Jeremy Bigwood

• "Aerial Attack Killing More than Coca (Post - Jan. 7, 2001)" • World Section • World Live Online Archive • Talk: World news message boards • Live Online Transcripts

The Perils of Destroying Colombia's Coca Crop
Jeremy Bigwood, Fumigation Expert
Friday, Jan. 12, 2001; 11 a.m. EST

"Aerial Attack Is Killing More Than Just Coca," the Post's Scott Wilson recently reported from southern Colombia where much of the world's narcotics originate. The U.S.-backed campaign to fumigate the illicit drug crop has generated reports of illness and destruction of other crops.

Will fumigation efforts work to reduce the supply of drugs? Do the chemicals sprayed on coca fields pose a hazard to people who live in the vicinity?

Journalist and fumigation critic Jeremy Bigwood talks about those questions and others arising out of the U.S. growing role in Colombia. Bigwood recently spent more than a year studying U.S.-backed development of toxic fungi to eliminate illicit drug crops in countries such as Colombia under a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. His findings are collected at usfumigation.org

The transcript follows.

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.

washingtonpost.com: Welcome to our discussion of coca eradication in Colombia. After we announced that we were having a discussion with Jeremy Bigwood, the Office of National Drug Control Policy approached washingtonpost.com and suggested that we have a guest with a different perspective on the subject. We, of course, were delighted to have more debate on this important subject. So we are pleased to announce that Allison Major, a senior policy analyst with the Office of National Drug Control Policy, will continue the discussion of coca eradication and U.S. policy in Colombia at noon EST. Stick Around.

washingtonpost.com: Before we start with readers' questions, Jeremy, I'd like to ask about the history of coca eradication in Colombia. How long has this been part of Colombia's counter-drug strategy? What sort of efforts have been launched in the past, if any?

Jeremy Bigwood: Marijuana spraying started in Colombia sponsored by the US in about 1980. The US Department of State was very happy that it caused marijuana growers to switch to coca. See: http://jeremybigwood.net/Humor/state_department_drug_policy.htm
As with all of the USG's "War on Drugs", this was counterproductive.
Historically, the first place where the US used herbicides was in Vietnam, and that caused many problems even among veterans. Later some of the ingredients of Agent Orange were used in Latin America against drug crops.
Various chemicals and experiments have been made in Colombia, all showing various degrees of toxicity. Supposedly, they are spraying a series of glyphosate formulations now, but no one can tell us which one. Nor is there effective oversight.

Annapolis, Maryland: Here's a hypothetical question for you. Would it be possible to develop a hybrid coca plant that produces none of the chemical used in the making of cocaine, i.e. a useless weed essentially, except it could then be sowed endlessly down there, eventually replacing the real coca plant. Wouldn't that help eliminate the problem in a more environmentally conscious way?

Jeremy Bigwood: Excellent question. There are over two hundred species of coca already, and that indeed might be possible to do. However, it would not solve our drug problem, because if cocaine from coca-leaf were eradicated, drug users would find something else (such as synthetic cocaine or another stimulant). The problem is also that there is a "balloon effect". When you wipe out drug production in one area, it will expand in another.

The way we need to deal with our drug problem is through a little intelligence. But the main problem is here, and not "over there."

Washington, DC: What method of eradication do you believe we should use in Colombia given that the lives of Colombians are at great risk if manual eradication is used in guerilla dominated areas?

Jeremy Bigwood: We need to look at all aspects of the drug situation. We need to try to reduce demand here. This requires the investment of considerable time and effort here. I believe, for instance, that marijuana should be legal, and that coca, not cocaine -should be available to adults through some kind of mechanism. This would alleviate a lot of problems.
So, the problem is here. If we wipe out the coca in Colombia, it will move to other countries. I have heard of coca being produced in Africa. Indonesia used to produce a lot of coca.

In the case of a fumigation method, Colombian lives are at great risk under the present policy; we are not aware of exactly what is being applied there. ONDCP says one thing, NAS in the Embassy says something else. USDA says they don't know! This is clearly an American problem; don't blame the Colombians. We need to spend money on treatment and reduce harm and demand.

The best method of eradication is manual, and the place that has had the most success with eradication is Bolivia, which ONLY uses manual eradication.

washingtonpost.com: I understand that glyphosphates are same category of herbicides as the backyard weed killer round-up. What are the variations of this chemical and why would it make a difference which one is used?

Jeremy Bigwood: Good question! This touches on the safety issue. Yes, it is true that glyphosate is the herbicide in the commercial US product Roundup, and I am guilty of using it myself. But small-time application of glyphosate in your back yard is not comparable to massive dosing by air (The maker states on the product that it should not be sprayed by air!) There are several more problems. The most important problem is that I, at least, can't get any matching responses on what is actually being sprayed from either USG entities or their Colombian clients. In other words, is the product being sprayed there the same as the US product. From what I have gathered, chemicals are added to the product in Colombia. Next week, I will investigate this story on the ground in Colombia. This will be a test of the USG's openness and transparency on this issue.

There are many scientific reports indicating that glyphosate is indeed toxic to aquatic life, birds, and mycorrhizal fungi. This is particularly important in a place as biodiverse as Colombia. The soils there are not as "strong" as the soils in the US and Canada where tests were done. Any destruction of the species will have an unknown effect on the overall ecology of the "worlds lungs" -the Amazon rainforest.

