(00:00:03) The following NPR program is made possible by funds from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting from the Rayburn house office building in Washington DC National Public Radio presents a live hearing by the inter-american Affairs subcommittee of the house Foreign Affairs committee. Good afternoon. I'm Bill Busan Berg. Today's hearing will be chaired by Congressman Michael Barnes Democrat of Maryland. The topic today is the certification involving El Salvador the two witnesses do we expect to testify shortly. Once this hearing gets underway is Congressman Don Bonker a Democrat of Washington and followed followed then for most of the hearing today by the assistant Secretary of State for inter-american Affairs Thomas Cinders with me in the hearing room. Today is the veteran diplomatic correspondent of the Baltimore Sun Henry true it it's good (00:00:48) to have you here Henry. Let me ask you first of all, we heard assistant Secretary of State enters testify yesterday over on the Senate side will be saying similar things today on the house. Although I Actually challenged a bit more. What what did we learn yesterday from from what he was saying the assistant secretaries principal point yesterday Bill seemed to be the Strategic implications of El Salvador for the United States, especially in his prepared testimony. There were some fairly dramatic language. I believe he said that the what was it the battle for Central America is now underway in El Salvador and he sort of went from there to spin out that thesis right now in the first hearing yesterday, of course before Senator Jess's Jesse Helms subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere Affairs. He had a fairly easy time the some faintly critical questioning the members of the subcommittee seem to be wanting some kind of reassurance. He had a bit rougher time in the afternoon when he went before Congressman Clarence Long's subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee where matters can be inserted on cost to the United States. But today we expect the mr. Endres will have an even rougher time if I would guess I would think of Trevor time because from everything we've seen so far this subcommittee is going to focus very much on the certifications. The United States had to make if Aid to El Salvador was to continue and I don't think anyone seriously questions at the administration stretched every point. It had to certify in order to continue late human of the Salvadoran government was supposed to be making efforts to improve human rights to bring its government forces under control to move toward free elections, which seems to be the one aspect of the certification that no one can seriously challenged at this point all the rest of them meant a stretched point in One Direction or another by the administration. I think everybody understands that but nonetheless it makes it very painful for the administration and making its argument especially before a subcommittee such as this which is going to focus very highly I think on human rights violations. I've just come from a press conference where Congressman Gary studs a Democrat of Massachusetts who sits on this subcommittee just has introduced legislation declaring that certification. Boyd and he had some very critical things to say about it that this administration had simply whitewashed in his words the certification by doing what they did. So we'll be having a congressman stead's questioning the assistant secretary and that that should be interesting some of the other things that the secretary raised yesterday included the money that will be going to El Salvador. He announced it 55 million dollars in emergency military aid will be sent to El Salvador that comes on top of some 26 million already approved for this year. And he also used the figure of about a hundred million in economic aid later on. So we're talking just this year something over 220 million dollars in aid for El Salvador and the Congress basically has no role in that as I understand it. There is no even if that null and void legislation for example past there is no way that that money could be affected by the Congress that is Administration is sending it and that's it that Certainly the case bill with regard to the 55 million in replacement military equipment which would go to El Salvador to make up for the aircraft that were lost in a very successful Insurgent raid on the main Salvador and Airbase last week. It's break that down there were about all together. There's about a hundred and forty million budgeted for El Salvador this year Congress has already approved that the 55 million for additional military equipment is not subject to Congressional approval. There's another hundred million lurking out there, but that will be subject to Congressional approval will cause it will probably be presented to Congress as part of a an aid package a regional Aid package for several countries, including El Salvador of which El Salvador would receive a hundred million. So that much will be subject to Congressional approval and we're going to hear a great deal about that as the legislation moves forward. I should think it seems yesterday and looking over the assistant secretary's remarks that he expects to make here today. He paints a very Stark Choice. He puts it in terms of we can support this government or we can abandon it and that will lead to I think the word you used yesterday was in Nicaragua Nick Nicaragua is excuse me. I don't blame you. That's a weird. He invented I assume but basically saying we would have another Nicaragua and that seemed to go over with the subcommittee yesterday, but I'm certain that it won't have such an easy time here today. Well, let's face it. We have several members of this subcommittee who are very concerned with human rights. They are less concerned with geopolitical strategic concerns, which was more generally the kind of audience. Mr. Endres had yesterday. Yes, he the they're not going to be impressed. I think we're the longer-range political geopolitical strategic concerns for the region as much as they are with having the Salvadoran government get its house in order before the United States tries to fulfill that obligation as a chicken or egg sort of thing. And of course governments, Toric, lie, especially American government says as representatives of a superpower are concerned with where you wind up at the end of this process. And of course the thesis of this Administration is that if you have lost not only Nicaragua but El Salvador possibly want Amala, then pressure begins to mount against the genuine democracies in the area with which the United States is Affiliated specifically Costa, Rica and Honduras, right? Then you have a serious long-term problem about there's a thesis within the administration that most Americans are not even aware that the Monroe Doctrine is long dead and their dollars eternally surprised when they realize that the United States does not exercise the power in the Western Hemisphere that it once did We have a assistant secretary Enders has come into the room. We expect again that he'll be testifying second behind Congressman Don Bonker. But the most of the subcommittee members have not come in yet again, just to let you know what we're expecting. This is a live hearing by the inter-american Affairs subcommittee of the house Foreign Affairs committee Congressman. Michael Barnes a democratic Maryland is the subcommittee chairman. He is not yet in the room. As far as I can see. We have a pact hearing room today literally people standing up in front of us so we can hardly see what's going on. But we will the the main event if I might use that term will be Thomas Anders when he comes in and when he begins to testify the subject today is the certification on El Salvador why just back up a minute and go back to where that certification came from. It was in December that both the Senate and the house put that into the foreign aid authorization act. And this was of course the big foreign aid. All that that we haven't had a foreign aid bill for three years. So it was certain that the president was not going to veto that legislation. But the administration did not like these conditions. Is that the Congress put on Aid to El Salvador, but they did set a number of conditions and said that the president must certify to these within 30 days after passage of the legislation and then every six months so that was in late December now the 30 days was up last week and the president did certify that a number of things as you mentioned in Rio number of things are taking place are in the process of taking place in El Salvador, but there's great disagreement on that. I think part of the problem. The Administration has here is that newspaper accounts just this week and last week. I've been talking about major massacres in El Salvador during the month of December those kinds of things are coming out at the time. The administration is saying that things are getting better that progress is being made. There was a As you'll recall Bill the original restrictions that is the requirement for certification were written into the foreign 8 act as a result of earlier reports of misbehavior. I don't know what the kind of sort of term can be applied to that kind of behavior by federal forces government forces in El Salvador. There is no question in my mind that a reasonable man must judge that the Salvadoran military forces were by and large undisciplined and quite often running amok right as they made their way through the countryside in the early months after the overthrow of the dictatorship and El Salvador and the formation of what we now refer to as a civilian military Junta which is running the country the there have been some that are Beyond any question. Massacres assassinations by federal forces without any serious doubt on anyone's part subcommittee and generous how that it should affect the American position. Okay. Thank you very much Henry, true it the Baltimore Sun. We're just about ready to get underway here. This is Congressman Michael Barnes Democrat of Maryland three hearings on President Reagan's January 28 certification with respect to El Salvador. Unless there is objection the certification and the attached justification will be included in the record at this point. Our Witnesses today are our colleague The Honorable John Bunker chairman of the subcommittee on human rights and international organizations of this committee and The Honorable Thomas 0 Enders assistant Secretary of State for inter-american Affairs on February 17 and February 25 also at 2 p.m. In the afternoon in this room. We will hear Witnesses from the public. I'm sure that none of us was surprised by this certification. We're all fully aware of the factors which in the president's judgment compelled him to make the certification. Nonetheless as chairman of this subcommittee and as a member of Congress, I'm disappointed that the president of the United States would put his signature to this document. Unless the administration is telling the Salvadoran military something in private that it isn't saying in public which I fervently hope is the case the military in Salvador would have absolutely no reason to conclude from this document that it's in any danger of losing the support of the United States. If it doesn't stop feeding the Insurgency by its repressive tactics and its refusal to negotiate an end to the war. I know of no convincing evidence that the government of El Salvador is quote making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights. The good intentions described in the certification are overwhelmed by the evidence compiled by outside observers such as the Americas watch committee and the American civil liberties Union, which recently issued a voluminous report and the Council on hemispheric Affairs, which has cited El Salvador as one of our hemispheres to worst human rights violators in 1981 by denying this evidence President Reagan makes it impossible for president Duarte to effectively fight these abuses one of the reasons for this dismal human rights record is precisely that President Duarte is becoming more not less a captive of the armed forces that are the perpetrators of the human rights abuses time. After time. We've seen eyewitness accounts of military atrocities atrocities against civilians that belie the claims that President Duarte is succeeding in ending abuses through increased control. On Military it's reliable reliably reported that just two days ago the Army invaded a San Salvador slum killing civilians and raping young girls, but rather than helping president Duarte by stating the displeasure of the United States with these abuses the certification blandly says that they are unavoidable the evidence seems to be that the Land Reform programme is not progressing as alleged in the certification according to information available to me. The agency for International Development does not in fact know how the program is going because it doesn't send people into the field to find out the verdict of El Salvador's principal peasant organization. The UCS would seem to be more reliable. They report no significant progress is being made in granting titles to the land more than 25,000 peasant families have been evicted from their land and many peasants and at least 20 of their I've been murdered. I'm informed the president to our take commissioned that report himself in an attempt to assert his authority and Independence the fact that we've sought only to discredit the report shows how little backing president Duarte is really receiving from us at this point the Salvadoran military backed by the United States continues to reject a dialogue with the left despite the fact that both elements of the Christian democrats and the left want discussions leading to a political solution that would include elections and an end to the violence President Reagan doesn't even attempt to argue in his justification that this condition has been met. There has been no visible progress in the case of the murdered American nuns. We don't know what our government knows or what the Salvadoran government knows about these murders and year-long efforts by Congress to gain access to confidential State Department cables, that would answer those questions for us have been rebuffed until this morning when I was informed by the state department that some arrangement may be worked out for access to those cables in the near future. Subcommittee looks forward to having the opportunity to obtain the information that we've sought for the last year according to the press charges against two people arrested for the murder of the two American land reform workers have been dropped and none of the sex suspects is any longer in El Salvador president Duarte cannot get the military to permit Justice to be done in these cases if the United States acquiesces in the cover-up now, I'm a political realist. I know the administration is not going to stop aiding the Salvadoran military, but I'm concerned about the signal being sent by this certification, by the way, it was worded and by the administration's attempts to discredit eyewitness accounts of abuses that somehow the signal is being sent that the United States condones those abuses. I'm concerned that the administration does not seem to appreciate that. It's whitewash of the Salvadoran military undercuts both president Duarte and our own interest in fostering a You mean moderate alternative to the fmln above all I'm concerned that the administration still doesn't have a policy for bringing this war to a conclusion our ambassador to El Salvador said just a few days ago that he didn't know what the conclusion might be. The policy issues posed in our hearing of last September 24, which was recently published and is now available from the committee have not been addressed. I hope that in its testimony today. The administration will be able to speak to some of these doubts about the certification for my part and I'm sure that I speak for my colleagues on the subcommittee. We remain willing to work with the administration on a bipartisan approach to the situation in El Salvador that obviously vexes and worries all of us. I now want to call upon any colleagues that may have brief opening statements any members of the subcommittee. Mr. Chairman just log Marseille know this is Robert Marcum. Orsino A Republican of California would think that some of it is it in advance of hearing what the administration has to say? I mean why have the hearing if we've already made up our mind? I certainly agree with the gentleman that and the purpose is to hear from the administration and that's what I've suggested some of the questions that many of us have in our minds about events in Salvador. And we look forward to hearing the administration's response to these and other questions. Mr. Yeah turn. Chairman, I would like to take this out. This is Gus yatra a Democrat from Pennsylvania certification hearing is at a very important time when the administration is increasing its military assistance to El Salvador and I want to point out in the first session of the 97th Congress under the Chairman's Guidance, the subcommittee played a very decisive and positive role in the application of u.s. Foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere and to this end I want to say that I look forward to working with the chairman and the rest of our colleagues on the subcommittee and the second session of the 97th Congress. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Well, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his statement and I want to specifically thank the gentleman for his contributions to the subcommittee and for his great cooperation during the first year. I look forward to continuing to work with with the gentleman during the second session of the 97th counters gentleman from Florida. Mr. Mica. Administration says dan, Micah Democrat of Florida. No alternative. I am interested in Alternatives, but we must keep in mind that right now. At least I'm looking for a position where Alternatives might be available that were not available when we started this. Entre into El Salvador and these actions and also to hear the explanations on a fair and reasonable basis. