Colombia Chopper Wars
by
Arianna Huffington
Filed June 26, 2000
A full three months after
the House approved a $1.7 billion drug-war aid
package for Colombia, the
Senate finally passed its own scaled-down $934
million version. You might
assume that the world's greatest deliberative
body took so long because of a
heated debate over the merits of further
involving ourselves in a country in
the midst of a 40-year-old civil war
or, indeed, over the merits of fighting
the drug war through interdiction
rather than treatment. But you'd be wrong.
The delay actually had a lot to
do with a Blackhawks vs. Hueys Beltway
battle. Call it Chopper Wars -- a
behind-the-scenes dogfight as absurd as it
is revealing about what drives
public policy.
The prize was a huge
contract to manufacture Colombia's copter of choice.
On one side were
lobbyists for United Technologies, whose Sikorsky Aircraft
produces the
Blackhawks. On the other were lobbyists for Bell Helicopter
Textron, which
produces the Hueys.
The House had split the difference and approved a
package that included
roughly 30 of each aircraft, at a total cost of nearly
$450 million. But
despite the fact that the Colombian military, the Pentagon
and the State
Department made it abundantly clear that they preferred the
high-tech
Blackhawk to the smaller, slower, far less expensive Huey,
bargain-hunting
senators on the Appropriations Committee shot down the
Blackhawks and
settled for 60 refurbished Hueys -- a steal at the
priced-to-move cost of
$188 million. "There's no reason for anybody to be
ashamed to fly a Huey
into combat," harrumphed Appropriations chair Sen. Ted
Stevens (R-Alaska).
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) begged to differ.
Usually a stickler on
human rights and a hands-off approach in Latin America,
he has lately taken
the lead on pumping millions in military aid to the
Colombian army, one of
the worst human-rights abusers in the world. Why?
Well, it's probably just
a coincidence, but Sikorsky just happens to be
headquartered in his state,
and through its parent company has -- also
coincidentally, no doubt --
given Dodd more than $38,000 worth of combat aid
(in the form of campaign
donations) in the last election cycle.
Anyway, Dodd wasn't about to let his hometown helicopter go down without
a
fight. He took to the Senate floor and offered an amendment that
would
leave the choice of choppers to the "experts" in the Pentagon and
the
Colombian military -- a smooth move that would have guaranteed
the
Blackhawks would prevail.
After all, Gen. Fabio Velazco, the
Colombian Air Force commander, is on
record expressing his contempt for the
Huey: "It's like comparing a '60
Ford to a new Mercedes." And Colombian
Defense Minister Luis Fernando
Ramirez chimed in, clearly forgetting the
adage about not looking a gift
Huey in the mouth. "When the Huey is coming,"
he whined, "the first thing
you hear is the noise, even 10 minutes before you
see it. It's a very noisy
helicopter. With the Blackhawk, by the time you
hear it, it is practically
overhead."
But Stevens and his
coupon-cutting cronies were undeterred. "The Blackhawks
are the tip of a
sword going into another Vietnam," he claimed, playing the
Southeast
Asian-quagmire card. Which raises the question: If 30 Blackhawks
put us on
the road to another Vietnam, where do 60 Hueys lead? Another
Grenada?
In the end, the Hueys won the Senate dogfight, but the Blackhawks
will
clearly live to fight another day. As the House-Senate Conference
Committee
tries to reconcile the two bills, Colombia's ambassador to
Washington has
warned that his country will insist on the state-of-the-art
Blackhawk.
As absurd as the Chopper Wars are, they are in keeping with
the overblown
rhetoric of the Colombian coke issue. Sen. Paul Coverdell
(R-Ga.) announced
that "Colombia is the heart of the drug war, and we'd
better get on with
it. If we lose Colombia, then we lose everywhere." It's
the domino theory
all over again, with coke instead of Communists.
Dodd was equally overwrought: "When we step up and offer the
Colombian
democracy a chance to fight for themselves, we're not only doing it
for
them, we're doing it for ourselves." Translation: "When we step up
and
offer a major campaign contributor a chance to make an enormous
profit,
we're not only doing it for them, we're doing it for ourselves."
But the crowning absurdity was the ongoing pretense that the Colombian
aid
package is about winning the drug war at home. If that were really
the
goal, you'd think all those senators looking to get more bang for
their
bucks would have relished the chance to vote for Sen. Paul
Wellstone's
(D-Minn.) amendment that, had it passed, would have transferred
$225
million from military aid in Colombia to drug-treatment programs in
the
United States. Treatment, after all, has proved to be 10 times
more
cost-effective than interdiction.
As if to underscore the
futility of the drug-war package, Colombia's
national police chief, Gen.
Rosso Jose Serrano, who has been hailed on The
Hill as "the best cop in the
world," stepped down last Friday. "We'd rather
see drug consumption drop than
get any of this aid," he told the Associated
Press.
If everyone knows
that's how to win the drug war, then why are we spending
more than a billion
dollars in Colombia? And if everyone doesn't know it,
why aren't we debating
that instead of bickering over Blackhawks and Hueys?
Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If
you're not a member of ReconsiDer and would like to join please fill out our membership form. And be sure to visit our website.
Click here to unsubscribe to
this mailing list.