Citizen G'kar: Musings on Earth

Showing posts with label South America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South America. Show all posts

June 05, 2009

The Dark Side of Plan Colombia: How the U.S. is Subsidizing Death and Drug Trafficking on Stolen Lands

Álvaro Uribe, Presidente de Colombia.

Image via Wikipedia

AlterNet
As Congress prepares to debate new Plan Colombia funding, it's time to investigate how money for biofuels is linked to violence and bloodshed.
Research support for this article was provided by the Puffin Foundation Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute, with additional support from Project Word, a Massachusetts-based media nonprofit organization.
On May 14 Colombia's attorney general quietly posted notice on his office's website of a public hearing that will decide the fate of Coproagrosur, a palm oil cooperative based in the town of Simití in the northern province of Bolívar. A confessed drug-trafficking paramilitary chief known as Macaco had turned over to the government the cooperative's assets, which he claims to own, as part of a victim reparations program.
Macaco, whose real name is Carlos Mario Jiménez, was one of the bloodiest paramilitary commanders in Colombia's long-running civil war and has confessed to the murder of 4,000 civilians. He and his cohorts are also largely responsible for forcing 4.3 million Colombians into internal refugee status, the largest internally displaced population in the world after Sudan's. In May 2008, Macaco was extradited to the United States on drug trafficking and "narco-terrorism" charges. He is awaiting trial in a jail cell in Washington, DC.
Macaco turned himself in to authorities in late 2005 as part of a government amnesty program that requires paramilitary commanders to surrender their ill-gotten assets -- including lands obtained through violent displacement. Macaco offered up Coproagrosur as part of the deal.
But the attorney general's notice made no mention that Coproagrosur had received a grant in 2004 from the US Agency for International Development (USAID). That grant -- paid for through Plan Colombia, the multibillion-dollar US aid package aimed at fighting the drug trade -- appears to have put drug-war dollars into the hands of a notorious paramilitary narco-trafficker, in possible violation of federal law. Colombia's paramilitaries are on the State Department's list of foreign terrorist organizations. USAID's due diligence process "did not fail," according to an official response from the US embassy there, because Macaco was not officially listed among Coproagrosur's owners.
Since 2002 Plan Colombia has authorized about $75 million a year for "alternative development" programs like palm oil production. These programs provide funds for agribusiness partnerships with campesinos in order to wean them from cultivating illicit crops like coca, which can be used to make cocaine. These projects are concentrated in parts of northern Colombia that were ground zero for the mass displacement of campesinos.
USAID officials say the projects provide an alternative to drug-related violence for a battle-scarred country. They insist that the agency screens vigilantly for illegal activity and has not rewarded cultivators of stolen lands. But a study of USAID internal documents, corporate filings and press reports raises questions about the agency's vetting of applicants, in particular its ability to detect their links to narco-paramilitaries, violent crimes and illegal land seizures.
In addition to the $161,000 granted to Coproagrosur, USAID also awarded $650,000 to Gradesa, a palm company with two accused paramilitary-linked narco-traffickers on its board of directors. A third palm company, Urapalma, also accused of links with paramilitaries, nearly won approval for a grant before its application stalled because of missing paperwork. Critics say such grants defeat the antidrug mission of Plan Colombia.
"Plan Colombia is fighting against drugs militarily at the same time it gives money to support palm, which is used by paramilitary mafias to launder money," says Colombian Senator Gustavo Petro, an outspoken critic of the palm industry. "The United States is implicitly subsidizing drug traffickers."
Land Theft and the Biofuel Boom
Brig. Gen. Pauxelino Latorre led an elderly farmer through a maze of concrete hallways, past a series of harshly lit rooms overlooking banana plantations and deep into the barracks of the Colombian army's Seventeenth Brigade in Carepa, a town in northwestern Colombia. Soldiers saluted stiffly as the general barreled by. The farmer -- Enrique Petro -- poor, in his late 60s, shuffled a few steps behind, trying to avoid eye contact.
Petro was understandably anxious. Criminal investigations had repeatedly linked the Seventeenth Brigade to illegal paramilitary groups that had brutally killed thousands, including Petro's brother and teenage son. As he walked deeper into the barracks, Petro had a sense of foreboding. Latorre opened a door into a building at the back of the base, where Javier Daza, then head of Urapalma, was waiting. In the ensuing encounter, Daza and the general did most of the talking.
It was August 2004. A few days earlier, Petro had complained to the general that Urapalma was growing oil palms on land paramilitaries had stolen from him in 1997, in the nearby province of Chocó. In response, the general had suggested a meeting at the base, and Petro, supposing he had little to lose, had agreed. By the end of the brief sit-down, Petro says, Daza and Latorre had intimidated him into legally validating the seizure of his land. With Latorre's signature on the contract as a witness, Petro lost 85 percent of his 370-acre farm -- for which, nearly five years later, he has yet to receive the meager payment.