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Thank the gentleman for his statement will now recognize our colleague the chairman of the subcommittee on human rights and international organizations animal Don Banker from Washington Don welcome to the subcommittee. We welcome your statement. Mr. Chairman my colleagues on the committee. I want to thank you for this opportunity to testify on the administration's decision to certify the continuation of a to El Salvador. As chairman of the subcommittee on human rights and international organizations. I will limit my comments only two two points that relate to human rights in the certification procedure. The first is the determination that the government of El Salvador is making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights. And the second section is that which pertains to the investigation of the murders of the Catholic missionaries and two other us Nationals in December 1980 and January 1981 and the current status involving the investigation and probable prosecution of those involved. Mr. Chairman. The state department has not offered any compelling evidence to support its determination. No reputable human rights organization in the world supports the state Department's contention on the contrary and it's January 1982 update Amnesty International recorded the following a systematic and brutal policy of government-sponsored intimidation and repression has characterized the past year in El Salvador people from all sectors of Salvadorian Society have been detained without warrant disappeared. They've been tortured and murdered among the reported atrocities have been The dismemberments including children being slashed to death with machetes and decapitation strangulations massive bombing summary executions of internal refugees and displaced persons incidentally, mr. Chairman, most of the definitions. I've seen of human rights violations in El Salvador really cover the spectrum of various and Sundry kinds of violations that we know about that exist in the world today. It is noted in the certification that the government of El Salvador is achieving substantial control over all elements of the Armed Forces. So as to bring an end to the indiscriminate torture and murder of Salvadorian citizens yet in 1981 alone, approximately 13,000 civilian non-combatants were killed in El Salvador and every respected International Human Rights group and I might include along with Amnesty International the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva, the inter-american commission on human rights the American civil liberties Union and numerous Church organizations all agree about the violations that are now occurring in El Salvador. Every respected organization that this committee deals with holds that the Salvadoran Army and security forces responsible for the mass of the vast majority of killings in that country last April the Salvadorian treasury police dragged 30 men women and Teachers from their homes and saw your Pongo El Salvador and shot them for months later that they decapitated bodies of some eighty three children and young people were found in Santa Ana the Minister of Defence publicly promised an inquiry, but no satisfactory investigation has ever taken place. Just last week eight months after the massacre that soil Pango we heard reports about yet another Mass killing by the Salvadorian Army in the town of mozote a the sole survivor. Let a reporter to a ghost town of rotting bodies and crumbling huts and describe the slaughter of men women and children. Several days ago there were reports of a massacre in the slums of El Salvador 19 people were pulled from their homes and assassinated including the 57 year old woman and a 14 year old boy teenage girls is you've already noted. Mr. Chairman. We were in the neighborhood said that they were raped by government troops during the raid. Conditions in El Salvador are so desperate that I am told that the common greeting among friends is I'm glad to see that you're alive for the past two years time and time again, the state department has given assurances to Congress that such excesses are deployed by the Draught a government. The state department has continued to issue comforting reports about The increasing proposed professionalisation of the Salvadorean Army and has continued to give hopeful Promises of discipline and reforms and I rather imagine that much of the administration's policy are based upon these assurances, but the facts lend no Credence to the Department's findings assurances continue that the violence of the security forces is being controlled, but that massacres of the civilians continued unabated. Mr. Chairman the second issue and one which particularly concerns me is about the failure of the El Salvadorian authorities to prosecute those responsible for the murders of the for American Church women and their to labor advisors when the president dorota a period before the full committee, and I rather imagine that most of the members who are sitting in today attended that session I asked president barati about the status of the investigation and prosecution of those who were responsible for the murders. And if you recall he gave us some assurances that the investigations would be ongoing but then he turned it over to a security Chief who then rambled on for a half hour just to find the security forces action to date but nonetheless there has been no real progress and little indication that Justice will be done concerning American Nationals who were involved in that shocking incident indeed. It's surprising that the Reagan Administration which is outraged by terrorist attacks on American citizens. In other parts of the world does not show a similar concern for our citizens in El Salvador. This is the first test of certification a policy that's been laid down by this Congress and it relates to El Salvador. Now rather than prohibiting various forms of assistance to countries that have human rights problems that Congress this past session has decided to give the president the discretion in providing that assistance so that some conditions are met before we extend any military assistance as you recall. Mr. Chairman. We apply the same procedure to Argentina and Chile removing the prohibition that was in place because of their growth and consistent violations of human rights. And as a result, we put a great amount of trust and discretion into the administration. But if this is the example of what the certification procedure rep means to the ministration that I for one will strongly support going back to amending the law and prohibiting Aid on a country-by-country basis and removing that discredit that discretion from the administration. I don't think any of us will be satisfied with continuing attempts to conceal excuse or Justify consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights in El Salvador. Mr. Chairman. Any such certification is an affront to this committee to the Congress and a contravention of the spirit and the letter of the law. I thank you. Thank you, mr. Bunker for Very eloquent statement. Are there any questions of our colleague members of the committee? Misty action Cisco see a trend a Democrat of Pennsylvania in the questioning is to Don bunker Democrat of Washington Bhangra. Do you have any statistics that with respect to the number of people that have been murdered innocent people that have been killed by the gorillas? Well, you know, mr. Uh Ron this Congress now receives once every year towards the end of January a country-by-country report on human rights conditions by the state department and that becomes a basis upon which we make a determination concerning a country's human rights record. The report that was submitted to this Congress last January noted that nine thousand persons have been killed in 1980 and El Salvador and it goes on to specify the nature the character the conditions and so forth and there's no question that paramilitary troops the security forces and others who are associated with the regime engage in this activity. Now, this was a report as of the end of January 1980 the committee's now have in their possession the current report, which is the first one prepared by the Reagan Administration. We have not had access to that report. Until we do see the report firsthand. We rely on the kind of information that comes to us from Amnesty International various Church organizations, and other human rights groups without exception. All of them have said to our staff that the human rights situation has worsened in El Salvador not improved, but worsen and I think judging by the statements made in his opening comments by the chairman and the statements noted by myself all of which are documented by these various organizations. There's only one conclusion human rights conditions in El Salvador have worsened over the past year. Thank you. Thanks June. Mr. Gilman. I want to One of this is Benjamin Gilman Republican of New York taking the time to appear before our committee and to express himself with regard to his concerns Hennessy his subcommittee Senator. He staff people to Salvador to develop any accurate estimates of human rights violations there. The subcommittee is not sponsored a trip to El Salvador for the purpose of investigating the human rights situation. We do rely pretty much on the evidence and the information that follows from groups that have been there and in addition to members of the Congress who have also been into El Salvador. Have you seen any Improvement at all in attempts to control the military forces in Salvador that have been undertaken by the government. I'm mr. Gilman subcommittee has aware that there are certain institutional improvements. I think and their their policies and their attempts to initiate reforms but by and large most of the violations about which we know occur outside the official ranks, but a very closely associated. So I think that those improvements and I know mr. Endres going to comment on them have been noted but you still have to look at the evidence the evidence of how many people are being murdered how many people are being tortured how many people are forced to flee the country? So all those institutional changes and improvements have little buried upon the actual fact of the atrocities that are now Remove the country. Where do you think the Dewar T regime is sincere in undertaking an effort to stem some of the acts of violence. I personally feel that President Duarte is a moderate and one who has committed to advancing the land reforms and reducing the terrorism on the right. I'm not sure that the right a is fully in control of the events and the activities in the country. I think he genuinely is committed to Bringing about the policies that we can support. I think what's important about this certification is not only as it relates to the president and his relationship to Congress and the amount of USA that will float El Salvador, but I think that it puts them on notice that we are watching. We are concerned about human rights. We are concerned about those land reforms and we fully expect the president to be accountable to this Congress before he extends. Port if we don't do that then when Draught a tries to repeal is far right then he's not going to have any resources to keep them down. So I think what we do, you know, there's an old saying in the for service of the only thing that keeps you upright is equal pressure on all sides and I'm all for keeping pressure on dorotea to do the right thing in El Salvador. We recognize that there's violence on all sides including Violence by the government. Would you say that the government is attempting to stem some of the violence and both the right and left? Well, I guess what you have is a civil war and of course they're going to attempt to restrain not only restrained violence, but subdue the Guerrilla forces, but I don't think we can be directly accountable to the transit. He's on that side because we're not providing military assistance nor do we support or endorse that that faction but we have to be accountable for that to whom we provide assistance and make this assistance conditional on doing the right things. But I do think there's an effort being made to minimize violence in the country. But the situation is almost out of control. Of course the main issue here is whether any progress is being made by the government it since we first reviewed this matter and since the committee formulated the conditions in the eighth measure and when that measure was adopted, would you venture an opinion as to whether any progress had been made since that day? Mr. Gilman, I our committee has looked at this whole question of how you measure a country's human rights record our law and in foreign assistance act specifies or attempts to Define gross and consistent violations of human rights in a few years ago. We added disappearances to murder and torture and so forth. But nowhere in our law do we specify progress that a country makes progress towards human rights? Otherwise, you know Argentina could say well, you know, only 12,000 people disappeared in 1979 and 6,000 disappeared in 80. So we've made progress indeed the language in this certification procedure says that the determination that the government of El Salvador is making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights. That's all we stated now that could be interpreted as meaning progress, but that isn't Way I Define the language and of course they have to look at Congressional intent and you may have had a different intent than I have but consistently we have not used making progress. As any means to measure a country's human rights record. It's more fundamental than that, and we've been fairly definitional in approaching this whole question of Human Rights. I would like to ask first like to question you further, but I see that my time is run. I think it's German. Michael this is Congressman Dan Micah Democratic, Florida. He's questioning Congressman Don Bonker Democrat of Washington. We need to do everything we can to put a stop to these atrocities, but you simply simply say that you think the President should not have made any certification at all. Not the president has a responsibility to submit a certification to Congress. How will the wording of the certification then or the fact that he's done? Well, I'm testifying as to Michael only and behalf of the human rights provisions. And I think that the committee will have an opportunity to look at the land reforms and other conditions in the certification but as it relates to Human Rights and those two Provisions that which concerns whether or not the country is compliant with internationally recognized standards of Human Rights and investigation surrounding the deaths of those for Catholic missionaries and the to labor officials and that respect the certification procedure in my judgment was not warranted or at least certification itself was not warranted. There has been no effort to comply with those standards and there has been no progress whatsoever that I know of concerning the possible prosecution of those involved in the deaths of our us Nationals now if it has On that basis alone. I would have to say that certification should have been denied. Do you think that we should just abandon the dorte government fist bottom lines? I don't think we should abandon the Dorothea government. The question is whether or not we should provide military assistance to that country. And the Congress is very clear that it says that we shall not provide the Assistance or we shall prohibit assistance until the president has certified that these conditions have been met. This is Congressional intent. This is federal law and we fully expect the president to comply but if we reach a point where we make that certification procedure nothing but a charade Then I think we have to go back to a more flooding fundamental decision and that is to cut off military aid to that country. And that's the way we used to do it. That's the way we applied our prohibition on the Argentina and Chile but we've done the same with those two countries. We say that if these countries the recipient countries comply with the conditions set up set forth in the in the certification procedure, then we will provide the assistance. When we come to the point of certification of should we as a committee be redrafting a new language certification? And in other words it is the language itself not correct or did we leave too much to the discretion of the president? Well, if this is an example of what it's going to be like as it relates to other countries to whom we've applied this procedure. I would be all for doing way to certification procedure and go back to outright prohibition surveyed. The last question. Do we have any reason to believe and I say this in all sincerity do we have any reason to believe that the so-called Guerrilla forces if they were to form a government or if they indeed were to take over that country that we would have any influence or that they would anyway have a better record. Do we have any benchmarks such as Cuba or Nicaragua or any other place where we've we've had an opportunity to review what they've had it handled. Well the conference committee took up this issue by way of the Hatfield Amendment which An attempt to bring about some negotiations between the warring factions in El Salvador. I hardly support that approach and feel it ought to be implemented so that we have some access to all sides of the situation in El Salvador. I gather none of our colored none of our other colleagues have any questions that's Bonkers. We want to thank you very much for taking the time to present your testimony this afternoon to the subcommittee and for your continued leadership on these important issues in your chairmanship of the important subcommittee. