rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (06/24/91)
Downloaded from: THE CIVIL LIBERTIES ELECTRONIC FORUM Networking the National Lawyers Guild Civil Liberties Committee Chip Berlet - SYSOP (System Operator) Operating 24 hours-2400-1200/300 baud 617-221-5815 U.S. MEDIA COVERAGE OF THE DRUG WAR IN PERU AND BOLIVIA by Margaret Quigley Media coverage of the U.S.-led drug war in Peru and Bolivia has been marred by an uncritical acceptance of the Bush and Reagan Administrations' theory of narco-terrorism. Narco- terrorism (the term was coined by U.S. Ambassador Lewis Tambs in 1984 in the mistaken belief that revolutionary guerrillas were defending a drug traffickers' laboratory) is an analysis which assumes an extensive and ongoing alliance between drug traffickers and leftist guerrillas. Under narco-terrorism theory, U.S. drug war forces engage in counterinsurgency against those it defines as narco-terrorists in order to eliminate cocaine production and by doing so eradicate cocaine use in the United States. Narco-terrorism has become the cornerstone of U.S. drug war policy, and military aid virtually the only aid available to coca-growing countries, despite forceful arguments for the need for meaningful, economic development aid for coca-growing countries, including a well-funded crop substitution program to help farmers switch to crops other than cocaine. Peruvian journalist Gustavo Gorriti, among others, has argued ("Atlantic", 7-89) for a shift in the drug war's focus from counterinsurgency to economic development. More recently, Peru's President Alberto Fujimori declined all U.S. military aid after his request for development aid was ignored, despite a last minute trip to Peru by Vice President Quayle urging him to accept the military aid. Under narco-terrorism, international drug traffickers, members of violent revolutionary guerrilla movements like the Sendero Luminoso ("Shining Path"), and poor coca-growing farmers are all equally essential targets of the drug war. Media coverage has spoken, for example, of the need for the U.S. to "help Peru's fragile democracy defend itself" against the farmers who grow coca as well as against the leftist guerrillas ("U.S. News and World Report", 9-18-89). In contrast, the Peruvian army, while supportive of counterinsurgency efforts against leftist rebels, rejects narco-terrorism theory and argues that coca eradication projects, in the absence of development and crop substitution aid, actually force small farmers to turn to revolutionary movements. General Alberto Arciniega has argued, "To be a drug trafficker and a coca grower are two different things...I want to attack the coca problem--but not by attacking the "campesino"." ("New York Times Magazine", 3-4-90) The Congress of Bolivian Workers has stated that, while it does not support narco- traffickers, "it is peasants who have suffered from state violence while narco-traffickers and their laboratories appear to enjoy immunity." ("Guardian" , 10-25-89) Other criticisms of narco-terrorism theory have been raised but have failed to receive substantial mainstream media coverage. Narco-terrorism absorbs the majority of funds earmarked for the drug war (more than seventy per cent of U.S. funds to fight drugs goes to the police and military). As a result, other possible approaches to decrease drug use in the United States are ignored or de-emphasized, including stopping the flow of U.S.-made solvents necessary for cocaine production (and not available in the coca-growing and cocaine-producing countries) or interdicting cocaine at the U.S. borders or after its entry to the United States. Additionally, the exploration of supply-side approaches, such as expanding domestic drug education and treatment programs in order to reduce the U.S.'s demand for cocaine are also de- emphasized. The single-mindedness of narco-terrorism theory also obscures coverage of the racial issues underpinning much of the conflict in the region. In its drive to eradicate the centuries- old traditional cultivation and use of coca by the mostly Indian farmers in the Andean region rather than to eliminate cocaine or cocaine use, narco-terrorism theory has been called culturally insensitive as well as naive. In general, the media make only infrequent references to racial realities in Peru, a country with a majority Indian population dominated by a white minority. For example, one article in the "Washington Post" (2-2-90) did mention that the mass arrests of 15,000 people in February was "largely an exercise in rounding up the usual suspects: young, dark- skinned men with Indian features." The same article claimed, however, that it was the white minority that feels "under attack by a majority that stems mostly from Indian stock." Media reports of the 1989 presidential election in Peru provide another clear example of the media's failure to deal adequately with racial politics. Novelist and newcomer to politics Mario Vargas Llosa was a conservative advocating an IMF- style austerity program and supported primarily by the wealthy, most of European descent. Alberto Fujimori (of Japanese descent and also a political novice) received extensive support from poor Peruvians, mostly Indians; Fujimori opposed Vargas Llosa's economic program, claiming it would create too much suffering. Although most of the media avoided explicit mention of the racial and class issues infusing the race, coverage often resonated with the undertones of such politics. Vargas Llosa, for example, was described by the "Washington