Petro is one of the lucky ones; he is still alive. According to reports by the Colombian government and nongovernmental organizations, Urapalma has illegally claimed more than 14,000 acres of dense tropical land in Chocó -- land seized with the help of people like Latorre and his paramilitary collaborators. Latorre, a graduate of the US Army training academy known as the School of the Americas, was charged last year with laundering millions of dollars for a paramilitary drug ring, and prosecutors say they are looking into his activities as head of the Seventeenth Brigade. Another general, Rito Alejo Del Río, who led the Seventeenth Brigade at the time of Petro's displacement, is in jail on charges of collaborating with paramilitaries; he, too, received training at the School of the Americas.
Government reports, legal documents and testimony from human rights groups show that drug-fueled paramilitaries -- often in cooperation with the US-funded military -- forcibly displaced thousands of Chocó's farmers in the late 1990s, killing more than a hundred. Since 2001 Urapalma and a dozen other palm companies have seized at least 52,000 acres of the depopulated land in Chocó, most of it held collectively by Afro-Colombian farmers like Petro.
The damage may be just beginning. In 2005 Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, citing surging markets in food and biofuels, urged the country to increase palm production from 750,000 acres to 15 million acres -- an area the size of West Virginia. Critics point out that many of the new palm growing regions exhibit patterns of narco-trafficking and paramilitary violence similar to that in Chocó, including massacres and forced displacement. A report by the international organization Human Rights Everywhere found violent crimes related to palm cultivation in five separate regions -- all of which fall within Uribe's initiative. Almost all of these regions have also been targeted for palm cultivation support by USAID.
The US agency administers Plan Colombia's alternative development program from its headquarters in the massive bunkerlike compound of the US Embassy, on one of Bogotá's busiest streets. Oil palm, or African palm, is one of the few aid-funded crops whose profits can match coca profits. Since 2003 USAID's alternative development contracts have provided nearly $20 million to oil palm agribusiness projects across the country.
Almost half the palm oil produced in Colombia is exported each year -- mostly to Europe but also to the United States. The government now has its sights on the stalled US-Colombia free trade agreement, whose passage by Congress--seen as likely, with President Obama's explicit support -- would allow Colombian palm oil to enter US markets duty-free. Although the oil finds its way into various US food imports, Colombia is banking on the burgeoning market for biofuels.
"We are at the dawn of a grand new development in energy: biodiesel production from African palms," president Uribe said in 2005 as he announced the initiative. The country has roughly doubled its acreage planted in palms since 2001, the year Colombia became the world's fourth-largest exporter of palm oil -- and the year palm companies arrived in Chocó.
Human rights groups have long accused palm companies in Colombia--Urapalma in particular--of cultivating stolen lands. Jens Mesa, president of Fedepalma, the national palm growers' federation, says these charges are grossly overblown. Mesa complains that the Chocó companies, which are not in the federation, are exceptions that have unfairly stigmatized the industry.
Nonetheless, the Congressional Black Caucus has frequently expressed its concerns about the palm industry, which is concentrated in areas with large Afro-Colombian populations, to the Uribe administration. Worried that Congress will withhold Plan Colombia funds or block the trade deal, the Colombian government has begun to take these charges more seriously. In late 2007, Attorney General Mario Iguarán announced an investigation into allegations that twenty-three palm company representatives in Chocó, including Urapalma's, worked with paramilitaries to seize community-owned land. Around the same time, Senator Patrick Leahy attached an amendment to Plan Colombia funds that prohibits the financing of palm projects that "cause the forced displacement of local people." Congress will soon debate Plan Colombia funding for 2010, the first foreign appropriations budget penned by the Obama team. In the bill's current draft, Leahy's amendment is marked for deletion.
Sean Jones, until mid-May USAID's director for alternative development in Colombia, recognizes that the country's palm oil industry has "two faces." One is the law-abiding companies, he says, but "there is this ugly face of African palm, too, where you have some really nasty players out there."
Paramilitaries and La Violencia
Even in Colombia, with its tremendous geographical and cultural diversity, the jungle province of Chocó is considered exotic. Chocó's tropical rainforests, wedged into the northwest corner of the country where South America joins Panama, are among the most biodiverse on the planet. But most Colombians still see it as a violently contested backwater. Torrential downpours nourish low-lying mountain ranges, which feed hundreds of rivers and swamps that stretch veinlike across the landscape. Most of these waterways flow into the large Atrato River, which snakes its way north through the rainforest until its delta empties into the Caribbean gulf. Locals call this area Urabá.
