

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The Colombian government on Thursday night said it would halt the toxic fumigation of coca plant fields, defying a U.S.-backed program that has been in place for decades.
In announcing the decision, Colombian health minister Alejandro Gaviria cited concerns that the active ingredient in the herbicide--glyphosate--causes cancer. The World Health Organization reported in March that the weedkiller, widely used in Mosanto's Roundup products, was "probably carcinogenic to humans."
Colombian officials have said that a previous Supreme Court ruling in the country called for an end to the aerial spraying program if health concerns over glyphosate were discovered.
Daniel Mejia, the director of the Center for Security and Drug Studies, a research group in Bogota, told the New York Times on Friday that the spraying operation was "inefficient and counterproductive."
"I would recommend attacking the links in the chain of drug trafficking, the labs where cocaine is processed, the large shipments of chemicals, which is really where the hard drug trafficking is, where organized crime is," Mejia told the Times. "It has been shown that attacking the farmers doesn't work."
According to Adam Isacson, senior associate for regional security policy at the research group Washington Office for Latin America (WOLA), halting the program was the right move.
"Ending fumigation is the right choice for more than health or ethical reasons. Spraying with glyphosate simply hasn't worked. For every acre of coca reduced in Colombia, more than 16 have been sprayed," Isacson wrote in a blog post for WOLA on Wednesday. "The past 20 years have shown that intense glyphosate fumigation can reduce coca-growing in specific areas for limited amounts of time. But populations, lacking other viable economic alternatives, eventually adapt to the spraying, and the crops return."
Hannah Hetzer at the Drug Policy Alliance details some of the problems with the spraying operations:
The damaging effects of glyphosate are compounded by the vast amounts necessary to eliminate crops. A recent study by Pascual Restrepo of MIT and Sandra Rozo of UCLA showed that for every hectare sprayed with glyphosate, illicit crops are reduced in only 0.035 hectares. In other words, to eliminate a hectare of coca, 30 hectares must be sprayed with glyphosate, at a financial cost of $72,000 per hectare. This is an inefficient program, which affects the country's health and environment. In 2007, Afghanistan halted the use of glyphosate for aerial spraying, leaving Colombia the only country in the world to continue with this practice.
Most coca growers are families netting roughly $1,220 per person a year, Isacson writes. Fumigation chemicals in rural areas have "penetrated their residences and left them with nothing to eat. Most of the time, there was no government effort to help those who had been sprayed, not even with basic food security."
Isacson continues:
Coca cultivation is a symptom of the Colombian government's absence from a territory and failure to provide for its people. Like taking an aspirin to fight a serious illness, fumigation--regardless of the chemical used--has sought to alleviate a symptom while allowing the cause, poor governance and lack of economic opportunity, to fester.
The U.S. ambassador in Colombia, Kevin Whitaker, wrote in an op-ed for El Tiempo that the move would not harm diplomatic relations between the two countries.
In an interview ahead of the announcement, Whitaker said, "This is their sovereign decision to make, and we will respect that and we will continue to use the tools that are available to us, as Colombia wishes us to do, to continue to be a partner with them in this fight."
Still, ending the spraying program will have little effect on the long-term effectiveness of the U.S.-led War on Drugs in Colombia if it is not followed by a concerted effort to reform government services for civilians, Isacson writes.
"If there is no effort to establish and improve the presence of civilian state institutions in Colombia's national territory, then coca cultivation can be expected to flourish."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The Colombian government on Thursday night said it would halt the toxic fumigation of coca plant fields, defying a U.S.-backed program that has been in place for decades.
In announcing the decision, Colombian health minister Alejandro Gaviria cited concerns that the active ingredient in the herbicide--glyphosate--causes cancer. The World Health Organization reported in March that the weedkiller, widely used in Mosanto's Roundup products, was "probably carcinogenic to humans."
Colombian officials have said that a previous Supreme Court ruling in the country called for an end to the aerial spraying program if health concerns over glyphosate were discovered.
Daniel Mejia, the director of the Center for Security and Drug Studies, a research group in Bogota, told the New York Times on Friday that the spraying operation was "inefficient and counterproductive."
"I would recommend attacking the links in the chain of drug trafficking, the labs where cocaine is processed, the large shipments of chemicals, which is really where the hard drug trafficking is, where organized crime is," Mejia told the Times. "It has been shown that attacking the farmers doesn't work."
According to Adam Isacson, senior associate for regional security policy at the research group Washington Office for Latin America (WOLA), halting the program was the right move.
"Ending fumigation is the right choice for more than health or ethical reasons. Spraying with glyphosate simply hasn't worked. For every acre of coca reduced in Colombia, more than 16 have been sprayed," Isacson wrote in a blog post for WOLA on Wednesday. "The past 20 years have shown that intense glyphosate fumigation can reduce coca-growing in specific areas for limited amounts of time. But populations, lacking other viable economic alternatives, eventually adapt to the spraying, and the crops return."