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. We have a request from testimony from Don bunker Democrat of Washington here. Again is the committee chairman Michael Barnes Democrat of Maryland letter that Congressman ottinger has sent to President Reagan on the subject of the certification unless there's an objection. I'll include Congressman Rogers letter in the record at this time. Mr. Chairman might I also asked for the opportunity to include my letter to the president which was mailed on Friday and should have been received by now sure any objection to the gentlelady's request hearing none. It will be also included in the record at this point. will now welcome our next witness secretary Enders to the subcommittee once again, Mr. Secretary, we do appreciate your willingness to appear before us this afternoon. I know you spent most of the day yesterday testifying on the hill and the record will show that you've always been willing to make yourself available to this subcommittee, even though I think it's fair to say that the experience is probably not always been a totally pleasurable one for you. We're grateful to you for your willingness to work with the subcommittee and to present your testimony. You have the floor. Mr. Secretary. I know you have a prepared statement. You may proceed as you wish will include the entire statement in the record and they summarize if that's your that's your pleasure. This is Thomas Cinders the assistant Secretary of State for inter-american Affairs at the state department and the opportunity to come and discuss with the committee the certification that the president has made under under law and I really welcome very much Euro. Any remark that we should attempt to achieve a bipartisan approach to this very difficult problem that we all must face in Central America problem. We cannot turn our backs on however much we might wish to do so at times and let me say that on behalf of the administration that it is fully committed to the goals which were set out in the foreign assistance act with regard to to El Salvador. We understand the ACT to say yes, there is a challenge to our national security and that is why economic and security assistance are authorized But it says at the same time we must use our assistance to help El Salvador control. It's the violence in that country make Land Reform work develop a democratic process and bring the murderers of our countrymen and countrywomen to Justice. the certification that was made by the president last week shows that there has indeed been substantial progress towards each of the goals laid out in law. Let me start if I could with the human rights issues. The law requires us to certify that El Salvador is making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights and is achieving substantial control over all elements of its Armed Forces does not say that human rights problems must be eliminated. It does demand progress. There's no question that the human rights situation in El Salvador is deeply troubled as is detailed in our annual report, which has just been submitted to the Congress. Explosion of violence and counter violence following the extreme left receipt of outside support for guerrilla warfare has accentuated already high historic levels of violence strain the system of justice to the breaking point and eroded normal social constraints against violence countless violations of human rights have Arisen from partisan animosities both the left and the right personal vendettas, retaliations, provocations intimidation and sheer brutality. A breakdown in this Society has been profound it will take years to heal. Accurate information. I think we've all have found out is very hard to establish. Responsibility for the overwhelming number of deaths is never legally determined nor usually ever accounted for by clear or coherent evidence. Seventy percent of the political murders known to our Embassy were committed by unknown assailants. And there is much special pleading going on also, and as for example, you've many of you read about something called the legal aid office of the archbishopric. Socorro who read Eco is its Spanish name is often cited in the international media. If you look at its statistics it strangely lists no victims of gorillas and terrorist violence. Not at all. Apparently, they don't commit violence. In January, the apostolic delegate Rivera Dom has deprived This legal aid office of any right to speak on behalf of the archbishopric that was a statement which was approved by the other Bishops of El Salvador. There's another organization the Central American University. that collects statistics to It's bias may be apparent from the fact that it does include a category of persons killed by what I believe Congressman Bonker referred to as paramilitary organizations and they are called in Spanish a Hostess yato's referring to persons that have received Justice at the hands of their Executioner's finally. I should say that the organization that calls itself the Human Rights Commission, which occasionally issue statistics from outside. The country just did recently on the incident in mossotti has become itself a propaganda vehicle for the Insurgency and has no independent information gathering capability. Most difficult of all to assess are the repeated allegations of massacres. The ambiguity lies in the fact that there are indeed incidents in which the non-combatants have suffered terribly the hands of the gorillas rytas Vigilantes government forces are some are all of them. But that at the same time the Insurgency have also repeatedly fabricated or inflated alleged mass murders as a means of propaganda. last year, for example in a widely publicized case the massacre of a thousand people in a cave was related by radio Vince Ramos actually this Charges just been repeated by Belgian priest broadcasting for the radio was picked up in the media in convincing detail until a geologist determined that there was no large cave in that region of El Salvador and the atrocity could not have physically occurred. There was another incident in April. You may remember mr. Chairman when 600 people were alleged to have been killed crossing the border from El Salvadoran to Honduras at the Rio lempa. We are asked the United Nations High commission representative High Commissioner for refugees Representatives who in the neighborhood if they could have a look because they have an access through there and they did and they found that there was no evidence of the outrage occurred. On the other hand as you yourself indicated in your opening statement, there are terrible incidents that occur in my belief one did occur two nights ago the 19 people that died in the Innocence Salvador. I don't know whether there were weapons found their whether these people were members of Guerrilla organizations, but I find it hard to accept that there was a firefight that this was a military action as has been alleged and I deeply deplore as this government does the excessive violence of the Salvadorean forces in this incident? We sent to Embassy officers down to investigate the reports that you referred to mr. Chairman of the massacre and mossotti in in the Morris on province. While it's clear from the report that they gave that there has been a confrontation between gorillas occupying Elmo. So T and attacking government forces last December. There is no evidence at all to confirm that government forces systematically massacred civilians in the operation zone or that the number of civilians killed even remotely approached the 733 or 926 victims variously cited in the press and I note in this case. They asked how many people there were in that continent and we're told that they were probably not more than 300 in December and and there are many survivors including refugees now. So we have clearly to be very careful about trying to bring evidence adduce evidence to the certification. We try our Embassy tries to investigate every report we receive and we used every opportunity to impress on the El Salvador government and army that we are serious about practicing human rights and that they must be too. Results are slow in coming I would agree with you on that, but they are coming. Since October 1979 the Salvadoran authorities have done much more than repeatedly emphasized to officers and Men the need to protect human rights. They have broken the traditional links between large landowners in the security forces by outlying outlawing the paramilitary organization Orden. They promulgated a military code of conduct that highlights the need to protect human rights. I've transferred retired or cashiered of punished a thousand officers and men for various abuses of authority. And they have gradually reasserted their control over scattered local security Force personnel by strengthening the authority of the high command. In Consequence the level of noncombatant violence to judge by our best estimates and even by the trends that appear in the to other agencies that I cited in the figures that they have appears to have declined by more than half over the last year. Mr. Chairman. Let me focus a little bit on this because I think it's a it's a matter of some some importance here the American civil liberties Union report, which I've read with with deep interest was published in our contained information which was up through or up to September 1981 the It did not have available to it. The figures that our own Embassy has been very carefully compiling since September 1980 and it did not have the advantage of the short-term Trends rather than the broad General treatment that that report or those reports which are issued weekly can provide I would say that the same is true of the Amnesty International report, which actually is without historical reference. It doesn't refer doesn't compare to earlier years so that you can't tell whether the crucial issue that has been posed by the certification process the issue of whether there has been progress can be judged because I assume what is meant by progress in this instance is is progress from the certainly from the time of American involvement in in El Salvador progress recently. And sustained progress the figures show it we have September October November December figures for 1980 which which show something on the order of eight hundred 779 575 665 political murders. That's for 1980. We have the same figures for this year, which show September hundred seventy-one October a hundred and sixty-one November 302. It shows December 200. Our returns are showing markedly different numbers on the same methodology. Now, let me be clear. This is not a complete report. The nobody has a complete report. The embassy says that maybe it's within thirty percent of the of the total but I can't say for certain that that is the case but nonetheless it is a coherent attempt to answer the question that you've raised. Are we getting something more than merely X or tations or sweet words are we getting some results? This is the indication that I submit to you that we are. Let me make clear. Mr. Chairman that the control of violence is at the center of our relationship with the Salvadorian government. We mean to see it reduced to the minimum can levels consistent with existing civil Strife. Are you mentioned the reforms the law asks us to certify that El Salvador is making continuing progress in implementing essential economic and political reforms including the Land Reform. I think you know that progress in Land Reform has been substantial in the sense that the states that are larger than twelve hundred and thirty five acres have been distributed to Farmers who work on them and compensation to former owners is being made. The second part of the program transferred ownership of small farms to tenants and sharecroppers and this has been the toughest. I think it's politically and socially the most important part it's been the toughest part of the of the process. You said that you didn't think that titling was going ahead. Well actually it has accelerated since mid year at titles are now being issued at a rate of approximately 4,000 a month and a total of 20. Mm has already been issued you referred to the document that was issued by the Campesino organization the union' communal a Salvadoran at the request of President Duarte. They did detail many problems of a security nature desire to get on with the titling even faster that they have with the program and that indeed we have with the program because we have been in our side involved in trying to promote both. But when this request to accelerate the program was used by many in an effort to discredit it the UCS went out of its way to emphasize that the government was responsive to its concerns and that the union expected to participate massively in the election in consequence of this in its letter of January 25, that is to say more than a month after the report you cite. The UCS said as for The Agrarian document that was presented in an updated form to president Duarte by the UCS in December 1981 dealing with the implementation of the reforms. We note that many of the suggestions bearing their in have been taken into account by the government. This document was presented without any intention of giving ammunition to the enemies of the Land Reform process. From December 1 1981 the system of liaison between the armed forces and the UCS began to function and now we can arrive rely on a high-ranking responsible person who has direct connection with the ministry of Defence the political consciousness of the Salvadorean campesinos has changed substantially. This is the purpose of the of the Land Reform and I think we agree on that influence by The Agrarian changes that have taken place lately. We understand that the vote is a weapon of democracy and this time the elections will mean for us the definitive bonds cementing our land tenure. anybody who wants to know what elections can mean in a trouble Society probably ought to think twice about that elections The law asked that we certify that the government is committed to the holding of free elections at an early date. We think this is incontestably the case. Mr. Chairman preparations for its constituent assembly elections on March 28 1982 are well Advanced a new electoral law promulgated in December was drawn up after thorough discussion among the participating political parties 8 parties ranging from the nonviolent left to the far right are now participating in the election momentum is growing independent labor group of campesinos and trade unions and the businessmen's association of appealed for the public to vote just a week ago the Council of Bishops, including the apostolic administrator of the Catholic church had this to say we see in the elections a possible beginning of a solution of the current crisis. Through this constituent Assembly Election, we will pass from a de facto government to a constitutional government, which is a fundamental importance for the development of the country's life. It would be ideal for all citizens to participate in the elections. That is why we regret that some of our brothers are rejecting them. The law also asks us to certify in complex language that to this end that is to the end of early free elections government has demonstrated its good-faith efforts to begin discussions with all major political factions in El Salvador, which have declared their willingness to find and Implement an equitable solution to the conflict with set solution to involve commitment first to a renouncement of further military or paramilitary activity and second the electoral process with internationally recognized Observers. Now it's clear. Mr. Chairman that the FDR fmln is not committed to the current electoral process. The gorillas have burned down town halls threatened to kill anybody found with voting ink on his finger and assassinated or intimidated local officials and candidates. Nor I think this is important is the FDR fmln committed to elections in the future. And apparently authoritative December statement by the two organizations says only that there should be a plebiscite throughout defy the government after the gorillas have gained a share of power. This plebiscite would take place only after six months of past would not offer voters a choice between competing slates in other words with some Cosmetics. This is the Nicaraguan model president Duarte in contrast has invited all political parties and groups to renounce violence and participate in the elections after an advanced Dialogue on the ground rules. The Communists and Social Democratic parties were both formally recognized and invited to participate nonetheless the FDR fmln refused even to discuss electoral ground rules. You may recall that Apostolic administrator Rivera Adamas in his January 10 Amelie Amelie which gave his personal support to the election process said not to believe in elections or not to see in them a solution gives no right to resort to Blackmail and fraud on one hand are sabotage on the other. I believe that voters have the right to express what they feel. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to have discussed in in detail the issues which I think are at the heart of the certification process. I would recall only in summarizing the remaining part of my statement that the foreign assistance act expresses as well as our humanitarian and political values the need to defend our national security interests and that those interests are incontestably being challenged in Central America in ways that we cannot ignore and I would add that. to that that if we are not able or willing to sustain the struggle to press on this Salvadorian with the Salvadorian government towards political and social reforms and the control of violence. That we will fall back into that terrible vicious circle that we have a tried all of us to avoid and which in Central America the only alternative to a right-wing dictatorship is a left-wing dictatorship. General Romero's traditionalist military government was overturned two years ago by a military civilian Coalition committed to reform the land reforms. We've been talking about and the transformation of El Salvador into a democracy. We supported the reforms then. We support them now. Some may be proposing that we now cut off Aid to El Salvador. I do not see mr. Chairman how that could Advance the goals embodied in the foreign assistance Act? Whether they are security democracy or human rights. I think it's pretty clear that the hope for democracy would be extinguished. We have only to look at Nicaragua Soviet Union and the and Cuba would have a new opening to expand their access to the American Mainland and the American mainland in Central America would become a factor in East-West struggle. And I must say I wonder how given the experience that we have seen in Nicaragua. With suppression of the mosquito Indians on the east coast and 5,000 political prisoners and repeated closings of Le Prince on the independent radio station and the pressure on the church. I wonder how it would promote human rights to repeat the experiment in El Salvador. Our intention is to keep the pressure on to keep the pressure on our friends to keep the pressure on the government and the Army in order to promote the full scope of our interest in El Salvador, we think that there is a wide agreement in this country that we should pursue two basic interests in El Salvador in the area on the one hand the defense of our national security interests against the challenge of the Soviet Union and Cuba on the other hand the promotion of more democratic and more Humane Societies in our immediate neighborhood. