William A. Arkin

• Talk: World Message Boards • Live Online Transcripts • Subscribe to washingtonpost.com e-mail newsletters

The Missionary Plane & U.S. Military Operations
In South America
With William M. Arkin
Military Affairs Columnist, washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, April 24, 2001; 11 a.m. EDT

The shoot-down of an American plane by a Peruvian military jet, which resulted in the deaths of an American missionary and her 7-month old daughter, has prompted questions about U.S.-supported military and counterdrug activities in South America. The Cessna 185, which is owned by the U.S.-based Association of Baptists for World Evangelism, was mistakenly suspected of drug-running.

William M. Arkin, washingtonpost.com military affairs columnist, talked about the military environment in which the accident occured, the role of the CIA, and the efficacy of counterdrug air operations in Peru.

Arkin is a former Army intelligence analyst and consultant and has written extensively about military affairs. His Dot.Mil column, launched in November 1998, appears every other Monday on washingtonpost.com.

Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.

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: Bill Arkin will be with us shortly. Please send your questions now.

washingtonpost.com: Before we get to the questions Bill, tell us a little bit about the environment in which the missionary plane was shot down. Can you describe the size and scope of U.S. military air interdiction operations in Latin American?

William M. Arkin: Hi there all. Sorry for the delay.

This is a big question. U.S. military, Customs, Coast Guard, intelligence agency, and contractors are now strung out throughout the Caribbean and South America conducting counter-drug operations, in Peru, Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador, etc.

Surveillance of aircraft activity is the main interdiction efforts, particularly small aircraft, which tend to use small airfields and dart in and out of Brazilian, Peruvian, and Columbian airspace to move cocaine.

Silver Spring, MD: What are the rules of engagement for these anti-narcotic / intelligence missions? How many other innocents, who may not have had the privilege of U.S. citizenship, have been murdered in this fashion? Why not redirect efforts to hit the money trail instead? Or would that render impotent this country's 400+ year tradition of keeping men and women of color in bondage?
Charles J. Becker

William M. Arkin: The ROE's are fairly strict when U.S. personnel are involved. And they are involved in a variety of ways: listening in, manning radars, and as we've recently found out, onboard surveillance aircraft.

As far as we know, in some 30 incidents since 1995, this is the first case of an innocent plane being shot at.

Annapolis MD: Combined with what happened in China, what ramifications do you think this incident could have for our covert missions? It seems that, in this case, we have been quick to blame the Peruvians, while facts are showing that it was the CIA's fault as well. I think we handled China well, but I am wary of another situation where we blame the other country. It will look to the world like a pattern, don't you think?

William M. Arkin: The U.S. government would argue that this is not a covert mission, and given the number of GAO reports and other articles on the counter-drug operations, in some ways they aren't covert. But that does not mean that people know about them.

The "CIA" is also a bit misleading, for the personnel onboard, as far as I can tell, were CIA contractors.

The problem here is why CIA involvement at all, and why U.S. military involvement for that matter?

Houston, TX: Thanks for coming on to illuminate such a dark and hot topic.

Ari Fleischer spoke yesterday defending US cooperation in assisting other national militaries to intercept and sometimes down suspected drug-running flights. He took a rather triumphal tone in regard to thirty-some such incidents revealed to have taken place since the program started. An undisclosed number of drug suspects were apparently killed in some of the previous cases; Fleischer would only allow that no earlier casualties were "innocent." What happened to the concept that a suspect is presumed innocent until proven guilty? How can this country have quietly adopted a policy of cooperating with foreign regimes in what amounts to extrajudicial executions?

William M. Arkin: Small planes are known to be the main method of moving drugs in this area. Governments try to control the flow by restricting access to aviation fuel, and by conducting surveillance. Given that there are three ways that a plane could be innocent -- filing a civilian flight plan, sticking to the plan and responding to hailings, and through the identification of the airplane through its tail number -- in theory there are adequate safeguards to protect innocents.

