2002 Ron Paul 14:1
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 todays suspension
calendar.
2002 Ron Paul 14:2
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.
2002 Ron Paul 14:3
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 two 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, two 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 doesnt
make sense.
2002 Ron Paul 14:4
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.
2002 Ron Paul 14:5
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?
2002 Ron Paul 14:6
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 American taxpayers 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 American citizens 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?
2002 Ron Paul 14:7
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.
2002 Ron Paul 14:8
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.
This chapter appeared in Ron Pauls Congressional website at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002/cr030602.htm