[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.

                          ____________________