In theory. Obviously, when these types of incidents occur, the theory breaks down.

Edinburg, Virginia: Although the facts are still unresolved, it appears that the downed plane was a civilian flight that had crossed national borders for legitimate reasons. What international law is in place to protect civilians from overzealous applications of military force?

William M. Arkin: I'm not sure overzealous application of military force is the issue. To me, the question is the entire drug interdiction and intelligence collection enterprise, which now has a life of its own down in South America. Eventually some incident is going to occur, and in this case, it is tragic. I prefer to focus on the bigger question of the mis-use of the U.S. military and its overstretch in these types of missions.

Washington, D.C.: Why is all the blame being focused on the Peruvian military? It is very clear that there were U.S. officials present at the time of the incident. What exactly are the procedures for controling illegal drug smuggling through Colombia and Peru?

William M. Arkin: The Peruvian pilot, and his controllers, evidently made the decision to fire, escalating the incident. The U.S. government is claiming that the U.S. personnel urged better identification and a slow-down of the incident. It seems to me that there is more than enough blame to go around.

Herndon, Va: Mr. Arkin: At first glance, this looks like what, during my brief Army career, would be called a "FUBAR." Should we read any more into it than that?

William M. Arkin: Well, I would agree that this is FUBAR (though there is some recognition). I wonder whether the U.S. personnel should have been in the position to direct the Peruvian plane in the first place/

Washington, DC: Would we stand for a suspected drug-running plane being shot down in America, even if the passengers were actually drug runners? Why is the CIA participating in something on foreign soil that we wouldn't allow here?

William M. Arkin: I'm not sure we wouldn't allow it here. But in the U.S., it's very difficult to fly a plane without the FAA seeing it, and with a flight plan.

In the Andes, it is a different matter. And these small float planes can set down on sandbars in the Amazon and its tributaries, so there is a lot of places to hide. That is why so much effort is going into air surveillance.

Miami, FL: What was the type of Peruvian interceptor used in the downing of the Cessna? Was the pilot shooting to force it to land? Apart from the two deaths, I'm surprised that a blast from the Peruvian jet's cannons didn't completely shred the Cessna.

William M. Arkin: An A-37B "Dragonfly" plane shot down the civilian plane. It is a Vietnam-era slow flyer used mostly for ground attack.

As far as we know, the plane was not contacted successfully and told to land. I imagine the shots came out of the blue, the result of panic on the part of the Peruvian AF pilot, or his controllers on the ground, that this plane was going to leave Peruvian airspace.

Fromberg, Montana: Given the human rights record of Peru, including sanctions by the Organization of American States and, criticisms by the United States in a report on the continued human rights violations by the Peruvian armed forces and police, how can cooperation with Peru by any agencies of the U,S. government be justified? The military establishment of Peru has many military officers STILL SERVING who were placed through the efforts of the now disgraced Vladimir Montesinos and Alberto Fujimori and are responsible and unpunished for human rights violations. Why should we expect good judgement and protection of human rights and human life by these people?

William M. Arkin: I think people should not expect much from the Peruvian military or police. I think these operations do little to stop the flow of drugs, and they are bad for the U.S. military and reserves. The operations exist though, and the U.S. government's position is that through "engagement," Peru's human rights record can be improved. It's an old argument that needs some empirical proof.

Arlington, VA: How many planes are shot down like this each year and how many are forced to land (not crash)?

William M. Arkin: The U.S. government says that in Peru, there have been 30 some incidents since 1995: strafings, shoot downs, and capture of planes on the ground. That's an average of five a year. Think about it: A multi-million dollar operation involving the U.S. military, CIA, and contractors to intercept five planes a year. Ridiculous.