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. We've been listening to Thomas Anders the assistant Secretary of State for inter American Affairs at the state department. He's testifying before the house inter-american Affairs subcommittee. This is the subcommittee chairman Michael Barnes Democrat of Maryland incident. Have been posed by the subcommittee and scheduling the hearings. Someone who's been very close to the situation in Salvador suggested. recently that if what we really wanted to do was Bring about the ends that were the purpose of the Congressional certification. Requirement we would have not certified. And suspended assistance to the government of Salvador. Even if only on a temporary basis to make it clear to the elements within the government that are not responding to the efforts of those within the government who are seeking a better situation that they don't have unlimited support from the United States unless they change their way of operating. It was suggested that by making this certification. And glossing over essentially in order to make the certification what you concede are continuing very serious. Problems in the country. We give no incentive to those in Salvador who are perpetrating these acts to change. What's your response to that? criticism of the president's action and sending the certification to Congress I don't think that there can be any mistake at all in the El Salvadorian army or government about how seriously we believe in the need to get on with improving human rights and controlling violence. Not only have we communicated this to them repeatedly at the very highest level of the American government and through our Embassy there but we have demonstrated to them. I think quite straightforwardly and simply that there must be for the continuation of support for the political reforms process in El Salvador. They must be a broad consensus in the United States that the behavior of the government is acceptable within acceptable norms for us. In this case. There must be progress. I don't think that there is a shadow of a doubt of that down there now. I've been in this business a long time, mr. Chairman and one of the things that it seems to me that is necessary. In order to obtain performance from other countries is to be able to set standards that are reachable to be able to identify steps that can be taken which are within their ability to deliver on a short time you this law was completed on signed by the president on December 29. It was certified under law by the way on January 29 a month later required. I think that if we had gone to the salvadorians and said to them we have we've noted that you've made some improvement, but we must see an end to all politically. Motivated murders in which you might have had some hand regardless of what your enemies do. They would have said to us simply they would have regarded that they United States was pulling out with a massive blow to the psychology of that society, which would have interpreted it as an American abandonment. I do not think that that would have been an advisable tactic but I think that the message is there we see one of the thing the Salvadorian Army and security forces are decentralized and only gradually being resentful alized they were decentralized in the past because there was an effort to balance provide checks and balances in a military run government between for services and also to prevent the accumulation of too much power in any one hand in the center over the city's it takes a long time to pull that back into a disciplined a structure that knows how to deal with human rights. I don't think it does any good. To ask an organization to transform itself overnight when you know, it can't do that, but it can make progress. Well, you say that that the message has been sent and there cannot be a shadow of a doubt in the military and Salvador as to the importance of this issue to the United States and to continued support for them from the United States and yet two or three days after the president makes the certification by your own account and your testimony this afternoon the military apparently none of us know all the facts but apparently engaged in what amounted to of rather tragic occurrence. You said that you didn't think it was a firefight your best. Guess is that that's not what it was the evidence reported in the newspapers. Is that Some of those who were who were murdered or had their hands tied behind their backs and other Witnesses testify to rapes of children by military personnel. This is a couple of days after the president makes the certification If the message has been sent and if it's so fully understood down there. What's the explanation for this? Well, I don't think that as I said just a moment ago. I don't I think it'll be some time before the leaders of that Society are able fully to assert control over all elements of those Services the what we have attempted to demonstrate and believe we have demonstrate his progress towards that goal not the achievement of the absolute standard that for example representative Bonkers as stated. I'm not trying to say to you mr. Chairman that there will not be further incidents on both the left and the right I believe that there will be what we are attempting to do is to prevent them in the largest number of possible. The diminish them and would appear that that is the standard that you have set. If in fact the standard that you have said is that there should be no such incidents in a country of civil Strife then it would be in effect tantamount to saying that we are not going to support this country. Do you know or or does anyone know who was responsible for that particular action? No, sir. Someone may know I do not know. Are there any circumstances that you can outline for the committee under which you would recommend to the president that assistance to the military government in Salvador be suspended? Well the clearly the president would if he believed that progress were not being made towards the goals that were set that President would have to under under these conditions would have to not certify that the question arises as to whether there and I'm not able to address that as to whether as to what would happen then but we didn't do not believe that we are in the situation now. Want to recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania? Mr. Yeah turn this is Gus yet. Hren Democrat of Pennsylvania questioning Thomas Cinders at the state department. Catholic Church in El Salvador assembly elections to be held in Marge Congressman you have to and I I intended gesture to read it to you. Perhaps I could just summarize it again for you. It says that we see in the approaching La elections which are the constituent assembly elections. We see a possible beginning of a solution to the present crisis in the country. And it explains why by the means of these elections we will move from a de facto government to Illegal government a change which is basic for the development of the country deputies of the constituent assembly will revise the present Constitution or write a new Constitution which will form the base of the political judicial and social order of the nation that goes on to appeal to all Catholics to participate the secretary. Can you tell me which countries are providing international observers to witness the elections and are these observers going to review the whole electoral process or are they just going to be there for election day only they are invited for the Election process the question. We don't know how long individual countries will be there. By the way, let me say that we hope that a number of American organizations which have been concerned with the holding of Elections will respond or volunteer or if they wish to to be invited to go down and observe the elections. It would be very useful thing in addition to an official American delegation the countries that have expressed their interest so far and sending observers includes Costa Rica Egypt, Colombia Venezuela Peru Ecuador on Doris, I would expect that every almost every democracy in the hemisphere plus a number of other from other parts of the world would put this big Can you tell me how much credibility will be given to the elections by the people of El Salvador and the various International organizations that the fpr does not participate? Well, the you know, it would be understandable. If all the FDR was saying was we're not sure of the security of our candidates. We don't think we can maybe have a good election under these circumstances. So we're not going to participate they're not saying that what they're saying is that we must deploy our forces we must try to by force to prevent the elections from happening which suggests that they feel they have something to be afraid of and maybe what they're concerned about is the legitimacy to or first step towards the Gemma see which might come out of out of the election process. Let me say in this regard. Mr. Bertrand that the there is no Army candidate in this election. Step away from the past. The armed members of the armed forces are not permitted to vote. And therefore there should be there should be free from the kind of military pressure, which is plagued other votes of this kind one final comments. We think that the insurgents tried very hard to gain a broad movement broad support in the country. You remember two years ago. They had mass movements had strikes and demonstrations on a very large scale then they decided to go for this war against the economy what they call the get up along gotta the idea is to wear down the economy by heating the bridges and the dams and so forth and discredit the government and that way and in the process, of course, they're attacking people's livelihood. So they've lost a lot of their broad constituency. So I don't know whether they're non-participation changes it that much. One final question. Mr. Secretary of you were a candidate running for a seat in the constituent assembly elections in March and you openly oppose these and criticize the policies of the Duarte government you feel that you can conduct a safe and open political campaign under the present atmosphere War without fearing for your life. Oh, I think that that there is no doubt among those piece persons who are running who are participating in the political life of El Salvador that there are substantial risk to doing that that Duarte himself knows about that from his own personal experience a number of political leaders have lost their lives in the course of the last several years from from all parts of the political Spectrum. However, there are a lot of salvadorians who feel very strongly about the future of their country and instead of going off to abroad are back in there still in Are campaigning there people are willing to take risk and I assume they're willing to take risk because they future of their country is important to them answer in a word sure. It's risky. A lot of people are willing to run those risks. Thank you. Mr. Secretary. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Tell me from New York. Mr. Gilman. This is Benjamin Gilman a republican from New York again questioning Thomas Cinders at the state department manifold and complex. Would you care to come in a little further about the Electoral processes, you know the subcommittee and the full Foreign Affairs committee is considered an approved last year a resolution authored by our colleague the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Mr. Yet. Hren calling for discussions among all of the political factions in El Salvador the support of the elections. Through the leadership of the gentleman from Pennsylvania. This issue received a considerable amount of attention in the Congress. And in fact was embodied in the certification process under point 4 of section 7 28 a of the International Security and development cooperation Act of 81 calling for a determination that the government of El Salvador has committed to holding elections and to that end is demonstrated. Its good faith effort to begin discussions with all major factions in the country. We'd welcome your further elaboration of how we're proceeding in that direction that we made some progress under point for Well, the president of the country Duarte has repeatedly offered proposed as for the participation of all factions, including the insurgents in the election. I have here a statement from for example from the 29th of January that he made on this. Let me read if I could just two paragraphs power belongs to the people elections of the only civilized means for people to Define themselves. We believe in elections by voting not in elections by violence. He said and then he went on to say I again invite the armed opposition to join our electoral process. He's done this repeatedly. In response, he's been told that well what is required is to to have negotiations about the opposition joining in a coalition government that after that the that are at the same time that the security forces would be disbanded. The Army would be asked to purge itself new security forces would be created and finally six months later maybe a plebiscite on this all this process could be had it doesn't sound like a response to join in the electoral process and I raised the question as to whether in fact under law this under our law whether this proposal really meets the criteria and you just read mr. Gilman. Mister secretary would you come in for a son recently reported statement that was made by Ambassador hitting on the subject of the elections. Well, mr. Hinton was quoted in the in the Washington Post and I don't know whether it was an accurate quote or not and in making some remark about about whether the whether or not the the constituent assembly elections would end the war. Well, I think it's clear that constituent assembly elections will not end the war they particularly since the fmln FDR has has sworn to try to destroy them physically and the people that are involved in them and the government forces will have to defend themselves at polling time and before and afterwards The purpose of the elections is to move on towards a legitimate government and salvadorians feel very deeply that their governments throughout much of this Century have been illegitimate imposed by force and that is one of the reasons why there's broad spread failure of Salvador Indians to cooperate effectively respect each other respect the society they live in is that it has been an illegitimate government for all of their lifetime and the idea is to take a step towards legitimacy by the only means that can confer that and that is open elections. It's only a step. It's a vulnerable step. It's an even a dangerous one, but it's the first one towards getting a popularity representative government and I think that you know, we this is something that we as Americans believe in very deeply we think they're on the right track. We would be surprised if that were the only answer the constituent assembly. First step. Is there widespread support for this electoral initiative. As I say there is not only a lot of party momentum. The church has come in very strongly behind it. Now after some skepticism. I think we from our earlier conversations. Mr. Barnes. We were all aware that the church was uncertain about this they have their position has evolved and they are now as I indicated strongly behind it. I think it's interesting that the biggest non violent labor organization in the country the upd which is a very large organization indeed is strongly behind this and finally the Campesino group itself. In addition to that. The international support has been brought in. Is that you will recall how 22 members of the organization of American states voted in favor of this process last December? I think the other democracies in particular in Latin America particularly The Neighbors on Doris and Costa Rica Honduras has just had its first democratically elected president in 12 years come into power in an election in which was very wide participation, which is a very hopeful thing there those countries want to see to succeed. With regard to the elections in on doors both mr. Locher macedo and I had the opportunity of personally observing those elections when quite gratified that they were open and free elections. We hope we're going to see the same thing in El Salvador. Just one last question. I know my time is run. Mr. Secretary. Can you further elaborate on the progress? We're making with regard to the investigation of the execution of the nuns and what progress is being made to bring the perpetrators to trial your call Congressman Gilman that in April 6 Guardsmen were picked up on the basis of information that was developed largely circumstantial information. I must say developed in part with the support of American analytic and investigating Personnel. The evidence was so fragmentary a bullet fingerprint that it probably would not have stood up. An American Court sufficient to obtain a conviction and was judged not to be sufficient in their legal system. We tried a number of devices and finally in in September of this year president Duarte and the and general Garcia the leader of the army of proposed to us a device which has proved to be very helpful the formation of a special investigatory Commission of Salvador Indians to which we provided technical assistance technical assistance coming in the form among others of polygraph examinations in the course of the Fall a great many new interviews occurred the polygraphs were taken and we believe that a strong case as build up and as I have said earlier this week, we expect that in the very near future perhaps this week and indictment will be forthcoming. Thank you. Mr. Secretary. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Massachusetts mr. Studs. This is Democrat Gary studs from Massachusetts. Out there all lined up to express their appreciation for the administration's policy and I will try to summon the courage to proceed nonetheless. I think someone is done the president a grave disservice someone somewhere obviously prevailed upon him to sign his name that certification document and if there's anything left of the English language in the city after its year-long assault by your immediate Superior, it's gone now because the president has just certified that up is down and in his out and black is white and I anticipate is telling us that war is peace. In any moment. There is not as the Chairman's calmer. I'll temper remain calm also, but Commerce set of questions has set out very clearly hear any evidence of any kind from any source that I know of or have heard of outside of this Administration and the Press of San Salvador upon which our own Ambassador says, we rely for our official statistics of what's going on down there to corroborate or to verify or to Bear out anything of any major substance certified to by the president. Last week Congressman Bonker read from the Amnesty International report. I think that Amnesty International has some fairly good credentials here. Let me read you the conclusion he read through the introductory part of that. It is amnesty International's considered opinion after reviewing hundreds of detailed accounts reaching our organization that in the majority of the reported cases official security forces have been implicated and these human rights violations have occurred on such a massive scale. This is 1981 that they constitute a gross and consistent pattern of Human Rights abuses testimony received by Amnesty International implicates all branches of the Salvadoran Security Forces, whether nominally military military police or paramilitary in human rights abuses aimed at civilian members of the population who had no part in Guerrilla activity for the record. Our there's not time now, mr. Secretary. I would like to ask you to provide this committee with the sources upon which this statement was based on the president's own certification statistics compiled by our Embassy in San Salvador. A declining level of violence over the past year and a decrease in alleged abuses by Security Forces. There has been a definite Trend in this regard. I would appreciate it. If you could provide for the record these reassuring statistics and a reference to the sources and I would hope that some of them at least are not from the government controlled press in San Salvador. May I also say that with respect to the incident two days ago and the slum section of San Salvador, which has been referred to by several people earlier without bothering to go back over the the killings the rapes. This was not a small rural group of military going wild out in the in the countryside. As you know was a planned orchestrated action that which the military command appears to have been quite proud. It took place in San Salvador and it was cold-blooded murder. There were no arrests. There were no prisoners was no collection of proof know self-defense just murder the bodies as you know are found in the streets in the morning. The only really unusual thing as far as I can tell about this is that it involved a reasonably large group rather than a few individuals are a family and that it was widely reported as this these things have come to be in the past couple of weeks and our own press bodies have turned up every single day of the year as you know in El Salvador, but I like to know and this is a rhetorical question at the moment, but I would appreciate at the end of you have a response is how long you think this Administration can continue to shrug Away stories of Massacre and torture and murder of this type and how long you can downplay as you did in your earlier remarks killing such as those which occurred earlier at mossotti and at the real Lumpa before that and at the Rio some pool before that and the murders of the church women and the killing of the Archbishop and the assassination In Cold Blood in November of 1980 of the entire leadership of the opposition. I don't understand why it's in the best interests of my country to associate itself with acts of terrorism of this sword whose guns Whose bullets killed those people in San Salvador this Sunday morning chances are they're paid for by our own taxpayers secretary the Bingham. So Lars language was the president has now certified that the government of San Salvador El Salvador is in compliance with was designed by this committee very very carefully and in conference with the Senate it was the result of a strong 2067 bipartisan vote in this committee and was designed to give you leverage you the Executive Branch the state department leverage to compel the military Junta in El Salvador to clean up its Act I submit to you that you have now pronounced yourself you the government the president by signing the certification satisfied with his current government's efforts. No, sir. You take empty rhetoric and you call it reform you accept promises without having demanded action. You look at a 14 month gap between a murder and the application of a lie detector test and you call it an investigation. We've given El Salvador more military aid and we have ever bestowed on any Latin American country and it hasn't worked and in response you and you've had some experience in this area have resurrected the state Department's approach to Vietnam if it doesn't work do more of it. And you have also said to us or the presidents. Are you said in your statement if after Nicaragua El Salvador is captured by a violent minority who in Central America would not live in fear. Mr. Secretary. You must know that El Salvador is at the moment captured by a violent minority. It has been run by a violent minority for the duration of this century and unfortunately a violent minority supported by our own government. Seems to me that if you can rationalize and I will give you two obviously a chance to respond. But if one can rationalize if one can rationalize signing the certification as the President of the United States has done one can rationalize just about anything we have said to the military by the certification in El Salvador. No matter what you do because we think more important things are at stake namely the great confrontation. What did you say the decisive battle for Central America? Go ahead. We're going to certify that you're in compliance. No matter what happens no matter what massacres no matter who is killed no matter whether the Land Reform program is falling apart as the peasant report said whatever because we think the security of this country is at stake. We're going to certify that there goes your leverage there goes the full impact at the Bingham solars language was designed to give to the government the United States to hold over the heads of the military of El Salvador. You let him off the hook. If you'll tell them that their performance of the past couple of months in the past year is okay. You've told them they can do virtually anything they choose to do and the United States will continue to Put them I suggest to you that this is just one more step one more pulp into that Tar baby. And how in the world are we going to get out of this room? but the audience will please refrain from I would I would ask the audience to please not express its its We join the chairman in that I that was not my intention at secretary. I think it's these are emotional times and those who can deal with tragedies of this Dimension without some degree of emotion or those who have other powers to account to the guests of the committee will not will not react to statements of members of the committee or the witnesses. And if they do they'll be asked to leave the committee room time of the gentleman has expired, but certainly the gentleman and the other members of the committee will welcome the response of secretary Anderson to the questions that were posed. I'm not aware that any questions were posed and not remarks by mr. Studs. I would only say this is that the certification which was made by the president is not an expression of satisfaction. Clearly the Land Reform is not over. The important part of it the so-called section 207 part is a long ways from being carried through and will take probably another year maybe another two years before it is done. And we intend to get it through it is making progress clearly. We've talked a lot about violence. I don't think you and I would perhaps differ all that much on how much violence remains there is a substantial amount of violence and we intend to overcome it. We think we've been asked to certify that there has been progress and we think we can show that we must have more progress. The elections are only the first step towards legitimate government. It has to be followed by the Constitution and the larger. Election for President and four representatives to a parliament we tend to see that go onto. We are not saying that we are satisfied. We are not saying to anybody that you are off the hook. I'm not saying that United States has only one interest here security and not its political and humanitarian interests. So your statement is not accurate either as to what we intend or to what is being heard. Gentleman from California. Mr. Latimer see no, this is Robert. I got mercy no Republican of California. He's questioning Thomas Anders of the state department suazo and the military in Honduras say that what they need more than anything else till is economic aid and I think that in this discussion that should be mentioned what economic aid we have provided to El Salvador. The emphasis has been on military aid and that certainly is a problem, but I think it for the record. It should be stated what economic aid we have provided in our on the course of the last year we provided economic to military aide at a ratio of about three two one as you know, three economic to one military the we are now preparing a very broad program of economic proposals for the Caribbean Basin as a whole. Based essentially on trade but including in incentives to investment but also including some emergency economic assistance for a number of countries, including El Salvador and I would expect that the basic ratio of mostly economic assistance would be maintained about at the same levels this year as it was last year. Mr. Secretary. Could you comment on the recent formation of the Central American Democratic Community El Salvador Costa Rica and Honduras and what that means with regard to the attitude of those two democracies Honduras and Costa Rica with regard to Honduras to El Salvador. Well, they are they're concerned those two countries Costa Rica with a century of democratic traditions and on doors with the newly elected democratic government. They're concerned about democracy surviving in Central America and about it being promoted a look across the border and they see the big arms buildup in Nick. Agua, and they know that Nicaragua is deeply involved in the Insurgency and in El Salvador and they wonder what this means for them. They look also to the economic situation and realize that with economic crisis in Costa Rica and Honduras and El Salvador that free political institutions will either be in danger too hard to create so they've come together into a new community and which they will support each other and which they've asked for the support of other democracies and at the end of January 3 other democracies Venezuela Colombia, and the United States said that they would provide support political support to the degree possible economic support and the countries also pledged to use the inter-american system and all its resources to make sure that those countries were defended against armed aggression. I think the point here is that the countries of the neighborhood feel that they have to band together and act in the face of the kinds of threats, which now are bearing on the region threats from outside the region as well as from within it. You will know when the you and I and others spoke with President suazo last Wednesday. He indicated his need for economic assistance from the United States and other countries and institutions, but he also very clearly pointed out the need that they feel they have for military assistance as well. And that is a country that has not yet experienced. The violence that is going on in El Salvador. Although efforts apparently are underway to achieve that same result. Mr. Chairman with regard to the Salvadoran Episcopal conference statement that has been referred to several times. I would like to ask that that statement be included in a record. I have a report of it from the 29 January FBI is report that objection. It will be included in the record. Sometimes I seem to get the impression from what I read in the press and watch on on television that the United States is the only friend of the process going on in El Salvador. Could you comment on that? What are the other democracies and let alone the countries that are not democracies but the other democracies in the area saying and doing with regard to what's going on in El Salvador, but you remember when President Herrera campaigns of Venezuela was up here in November that he spoke very vigorously as bigger asleep as the United States does in support of the political reforms and land reforms in El Salvador and the need to help El Salvador become a fully Democratic state in spite of the challenges from the insurgents and outside support. We've had through this new Central American Community the same kind of rallying around the United States is not Alone and Central America. It is not the big United States imposing its will on or supporting a violent minority as mr. Studs would indicated rather on the country. It's the majority of the countries in the area that a concern for the survival of a reforming government in El Salvador. Honduras which is late as just a week or so ago some people in this country commentators were saying would never occur that the Army there would never allow that to take place. How do you view that is affecting the situation in El Salvador. Let alone the entire region big step forward. It was you know, of course because you were down there to observe it but it was an astonishing turn out in that election a very very high proportion of the electorate in very peaceful circumstances and in expressed a real will to to have a new Direction in their policy in a responsive elected government. I think that we always do ourselves a disservice by under estimating the the appeal of the democratic idea in Central America. Sometimes is kind of an implicit patronizing attitude from people in this country who say that democracy is for us, but they haven't been able to do it and we sort of tend to brush off there. Threats to do it. They want to do it a lot of them the president War Two and the head of the armed services Avail Salvador's Wells at foreign minister were present at that inauguration last week. Gentleman from Connecticut. Mr. Gates This is ham guidance in Democrat from Connecticut the administration's commitment to an end of violence against civilians in El Salvador. Some of it must come directly from the way the administration deals differently with different parts of the world. I for one applaud the administration for the strong voice. It has lent to opposition of what has occurred in Poland and when people were killed in Poland we heard very pointedly from this Administration about its outrage. We don't seem to see that in Latin America. And here is a situation where you spoke very eloquently about absolute standards and how difficult it is to establish him in a situation is volatile and as violent as the one in El Salvador. That that difference of apple absolute standards are achievable standards has little impact on the people who are being killed on a daily basis. And for those of us who would like America to stand for the principles of this country was founded on and I think still functions onto a degree today. We'd like to hear the administration if it feels necessary to support the Junta in El Salvador that that's fine and I think you'd find a reasonable amount of support for that. But we would like to hear some of that same count of kind of outrage for the continuing murders that are going on in El Salvador, but in Salvador in El Salvador and Guatemala, and in other places in Latin America were told that silent diplomacy works there and that it is only in selective areas of the world that we should speak out. I'm left very uncomfortable with that experiences in the world all too often through the centuries and through the recent history and in World War Two where there has been Silent diplomacy to save people's lives and stop civilian murders. There's been no diplomacy or there's been very little effect. Let me ask you a couple of questions about sanctions against Military Officers and I don't expect you to provide these today. What I would like to have is maybe a list of or some kind of documentation that the sanctions we so often hear about against officers and members of the armed services that violate the codes of standards of the players those be provided to the committee and that maybe we were provided with a list of some of the officers who have been removed from Duty so that we can maybe get some sense that something's being done because I don't think that you'd find many Americans in opposition to establishing a democratic government through elections and be willing to be patient with the process. What is frustrating is that we hear absolutely no outrage on the part of the administration. Situation about the death that occurs in El Salvadoran and and we hear it in other areas and we see very little tangible evidence that there is progress being made. Instigating sonar will be glad to provide you all the information that that we can on on this and let me add in regard to that is that perhaps would be useful for the committee to have a look at the statistical analyses which has been made at at some considerable effort by the by the embassy during during the year. We will provide you the names of all of the officers that we can identify that have been transferred. Thank you the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Mr. Goodwin. Thank you. Mr. William. F goodling congressman from Pennsylvania a republican. I believe in my Chairman's opening remarks. He indicated that that he is very comfortable with mr. Duarte. I find myself very comfortable in the several occasions. I've been in his company as well as the young foreign minister etcetera. I think my chairman may have also said that he's not sure that he has too much control over what happens and I think the chairman of the committee dealing with The human element indicated that in fact, he believes there is a declining control that Duarte and people like the foreign minister have over this government. Could I have your assessment is his control declining? Is it on an upswing? Is it does it remain the same? How do you say well this is a coalition government. You've got it was born in a revolt against a traditionalist military government and it was a a junta consisted in the first instance of a number of elements from across the political Spectrum proved incoherent and three or four months later the current formation the alliance between the Christian democrats and the military was formed. It's explicitly transitional government. That Alliance means that the political and Military decisions of the government are taken in common by a process of discussion or presumably in some cases of negotiation. So it and that although there have been very great tensions on that government. It has held up during this period remarkably. Well, it was the author of the Land Reform. It was the author of the political reforms that are now coming through but it is a coalition that after all will change form in the future once their elections very likely there will be a change and there will be a government which does not involve directly the probably the military as an element of the government. Although of course, the military will continue to play an important role in a country that is in civil strife and this way so I think that the important question to ask oneself is are the civilians in Gradually, assuming more power in the course of the political transformation underway. And that is the objective of it. One of the reasons why there is no military candidate why the military are not voting in this election having just attended the inauguration of the president and Honduras. It was a military leader who brought about that transition and they paid quite a bit of respect to him at that particular time. Is there some molarity is there some similarity and relationship to what happened in Honduras to what is trying to take place and El Salvador military have been behind this political reform from the start. And as I say now are carrying it through he could not have occurred without their support now you just Received a 10-minute lecture by one of the most capable lectures in the Congress of the United States which elicited the usual response that it usually does from those many of those who attend our hearings having heard all of that now could you give me an idea of what is the alternative? I never hear the Alternatives? What is the alternative in this situation? Well, if we do not provide economic and Military assistance to this government or if we take some dramatic action to to withhold it then of course, it would be a repudiation of the policies adopted by first President Carter and then President Reagan and it would be received by the citizens and government of El Salvador as a repudiation. I have no doubt at all that the struggle would go on would not be observable facto the end of the war but the psychological blow would be so heavy. So strong that the odds would tilt very sharply presumably there would be before long some form of insurgent victory at it might take the form of a coalition government that occurred in the in the early period very much as a coalition government occurred in in Nicaragua, and then I don't know any reason why we should not expect the developments that have occurred in Nicaragua to occur in El Salvador. That is to say a step-by-step moved towards a one-party state. The denial of pluralistic elements in society repression of the press and church and finally and very importantly a heavy investment in imported arms the buildup of military power inviting in of a large Cuban and Soviet presence. So it would have both internal repressive aspects and a as I said earlier East-West applications and one last question. I was very impressed with Colonel Alvarez in Honduras. When the senator said if you could present a laundry list of things you need and security assistance, what would you want and he said security assistance is important to us particularly what's happening around and particularly with the build-up which they're all fearing now in Nicaragua, but he indicated that it really wouldn't it wouldn't have any kind of lasting effect. If in fact they aren't able to move the social reforms and the economic problems that they have and huh? Is forward at the same time. My my question is then what do you see as the feeling of those such as in Honduras Etc? What kind of feeling do they have in relationship to the success of this election electoral process that supposed to take place in cell El Salvador or the failure of that that process well the Hondurans hope it will succeed because they hope they'll be another government or less like the like there's as of it as legitimate as theirs has become they're well aware that future government will have to deal with the Insurgency will have to deal with the economy as well as being freely elected and those two problems still stand before the El Salvador electorate as they stand the government come out at as I stand before the on Doris government. I think it's worthwhile noting here that in spite of these democratically elected government. We have the Cuban government now attempting to do the same thing in on Doris that it did in Salvador and Nicaragua and Guatemala and attempted in Colombia. It's right at the moment trying to unite the various leftist factions on the same basis that we Cubans will provide military assistance and will provide training for your soldiers. If you all commit to violence and the violent overthrow of the government in other words now that The democratically elected government has appeared quite legitimate Cubans are going to really make an effort to overthrow it remember that just as the reforming government appeared in El Salvador committed to land reform and to political reform what happened. Same thing left was United you developed a pipeline for arms and trading and he challenged the government that was in fact going to be able to acquire legitimacy in the future. Thank you gentlemen. The gentleman from Florida. Mr. Mica Congressman Dan Micah Democrat of Florida concerned but I have been straining for the thought and the words to approach this problem and I come to find it. I have violent opposition for what was just said in this room to about the problems and how to solve them. I don't think a simple condemnation of the Duarte actions is just inappropriate and I think if it's humanly possible to have violent opposition to both parties and what is going on in El Salvador. I have it because I cannot in good conscience applaud or give a positive response. That would lend Credence or credibility to an organization that's talking about killing those who participate in an election in an organization that also is participating in Murder rape mutilation of women and children. I think that what's appropriate here is total outrage. The outrage that my colleagues have asked to be exhibited toward the Duarte government to be exhibited to to all the killing all the repression the death the rape the murder it's going on in that country and I think that what's important to me right now and what's going through my mind is another alternative we're being asked here to make a decision either to support the Duarte government and what goes with it in terms of military repression or to walk away from it and have another Nicaragua or a Cuba. I'm from South Florida. We have a hundred and twenty-five thousand Cubans who just came to this country last year and they can tell us about repression a lot of Don't realize that we have over 100,000 nicaraguans in Miami just in the last year. I'm sick of these choices to be told we either have to put up with the repression or we have to let it go communist. You have thousands working for you in the state department. I implore you to come back to us with some New Alternatives. And while we're looking for these alternatives to condemn both not one or Overlook the other but to come up with some new solutions to say that we as a Humane and Democratic Society cannot tolerate what we've just certified and I worked with you on the certification. I was an author of this legislation this wording and worked on it, but I can't in good conscience leave this room and say that I would support one or the other. I don't want to walk away from a possibility of a Democratic Society in Latin America, and I know Right now today Nicaraguan we clamored because of Samosa and his repression. Nicaragua is building the strongest standing army ever to exist in this hemisphere larger than that of Cuba. I don't want to see that happen and I don't want to see an expansion of that and it isn't the other side of the world. It's right here in our own backyard, but the alternatives are alternatives that American people I think seeing both sides and I choose from we need your assistance and I do ask you in all sincerity to come back to us with some approaches that condemn all for these actions and try to come up with some solution and move for quicker progress. I think you'll find in me and in this committee a willingness to try to move together in some kind of a bipartisan approach to see that we can find some other way to maybe join together with outrage. In this situation and see if we can't come up with some other way to approach it. I don't like the choices that were being asked night now, let me just ask this. Is the administration preparing a major announcement or initiative with regard to Cuba? No, we expect to have some announcements in on Cuban policy in the course of the next several weeks, but they relate to the Embargo and some other matters, but they would not characterize them as I have a list of dates of seven meetings that have taken place in some that I didn't I was not informed of as a member of this committee, but through the public media secretary Hague meeting with Carlos Rafael Rodriguez Vice premier of Cuba and in November with numerous meetings with State Department officials with socialist International Cuba, and the state department was meetings as recently as just last week last month. I should say secretary Hague and Felipe Gonzales discussions that I understand involved Cuba Nicaragua El Salvador. Is there any action now going on that? We should be aware of with regard to the situation. Congressman Mica, let me say that we have made as I think you know, we made a really major effort to see talking about Alternatives whether we had there are alternatives in Central America and the Caribbean area. We made a major approach to Nicaragua for that. Very reason thinking that was important to communicate into we made some written offers to Nicaragua for a way out of our current impasse. We as President Reagan announced secretary Hague and vice president Rodriguez did meet in Mexico in November and had a long conversation precisely on that on that subject. I cannot report to you that Alternatives other options have come out of either of those discussions and on the contrary the buildup in Cuba for example continues searching for Alternatives in El Salvador. Well, I the meetings in meetings in Nicaragua where specifically about the relation between the United States and Nicaragua which have the tear and the developments in Nicaragua. The threatening ones that you've talked about the big military buildup the interference in El Salvador. The local repression is there some way out of that those meetings were about that in the case of the discussions with the Cubans. Those meetings were very broad about the whole area indeed about the whole world. But seeking an alternative to what appears to be an increasing challenge increasingly dragging this area into the East-West conflict which is evidenced by the big buildup in Cuba that you've cited. Now, we've got a new Squadron of mig-23s that have come in and we've had over 60,000 tons of military equipment imported in the last year the big buildup in Nicaragua. Time of the gentleman has expired the gentleman from California. Mr. Jordan. Congressman Robert K. Dornan Republican of California come back up on the next cycle. I would like to defer to the gentlelady from New Jersey who has pressing business. It's the gentleman's time. You want to take the do you want to swap time with the gentlelady? That's yes there objection to that gentleman segment after one of my College of Engineering no objection. The gentlelady from New Jersey is recognized. I think my car is going Millicent Fenwick Republican of New Jersey and kindness. I think that mr. Mica has expressed best the feelings of many of us and many of us in this country. Terrible dilemma seems to faces and I would like to say at the outset that I think many of us hope that we can give Aid to El Salvador for land reform purposes and for elections and for what might be necessary in those in that regard and avoid any more military aid. I think the military need a lesson that only that can give and I hope very much that we can do that. I say that not only because I think it's right and I think it would be Priya to the difficulties in the suffering in that country, but because the Communists that I have seen most particularly don't want it. I happen to be at a television programme Doctor Who go was there with an aid that aide told me in no uncertain terms. I'm a Cuban communist and that derided the American Obsession as it was called with elections. So I am Keen to give any Aid we can for elections second. I went to a meeting here in Washington three Communists from El Salvador and I did not know that very important labor organization had asked us not to go. I didn't get that that message. So I went I go to hear everybody and they asked above all that we not give economic aid. I said why why do you object economic aid more than military and the three Communists said because it's going to bring about Land Reform I said, why are you so much against Land Reform and they said because it empties our promise of the collective. So for those two reasons in addition to the reasons that I think that those are wise, I certainly support anything we can do to promote elections and land reform in El Salvador. But I have some questions that are hard. I would hope that you could give us some indication if we could give Aid economic and for the elections rather than military and that is where I'm afraid many of us come out, mr. Secretary, but I have questions from a constituent who was just that was murdered and they are the questions are has State Department sent reports to the families of the nuns as to the progress of Investigations. I've been in I've been in touch with mr. Ford on a number of occasions, we have throughout the year, but the we expect to be able to give them very shortly in advanced wording information on the indictments themselves. Thank you. Could I Dido just say a word about your own remarks which take very much to heart much of our assistance has been for reform to sustain the society while it does change itself politically and while it does go ahead with the Land Reform, of course, we haven't ourselves Finance the Land Reform, but but we've helped why not generally wouldn't that be better? Let them Finance the military if they want military and we Finance learn the well, we believe that they can compensate their own citizens and they are in bonds and in local currency rather than in paying for it with foreign exchange, but it's going head. That's not that's not the reason that is holding it back there. There are other reasons other obstacles that have come into but when you have an armed minority supported from the outside with increasingly effective weapons and good control with its command and control apparatus outside. How can you ignore I'm not ignoring it with the secretary. I'm suggesting that we give them aid for what we approve of and deny aid for what we very much regret, which is the continuing violence on the part of the military. I know we can't cure it overnight but somehow they've got to learn a lesson. They've got to learn the United States is not going to finish this kind of aid for that kind of conduct and if they want we would happy with land reform happy with elections, but not happy with the continuing depredations of those who are in the uniform of the country. I think we ought to make that clear. Mr. Endres. It seems terrible that we can't you say that they ought to pay for their own land reform. Maybe they can't maybe they're in difficulties Let's help with what we approve of I wish very much that from the beginning. We sent a mass of doctors and teachers and nurses and hospital equipment and all and and raw materials for their Industries to give employment. I wish we'd been that kind of a country and let them with their own Resources by what they want where they want to buy it now. I have some more questions. Will the families know when the trials will begin so that they can send representatives to the trials? They will certainly know when the trials are going to begin. We have not addressed with the government or with the families the question of representation, but I'm we will do that shortly. I don't know when exactly when and where the trial will be, but they will be notified. Oh, absolutely and will the state Department's and monitors to make sure that the trials are conducted as in a fair way. We would do that through our Embassy as we have devoted a large portion of Embassy resources to this case. Thank you. Mr. Secretary. Thank you. Thank you the gentleman from New York. Mr. Bingham. The witness is assistant Secretary of State for inter American Affairs Thomas enters the question or Jonathan Bingham Democrat of New York standing statement, and I'd like to associate myself with it and every respect. The secretary I'm I think by mistake a little while ago you suggested that we were concerned here in this hearing with some barrier to economic assistance. Surely. You didn't mean to imply that there's nothing there's no barrier to economic assistance involved in these conditions that were talking about or certification. If you're uncertain on that, I'm absolutely amazed because you know, I'm not I didn't suggest that. Well you didn't intend I didn't intend to use it you did say it is essential for us to continue economic and Military assistance as much as to say if the if you're those who disagree with the certification have their way there wouldn't be economic assistance either and I'm sure you didn't mean to say that and I'd like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentlelady from New Jersey on the importance of continuing economic assistance one of the key points. And as far as military systems is concerned is whether Duarte is in control of the security forces In This Very Room when he was here. I asked him whether he was in control of the security forces, and he turned and relay the question to Colonel Garcia. I didn't think that was very promising way of handling the matter. Do you think he's in control of the security forces? Well, he is not the commander of the security forces and he is not presented himself as such it is a coalition government as I mentioned before Congressman Bingham and which the president has a large role in Affairs but is not the only person who decides but the problem of control is is not a problem of Who gives the order from the top or who is who is in the top position? It is a problem of vertical control and that's a problem which that leadership of the army and president the war Debo shared and I've agreed here that it is a significant problem and it's certainly not been overcome. Although progress has been made on it you have agreed on various occasions and you have here again that there are many there have been many killings by the security forces to the degree that the that the government is in control of the security forces to that degree. The government is responsible for those killings. Is it not should he I'm a little puzzled that in your presentation here today, you elected to focus on three of the five conditions required in the certification and you didn't discuss it. All what to me is the one in which the failure to the failure to out of El Salvador to qualify as most clear and that is condition number two to determine that the government of El Salvador is achieving substantial control over all elements of its own Armed Forces. You didn't get into that at all, and and I want to point out that. That language doesn't speak of progress that language was very carefully worked out and the conference and its key is a key issue as the president himself said on page 2 of his certification. This is a key issue. That's the issue of control in attempting to shoot ensure Democratic future, but then the president said over on page 2 and this you didn't deal with but he has it in his statement. In various ways that government has taken concrete steps to bring all elements of its Armed Forces under control. Now that's very different from saying it is achieving effective control or substantial control. We had this out in the conference the Senate wanted to have taking steps as the standard and we won on that and we required that they that the president find there that the government is achieving substantial control and I wonder why you have neglected to deal with that issue in