The farmers of Urabá most affected by the palm business live near two lush tributaries: the Curvaradó and Jiguamiandó river basins. In 2000 the government's rural land management agency, Incoder, awarded collective title to 250,000 acres here to slave-descended black communities, who enjoy the same territorial rights as indigenous peoples under Colombia's Constitution.
But the government, in an effort to attract global investors, has also branded Urabá "the best corner of the Americas." And in recent years, palm companies have taken more than 20 percent of the land fronting the two rivers -- the most habitable and agriculturally viable part of the territory.
In the late 1980s this part of Colombia became a base for paramilitary groups, or "paras," founded by three brothers from the Castaño family: Fidel, Vicente and Carlos, who came up through the ranks of the infamous Medellín cartel of Pablo Escobar. The Castaños received generous logistical and financial support from businessmen, wealthy landowners, drug traffickers and members of the army. They collaborated so closely with the Colombian military's dirty war against guerrillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) that a 2001 report by Human Rights Watch referred to them as the army's "sixth division." Fueled by zealous anticommunism, warlords like the Castaños slaughtered thousands of innocents accused of harboring guerrilla sympathies.
By the mid-1990s, human rights reports show, the paras turned their violence to an economic purpose: gaining lands and businesses, eliminating opponents and protecting their most lucrative activity, drug trafficking. The Castaños and their allies became Colombia's undisputed cocaine barons, earning them top spots on the U.S. government's most-wanted lists. The warlords began a bloody march into Urabá.
First, leaflets appeared warning all guerrilla collaborators to leave, and towns were riddled with paramilitary graffiti. Uriel Tuberquia, one of Enrique Petro's campesino neighbors, recounts that in the months before the paras arrived, rumors coursed through the community that the mochacabezas (decapitators) were coming, a reference to the gruesome way paramilitaries would dismember the bodies of their victims.
When the paras finally came, they killed Tuberquia's father as he grazed his cattle. "They shot him from behind, at long range," says Tuberquia, staring into the palm fields. "My dad never got a proper burial. He's just buried there, somewhere, underneath all that palm."
In October 1996 the paras had a macabre coming-out party in Chocó, with the murder of eight campesinos in the tiny town of Brisas on the Curvaradó River, an hour's walk from Petro's farm. What followed was a crescendo of terror locals simply call la violencia. In February 1997 the military, backed that year by $87 million in U.S. support, teamed up with its "sixth division" to hammer northern Chocó. Army helicopters and fighter jets rained bombs and high-caliber gunfire on the jungle communities, while the paras "cleaned up" behind them. Military and paramilitary roadblocks cropped up everywhere. International human rights groups documented massacres, torture, murders and rapes. Paramilitaries capped off the year by slaughtering thirty-one campesinos a week before Christmas.
According to the UN Refugee Agency, the 1997 offensive forced some 17,000 people from their homes. In the Curvaradó and Jiguamiandó basins alone, 140 farmers have been confirmed killed or disappeared, all but four by soldiers or paramilitaries. By 1997 Petro had already lost his brother and two sons to la violencia -- one killed by the FARC. Paramilitaries repeatedly warned him he'd be killed if he didn't leave his farm. He tried to stay on, but after another son left, Petro abandoned the land.
"They said they came here to clean out the guerrillas," recalls Petro, "but it was us, the campesinos, they cleaned out." In interviews, several survivors tell me that when the violence began, paras came to their farms with the same chilling offer: "Sell us your land, or we'll negotiate with your widow."
By 2001, when the paras announced they had gained definitive control of Urabá, Petro and the other campesinos were scattered. Some were hiding out in the jungle; others had left Chocó entirely. Though paras prevented them from visiting their farms, the campesinos heard rumors that their lands were being planted with palm.
Gustavo Duncan, a security analyst at the University of the Andes, in Bogotá, says the paramilitaries' turn to palm was the obvious business decision: "Palm was a perfect way to consolidate their militarized social control over a territory and invest capital accumulated from drugs into a profitable business." According to an affidavit by a former Urapalma employee who cooperated with the attorney general's investigation, the main bridge between the Castaños and investors was Hernán Gómez, an early ideological mentor of the Castaño brothers and husband of Urapalma's current CEO. The affidavit states that Gómez, who did not return multiple calls to his home, helped the Castaños recruit wealthy narcos with experience in the palm business to invest in Urapalma.
As farmers began trickling back to their homes after 2001, many found their lands razed and planted with palm saplings. Companies like Urapalma had posted signs on the land with big block letters: Private Property. A permanent paramilitary presence terrorized the area.
