Letter from Senators Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota) and Russell Feingold (D-Wisconsin), March 22, 2002

Letter from Senators Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota) and Russell Feingold (D-Wisconsin), March 22, 2002

March 22, 2002

The Honorable Colin Powell
Secretary of State
U.S. Department of State
2201 C St. NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Powell:

We write to express our concern regarding aerial herbicide fumigation in the province of Putumayo, Colombia. We have received reports indicating that this fumigation campaign, begun on November 13 of last year, has indiscriminately targeted farmers who signed alternative development agreements, as well as that it has affected legal crops and crop substitution projects. We request that you investigate these reports, that you consider a temporary halt to the fumigation campaign in Putumayo while undertaking an investigation, and that you prioritize support for the social pacts and alternative development programs in the region.

It appears that the recent round of fumigation B the second experienced by Putumayo residents in a year B represents a serious setback to the crucial development assistance component of U.S. aid to Colombia. Over the past year, more than 37,000 families in Putumayo, representing the majority of the region=s substantial coca cultivation, have made a commitment to participate in the social pact program. Under the pact framework, after receiving their first deliveries of assistance, participating families should have a year to eradicate their illegal crops before facing renewed spraying. The first round of pacts was signed in December 2000, and the first aid was delivered in June 2001. If reports are true, this new round of spraying targeted farmers who signed alternative development agreements, and took place within the one-year substitution period. Fumigating these families= crops, including their legal substitution crops, before the 12-month period=s end seriously damages the credibility of the pact program and increases peasants= deep-rooted suspicion of the Colombian government=s ability to deliver on promises.

We are similarly concerned that most of the families that signed pacts have yet to receive any development aid. In a neglected rural zone where families rely on coca for a steady income, the failure to date to offer families assistance in switching to a legal alternative represents an alarming setback in the program.

In its debate over the FY2002 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, the Senate expressed a variety of concerns about the fumigation policy. In particular, the Senate mandated that alternative development programs be in place before communities are fumigated and ordered that a study of the human health impact of fumigation be carried out before any new funds from the bill could be used to purchase chemicals for fumigation. The Senate also pressed for a compensation mechanism for farmers whose legal crops were fumigated.

The language in the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill provided a 6-month grace period to strengthen existing community development programs in Colombia. That grace period remains in effect, but we must note that the current fumigation campaign in Putumayo runs counter to the concerns expressed by the U.S. Congress. We ask that you consider a temporary moratorium on the fumigation campaign in Putumayo and focus U.S. efforts instead on promoting community development assistance in the region.

It is crucial that the U.S. government play a positive role in supporting alternative development in Colombia. Reports suggest to us that most farmers in Colombia=s impoverished coca-growing zones want to stop growing the crop, which has turned their regions into dangerous battlegrounds. They are watching the pact program with guarded optimism. And while many farmers are skeptical, believing that Bogotá will fail them again, most hope that this U.S.-backed effort may finally offer a legal alternative to coca cultivation and a more stable future. The fumigation of both the legal and illegal crops of pact signers before their substitution period expires, and before their aid arrives, is counterproductive and could encourage coca-growers to give up on the pacts and to grow coca in new zones, leading to a shift of coca to other parts of the country=s extensive and neglected rural zone, with no overall reduction in illicit cultivation. That would represent a devastating failure for the substantial U.S. investment in the eradication program in Colombia.

Thank you for your attention. We look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,

Paul D. Wellstone
United States Senator

Russell D. Feingold
United States Senator