your opening statement. Congressman bingum I included a single heading mentioning human rights over it in which I cited the language of both of the provisions in my presentation this afternoon intending to answer both of them together because they are so closely related in that part of my testimony. I mentioned to you that well over a thousand enlisted men and officers had been cashiered or transferred or retired in furtherance of the concrete steps that the government had propagated a new code that the military command had engaged in in a very large number of command discipline exercises with intermediate at lower level officers some of which we knew about directly but others of which we've been finding out about through other sources. And that the they had provided for example, it was mentioned here earlier a system of liaison with the Campesino organization in order to prevent abuses that have come in that area is sick dying. So for me for interrupting, but my time's running out that again is taking steps and I hope that you will provide mr. Jensen and the rest of the committee with the specific information about court-martials and so on that he's a sport that centered not the same thing as achieving effective control. Let me since the my time has expired. Let me just comment on on one further point and that is to cite the Judgment of the Ambassador the former ambassador to El Salvador. The denial of military aid is more likely to result in the survival of El Salvador's democracy than the provision of military aid. And the reason for that is that the by filed filing this certificate which is so dubious as has been brought out here time. And again, we have deprived Duarte himself of Leverage over the military from now on the military have carte blanche and neither. We nor Duarte have the kind of love that leverage that I believed what he needs to make a success of his government in El Salvador. Congressman Bingham you mentioned that before if I could say just a word about is achieving we've taken that as a normal way that words of that kind mean that is in the process of I assure you that was not the kind of discussion. We had in the in the conference and we believe we have demonstrated that but the we have been told here repeatedly though in the committee among others by chairman Barnes that purpose of the legislation was to assist president Duarte in his struggles with with with the military. I take it that the purpose of this legislation is to assist the executive in making sure that the will and view of the American people is reflected to all of those elements in Salvadorian society as we go on defending our national security interest, but at the same time promoting what we believe should be right down there and that's just how it I've used it and how we will go on using it and we expect to be able to show more progress because we believe that in the nature of this certification requirement. That is what we are required to do. The gentleman from California. Mr. Jordan, right Congressman Robert K Dornan Republican of California also want to associate myself with the excellent statement of our witness. I would like to point out at the beginning a few facts that have come to my attention from the mouth of mr. Fidel Castro himself a speech before the 68th inter-parliamentary conference Havana September 15th of 1981. One of his for our tirades here is one paragraph the warmongering policy and philosophy of the new Yankee Administration are already accountable for five bloody war actions almost all of them dangerous all hateful. I'm sure he lays Afghanistan and the Bloody fighting income patchy Cambodia at our feet first, it's interventionist and Jenna sidled actions in El Salvador by supplying arms and Advising a terrorist government that has assassinated over 20,000 sons and Of that heroic and Noble people. He's characterized. The Duarte government is Terrorist on January 14th front page of the Wall Street Journal Yasser. Arafat says, the following headline is PLO guerrillas serve in Nicaragua El Salvador and Angola Arafat says in a recent speech in Beirut the head of the Palestinian Liberation Organization appeared to confirm US State Department assertions of PLO operations in El Salvador Yasser, Arafat didn't explain what the PLO what the PLO people were doing in Nicaragua Pilots PLO Pilots were doing in Nicaragua or the activity of gorillas in the other two countries and PLO officials won't elaborate but sources in Beirut said the PLO history military aid to Latin revolutionaries has a 10-year history Washington had no immediate comment on the reports but a Nicaraguan un delegate categorically denied them. Now I think that those who refuse to accept that El Salvador is next up as a Target the central Focus Target of communist terrorism around the world are again rejecting history use that they do it with mock cries of is this another domino theory? I would like to check out some rumors and then ask a couple of questions. There are reports from El Salvador both Network and wire service that there was a military attache from the US Embassy that is now assigned to the Pentagon. This attache that he was involved somehow in the death of the for American nuns in December of 1980. His rank is given as a lieutenant colonel. Mr. Andrews. Do you have any of you ever heard anything like that? No, that's a false report. It was a false report. Thank you. Now. I would like to ask my colleagues and ask you to comment on the following if there are separatists groups in Canada uncontrolled by the government who turned to violence do we cut off our elide status with Canada? If there are violent groups in Great Britain or that part of Ireland that Great Britain still claims loyalty from do we cut off our line status with Great Britain if Afghan Freedom Fighters mutilate Soviet soldiers and helicopter pilots and they do cutting off their genitalia. Sometimes the shredding their skin leaving a commanding officer alive of a helicopter that had been Napalm and maybe a poison gas in a village if they get the helicopter crew. They torture the men to death in front of the Soviet helicopter pilot break his arms shred his flesh hanging. Sign around his neck and send the Soviet helicopter back to his unit, which of course emboldens the soul. Helicopter Pilots, this is Warfare not to flee in cowardice. But to ask for extra amounts of poison gas and Napalm to be carried Into The Fray the next day Warfare by its very nature is brutal and ugly. And if the Duarte regime is trying and I'm also comfortable around him as one of my colleagues in if he is laying his life on the line and I believe he is if he can't control certain elements in our country then if I can exaggerate slightly for emphasis. Are we forever going to ask small countries to go from the frying pan of some vicious hit Larry and oppression immediately into the Hell Fire of some communist suppression where an election will never be held in our lifetime. I wonder if you could just comment on these tough choices and the fact that the gilardi government is separate that seems to me a representative Dornan. The question of what do we have to be faced up by those who suggest that we cut off military aid and go on with economic ate it. If you look at that that says will you use your own resources go buy weapons wherever you can but if we don't sell the weapons who is going to sell the weapons. Where are they going to be found that implicitly says if you want to fight your own battles, if your challenge from outside you go ahead and and do it. Where's that going to happen? Doesn't that really say that you are not going to be able to resist against the Insurgency which is supported from the outside and we don't care. And I think that that's really what the implication is. Now. I don't know whether that's being said here. But if the notion is that in fact, no military aid, then it would seem logically to fall. (02:21:38) Well, I keep putting out to my colleagues. And as far as I know no one has gone down to El Salvador and spent a great deal of time out in some of the other Villages. I went down last April spent almost a week there and slept overnight at the beach went around and talked a lots of people and I didn't meet anyone that didn't hate the right wing repression the murder squads, but I saw them certainly asking for American friendship economic aid and admitting that some military aid was necessary. If we weren't going to prevent El Salvador from becoming a puppet of Nicaragua. I was stunned by the fact that I could get on a pen American flight in Guatemala City and fly nonstop back to Los Angeles faster than it takes me to get home from here San Salvador is closer to my city of Los Angeles forget San Diego Then his watch In DC and Guatemala City is closer than the Western border of the state of Pennsylvania. This is our front yard our backyard, whatever I choose the call it our front yard and I think that the military aid is there because the ante is upped by leftist terrorist sending in the Vanguard of those who have been exiled from Chile Argentina. There is evidence that there are tupamaros herb Mountain arzo Spanish terrorist. This is the cause celeb for that part of the leftist world that always tells their followers her seek some help the cause is in El Salvador go there and kill people see if you can get the United States to overreact. They probably won't because of lessons they learned in Vietnam, but see if you can get some right-wing dogs to kill civilians because I think the happiest people after this bloody murder on Sunday by force is probably on the right where the people on the left who cheer on that kind of thing feed off it and will try to destroy the Action based on the excesses of a group that mr. Doherty nor Colonel General Garcia seem to be able to control I want to associate myself with most of what mr. Stud said accept the fact that whenever he makes one of these impassioned pleas and I have no reason to question his motivation and I like every way he put it and I like the challenge that mr. Mica of Florida gave to the administration my Administration. The only thing is what are the Alternatives they don't seem to have Alternatives and I think you've given a coherent one and I know it was tough for the president to sign that certification and we could have predicted some excess on the right or someone gouged out of the left the forcing an excess on the right and I think the alternative must be to seek some sort of moderate Middle Road without throwing these people into the Hellfire of a constant life of communist. Oppression economic Decay and never an election again in this Century the style of which we have just seen in Honduras. Thank you. (02:24:25) The gentleman from New York. Mr. So Lars Congressman Steven so Lars of New York a (02:24:31) Democrat. Well Ian overtones of this certification in the sense that the president seems to be saying the human rights situation is getting better when everybody else says it's getting worse. And in the sense that he says that the Insurgent forces are unwilling to participate in elections as part of a negotiated settlement when they claim that they are in fact prepared to accept elections as part of an equitable political resolution to the conflict like to ask you there for a number of questions about the certification itself. I gather first of all, the different fact the president came to the conclusion that the realities of the situation in El Salvador was such that it would not be possible to make a good-faith certification that the conditions in legislation had been met that he would not have submitted such a certification to (02:25:22) us. Yes, sir. (02:25:25) If that is the case and I'm glad to hear it is let me ask you whether the president would have found that condition. Number two in the certification had been fulfilled. If we had come to the conclusion that the level of government related violence had increased in 1981 over 1980. (02:25:48) Well condition number two as extending its full control over arm. Armed Forces is obviously is open to a variety of interpretations. We have cited in that regard actions that I know these and results the I assume that some balance of both which are mighty be required. (02:26:13) My question is if the gum if the United States government had found or had come to the conclusion that the level of violence which could be attributable to the government and its Security Forces had increased rather than decreased in 1981 compared to 1980. Would you still have submitted a certification that condition number two namely the government of El Salvador is achieving substantial control over its Armed Forces had been made. You claim the number of government of the level of violence has gone down. But if you would come to the opposite conclusion, would you still have submitted the certification on point number two? (02:26:53) Mr. So Lars, we've been given I guess a an authoritative interpretation of that in the committee print. And I zoom it's authoritative. It says the committee wants to make its intent clear. It expects that the president will certify that this condition has been fulfilled only if the Salvadorian government is actually made substantial progress in gaining control over all elements of its Armed Forces substantial progress is the Criterion, (02:27:24) which is prettier with secretary (02:27:26) and the question would be I have have we had substantial progress, but maybe if it was a question of steps taken is a question of results. It is clearly not extra vote. Well, (02:27:37) first of all the language in the Senate Bill provided for condition Number Two the government El Salvador is moving to achieve control over the armed forces that clearly contemplates steps taken the language in the house bill provided that the government in El Salvador is achieving substantial control over the armed forces in the conference. We specifically agreed to remove the references contained in the Senate Bill precisely because What we were interested in were not the steps taken but the actual results leaving aside for a moment what steps were aware not taken in the certification itself the president pointed to the decline the level of violence as evidence that the government of El Salvador was in fact gaining substantial control over its own Armed Forces my question to you and I would have assumed you would have responded fairly easily to this is it if you would come to the opposite conclusion namely that the level of violence it increased in 1981 in comparison to 1980. Would you still have said the government in El Salvador is achieving substantial control over its own Armed Forces. I assume the answer would be no (02:28:47) have to look at the facts at a hole in making this but mr. Solos. Could I take excuse me, sir? May I read you though back? Because it seems to me that it's been the subject of some of some dispute here. May I say what the committee the Foreign Affairs committee said about this and I think it's Here it's which foreign affairs give this this Foreign Affairs committee said about this language the it said in consideration of the second condition this subsection the one we're talking (02:29:14) about talking about the conference report of the bill. Is it passed the (02:29:17) house? This is the report of the committee on Foreign Affairs this committee sir, right? It said in consideration of the second condition of this subsection the committee took into account the difficult nature of the task. Confronting the government of El Salvador and gaining substantial control over all elements of its armed forces the committee. Therefore did not include in the certification requirement it condition that the government of El Salvador has achieved total and complete control over all elements of its Armed Forces instead. It provided that the president must be able to certify that the Salvador government is achieving substantial control a clear distinction made by you (02:29:55) the secretary. I submit you've been utterly unresponsive to the question I asked so let me ask you another question you claimed in the certification that the level of violence has decreased over the last year. Could you tell us how many people in your judgment were killed over the course of the last year? Can you give us a specific estimate that the embassy provided you (02:30:15) with the embassy provided an estimate of roughly 6,000 people noncombatant deaths in the course of last year (02:30:24) that are attributable to the government or overall. (02:30:27) It was unable to attribute. More than 30% of that total to one side or the other but it is said 70% is unknown. (02:30:38) Okay, so I gathered the you know what the level of noncombatant that's was in 1980. (02:30:46) They figured it was sighted I think in our human rights report of 1980 was 9,000. (02:30:51) So you then therefore come to the conclusion the level of noncombatant deaths went down from nine (02:30:56) thousand to six thousand not on that basis right now. Could you tell not not on that (02:31:02) basis? No, you just testified that a year ago in 1980 in the human rights report. We said there were 9,000 noncombatant deaths and in the certification while we didn't mention a figure it was based to some extent on the conclusion reached by the embassy that the number of noncombatant deaths was 6,000 so (02:31:23) that the trend during the years the thing that has impressed, right? (02:31:27) Could you could you tell us mr. Secretary on what basis the embassy and the administration came to the conclusion that the number of noncombatant deaths had dropped from nine thousand to six thousand. Where's the evidence for this? What does it come from? (02:31:41) Well, I would be glad to present the evidence to you the each each week. The embassy does collect evidence which comes from a number of sources radio Vince Ramos is one local press reports of deaths are another local radio reports other reports that are available through Sources, it's an Eclectic. (02:32:05) Well, if that That's the basis rather than some kind of on the scene body count, which I gather is not the the way in which we collect these figures. How can you possibly account for the fact that in 1981 our Embassy based on radio vents Ramos based on death notices in the Press based on other eclectic sources came to the conclusion that there were 6,000 deaths. Where is Archbishop Thomas estimated publicly that they were 11,700 deaths the legal aid office estimated. There were twelve thousand five hundred deaths and the Central American University estimated. There were over 13,000 deaths and Amnesty International and every other organization that is reported on the human rights situation in El Salvador has said that the level of killing in the country is either at or above the levels that existed in 1980. Where is our Embassy claims its By 33% (02:33:06) Well, the totals are different but the trends are the same that if you look at the trends in the Socorro