Houston, Texas:
When the Citation V's were originally built for counter-drug work, instead of delivering them to the U.S. Customs Service (who was operating a fleet of 26 Citations at that time) General McCaffery gave them to the CIA for their operational use. This,in spite of the fact that these law enforcement missions in South America were being handled by Customs at that time (And seem to be still done to some degree based on news reports that a Customs P-3 monitored the radio broadcasts of the shootdown). My question is twofold. Why do these law enforcement missions continue to be controlled by the military out of Southcom instead of a law enforcement agency (especially considering that the military was supposed to "support" enforcement originally) and why did General McCaffrey assign those interdiction aircraft to CIA instead of a law enforcement agency? Thanks for your time and any information you are able to supply.

William M. Arkin: The aircraft, as far as I can tell, are owned by the Air Force, operated by Dyncorp, on behalf of the CIA. It is all very convoluted, and generally exists in this fashion because there is no one institution that embraces the counter-drug mission, and no national consensus as to whether it is desirable or successful. In pure bureaucratic terms, the tangled relationships also keeps the operations out of the public eye, and evades Congressional oversight. Sure a more "pure" law enforcement operation would be better, but I would argue that even that operation needs to be closely looked at.

Baltimore, MD: As a commercial pilot with experience in the area, I can see NO EXCUSE of any kind for shooting down a civilian aircraft, no matter if it has pot plants hanging out of every window.
J

William M. Arkin: I agree.

Monterey, CA: How prudent is it to announce that the U.S. has ceased all drug interdiction flights until a thorough review is completed? Doesn't this information give the narco-traffickers free reign in the area?

William M. Arkin: I suppose, but let's be honest, as they said in World War II: The bomber will get through. The narco-traffickers seem inconvenienced by U.S. operations in South America, not stopped. Given the prize ($$$), our efforts are puny and ineffective. So they will always find other ways to get drugs to the customers.

Columbia, MD: Thank you for addressing this issue today. Peru has done a lot under past President, Alberto Fujimori, to put a stop to illegal drug shipment. What is the U.S. now prepared to do to help a country in obvious need of help, especially with no president right now? Will more people have to die?

William M. Arkin: Peru probably does need help, and I imagine this incident will force a closer reexamination of our relationship, and the effectiveness of the anti-drug efforts. It's too bad someone had to die to force that.

Malone, Wisconsin: The United States' Armed Forces do not allow any advice or mingling in our country from foreign intelligence, why do they push their way to impose their self-righteous and many times "wrong criteria " on poor and struggling countries?...What is the CIA doing there, instead of the DEA?....that attitude of hiding information on questionable actions abroad only creates anger from the people of other countries , and offensive reactions towards American citizens and tourists around the world. Why should CIA people be still bossing around, and calling the shots in Latin America?

William M. Arkin: CIA people were obviously not calling the shots, at least the facts as we know them today.

Arlington, VA: So do you suppose this latest incident will do anything to change the American government's absurd policy of treating the drug "war" as a military operation ... 100% unwinnable since it is ultimately a war on our own populace ... and perhaps lead towards an policy more focused on treatment and the elmination of the demand for the product?

Does any reasonable person still believe current policy has even a remote chance of working?

William M. Arkin: I doubt it will end the drug war per se. Quite a bureaucracy and aparatus has been set up in the past decade. Regardless of whether we reevaluate the effectiveness, now there are bureaucratic interests involved.

Regardless of whether interdiction helps, I oppose the U.S. military's being mired in the mission, and see the CIA's involvement as a diversion from more important operations and analysis.

Berlin, Germany: Why do we suddenly start hearing about U.S. spy planes, whereas there had been few reports about them in previous years? Is the U.S. increasing its patrolling of non-U.S. skies?

William M. Arkin: It is a good question. I think more that we are becoming aware of the spread of U.S. military activities after the Cold War as a result of incidents such as the USS Cole in Yemen, the EP-3 plane, and now this in Peru. Perhaps a real debate about the extend of U.S. military "engagement" in the world will be provoked.

washingtonpost.com: Our time is up. Thanks to William Arkin for responding so trenchantly to the questions. You can read Arkin's latest Dot.Mil column by clicking here.

   |       |