Petro spent five years without seeing his farm, taking refuge in the nearby town of Bajirá. He returned only in 2002, to a devastating sight. "All the work of my youth was gone," he says. "One hundred ten head of cattle, nine horses, my wife had tons of chickens, pigs ... everything gone." Urapalma had plowed his pastures for palms. A year after his arrival, he says, shortly after he began working his land again, "the paramilitaries came to kill me." Petro had left for town that morning, and so he avoided harm. But he returned to find his home ransacked and covered in graffiti. The paras' slogans are still visible on the walls of his dilapidated house.
USAID and Palm
Three months after the paras vandalized Petro's home, Urapalma submitted a grant application to the Bogotá offices of ARD Inc., a thirty-year-old rural development contractor based in Burlington, Vermont, with offices in forty-three countries. On its website ARD describes itself as guided by "Vermont's ideals of leadership in environmental affairs and local participation in government." USAID, a major source of ARD's revenue, has $330 million in active contracts with the company.
In January 2003, ARD began administering $41.5 million for USAID's Colombia Agribusiness Partnership Program (CAPP). Urapalma was one of the first palm companies to send an application; the Macaco-linked Coproagrosur received its $161,000 grant the following year (a third of which was returned, unspent). ARD's quarterly reports show that Urapalma requested $700,000 in financing to cover the planting of palm on some 5,000 acres in Urabá -- the epicenter of stolen land. The grant application began working its way through ARD's process.
USAID officials refer to Urapalma's proposed project as a "strategic alliance" and typically call such efforts "community driven." "Without our support," said an embassy official, "farmers would have a weaker ability to negotiate fair alliances with the industrial processors." But according to documents from the Colombian attorney general's 2007 investigation, obtained by the Investigative Fund at The Nation Institute, palm companies in Chocó set up these partnerships to legitimize illegal land acquisitions after the fact -- often through fraud and coercion.
The investigation files include an affidavit by Pedro Camilo Torres, a former Urapalma employee who from 1999 to 2007 handled the company's loan applications, including the USAID grant proposal. His affidavit charges that Urapalma created campesino "front" organizations to secure phony land titles and gain access to public funds.
The most notorious case of fraud involves Lino Antonio Díaz Almario, who allegedly in 2000 acquired 14,645 acres -- an impossible fortune for a poor campesino -- and immediately sold these lands to the Association of Small Palm Oil Producers of Urabá, an organization started by Urapalma. But Díaz had been dead since 1995, when he drowned in the Jiguamiandó.
Urapalma's proposed USAID project, as summarized in an ARD report, referred to "Afrocolombian Associations." According to Torres's affidavit and eyewitnesses cited by the attorney general, all of Urapalma's campesino organizations were set up by Teresa Gómez, whom the U.S. Treasury identifies as the "financial manager" of the Castaños' vast narco-paramilitary federation. She managed at least two other paramilitary-affiliated NGOs and is wanted for the murder of a campesino leader in Córdoba province who had clamored for lands seized by the Castaños. Phone calls and messages left with Urapalma's staff over months were not returned.
Urapalma never received the grant money in question, an outcome that Susan Reichle, USAID-Colombia's mission director, says vindicates the agency's "due diligence." Reichle says her team has developed a "land protocol and a whole process to really ensure, to the best of our abilities and through several layers of investigation, that this land is clean land." But, she admits, "unfortunately, you'd love to say it's 100 percent -- you're never going to be." Sean Jones, who became head of USAID's alternative development programs in Colombia in 2006, contradicts Reichle, pointing out that Urapalma's application stalled because the company failed to submit paperwork on land titles.
According to CAPP's quarterly reports, a joint USAID-ARD "review committee" had advanced the Urapalma proposal as far as the penultimate stage of the process -- the last step before awarding money -- by January 2005. Roberto Albornoz, who has headed ARD's agribusiness program in Colombia since the inception of the USAID contract, says his staff conducted due diligence but never turned up evidence of suspicious activities. He confirms that the project was "put on hold" in April 2005 only after Urapalma stopped submitting documentation. Albornoz says his staff did not learn of Urapalma's questionable past until they came across a magazine article published five months after the proposal was put on hold. When pressed as to why ARD screeners failed to suspect the company of illegal activity, Jones echoes Albornoz: "The allegations around Urapalma weren't coming up in the press at that point."
But the forced displacements and massacres in Urabá were already in the public record. In July 2003, a month before Urapalma's USAID application, the national daily El Tiempo reported that "the African palm projects in the southern banana region of Urabá are dripping with blood, misery and corruption." The Washington Post picked up the story two months later.
In declassified cables from the U.S. Embassy, U.S. officials in Bogotá sounded the alarm about the paramilitaries' stranglehold on Urabá as early as 1996. A cable from that year states, "The Castaños have profited greatly from their activities, reportedly acquiring thousands of acres of land in northern Colombia." The cable refers to growing paramilitary control of entire regions and specifically mentions Urabá.
