Speech by Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota), June 30, 2000

Speech by Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota), June 30, 2000

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to the changes that were made to `Plan Colombia' in the military construction conference report. As if this body did not originally give enough to the military `Push into Southern Colombia' with $250 million, this conference report increases that amount by $140 million, to fund a 390 million dollar first-time offensive military action in southern Colombia .

`Plan Colombia' has been added to this conference report as an emergency supplemental. We are moving it through this Congress quickly under the guise of a `drug emergency.' But, if there is truly a drug emergency in this country, and I believe there is, why are there no resources in this plan targeted to where they will do the most good: providing funding for drug treatment programs at home? And, honestly, if the purpose of this military aid is to stop the supply of drugs, shouldn't some of that aid target the North as well? Something strange and dishonest is going on here.

During our debate over `Plan Colombia' I heard over and over again not only how much the Colombian government needed this assistance, but also how urgently it had to have it. I heard over and over again how if Colombia did not get this money now all hope for democracy would be lost, not only in Colombia but also for many other Latin and South American countries as well. This, my colleagues, is a far cry from stopping the flow of drugs into the United States. This, my colleagues, is choosing sides in a civil war that has raged for more than thirty years. And I think the American people deserve to know this.

This massive increase in counternarcotics aid for Colombia this year puts the U.S. at a crossroads--do we back a major escalation in military aid to Colombia that may worsen a civil war that has already raged for decades, or do we pursue a more effective policy of stabilizing Colombia by promoting sustainable development, strengthening civilian democratic institutions, and attacking the drug market by investing in prevention and treatment at home? I see today that we have chosen the former.

We are choosing to align ourselves with a military that is known to have close contacts with paramilitary organizations. Paramilitary groups operating with acquiescence or open support of the military account for most of the political violence in Colombia today. In its annual report for 1999, Human Rights Watch reports: `in 1999 paramilitary were considered responsible for 78% of the total number of human rights and international humanitarian law violations' in Colombia . Our own 1999 State Department Country Reports on Human Rights notes that `at times the security forces collaborated with paramilitary groups that committed abuses.'

We should support Colombia during this crisis. Being tough on drugs is important, but we need to be smart about the tactics we employ. This conference report decreases by $29 million the aid this Chamber gave to support alternative development programs in Colombia . It cuts by $21 million support for human rights and judicial reform. It also cuts support for interdiction by $3.1 million. Yet, it increases by $140 million funding for the military `Push into Southern Colombia .' What are we doing here? Guns never have and never will solve Colombia's ills, nor will they address our drug problem here in the United States.

I reiterate how unbalanced `Plan Colombia' is in this conference report. It cuts the good and increases the bad. A more sensible approach would have been to permit extensive assistance to Colombia in the form of promoting sustainable development and strengthening civilian democratic institutions. This would have safeguarded U.S. interests in avoiding entanglement in a decades-old civil conflict, and partnership with an army implicated in severe human rights abuses. Instead, we are funding a military offensive into southern Colombia and denying resources where they would be the most effective: drug treatment programs at home. I am appalled at this strategy.

As of July 18, 2000, this document was also available online at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r106:S30JN0-436: