I have no idea what you just said. I will say this: there is no evidence that Plan Colombia, or any other program there has failed. On the contrary, ample evidence exists of a successful continuing program, which continues to recieve increased funding...especially as it's prominance in anti-terror becomes more apparent.
There is no issue of deniability here. These programs are on the table; certain elements maintain operational security for the safety of thse involved. However, full disclosure reports are made before congress, and this is a program put forth by the State Department (et al). The specific mission in question, the eradication of certain drug producing plants and the support missions attached thereto, are not secret, are not denied, and are fully supported by the government.
The government uses contractors to fight fire, to build buildings, to maintain military aircraft, to fill numerous administrative positions, to flight instruct various agencies and military branches, etc. Let it be no surprise that contractors are used to fly, support, and operate these missions. Contractors fly numerous other roles for the government; it's nothing to do with deniability. These are state department operations and the state department has elected to contract out the job, pure and simple.
What kind of job is it? It's a crop dusting job. This isn't secret, but it needn't be published on the front page, either. A great deal of disinformation is published, both outside these operations, and from within. The purposes range from curiosity to poor reporting ethics by overzelous journalists and activists, to protection of those performing these duties.
What do the Caravans do? They photograph drugs and crops, and document before and after pictures of spray operations. Why? In order to show proof that only the specific targets and functions established by the State Department for these operations have been accomplished, and to document the fact that additional damage has not occured. In short, the Caravan ops are people who have been contracted to fly in support of preserving the reputation of the government by taking pictures in order to show that the government has done what it said it would do.
Shootdowns by the FARC are not denied or hidden by the US government. Neither are they brushed under the rug, nor suppressed. The government has expended a great deal of effort and money on finding and obtaining the release of those held hostage currently (there are hundreds), and will continue to do so. Those efforts are not public activities, nor should they be.
Two years ago a pilot was lost while ferrying a T-65 back from Colombia to Florida for depot maintenance. He was lost in a storm. A great deal of money and expense, and resources, were dedicated to locating him, to no avail. The government didn't deny what had happened, and it wasn't a secret. Nor did the government ignore his loss. This case presently is no different.
One of the functions I perform, among many, is contract initial attack wildland fire suppression for various US government agencies. I do not work for the agencies. I work for private companies that are contracted to the agencies. This is typical of many operations in which the government engages. Private contractors provide pilots, training, aircraft, support equipment, etc. The same thing occurs with a number of different contractors operating in Colombia, Peru, and locations throughout the world, as well as within the United States. There is nothing underhanded about this; a job is announced, bid, and a contractor selected to fulfill the role. These are not mercinaries; these are contract ag pilots performing an agricultural mission.
Who cares how any of this compares to what SWA, Fedex, or any other carrier is paying? This isn't a carrier job. It's entirely different. Perhaps you'd better served to compare it to ag wages in the industry, or other similiar types of work in the industry.