Post" as a "patrician savior" and an "urbane man of the First World who happened to be born in the Third and suffers it `like a disease.'" The "Post" described Fujimori, on the other hand, as "a dark horse" with "a simple message" and as "the undistinguished president of the National Engineering University and the former host of a little-watched political talk show...not even a prominent member of the 100,000 strong Japanese community in Lima." Media coverage, which under the influence of narco-terrorism has minimized the importance of such complex factors as poverty and race, has also provided inadequate coverage both of human rights abuses by the Peruvian government and of activities by government-allied right-wing death squads. Media coverage has instead placed a disproportionate emphasis on the Peruvian Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) revolutionary guerrilla movement, which is seen as a principal ally of international drug traffickers. In Peru, the claimed link between drug traffickers and the Sendero Luminoso guerrilla movement has been variously described as a "tactical alliance" ("Los Angeles Times", 9-11-89), an "uneasy coexistence" ("Newsweek", 4-24-89), a "constantly shifting alliance" ("Boston Globe", 6-15-9), or even "an ideological convergence of interests." ("American Spectator", 7-89) Most often, however, assumptions about the identity between the Sendero Luminoso and drug traffickers are implicit rather than expressed. "New York Times" reporting was typical in its conflation of drug traffickers with guerrillas. One story (3-18- 90) mentioned that U.S. aid "may be used against narcotics traffickers or against their guerrilla protectors," quoting an American official who said "You can't draw a black and white line between the two." The "Times" later (4-12-90) headlined an account of a clash between guerrillas and U.S. civilian troops, "U.S. Pilots in Peru Join Battle Against Forces of Coca Trade." Another "Times" headline (4-22-90) stated, "U.S. Will Arm Peru to Fight Leftists in New Drug Push." The story described Sendero Luminoso as "an increasingly important factor in anti-drug operations, blurring the line between counterinsurgency and the cocaine war." In fact, the exact relationship between the Sendero Luminoso and the narco-traffickers who act as emissaries from the Colombian cocaine cartels is unclear. In a "NACLA Report on the Americas" (3-89) on "Coca: the Real Green Revolution," Jo Ann Kawell described the relationship as a "complex and highly conflictive" one where "Sendero does not act at the behest of the narcos or in alliance with them." It seems clear that the Sendero guerrillas collect a mandatory "tax" on the farmers' coca, as they do on all products in the regions they control, in exchange for advocating for the farmers with the drug traffickers, whose activities the guerrillas also tax. In an article that discusses at length the Sendero guerrillas' brutal acts against farmers, prostitutes, and homosexuals, among others, the "New Yorker" (1-4-88) also concludes that Sendero Luminoso does not itself take part in the drug trade. Nevertheless, media coverage has consistently accepted the U.S. contention that war against Sendero Luminoso is a necessary part of the drug war. The violent activities of the Sendero Luminoso have provided a number of sensationalistic stories, including "Bloody Footprints on Peru's Shining Path" ("U.S. News and World Report", 9-18-89), "With the Shining Path: A Rare and Risky Encounter With Peru's Fanatic Guerrilla Movement" ("Newsweek", 4-24-89), and "Terror Coming Out of the Hills: We Walk With Fear" ("Los Angeles Times", 7-1-88) At the same time, while the media repeatedly describe Sendero guerrillas as savage, brutal, evil, and murderous, the drug traffickers who buy the coca, transform it into cocaine, and ship it to the United States at immense profit, are barely mentioned. The war against drugs has become, in the popular media, the war against the Sendero Luminoso. In May, for example, the "New York Times" (5-20-90) reported, "Drug experts in La Paz said the presence of the Shining Path guerrilla organization in Peru greatly inhibited raids and other interdiction activities against drug laboratories and traffickers there. As a result, they said, the price of coca leaf in Peru has not collapsed as in Bolivia." No other viewpoint was presented. Nor have the mainstream media adequately covered the government's role in the deaths of more than 15,000 citizens during the ten-year conflict, which has been marked by extensive human rights abuses by both sides. Amnesty International has documented that "a high proportion of the dead were victims of extrajudicial execution by government forces" and that more than 3,000 people have "disappeared" in the past eight years, the highest rate of forced disappearances in the world. The "New Yorker" has commented that "there is a feeling among human rights monitors in the country that the severity of the repression [in Peru] has not really registered with the international community." Media coverage which ignores government human rights abuses contributes to this. For example, a number of newspapers and magazines (including "U.S. News and World Report", 5-25-87) have referred without elaboration to Sendero Luminoso's "loss of key leaders in a bloody prison uprising." As an Amnesty International report established in early 1987, several hundred Sendero prisoners who had already surrendered to prison officials were nevertheless executed on the