========================================
Now more than ever we have to insist on
a peaceful solution. Nobody is going to
win this war. The commitment now, not
only of the government, but of the civil
society of this country, has changed.
========================================
 ARMY TIMES - DEFENSE NEWS

April 27, 1998 / May 3, 1998

Interview with Maria Emma Mejia, Colombian Foreign Minister 
-------------------------------------------- 

As foreign minister for the past two years, Maria Emma Mejia has presided 
over Colombian foreign policy at a particularly difficult time. 

Improving relations with the United States has been a high priority for 
Mejia as the need for U.S. help to combat drug trafficking and leftist 
guerrillas is greater than ever. But relations have been strained in recent 
years by allegations that Colombian President Ernesto Samper took $6 
million from Colombian drug cartels to help finance his election, and by the 
United States' refusal to certify that Colombia is fully cooperating in the 
war on drugs.

Strengthening ties with neighboring Venezuela, a country with which 
Colombia has had a long-standing border dispute, has been Mejia's other top 
priority.

Mejia, a former director of the Colombian Institute of Cinematography, got 
into politics while doing political films for Luis Carlos Galan, a 
presidential candidate a decade ago who was assassinated during the 
campaign. She then took over as the general secretary for the campaign of 
Cesar Gaviria, the candidate who took up Galan's presidential campaign. 

After Gaviria was elected, Mejia held a number of political positions, 
including ambassador to Spain and minister of education. 

She wistfully remembers her years directing and producing films in 
Colombia and for the British Broadcasting Co., noting that her involvement 
now is limited to occasionally going to the movies. 

Mejia spoke recently with Staff Writer Philip Finnegan at her office at the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bogota. 

--------------------------

Q. Are you concerned by the change in U.S. policy to allow the sale 
of sophisticated weapons on a case-by-case basis to the region? 

A. Very much so. I don't wish to see our continent rearming again. 


Q. Is your concern due to Venezuela's possible interest in buying 
F-16 fighters in the future?

A. No, [but] if one country begins [buying advanced fighter aircraft], the next 
one feels it has to. We feel we are making progress in our social programs 
in the region and we should continue that instead of arming. 


Q. Where does Colombia's border dispute with Venezuela stand? 

A. In 1990, Colombia and Venezuela created a mechanism [to resolve the 
border dispute]. Presidents of each country designate four members who 
deliberate secretly. That has allowed us to eliminate the difficulty while 
they discuss the issue.


Q. Is there a target date for finishing the talks with Venezuela? 

A. No. There is an open agenda, but we have been able to resolve our 
difficulties on our frontier with Venezuela to such an extent that we had 
seven incidents last year compared with 20 the previous year. 


Q. How have the incidents been reduced?

A. We have created two very interesting mechanisms between our armies 
and ministries of foreign affairs to get together and resolve incidents. The 
armies are having more contact on the frontiers. We are getting more 
civilized, more mature in solving and preventing problems. 


Q. Does Colombia have any other border disputes? 

A. Nicaragua believes they have a dispute with us over the San Andres 
islands, but we have never recognized that dispute. We don't have any other 
difficulty.


Q. Are you hopeful that the waiver by U.S. President Bill Clinton 
that eliminates sanctions against Colombia will increase U.S. aid to 
Colombia?
[Clinton issued a waiver in February stating that while Colombia still is not 
fully cooperating in the war on drugs, it is in the U.S. national security 
interest to waive sanctions, such as those blocking lethal military 
purchases.]

A. Certification is a mechanism that is not only rejected by us, but has 
deteriorated relations in the hemisphere. It is unjust and unfair. Colombia 
was treated unjustly in the past and has made enormous efforts [in the 
fight against drugs]. I think it is a right step. It eases tensions and goes in 
the right direction. 


Q. What will certification mean for Colombia's efforts to get more 
military assistance from the United States? 

A. It eliminates restrictions. Last year, we needed a [presidential] waiver 
[to buy military equipment]. Without a strengthening of international 
cooperation, it will be almost impossible to win this war. They are a 
powerful enemy. It is not just the narcos [drug producers and traffickers], 
but it is an army [of guerrillas] behind the narcos. One needs to combat an 
army with an army [equipped with] planes and other equipment.


Q. Do you expect this will increase military aid as well as speed 
it?

A. Hopefully increase it to try to increase our participation in the fight 
against drugs.


Q. How are efforts faring to bring the guerrillas to the table for 
peace talks?

A. Now more than ever we have to insist on a peaceful solution. Nobody is 
going to win this war. The commitment now, not only of the government, but 
of the civil society of this country, has changed. Ten years ago, drugs were 
seen as a fight of the United States, but it has touched us. Now it is our 
war, too.


Q. Are you finding the guerrillas receptive to negotiations? 

A. The linkage of money from the narcos has done a lot of damage. It has 
prolonged the guerrillas in war, armed them and corrupted them. It has made 
it a way of living rather than an ideological fight. Particularly in the FARC 
[Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, the largest guerrilla group, 
which comprises 70 percent of the insurgents], the element of ideology has 
diminished in favor of the element of corruption and delinquency. The narcos 
are so powerful that they even corrupted the Marxist guerrillas. The unity of 
command has diminished. 


Q. Are military setbacks in the war making it more difficult to 
bring the guerrillas to the peace table by making it seem, at least to them, 
like they are winning?

A. Yes. They killed many of our men. But there is the example of Central 
America. The worst times of war were the times of negotiating. Fighting 
was done to strengthen [each side's position]. That is partly the strategy of 
war, so I hope it does not mean that they are not thinking of negotiations.


Q. In the past, you have tried to use Cuban President Fidel Castro 
as a go-between. Have there been any new efforts to bring him in to 
facilitate talks?

A. Now it would be more [of a] good will [gesture] than a person who could 
have a role [as a go-between]. During the Cold War it was different. 


Q. Does that not make it even more difficult to bring them into 
talks if no one has influence on the guerrillas? 

A. That is the most difficult thing with our guerrillas. They have been in the 
mountains too long and are too isolated. They see themselves as still 
carrying the flag of communism and Marxism [even after the end of the Cold 
War]. The isolation is total. There is no sense of what is happening in the 
world.

Copyright 1998 Army Times Publishing Company