotics and not
counterterrorism. I do not want to erase this important distinction.
Mr. Speaker, I read the Spanish press, and let me assure you that in
Latin America and in my congressional district the support does not
exist for having the United States exert its military power in
Columbia. There are atrocities committed on all sides of this conflict.
Today, Secretary Powell testified before the Commerce, Justice, State
and Judiciary Subcommittee, on which I am the ranking member, and I
told him that I understand that drug trafficking is a problem in
Columbia, but that has never before been a reason to send American
troops. Let me be clear that the new threat of terrorism is not and
never should be a reason to change our policy toward Columbia.
Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike the last word in support of
the bipartisan resolution on Colombia and the need for a change in our
policy, now before the House.
While, I have long followed events in Colombia, I long gave the
benefit of the doubt to the Pastrana administration in Colombia with
its protracted negotiations and its Switzerland sized DMZ safe haven
provided the FARC, that naivete has finally ended, hopefully not too
late.
The FARC has attacked cities, towns, police stations, bridges, dams,
and power lines all across Colombia since the peace talks ended last
month. Let there be no mistake, the FARC are terrorists, and I have
been financed by illicit drug proceeds.
Along with their ELN terrorist friends in the last 10 years, the FARC
and ELN have kidnaped 50 Americans in Colombia and killed at least 10
of them. Their trade in illicit drugs help take numerous American lives
here at home as well from their illicit drugs. For example, it is noted
that the DMZ, now abandoned in Colombia, was loaded with opium growth
for heroin production eventually destined for American streets and
communities.
Bogota, the capital of Colombia, is only 3 hours from Miami, and the
beleaguered democratic nation of Colombia is up against the wall from
these narcoterrorists and right wing paramilitaries all financed with
the illicit drug trade and all engaged in terrorism per our own U.S.
State Department.
While our Nation is engaged in fighting global terrorism in
Afghanistan, Yemen, Georgia, and the Philippines, we still maintain the
fiction that the battle in Colombia in our nearby neighborhood is only
about illicit drugs, and our aid has been limited to counternarcotics
We have maintained the fiction of counternarcotics aid only for
Colombia long enough. The same people who kidnap, blow up pipelines,
and who kill Americans trade in illicit drugs to finance their other
criminal and terrorist activities. Only our State Department maintains
the drugs only fiction, on the ground the reality was different and the
Colombian democracy slipped further and further away.
This resolution calls for our administration to take off its rose
color glasses that President Pastrana and our State Department wore for
far too long and let Colombian democracy slip away. It is time we get
serious and fight terrorism and the illicit drugs that finances it in
Colombia and threatens American national interests in our very back
yard.
Protecting pipelines from terrorist attacks is but one way to help
Colombia. It is not enough for a Colombian policy and as the Bob Novak
column noted this week, it is a sorry excuse for a real antiinsurgency
strategy in Colombia. We need to do more.
We must help the Colombian police antikidnaping unites with
helicopters to rescue victims, including Americans in the often hard to
reach terrain. We ought to also restore the clarity we need by giving
the anti-drug mission in Colombia mainly to the excellent antidrug
police, who have a stellar human rights record.
Our assistance to the Colombian military should be antiterrorist
assistance, and not operate under the failed antidrug fiction of the
past. Let us bear in mind that no one here, nor anyone in Colombia has
ever asked for, or called for American combat troops for Colombia.
The Colombians want and deserve the equipment and training they need
to defend themselves and their democracy from the terrorist threat at
their and at our door.
Accordingly, I urge support for this resolution.
Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my support and
solidarity with the people of Columbia in their pursuit of stability
and peace. Along with my colleagues, I condemn the horrible violence
that has been inflicted on the Columbian people by the AUC, ELN, and
the FARC. But, I cannot in good faith support a resolution that
expresses praise to Columbia for improving it's human rights record,
when in fact it has eroded.
Many Member of Congress have joined me in expressing their profound
concern to the Columbian Government over the many murders of trade
union leaders that have gone without investigation or prosecution. The
scourge of murders of trade unionists in Columbia is the highest in the
world, thereby making Columbia notorious as the most dangerous place in
the world to be a union member. The government of Columbia has over and
over again demonstrated their unwillingness to pursue prosecution of
these attacks on organized labor. Columbia's de facto immunity extended
to these assassins has been
[[Page H715]]
clearly condemned by the International Labor Organization, United
Nations Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International, and our own
Department of State.
Columbia can drastically reduce the violence against trade unionists.
It begins with effectively halting the impunity enjoyed by these
perpetrators, many of which have credible ties to the military and
police. Columbia must aggressively prosecute these criminals and
restore its people's confidence in justice.
Mr. Speaker, this resolution fall short in condemning the impunity
enjoyed by human rights violators and the violence perpetrated against
all levels of society, including organized labor. Many of my fellow
Members have actively engaged the Columbian Government with these
concerns but without success. Passing a resolution basically
congratulating Columbia on improving its human rights record is wrong
and counterproductive.