In 2003, five months before Urapalma's grant request, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights singled out Urapalma for collusion with paramilitaries in Urabá: "Since 2001, the company Urapalma SA has initiated cultivation of the oil palm on approximately 1,500 hectares of the collective land of these communities, with the help of 'the perimetric and concentric armed protection of the Army's Seventeenth Brigade and armed civilians'" -- i.e., paras. Soldiers and paras undertook armed incursions, the court concluded, to "intimidate" communities into "join[ing] in the production of oil palm or evacuat[ing]."
Albornoz says ARD's screeners cross-referenced company records with Colombian and U.S. government databases of people linked to the drug trade. But the company had evident narco links: in its corporate registration papers, Urapalma lists as its founding investors two brothers from the Zúñiga Caballero family, which Colombian authorities charge is a paramilitary-connected clan with links to the Medellín and Cali drug cartels.
Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars
While USAID eventually tabled Urapalma's proposal, the agency awarded one grant to Coproagrosur, the company surrendered by Macaco, and another to Gradesa, which refines palm oil for domestic consumption and export -- much of it to the United States. According to ARD reports and USAID documents, the agency's grant to Gradesa helped support a project in Belén de Bajirá, Chocó, the Urabá municipality that is home to Urapalma -- and to the land formerly farmed by Enrique Petro. USAID appears to have supported Gradesa's involvement in refining palm oil from the Chocó killing fields.
USAID insists it has never funded a palm project in Chocó. Representatives from USAID, Gradesa and ARD deny that the Gradesa project was based in Belén de Bajirá, despite three years of references to the town in internal and public documents. USAID representatives say that the locale was referenced erroneously after Gradesa mistakenly mentioned it in a status report. "The error went unnoticed," USAID's press attaché explained by e-mail, "because our main interest centers on information related to hectares, families, employment and budget invested."
In any case, at the time USAID awarded Gradesa a $257,000 grant on December 19, 2003, corporate filings show that the same two Zúñiga brothers who'd invested in Urapalma, Antonio and Carlos, also sat on Gradesa's board. (Carlos appears on a Colombian government list of narco-traffickers as early as 1987.) In March 2005, Colombia's attorney general announced that he was seizing the Zúñigas' stake in the firm and filed criminal charges against the brothers for using Gradesa to launder narco-dollars. According to a Colombian narcotics official, that stake was 50 percent; a recent interview with Gradesa's CEO revealed that the brothers had owned this stake since the early 1990s, long before the USAID grant. The attorney general's case is now plodding its way through Colombian courts, the government's fifth attempt to pin drug-laundering charges on the Zúñigas.
Despite this pending legal action, USAID approved a second Gradesa grant in 2007, this one for $400,000 -- monies from a new five-year, $182 million contract with ARD. In a written response, a U.S. embassy official said that since USAID received no formal notice of the case against the Zúñigas, "there was no way that USAID could have been aware of the link between Gradesa and the Zúñiga investigation." The official said "no red flags were raised" in the due diligence process for Gradesa's second grant and that as the Zúñigas were no longer "shareholders, investors or managers" they did not qualify as "recipients."
Permanent Displacement
Life has not improved much for Petro or his fellow refugees. In April the government returned 3,200 acres -- just 6 percent of the stolen land -- to some farmers along the Curvaradó River. Twelve years after they were forced to flee, the rest remain displaced. The government says it is pressing the palm companies to return the remainder of the lands voluntarily, but locals have heard such promises before. Meanwhile, the companies are shipping out palm kernels by the truckload. Petro has only a fraction of his farm left, part of which he turned into a makeshift "humanitarian zone," a village of wooden shacks called Caño Claro, populated in recent years by as many as a dozen displaced families at a time.
More than 2,500 people still scrape by in a handful of these humanitarian zones, which dot the Curvaradó and Jiguamiandó river basins, though none enjoy legal recognition by the government. In some cases, all that separates these refugees from their palm-covered former farms is a cratered dirt road patrolled by paramilitaries, now in civilian clothing, and army soldiers. Children scamper around the camps with bloated bellies from illness and malnutrition, their families torn from their source of subsistence. Of late, reprisals and violent threats toward those demanding the return of their lands have increased.
One day last October campesino leader Walberto Hoyos was shot and killed execution-style near the Curvaradó River, his neck and face pumped with bullets by a paramilitary gunman. The next morning, the residents of Urabá woke up to find their towns riddled with fresh graffiti and leaflets announcing the formation of a new paramilitary group, an eerie reprise of events leading up to la violencia.
Related articles by Zemanta