Additionally, there are several reports--even in the New York Times -- of toxicity in humans after being sprayed with whatever is being used in Colombia.

There are also reports that the spraying is actually a mechanism to rid southern Colombia of its population (which mainly support the guerrillas). These reports came about because not only coca is being sprayed, but also foodcrops -- apparently deliberately.

Falls Church, VA: Since the United States Government spends far more on domestic treatment, prevention, and education than it does on international programs ($6 Billion versus $2 Billion), don't you think it makes sense for our government to continue to make an effort to help Colombia have the same crop reduction success achieved in Peru (2/3 reduction in 5 years) and Bolivia (55% reduction in 3 years)?

Jeremy Bigwood: Well, it is nice to see the USG so active this morning!

By the USG's own statistics, the amount of cocaine production actually increased in that time period in the Andean region. This is called the "balloon effect". Much of the reduction of coca production in Peru was due to the Fusarium fungal epidemic there and not to traditional eradication. See State Department doc: http://mycoherbicide.net/World-Regions/US/DoS/Feb94~Then_There_is_the_Fungus~/index.htm

Then, there is the problem of other areas of the world that could easily start growing coca, like the Congo, Indonesia, and Taiwan.

washingtonpost.com: What do you mean when you say there are "reports" that spraying is done to move populations out of guerrilla-held territories? Is this something the guerrillas themselves are saying?

Jeremy Bigwood: I have heard from sources (who I must protect - their lives are at risk from mainly paramilitary force -death squads_ that act in accordance with USG-paid army troops on the ground in Colombia, that because they have seen so much "collateral damage" -- damage to food crops, see: http://www.usfumigation.org/SprayDamage/photoindex.htm
and the Washington Post article : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24885-2001Jan5.html

If this is indeed true, the USG will bear the same kind of guilt that the Serbs bore in Kosovo. Under international law, you cannot just go in and depopulate an area because you don't like what the people do there.

I will investigate this next week on the ground in Colombia.

Buffalo, New York: What if the USG were to buy up Colombia's entire coca crop each year, then destroy it? My understanding is that the farmers who grow it right now are not getting all that much for it, so what difference would it make who buys it? Of course we would have to stop buying arms, helicopters, and supporting the fumigation programs.

Jeremy Bigwood: An interesting idea! I think that what we need to do is a lot of work on our own culture (are we still a democracy after the last elections?), and in Colombia we need to support a negotiated settlement!

Portland, Oregon: Dear Mr. Bigwood,
I am in discussion with several anti-drug war activists pursuing any leads that would establish a direct link between Roundup maker Monsanto and the illegal (immoral) modification of it before it is deliberately sprayed on people, their food and property. We want to use any such link to put pressure on Monsanto management to suspend all sales to the US and Colombian government.
Questions: do you think this is a good strategy? Do you know of any such links to Monsanto?
Floyd Ferris Landrath
American Antiprohibition League

Jeremy Bigwood: Monsanto is indeed the primary maker of glyphosate, and pressure could not hurt the situation. But we don't even know if it is indeed glyphosate being sprayed. There is no effective oversight.

washingtonpost.com: From your response to the questioner from Falls Church, I gather that you think there is little relationship between crop eradication and the actual supply of illicit drugs. But I gather that the new eradication efforts funded under Plan Colombia are of a different scale than has been attempted in the past. Is this true and why wouldn't a much larger eradication effort have more impact on the overall supply?

Jeremy Bigwood: Since plan Colombia started to move through Congress, coca production has increased in Peru. Now there is coca in Ecuador and in Brazil, when there wasn't before.

Ib parts of Bolivia where coca was never grown, they are starting to grow it again. And don't trust US government statistics - there is still plenty of coca grown in the Chapare where it had been supposedly wiped out.

Another thing is that coca is a traditional plant used throughout the Andes. It has been used for centuries, and is benign. We have no more right to wipe out other people's indigenous use than they would have to wipe out our wine production in California.

washingtonpost.com: Thank you Jeremy Bigwood for a most interesting discussion. Our next guest will be Allison Major, senior policy analyst for the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Submit your questions now

washingtonpost.com: What do the FARC and the ELN say about coca eradication specifically and narcotics control generally?

Jeremy Bigwood: The ELN has experimented with coca eradication in its zones of control, and as I understand, that eradication caused some problems with the local populations. They ran into the same problem that AID has run into : the need for a decent substitute crop that will provide money.

I do think that the amount of coca being produced is excessive, and I think that this can be reduced by a combination of efforts, the most important being demand and harm reduction in the US.

As for the FARC, they too have cooperated with the Colombian government agency PLANTE and with the United Nations Drug Program. However, at the behest of the unelected drug warriors over at ONDCP, the UN and PLANTE have been prohibited from negotiating with the FARC.

The FARC has come out for decriminalization of drug use by adults, a position I agree with.

washingtonpost.com: I'm sorry I didn't mean to preempt Jeremy Bigwood's last response. Again thanks to our guest and all people who submitted questions. Our discussion of crop eradication and U.S. policy in Colombia continues with Allison Major from the National Office of Drug Control Policy. Click here to read the transcript of the Allison Major discussion.