Speech by Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Arizona), March 6, 2002

Speech by Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Arizona), March 6, 2002

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.

As of March 7, 2002, this document was also available online at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/B?r107:@FIELD(FLD003+h)+@FIELD(DDATE+20020306)