Shortly after the attack, the army said the children were killed in a shootout with guerrillas, who, according to the commander, had used the children as shields. But partly as a result of the international attention focused on Colombia during the certification process for Plan Colombia, the Colombian army and government had to retract their earlier statements. An investigation was launched that resulted in the suspension of 45 soldiers and some of their superiors. "A serious mistake," read the banner headline in the magazine Cambio, which is edited by Gabriel García Márquez.

The killings of the children came just days after the army had celebrated a gratifying victory over the guerrillas by rescuing four kidnap victims, including a German citizen who was being held in a country house near the capital of Bogotá. The rescue mission was daring -- paratroopers were dropped by helicopters into rough terrain at night, exactly the type of military action the U.S. trainers are supposed to teach the army. The army had also just launched a television campaign promoting its role as a protector of Colombia's democracy. The killings obviously undermined both developments.

And the international outcry over the killings has given Colombians a taste of what could come next. With the American aid, such incidents will be the subject of greater scrutiny by international media.

In Colombia, even critics of the army were careful to couch their statements in careful words after the killings. Attorney General Alfonso Gomez, a liberal who has led many battles against army abuses and corruption, was quick to point out that from initial investigations, it was clear the soldiers did not know they were shooting at children. But others latched onto the news as proof that Colombians aren't ready for U.S. military aid.

"The truth is that without the conditions attached to the aid, we would not have had the army willing to clarify the attack. Their first reaction was to blame the guerrillas for the incident," pointed out Vivanco of Human Rights Watch.

But presidential advisor Ruíz said the problem with the debate in Washington is that American politicians don't understand how the conflict in Colombia has evolved. "Yeah, sure, we have a historical conflict that includes guerrillas and paramilitaries, but that historical conflict has been modified by drug trafficking. This is not Vietnam nor El Salvador. And if you want to write about the war on drugs, that's not exactly what is happening in Colombia.

"Sure we are in favor of decriminalizing drugs. And if the United States and Europe stopped consuming drugs, it would be better for Colombia. But the consumption in those countries is what generates the violence in our country. For us right now, to reduce violence and strengthen our democracy, we must reduce drug production," Ruiz said.

The next stage for disagreements between Colombia and the United States is already set. Some analysts think the policy is headed for serious trouble just because of the disconnect between the two realities. "We have to remember that Plan Colombia is a result of transactions in the U.S. Congress, and as such it is subject to the goings-on of American politics and public opinion. If there is another heart-wrenching accident like that of the children, or another humanitarian disaster -- from which we are not exempt -- there could be a breakup or discontinuation of the aid, severely affecting the military advances we would have gained," says Gabriel Silva, who was an aide to former President Cesar Gaviria.

"We should not get addicted to this aid," warns Silva. "It would be dangerous for this country to believe the tale that someone else will fight for us, and that they are also willing to pay the bill."

Politics 2000: Unflinching daily political news, analysis and commentary.