May 26, 2008

Rethink the Fight against Cocaine

International Crisis Group
When Plan Colombia (the multibillion dollar US assistance program targeted at curbing drug smuggling and supporting Colombia against armed guerrillas) started, coca was cultivated in 12 of Colombia's 34 provinces. Today it is grown in 23 of those provinces.


In 2006, after five years of Plan Colombia, four years of the regional Andean Counterdrug Initiative, and after spending $5.5 billion, some 1,000 metric tons of cocaine were produced between Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. That's about the same amount that was produced in 2002 when President Álvaro Uribe took office.


The head of the White House Office of Narcotics and Drug Control Program, John Walters, admitted at a press conference in Haiti recently that last year that cocaine production had risen to 1,400 metric tons in 2007 – a whopping 40 percent hike. Not surprisingly, his staff is scrambling to rephrase that.


Washington is focusing on the most easily replaceable link of the cocaine production chain – the impoverished campesino – through aerial spraying and forced eradication. These poor farmers feel unfairly singled out, since too many at the top of the chain – drug traffickers and illegal armed combatants – survive or are quickly replaced by equally brutal traffickers. This administration's policy of targeting the poorest is wrong.


Law enforcement and interdiction are essential to control drug trafficking, but not sufficient. A massive increase in rural development would provide a far better chance of reducing the drug supply flowing from the Andean ridge countries than eradication alone.


Colombia is faced with a continuing insurgency, which finances itself from drug revenues, and the Peruvian and Bolivian coca growers are among the continent's most impoverished indigenous communities. That's why it's so important for Washington to support a massive increase in rural infrastructure investment, rural governance, and public service extension into those communities now.


Congress made a good start last year by voting to shift Plan Colombia funding away from military to economic development and rule of law. Unfortunately, the administration opposed it. Now Congress needs to go one step further and push this administration, and the next one, to rethink a counterdrug policy that has not achieved its goals. Fundamental changes are needed in both supply and demand policies if there is going to be a decline in cocaine trafficking into the US.


In 2002, just under 9 percent of the US population from 12 to 25 years of age admitted to using cocaine the previous year. In 2006, the same percentage said they snorted cocaine. Since the population has grown, simple math shows that in absolute terms many more used cocaine.


A one-size-fits-all demand reduction policy essentially aims to put everyone who touches cocaine in jail – whether they are one-time or weekend users, addicts or traffickers. Certainly for traffickers, the only option is more effective law enforcement that works closely with other nations to go after their money, their assets, and their structures.


For cocaine users, it is time to build on the best models of dealing with addicts through a public health lens, with hospitals, clinics, and treatment replacing jails. And a massive public service effort should be launched to target recreational users that equates cocaine use with drunken driving – unacceptable destructive behavior. Their weekend fun kills young people in Colombia and Los Angeles and Miami. It has to stop.

June 12, 2006

China's Move Into Latin America

China plays a patient game. While the Bush Administration burns bridges and bullies it's allies repeatedly shooting himself in the foot, China walks behind and calmly charms those feeling abused by America. What is the Chinese intent? How does this play into their long range geopolitical objectives? Is China a real threat to America?
That question is answered in the first bullet point of this excerpt from an article from PINR.
China's activities in Latin America are part and parcel of its long-term grand strategy. The key elements of Beijing's grand strategy can be identified as follows:
  • Focus on "comprehensive national power" essential to achieving the status of a "global great power that is second to none" by 2049;

  • Seek energy security and gain access to natural resources, raw materials and overseas markets to sustain China's economic expansion;

  • Pursue the "three Ms": military build-up (including military presence along the vital sea lanes of communication and maritime chokepoints), multilateralism, and multipolarity so as to counter the containment of China's regional and global aspirations by the United States and its friends and allies;

  • Build a network of Beijing's friends and allies through China's "soft power" and diplomatic charm offensive, trade and economic dependencies via closer economic integration (free trade agreements), and mutual security pacts, intelligence cooperation and arms sales.

First and foremost is the Chinese strategic objective of limiting U.S. dominance worldwide. The world's rising superpower, China, has long viewed the world's reigning superpower, the United States, as its major global strategic rival that needs to be contained and balanced. Notwithstanding Beijing's rhetoric of "peace and development," China's strategic posture is based on the realist paradigm of "comprehensive national power" with which it seeks to defend its interests and intimidate, aggrandize, and support the enemies of its enemies. Faced with a dramatic expansion of U.S. military power ("hard power") all around China's periphery after the September 11 attacks, Beijing responded by unveiling its "soft power" strategy in the form of a diplomatic "charm offensive," the notion of "China's peaceful rise," and laid greater emphasis on multilateralism and economic integration.