It is my hope that Columbia will choose to aggressively improve it's
human rights record, so in the future we may pass a similar resolution,
with unanimous consent.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House International
Relations Committee and the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I
would like to state my strong objections to the manner in which this
piece of legislation was raised. I was only made aware of the existence
of this legislation this morning, just a couple of hours before I was
expected to vote on it. There was no committee markup of the
legislation, nor was there any notice that this legislation would
appear on today's suspension calendar.
This legislation represents a very serious and significant shift in
United States policy toward Colombia. It sets us on a slippery slope
toward unwise military intervention in a foreign civil war that has
nothing to do with the United States.
Our policy toward Colombia was already ill-advised when it consisted
of an expensive front in our failed ``war on drugs.'' Plan Colombia,
launched nearly 2 years ago, sent $1.3 billion to Colombia under the
guise of this war on drugs. A majority of that went to the Colombian
military; much was no doubt lost through corruption. Though this
massive assistance program was supposed to put an end to the FARC and
other rebel groups involved in drug trafficking, 2 years later we are
now being told--in this legislation and elsewhere--that the FARC and
rebel groups are stronger than ever. So now we are being asked to
provide even more assistance in an effort that seems to have had a
result the opposite of what was intended. In effect, we are being asked
to redouble failed efforts. That doesn't make sense.
At the time Plan Colombia was introduced, President Clinton promised
the American people that this action would in no way drag us into the
Colombian civil war. This current legislation takes a bad policy and
makes it much worse. This legislation calls for the United States ``to
assist the Government of Colombia protect its democracy from United
States-designated foreign terrorist organizations . . . '' In other
words, this legislation elevates a civil war in Colombia to the level
of the international war on terror, and it will drag us deep into the
conflict.
Mr. Speaker, there is a world of difference between a rebel group
fighting a civil war in a foreign country and the kind of international
terrorist organization that targeted the United States last September.
As ruthless and violent as the three rebel groups in Colombia no doubt
are, their struggle for power in that country is an internal one. None
of the three appears to have any intention of carrying out terrorist
activities in the United States. Should we become involved in a civil
war against them, however, these organizations may well begin to view
the United States as a legitimate target. What possible reason could
there be for us to take on such a deadly risk? What possible rewards
could there be for the United States support for one faction or the
other in this civil war?
As with much of our interventionism, if you scratch the surface of
the high-sounding calls to ``protect democracy'' and ``stop drug
trafficking'' you often find commercial interests driving U.S. foreign
policy. This also appears to be the case in Colombia. And like
Afghanistan, Kosovo, Iraq, and elsewhere, that commercial interest
appears to be related to oil The U.S. administration request for FY
2003 includes a request for an additional $98 million to help protect
the Cano-Limon Pipeline--jointly owned by the Colombian Government and
Occidental Petroleum. Rebels have been blowing up parts of the pipeline
and the resulting disruption of the flow of oil is costing Occidental
Petroleum and the Colombian Government more than half a billion dollars
per year. Now the administration wants the American taxpayer to finance
the equipping and training of a security force to protect the pipeline,
which much of the training coming from the U.S. military. Since when is
it the responsibility of the American citizen to subsidize risky
investments made by private companies in foreign countries? And since
when is it the duty of American service men and women to lay their
lives on the line for these commercial interests?
Further intervention in the internal political and military affairs
of Colombia will only increase the mistrust and anger of the average
Colombian citizen toward the United States, as these citizens will face
the prospect of an ongoing, United States-supported war in their
country. Already Plan Colombia has fueled the deep resentment of
Colombian farmers toward the United States. These farmers have seen
their legitimate crops destroyed, water supply polluted, and families
sprayed as powerful herbicides miss their intended marks. An escalation
of American involvement will only make matters worse.
Mr. Speaker, at this critical time, our precious military and
financial resources must not be diverted to a conflict that has nothing
to do with the United States and poses no threat to the United States.
Trying to designate increased military involvement in Colombia as a new
front on the ``war on terror'' makes no sense at all. It will only draw
the United States into a quagmire much like Vietnam. The Colombian
civil war is now in its fourth decade; pretending that the fighting
there is somehow related to our international war on terrorism is to
stretch the imagination to the breaking point. It is unwise and
dangerous.
Mrs. TAUSCHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my support for the
people of Colombia and ask my colleagues to support this resolution.
The people of Colombia have suffered through years of violence,
deprivation, and discord. They have seen their country torn apart in a
violent war between their government and various rebel factions.
Despite the best efforts of President Pastrana, the murder and
kidnapping of Colombian citizens, government officials, and even
American visitors have increased. His efforts to reach a peaceful
settlement have been rejected by the rebel groups.
Mr. Speaker, the United States has made a commitment to addressing
the root cause of these problems in Colombia--the drug trade. Through
Plan Colombia we are working with our Andean allies to destroy drug
production and interrupt drug traffic.
Our assistance will help Colombia's Government lead the country and,
eventually, end drug production and stabilize the Andean region.
As Colombia continues working to secure lasting peace, the United
States should continue to offer support and assistance.
This resolution is an important expression of that support, and I
urge my colleagues to vote for it.
Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) that the House
suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H.Res. 358.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________