Hannah Hetzer at the Drug Policy Alliance details some of the problems with the spraying operations:
The damaging effects of glyphosate are compounded by the vast amounts necessary to eliminate crops. A recent study by Pascual Restrepo of MIT and Sandra Rozo of UCLA showed that for every hectare sprayed with glyphosate, illicit crops are reduced in only 0.035 hectares. In other words, to eliminate a hectare of coca, 30 hectares must be sprayed with glyphosate, at a financial cost of $72,000 per hectare. This is an inefficient program, which affects the country's health and environment. In 2007, Afghanistan halted the use of glyphosate for aerial spraying, leaving Colombia the only country in the world to continue with this practice.
Most coca growers are families netting roughly $1,220 per person a year, Isacson writes. Fumigation chemicals in rural areas have "penetrated their residences and left them with nothing to eat. Most of the time, there was no government effort to help those who had been sprayed, not even with basic food security."
Isacson continues:
Coca cultivation is a symptom of the Colombian government's absence from a territory and failure to provide for its people. Like taking an aspirin to fight a serious illness, fumigation--regardless of the chemical used--has sought to alleviate a symptom while allowing the cause, poor governance and lack of economic opportunity, to fester.
The U.S. ambassador in Colombia, Kevin Whitaker, wrote in an op-ed for El Tiempo that the move would not harm diplomatic relations between the two countries.
In an interview ahead of the announcement, Whitaker said, "This is their sovereign decision to make, and we will respect that and we will continue to use the tools that are available to us, as Colombia wishes us to do, to continue to be a partner with them in this fight."
Still, ending the spraying program will have little effect on the long-term effectiveness of the U.S.-led War on Drugs in Colombia if it is not followed by a concerted effort to reform government services for civilians, Isacson writes.
"If there is no effort to establish and improve the presence of civilian state institutions in Colombia's national territory, then coca cultivation can be expected to flourish."
The Colombian government on Thursday night said it would halt the toxic fumigation of coca plant fields, defying a U.S.-backed program that has been in place for decades.
In announcing the decision, Colombian health minister Alejandro Gaviria cited concerns that the active ingredient in the herbicide--glyphosate--causes cancer. The World Health Organization reported in March that the weedkiller, widely used in Mosanto's Roundup products, was "probably carcinogenic to humans."
Colombian officials have said that a previous Supreme Court ruling in the country called for an end to the aerial spraying program if health concerns over glyphosate were discovered.
Daniel Mejia, the director of the Center for Security and Drug Studies, a research group in Bogota, told the New York Times on Friday that the spraying operation was "inefficient and counterproductive."
"I would recommend attacking the links in the chain of drug trafficking, the labs where cocaine is processed, the large shipments of chemicals, which is really where the hard drug trafficking is, where organized crime is," Mejia told the Times. "It has been shown that attacking the farmers doesn't work."
According to Adam Isacson, senior associate for regional security policy at the research group Washington Office for Latin America (WOLA), halting the program was the right move.
"Ending fumigation is the right choice for more than health or ethical reasons. Spraying with glyphosate simply hasn't worked. For every acre of coca reduced in Colombia, more than 16 have been sprayed," Isacson wrote in a blog post for WOLA on Wednesday. "The past 20 years have shown that intense glyphosate fumigation can reduce coca-growing in specific areas for limited amounts of time. But populations, lacking other viable economic alternatives, eventually adapt to the spraying, and the crops return."
Hannah Hetzer at the Drug Policy Alliance details some of the problems with the spraying operations:
The damaging effects of glyphosate are compounded by the vast amounts necessary to eliminate crops. A recent study by Pascual Restrepo of MIT and Sandra Rozo of UCLA showed that for every hectare sprayed with glyphosate, illicit crops are reduced in only 0.035 hectares. In other words, to eliminate a hectare of coca, 30 hectares must be sprayed with glyphosate, at a financial cost of $72,000 per hectare. This is an inefficient program, which affects the country's health and environment. In 2007, Afghanistan halted the use of glyphosate for aerial spraying, leaving Colombia the only country in the world to continue with this practice.
Most coca growers are families netting roughly $1,220 per person a year, Isacson writes. Fumigation chemicals in rural areas have "penetrated their residences and left them with nothing to eat. Most of the time, there was no government effort to help those who had been sprayed, not even with basic food security."
Isacson continues:
Coca cultivation is a symptom of the Colombian government's absence from a territory and failure to provide for its people. Like taking an aspirin to fight a serious illness, fumigation--regardless of the chemical used--has sought to alleviate a symptom while allowing the cause, poor governance and lack of economic opportunity, to fester.
The U.S. ambassador in Colombia, Kevin Whitaker, wrote in an op-ed for El Tiempo that the move would not harm diplomatic relations between the two countries.
In an interview ahead of the announcement, Whitaker said, "This is their sovereign decision to make, and we will respect that and we will continue to use the tools that are available to us, as Colombia wishes us to do, to continue to be a partner with them in this fight."
Still, ending the spraying program will have little effect on the long-term effectiveness of the U.S.-led War on Drugs in Colombia if it is not followed by a concerted effort to reform government services for civilians, Isacson writes.
"If there is no effort to establish and improve the presence of civilian state institutions in Colombia's national territory, then coca cultivation can be expected to flourish."