Pubdate: Wed, 02 May 2001
Source: Staten Island Advance (NY)
Copyright: 2001 Advance Publication Inc.
Contact:  http://www.silive.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/646
Author: Edward N. Luttwak, Los Angeles Times News Service
Note: Edward N. Luttwak is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and 
International Studies in Washington.

THE FECKLESS DRUG WAR SERVES DEATH, NOT VICTORY

U.S. policy encourages the militarization of life in countries that have 
had more than their share of military rule

Except at the height of the dry season when overland travel is possible, I 
can only reach my ranch in tropical Bolivia by avioneta, the single-piston 
engine light aircraft that are the only practical form of transport in much 
of the Amazon basin.

Forced landings with or without injuries are not that infrequent because of 
old aircraft, sketchy maintenance, poor navigation aids and the lack of 
timely weather warnings. But since 1995 a new and more lethal danger has 
emerged: Aerial intercepts by local air forces, such as the one that just 
killed an American missionary and her infant daughter in Peru.

No aircraft in which I flew was ever shot at, but in one case I did 
experience the next worst thing: A drug enforcement helicopter came so 
close to look us over that the thrust of our 140-horsepower engine was 
overwhelmed by the downdraft of rotor blades. It was by pure luck that we 
did not crash.

The so-called "war on drugs" is mostly metaphorical combat, but not in the 
Andean countries of Latin America. As in wartime air defense, U.S. airborne 
radars and U.S.-funded ground radars monitor avioneta flights, with U.S. 
airborne controllers ready to direct combat aircraft to intercept them for 
visual identification, followed by shooting if it comes to that.

The death of two Americans and the crippling of a third has finally drawn 
attention to this deadly practice started by the Clinton administration in 
a feckless attempt to show how aggressive it was in fighting the drug 
trade. At least 30 aircraft have been shot down so far with all aboard 
killed in most cases, and many more aircraft have been compelled to land in 
emergency conditions, causing further deaths and injuries. Given that 
low-bidding CIA contractors do the air traffic controlling (their skills do 
not extend to such heights of accomplishment as a knowledge of Spanish) 
while local pilots of varying standards bravely perform the interceptions 
of these unarmed light aircraft, it is extremely unlikely that 100 percent 
of the aircraft destroyed or forced down had something to do with the drug 
trade. For one thing, in the Amazon, flight plans are usually "filed" over 
the radio to "control towers" that are often shacks with a single operator 
who may not be attentive.

The U.S. officials who have been claiming that the Peru shoot-down was an 
isolated mistake in a flawless program should explain why is it that drugs 
are hardly ever found in forced-down and shot-down aircraft. One possible 
explanation that may have eluded our decision-makers is that the drug trade 
has been aware of the publicly announced U.S. intercept program ever since 
it started in 1995, and while the average avioneta owner cannot afford 
night-flying instruments, the drug fliers certainly can -- virtually 
ensuring a safe journey because local air forces do not have 
night/all-weather fighters.

On the ground too, the United States sponsors, funds and indeed demands 
warlike procedures, carried out by local drug police in combat uniforms, 
sometimes under the direct supervision of Drug Enforcement Administration 
agents. Innocent civilians are routinely confronted by guns at checkpoints, 
and forced to interrupt their journeys for roadside searches and 
interrogations.

Thus the funds of U.S. taxpayers and the efforts of U.S. policy officials 
from the president down are encouraging the militarization of life in 
countries that have had more than their share of military rule. They also 
are legitimizing high-handed police behavior in countries where the police 
need taming not instigation, and are adding deadly danger to innocent 
flying that is already perilous enough.

Every war inflicts its casualties as well as massive doses of 
inconvenience, but wars are fought in the hope of victory. Not so the 
Andean war on drugs, which has now gone on longer than the two world wars 
combined and which at best displaces the trade from one country to another 
and back again.

It is no surprise that the DEA obdurately pursues its bureaucratic aims, 
seeking more money for more programs while utterly indifferent to the lack 
of useful results. But one wonders why the U.S. Congress continues to fund 
the futility of it all, year after year, without serious question. The 
deaths of an altruistic American woman and a baby should in all decency 
evoke an honest reappraisal of the practices that killed them.
- ---
MAP posted-by: GD