[...]Beijing's growing role in Latin America has also coincided with elections that have brought populists and leftists to power in Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Bolivia. In particular, Brazil, Cuba, and Venezuela have made no secret of their game plan to play "the China card" to offset U.S. influence and trade dominance. In most country cases, when the U.S. withdraws or is negligent militarily, politically or economically, the Chinese move in.


[...]Beijing's customary denials notwithstanding, "the successful Chinese model" of "development-minus-democracy" or "development before democracy" is being sold to the developing world as an alternative model for ending poverty, and it resonates well across the world. The pitch is certainly winning an audience in Africa and Latin America. This "contest of ideas" further opens the door for Beijing to position itself to play the role of balancer and neutralizer right in Washington's backyard.
    [...]China's increasing influence in the region is an emerging dynamic that can't be ignored. China needs to protect its access to food, energy, raw materials, and export markets. This has forced a change in its military strategy, to promote a power-projection military, capable of securing lanes and protecting its growing economic interests abroad.

Beijing is training increasing numbers of Latin American military personnel, taking advantage of a void created by a 2002 U.S. law barring military training and aid to a dozen Latin countries -- Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay and Venezuela -- that refuse to exempt U.S. citizens from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. These countries had, in the past, received U.S. training and aid.


[...]China also has had exchanges of senior defense officials with Ecuador, Bolivia and Chile and provided military aid and training to Jamaica and Venezuela. In addition to its growing commercial prowess in Caribbean ports such as the Bahamas, Beijing has been operating two intelligence stations out of Cuba since 1999. Media reports speak of cooperation among the Chinese, Cuban and Venezuelan intelligence agencies. In August 2005, Venezuela decided to buy the Chinese JYL-1 mobile air defense radar and surveillance system. In his testimony before the House Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Roger Pardo-Maurer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Western Hemisphere affairs, said that the United States needs "to be alert to rapidly advancing Chinese capabilities, particularly in the fields of intelligence, communications and cyber-warfare, and their possible application in the region. We would encourage other nations in the hemisphere to take a close look at how such activities could possibly be used against them or the United States."


[...]Beijing's primary interest in infrastructure projects that would improve access to, and transportation of, resources, raw materials and commodities (as in Myanmar, Cambodia, Pakistan, and Central Asia) to fuel China's economic expansion causes unease in the region. Many Latin American economists and analysts warn against falling into the trap of being a supplier of commodities for China's value-added manufacturing enterprises, and thus assume the posture of a Chinese colony or economic dependency like Myanmar.


[...]Furthermore, with so much foreign investment going to China, Latin America is finding it difficult to obtain the capital it needs to finance its own growth. Finally, despite the proliferation in the number of Chinese language classes, the cultural barriers that separate China and Latin America remain formidable. Geography, history, culture and values inextricably tie Latin America's present and future to the United States.


In short, Beijing's relations with Latin America are neither too cozy nor frictionless. Different countries and sectors in Latin America benefit differentially from economic ties with China. While labor-intensive manufacturers (in Brazil, Mexico and Central America) are losers, energy and resource extractors and high-tech goods suppliers (in Venezuela, Uruguay, Peru, Argentina and Chile) are winners. Nonetheless, the point is that for Latin America and the Caribbean countries, China is no longer a distant Asian power, but a mighty rival, indispensable partner, potential investor, as well as a great power friend and counterweight to the United States, and, above all, a global power that needs to be handled with care.


[...]Beijing calculates that one of the consequences of the burgeoning Sino-Latin American trade and resource dependency will be a widening of the gap between U.S. and Latin American interests. As U.S. Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Pardo-Maurer points out: "China has its own set of political, economic and military interests, requiring us to carefully distinguish between legitimate commercial initiatives and the possibility of political or diplomatic efforts to weaken the democratic alliances we have forged."


While Beijing's forays do not indicate a seismic change in the balance of power within Latin America, the very presence of China does make U.S. diplomacy difficult. Increasingly, "the China option" affords Latin American countries greater room for maneuver and an additional source of leverage vis-à-vis Washington. While the Chinese may not want to be drawn into Venezuela, Brazil or Cuba's problems with the United States, that does not mean that these countries will not play "the China card" in their relations with the United States.


[...]China's increasing imprint on the economic, political and strategic character of its region makes it important for Washington to seek a mutually beneficial accommodation with its new neighbor. Washington welcomes China's trade and economic ties with Latin America, seeing it as a means to reduce pressure on the United States to underwrite regional economic development. A test of whether China is a stakeholder or just a seeker of the continent's natural resources and markets would be its commitment to developing some rules and common objectives whereby Latin America gains as much from its economic engagement as China without undermining transparency, growth, stability and democracy in the region. To this end, Beijing would need to invest not just in oilfields and mines, but in other sectors that would contribute to Latin American growth and development.


