The Sunshine Project
Press Release
7 July 2000

Biological Agents in the Drug War:
Colombian Response to US Pressure for Biological Drug Eradication is Inadequate; UN Role Questioned

According to press reports, yesterday Colombia agreed to test biological means of drug eradication. In a deal to free up US $1.3 billion in mainly military aid, Colombia is reported to have agreed to search for biological agents to eradicate coca; but appears to have rejected field tests of a fungus developed by the USA. Initially, the USA had proposed to release Fusarium oxysporum, a microbial agent that kills coca crops, into the Colombian environment for testing purposes. The government of Colombia rejected this idea and replied with a counterproposal, which has formed an apparent basis of yesterday´s decision.

The Sunshine Project has obtained a recent version of the Colombian document and has concluded that the still-secret proposal, mentioned in recent reports by AP, Reuters, the New York Times and Miami Herald, is currently insufficient to stop US deployment of biological weapons in the Drug War.

According to Susana Pimiento, a Colombian attorney with the Sunshine Project, "The counterproposal is heavily weighted towards satisfying US pressure, not Colombian needs, and it cannot be supported in its current form. Despite confusing statements from the US State Department, we are encouraged that press reports and the document itself appear to indicate that plans to immediately field test the dangerous US-developed agents have been stopped. But this counterproposal would only result in a delay, not a prohibition, on the use of biological warfare agents in Colombia."

Pimiento says "We are supportive of ecologically-sound ways to reduce coca cultivation. The Colombian Government should modify its plan to ensure civil society and indigenous peoples’ participation, rule out biological eradication agents, and focus on environmentally-sound manners to enhance the profitability of legal alternatives to coca."

Of special concern in the plan is the lack of participation. It does not adequately involve civil society and indigenous people. Dr. Tomas Leon, a Colombian scientist says "There must be complete transparency and full participation in the search for safe and ecologically sound ways to reduce coca cultivation. We should not move any further with this proposal until civil society is fully consulted and involved."

Sunshine Project's Susana Pimiento concurs, saying, "Until the shortcomings are fixed, the door remains unlocked to the US plan to use the conflict in Colombia as a live-fire proving ground for creating of crop killing technology."

The Sunshine Project’s copy of the counterproposal document is a 20 page near-final draft recently circulated among Colombian and foreign government officials. The counterproposal project is to be implemented by two prominent semi-governmental research institutions and is largely aimed at identifying and developing alternatives for the protection of biodiversity in Amazon areas impacted by coca cultivation and eradication. But one component that has nothing to do with protection of biodiversity has been introduced. This component is aimed at the identification, testing, and development of "environmentally-safe biological mechanisms" for eradication of coca and responds to US pressure to test mycoherbicides.

Poking a Hole into the Biological Weapons Convention

"The US is opening a Pandora´s box here. The critical principle is that governments should not develop biological agents to kill cultivated crops. Others will see this work as license to develop ways to kill crops they don't like. It is an invitation for countries opposed to alcoholic beverages to develop biological agents to attack grapes and hops", says the Sunshine Project's Jan Van Aken in Hamburg.

UN Role Questioned

A concern is the continued role of the Vienna-based United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP), which is lobbying Colombia to agree to US plans and serving as a multilateral intermediary for the project. According to Hammond "UNDCP has overstepped its bounds. The US and Colombian governments are internally split on use of biological agents. If even the major ministries of the two principals are deeply divided, why is UNDCP playing the role of the USA's junior assistant, receiving the money, drafting agreements, and pushing and prodding Colombia to do what the US says?"

The questionable role of UNDCP in this issue became clear in a cable from US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, from last year, where she "urge(d) UNDCP to solicit funds from other governments, in order to avoid a perception that this is solely a USG initiative."

Native Nonsense:

Says the Sunshine Project's Edward Hammond, "There is a lot of nonsense coming from US officials that if fusaria occur naturally in coca in Colombia, then massive spraying of virulent types can be justified. But many biological weapons are 'natural' toxins and diseases used in an unnatural way. The massive multiplication and spreading even of native pathogens can cause new epidemics, with unforeseen consequences for the environment and human health. Ebola is endemic in Africa, but is this an argument to produce it by the ton and saturate the countryside from airplanes?"

The Sunshine Project and CSOs are urging an overhaul of the plan, including:

- Placing emphasis on characterization of Amazonian biodiversity. Over 90% of the species of the Colombian Amazon are uncharacterized. Soil microbes are an almost complete mystery. An ecologically-sound plan to reduce coca cultivation must include a far better understanding of these ecosystems.

- Involving indigenous people and farming communities in all levels and components of the project. They are most directly affected and understand the fragile ecosystems best. It will be impossible to research to reduce the environment impact of coca cultivation without farmers and indigenous peoples organizations in a lead role.

- Biosafety issues must be clarified. The proposal does not rule out use of genetically-modified organisms or clearly ascribe liability in its "environmentally-safe biological mechanisms" component.

- No rationale is provided for studying biological mechanisms in the first place. The safety and effectiveness of chemical eradication is aleady highly questionable. Colombia should reconsider using aerial fumigation at all, rather than moving from a dangerous chemical system to a biological approach that could threaten ecosystems.

- Lack of international partners. A broad range of expertise exists nationally and internationally which might assist the program; but which has not been included. UNDCP is a small UN organization with a narrow focus, while UN agriculture, health and environment groups have important roles to play as principals in this research.

- Need to involve neighboring countries. The geography of the Amazon basin and coca cultivation are unavoidable. This research on Colombia's coca growing regions has potential impacts in Ecuador, Peru, Venezuela and Brazil. Issues of liability and tranboundary movement of species must be thought through. Other Andean countries, including Bolivia, may even be interested in looking at methods for crop substitution programs that can help small farmers achieve profitability with non-narcotic crops. Colombia could take the initiative of suggesting the program be examined regionally, through the Andean Community.