spot by government forces. Coverage by the "New York Times" also provides a good example of how the government's role in political violence can be obscured. The "Times" (3/25/90) initially reported accurately that deaths from political violence in Peru--3,198 reported in 1989--were "about evenly divided" between the government and Sendero guerrillas. Less than a month later, however, the "Times" (4/22/90) claimed, "Last year, 3,198 deaths were attributed to guerrilla violence--a five year high." The next day, even the "Times"' liberal columnist Tom Wicker referred to the 3,198 "deaths attributed to the guerrillas" in 1989. Media coverage has sometimes read like an apologia for the government's bloody counterinsurgency war. The "Los Angeles Times" (7-1-88) reported, "This frustration [over Sendero Luminoso violence] has persuaded many officials that there is no option but to respond to rebel brutality with army brutality." The "New York Times" (8-31-88) stated, "Some Government officials have argued privately that human rights abuses committed by security forces will be reduced if the new anti-terrorist legislation closes legal loopholes that until now have been skillfully exploited by Shining Path and its lawyers." Coverage of the government-sponsored Rodrigo Franco Command (RFC), a right-wing death squad that first surfaced in 1988, has also been marked by an inadequate and uncritical analysis. For example, the "Los Angeles Times" (8-17-89) was still referring to "alleged right-wing death squads" nine months after a "New York Times" (12-4-88) story, "Death Gang Linked to Peru's Rulers," reported that "extremists within Peru's leading party are sponsoring a paramilitary group that has claimed credit for death threats, bombings, and at least two murders over the past four months." About the same time, a "Newsweek" story (12-26-88) commented, "Despite the rising [Sendero Luminoso] violence, Peruvian courts convicted only 5% of the suspected terrorists who were brought to trial last year. A frustrated Rodrigo Franco Command vows that a rebel or sympathizer will now die for every government official slain." Although the article mentioned that the Rodrigo Franco Command (which it described as made up of "disaffected police, soldiers and party hotheads") had threatened "journalists, human rights activists, television comics who poke fun at the government, even the government's own investigators," it failed to question the RFC's claim that it would kill only those who were rebels or sympathizers. A year later, only the socialist "Guardian" (11-8-89) reported that all documents collected by the parliamentary commission investigating the links between Peru's ruling party and the RFC death squad had disappeared. For the most part, the national media has ignored the current and historical role of the CIA in drug wars and drug trafficking. For example, the "New York Times" published a number of stories (3-15-89, 5-7-89) that praised Bolivia's then- presidential candidate Hugo Banzer Suarez, without mentioning either Banzer's well-documented ties to drug traffickers or the role the CIA played in the coup that brought him to power as Bolivia's military dictator ("In These Times", 5-3/9-89; "Guardian", 7-7-89)). Nor has the CIA-sponsored privatisation of the drug war in Peru and Bolivia, paralleling that of the Nicaraguan contra supply network, received much coverage. In fact, a "New York Times" story (3-25-90), which discussed the CIA's drug-trafficking role in Southeast Asia during the 1970's but failed to mention the CIA's role in today's drug war, was incongruously headlined, "CIA Shedding Its Reluctance to Aid in Fight Against Drugs." An early story on the CIA's role appeared in "The Nation" (8-13/20-88) and this year the "Philadelphia Inquirer" (5-30-90) revealed that "a dozen veterans of the Reagan Administration's illicit effort to aid Nicaragua's contra rebels" were working on the war against cocaine in Peru, including several civilian pilots employed by the CIA-linked National Air Transport and executives of Betac Corporation, a consultant to the Defense Department on the drug war. Two weeks later, a "New York Times" article (6-13-90) detailed a number of problems facing National Air Transport, including the indictment of the company's chief aircraft operations officer for conspiracy to smuggle drugs. Although the article, "Management Woes Hobble U.S. Air Fleet in Drug War," did not mention the "Inquirer"'s allegations, it did claim that there was no current CIA link to National Air Transport. The ideology of the war against drugs, as played out in the U.S. media, has substituted sensationalism and jingoism for a more complex analysis. The media has both failed to describe adequately and failed to look critically at the role of the American-led drug war in the Andean countries. The theory of narco-terrorism is being used to legitimize the transfer of massive amounts of military equipment, without congressional approval, to countries with enormous needs for peaceful economic development. As drug war becomes literal war, media coverage of the U.S. drug war in Peru and Bolivia has continued to filter information uncritically through the lens of narco-terrorism, which distorts as much as it reveals. ***Margaret Quigley is an Archivist with Political Research Associates in Cambridge, Mass. This article originally appeared, in a shorter form, in "Extra!", the newsletter of the New York- based media watchdog group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting.