Colombian heroin production, nonexistent a decade ago, totaled 8 metric tons last year, putting Colombia ahead of Asia as the principal U.S. supply source. Clinton administration officials argue that the United States can't afford to let Colombia succumb to the growing havoc wreaked by the drug traffickers and the guerrillas who protect and profit from the drug business. And Congress, especially in an election year, appears eager to step up the drug war, though nervous legislators question whether the U.S. strategy will work and how much time and money it will take. By all accounts this is just a down payment in a long fight, and despite administration assurances that U.S. troops will not be deployed in operations, much less in combat, some lawmakers are not appeased. Aside from the risks, there is the issue of spending more on an eradication policy that seems to have the effect of merely moving production from one country to another.
Critics cite studies showing that demand-reduction programs at home are cheaper and more effective.
Already, aerial imagery has detected a new coca zone that nearly tripled in size last year on Colombia's northeast border with Venezuela. Others are leery of forging a close alliance with Colombia's Army because of its alleged links with brutal right-wing paramilitary bands. The biggest wild card is how the Colombian guerrillas, who roam the southern provinces, will react to the military offensive. The architects of the plan are counting not just on the stick of military pressure but also on economic incentives to wean growers off the coca crop and to gain support for democracy-building programs. President Andr s Pastrana is holding out the carrot of peace talks to the rebels.