China's influence in Latin America cannot supersede that of the United States. U.S. trade and investment in Latin America not only dwarfs that of China, but its economic engagement is also qualitatively different from that of China -- as a provider of high-tech and knowledge-based goods and services. The enormous power asymmetry between China and the United States, and Beijing's domestic development priorities, ensure that the Chinese leadership will continue to steer clear of direct confrontation with Washington. MORE

Clearly the Chinese are content to watch America destroy itself on debt, domestic labor dissent, and declining infrastructure. However, come 20 years from now, China will be positioned to challenge the US in every way. They expect the US to decline by some means within 40 years.

August 20, 2005

Ecuador sends troops to guard oil installations from protesters

FT.com
Ecuador has sent in troops to occupy its oil-rich Amazon region and declared a state of emergency, after attacks on installations by community groups cut oil production by about 65 per cent.


The armed forces said on Thursday evening they had secured the eastern provinces of Orellana and Sucumbios, which account for three-quarters of state oil production and about half of private oil production in Ecuador, in order "to guarantee the physical security of the hydrocarbons complex and the return of the flow of petrol".

[...]
The protests are the latest blow to Ecuador's troubled oil sector, South America's second biggest exporter of crude to the US. No new foreign investors have signed exploration or production contracts since 1996, and some of the largest foreign investors are being forced out.

[...]
Local groups began protesting last Sunday, calling for higher wages, more jobs for local people, and the con struction of schools, roads and health clinics. The oil sector agreed last week to devote more funds to infrastructure spending in oil-producing areas, but the deal failed to prevent the unrest. Protest leaders are now demanding outright nationalisation.

The people of South America seem to have hit on a winning formula of response to globalization. They have organized to ensure the benefit of their national resources reach all of the people, not just the rich landowners. Brazil, Bolivia and Venezuela have had similar successes in at least the initial steps towards capturing a piece of the excessive profit in oil and natural gas, but not without significant political consequences both internally and internationally. The US oil interests and the Bush Administration has been working to isolate these countries and pry free the oil and natural gas. They even appear to have funded a move for landowners to secede from Bolivia.
It seems that an organized populous will ultimately benefit, but we will have to wait and see.

July 01, 2005

One in six countries facing food shortage: Climate change main reason

One in six countries facing food shortage: Climate change main reason: -DAWN - International
One in six countries in the world face food shortages this year because of severe droughts that could become semi-permanent under climate change, UN scientists have warned. In a stark message for world leaders who meet in Gleneagles next week to discuss global warming, Wulf Killman, chairman of the UN food and agriculture organisation’s climate change group, said the droughts that have devastated crops across Africa, central America and south-east Asia in the past year are part of an emerging pattern.


“Africa is our greatest worry,” he said. “Many countries are already in difficulties ... and we see a pattern emerging. Southern Africa is definitely becoming drier and everyone agrees that the climate there is changing. We would expect areas which are already prone to drought to become drier with climate change.”


The food and agriculture organisation and the US government, both of which monitor global food shortages, agree that 34 countries are now experiencing droughts and food shortages and others could join them. Up to 30 million people will need assistance because of the droughts and other natural disasters such as the Asian tsunami.

This is just the beginning of the coming changes. Unfortunately, these changes don't have devastating effects on the primary polluters of greenhouse gases that produce global warming. The US heads the list. For more information on Global Warming, this site has a comprehensive list of articles.

March 05, 2005

Bolivia and Peru Are Destabilizing Because of Bush Drug Policy

The Bush Administration is cutting back on development money for Peru and Bolivia at the point when the populous is turning against the government for punishing even legitimate coca farmers and devastating rural areas by destroying the local economy without offering alternatives. In effect, Bolivia and Peru may be another casualty of the war in Iraq.
International Crisis Group | Coca, Drugs and Social Protest in Bolivia and Peru
U.S. counter-drug policies there also emphasise eradication and downplay the legitimacy of traditional coca production and have prompted mounting social protest by coca farmers, particularly in Bolivia but also in Peru. There is no doubt that a large part of coca leaf grown today in the two countries is sold for processing into cocaine. The extremely weak governments and state institutions, which lack the capability to control their vast territories and enforce the law, have come under increasing pressure from social movements and populist opposition parties. The counterdrug policies impact on coca farmers from poor indigenous communities with historical grievances against the economic and political elites. The implementation and public perception of counterdrug policies add fuel to a political tinderbox that already has seen a president forced from office in Bolivia. Democratic governance, prospects for equitable socio-economic development and social peace in Bolivia and Peru are in serious jeopardy.