who read ago the legal aid office and I pointed out to you earlier something about its own tilt. And there's you'll find the same downward Trend that is also true the statistics collected by the Central American University. But again, it has a particular Prejudice. They all show this downward Trend during the year That's the basis for the (02:33:36) statement sir. I have one final question at this point my secretary. That is that clearly the critical consideration is not the overall number of deaths, but the number of deaths for which the security forces in the armed forces of the government of El Salvador responsible. Did you tell us on what basis we decide what percentage of the deaths and the country the noncombatant deaths that is to attribute to the security forces of the Armed Forces. Is and on what basis we've come to the conclusion that the number of noncombatant deaths attributable to the armed forces and the security forces has declined from 1980 to (02:34:14) 1981. Well, we the total number of noncombatant deaths calculated by any one of these three organizations appears to be on a downward Trend in from month to month. That's the basis is I as I said earlier, we're not able to attribute. Very much of the name any of those deaths to one side of the other and we're not sure even of those that are tribute at whether they make sense or not. The point is here is that that there has been and according to each of these statistics that downward Trend the government has been attempting to get control over it. We find that the insurgents claim that whenever they committed violence that it is Justified because it's in defense of a new order that and therefore we are not sure that they intend to contribute to lesser violence. And so we assume that there has been some effect but we do not know in detail how many deaths are caused by people related to security for (02:35:17) so I have more than used up my time, but I can only tell you my secretary that if you say yourself we have no way of knowing which of the noncombatant deaths or how many of them are attributable to the security forces of the Armed Forces. I can't for the life of me understand how you then can with a straight face a to the Congress. We believe that the level of Government supported violence has declined because even if your statistics are right in suggesting that the overall number of noncombatant that's his decline that doesn't necessarily prove or indicate that the number of government inflicted noncombatant deaths as decline. (02:35:53) Mr. Chairman. May I make one more comment on this? I think that I don't know whether this can be pressed any further given the fact that really none of us know but I would only say this is that for example in the last seven months, righty-o, Vince. Our aim has claimed that it inflicted 2,000 casualties and it regards the infliction of casualties as a legitimate instrument of Revolution and War. I have not heard any statement from anybody representing the insurgents that say that they think that human rights violations must be curbed by them that it exists a problem on their part. So I wonder whether you can attribute what a cheap what a what progress Been achieved to the insurgents. The only way that your remark could in logic hold up would be as if you said that all the improvements have been done by the insurgents. They don't think any Improvement is necessary. The gentleman from Iowa. Mr. Leach a member of the committee is recognized for five minutes Republican Jim Leach from Iowa. Mr. Reviewing (02:37:01) this whole policy that we've developed towards El Salvador. It seems to me that it divides into three categories one is the morality of are identifying with a less than perfect government and here I think the majority of the committee probably agrees with the views of our leadoff witness, mr. Bunker more than that of the administration. Secondly the efficacy of it of an enormous degree of emphasis on Military assistance and here I think again, the majority of this subcommittee probably agrees with the views of the gentlelady from New Jersey more than the administration and here I must say that that on the efficacy issue. You stated in your original statement that we're dealing with something. That's a factor in the East-West conflict in many of us think that El Salvador primarily should be viewed outside the category of being a pawn in an East-West conflict and that we're dealing with poverty more than we're dealing with the Soviet Union in the fact is that many of us think that there would be a conflict of the Soviet Union did not exist as a state today and then thirdly and I would like to dwell on this although it's the least important point of all and that is the economics of the issue. Is we're looking at a very difficult internal economic situation in this country. The American people are being asked to cut back and social programs at the same time that they're being asked to spend more and foreign military assistance. That is a trade-off that I think carries very profound implications particularly as we look at the history of the 60s and 70s and there are great questions whether the Vietnam War analogy is proper or not, but certainly in an economic sense. One of the reasons for the inflation of the 70s was the Vietnam War and many of us would be hopeful that the Reagan economic recovery program would not be jeopardized by foreign military entanglements and here I'd like to ask several very specific questions one surprised notation in the press to me was that at this recent rated at the Air Force Base named Ella Pongo five? U.s. Loaned Huey helicopters were apparently destroyed in the term loaned raised a question in my mind where these helicopters provided outside direct military aid approved by the (02:39:30) Congress. No, they released in the the cost of the least was allocated sort of eteri program (02:39:36) secondly destroyed were 16 french-made Jets. Do you know did the government of El Salvador pay for those (02:39:43) Jets? I don't know that I believe so. Is anybody know? Actually, they were paid for they were actually purchased from he Israelis (02:39:55) until well. The reason I raise this is that in essence if the government of the United States gets in the business of replacing French maid Jets. What in essence is happening is that the American taxpayer is funding the purchase by the El Salvador and government of foreign equipment. And again the economics of this issue Maybe by All Odds, the least important issue at stake in El Salvador today. But again, it's one that reflects priorities and given the (02:40:27) massive impacts (02:40:31) of total budgetary restraint. I would raise simply as an economic issue. Is this the type of administration program that we want to defend. (02:40:42) Mr. Congressman. Could I make a couple of points on that one is that if in fact the fighter bombers are replaced as we are now planning, we would not expect to purchase equipment from a foreign country that would of course American equipment that would be free. But on your larger point the the amounts of course are not not great the here again the Vietnam analogy falls down. We spent what a few hundred and fifty billion dollars in Vietnam overall. We're talking about a military assistance program this year of 25 plus 55 million and finally that V @ 55 million that has been drawn now allocated to additional military assistance is from funds already appropriated. It is not additional to the 1982 budget understood. Why would only I would concur in that would only make the one other point and that is the only point where the Vietnam Is not break down is that by identifying so thoroughly with the government of El Salvador with the placement of a trivial number of men (02:41:51) as well as a (02:41:52) not enormous amount of monetary value to equipment. We have (02:41:58) transferred or transform that (02:42:01) conflict from a civil war into an anti-colonial struggle and probably given the opponents of (02:42:08) this regime more incentive rather than (02:42:10) less and finally, let me just ask one small question and that is would you care to take this opportunity to State categorically. Whether the United States government will refuse to augment the number of military personnel in El Salvador in the near future. Well, it is about 50 now the we don't know precisely what the implications are of replacing the equipment that has been lost and in terms of transitional training and and also of allowing for the trading or at least the maintenance and the early stages of additional equipment that will be delivered under this program. There may be some increases over that 50 total, but our objective would be to keep them as small as possible and we do not expect any really major increase. Thank you. The chair notes the presence of couple of our colleagues who are not members of the committee who wish to pose questions to the witness who be recognized the gentlelady from Ohio. Mrs. O'Connor congresswoman Mary Rose. Oh car from Ohio a Democrat as you know, I have served as a liaison with the families to the Duarte government and I do want to acknowledge the presence of Ambassador Rivas Gallant who's been very courteous to our office. I can say I may have the families that they're not only interested in who pulled the trigger but who gave the order in hopes of saving lives in El Salvador and because mr. Secretary, you mentioned that the embassy just to quote your remarks in your introduction tries to investigate every reported receives and since in your opening statement, you did not mention in my knowledge anything about The investigations which are one of the key qualities that are required to comply with and since the certification was less than vague Reverend reference to the would-be Assassins. Let me ask you a few questions relative to who will actually be charged in some of the concerns that I have in reports that I'm sure you've received in terms of who was involved in the killing of our missionaries. Have you pursued it in by the way for the benefit of the chair and my colleagues I've asked the state department for a briefing on this matter and I would have preferred to ask these questions privately, but I was never given the opportunity to have that briefing so I have to make them public. Have you sought excuse me Congressman as ever we didn't respond to that? No, you didn't know I was told that you know sometime next week and then we said sometime another week and so on. I don't want to lose my time debating that but that's a matter of fact has the state department and FBI's been seeking an individual who is allegedly an eyewitness with the perhaps an alias of want Ernesto Cortez who indeed implicates a American Colonel and who apparently allegedly gave orders to intercept the nuns quote and had a close relationship with Hans creased now, have you heard that report? And if you have what are you doing about it? Could I say this congresswoman that all of the kind of question that That you would expect to be asked and circumstances of this kind such as not only where were you? What did you do? What is your attitude towards? Did you do this who was with you who gave you instructions Etc. All of those have been asked in the course of this interrogation of those directly concerned and it is of course the responsibility of the Salvador government to bring the murderers of our country women to Justice and we count on them to make the indictments and to bring this process to a close and hopefully to get convictions. Well, I see the process of all of that is that just interrupt you? I think you'll agree that the state department has been less than zealous and encouraging them to do this and in fact in our conversation with President Duarte, he implored our help to try to get the FBI back down to El Salvador. And so so let me ask you specifically the question again in a few. And I think I certainly in the families and I would appreciate has the state department and FBI been pursuing an individual named Juan or nesto Cortez who allegedly is a witness to these murders and could really possibly implicate other individuals besides a six military individuals that have been helped congresswoman. I would be glad either after the indictment in public or before the indictment in private to address all questions of that kind but I don't want to do anything that might Prejudice the getting of the indictment is the next necessary step in the well that will be glad we'll be glad to do that tomorrow morning. If in fact it hasn't I understand that a meeting has been offered but the if in fact it hasn't been arranged and that's our fault. Let's arrange it this evening. Well, let let me go on then and I don't do this lightly believe me, but I think it's about time the American people had Little into evidence of you know, some kind of pursuit and Truth involved here. They've been waiting 13 months with some kind of conclusion and I want the chairman and others don't I don't necessarily fall Theo Salvador government on this. I think that our cooperation could have been a little bit more zealous on the issue. Let me ask you if you have question any American and Military attache case who were assigned to the American Embassy in November December 1980 about their knowledge and or involvement with the case specifically Colonel Cummings who was a liaison to now General Garcia. He was a colonel when he came to me with some evidence a couple but a couple months ago, but to he was assigned to expedite the search and the investigation initially Colonel Cruz who was designated by the US Embassy as a Then to Salvadorian investigation committee appointed to investigate the murders and Colonel vosch who is the individual who these the so-called witness implicates in his in his report that he tried to give the American Embassy in in Mexico. I have you questioned these Kernels at all. The very substantial amount of questioning has gone ahead including questioning of Colonel Cummings among others. We have been asked for the complete file of information of this which is very voluminous to show to the chairman which we will do so and we'll be glad to give you a complete briefing in private. What about Colonel Bosch and Colonel Cruise? I can't address those correctly. You're not aware, but we'll have to check. Well, I don't like to tell you how to run a business but I would suggest that you since Colonel Bosh has been implicated by these so-called reports relative to this alleged eyewitness witness. Mr. Cortez who apparently you're pursuing I think it would be relevant to ask him what connection he had to mr. Han's creased who has also been connected with the slayings of our labor leaders, right? The other question I had and I'm sorry, you know, you don't want to volunteer more information on this or do you well, I'm as I said, I think once the indictments of have been made the important thing now is not too prejudiced in any way that That step. I think you would agree with that. Would you not that we have to get that in order to get on towards convictions? Absolutely, but I also would feel very strongly as I'm sure most American people feel that we do not want to see scapegoats used either, you know, in terms of who is actually check and and I got that too. I probably got indicated that there were Millicent Fenwick ask questions on behalf of one of them who constituents who indeed had when you expected indictments and so forth, but that's a little different than the trial process and I understand you know that goes to justice of peace and then it goes to a trial judge and one judge has resigned. The other one is taken leave of absence. I mean, you know, we could be dead and buried by the time there's any kind of Justice brought forward and so I don't think the families nor the American people have Guarantee and that area in terms of and I realize the problems with having Justice brought about and I have appreciated the Candor with which present Duarte has has dealt with on that matter and I think he was acting sincerely but I don't think we have any real knowledge of when we're going to see a trial take place in the actual individuals who are responsible for the orders Etc in the near future to say the least. I do also want to ask you a question about the United States troops in El Salvador. You mentioned there are 53. Are you including Puerto Rican individuals who apparently are in El Salvador? There are there are no troops in the sense of people who engage in military operations, if that I don't know where that was the implication well military personnel and military personnel. There are I think Was it how many are there 49 at the moment? How many Puerto Rican it's very personal but these are the members of the American Military in total whether there are any of them of that are Puerto Rican. Oh, I see. So in addition you're not excluding those who are in terms of their backgrounds of Puerto Rican and that's the total number. It's not something it's not something like 250. These are the American Military trainers and technicians in El Salvador at the present time. Thank you m'lady from Rhode Island for five minutes. Republican congresswoman Claudine Schneider of Rhode Island and the hearings today despite the fact that I'm not a member of this committee. I do have a (02:53:46) very specific (02:53:47) question for you. Mr. Secretary. It relates specifically to a the report that has come to the attention of the United States by mr. Philip Bourgeois who had witnessed the massacre of a column of a thousand refugees who were escaping the scene of the conflict and the reports indicate that this massacre was allegedly conducted with American Equipment. And I wonder if you might be able to tell me please is the state department currently investigating this particular allegation. We did talk with mr. Bourgeois. I didn't talk with him personally, but one of my associates did did talk with him as his armor. What he said was that He Came Upon A group of peasants that it was attempting to move at night from gorilla held positions two positions held by the Salvadoran military. And that somebody started firing and a number of them were killed. I'm not aware that he used a figure anywhere approaching a thousand in the course of this conversation. Although there were men women and children hasn't since civilians who were killed in this exchange of Fire. if I know anything about the numbers in it Mr. Bourgeois did in fact use the number of thousand I am told whether in fact in the middle of the night one would have been enabled that would have occurred or not. I don't know it seems to me that this is another one of the problems of what he going. What is going to happen when civilians get caught up between opposing forces. Well, I think that the testimony here today by the members of the committee has very clearly indicated a great deal of displeasure with the absence of any convincing details and so far as satisfying the members of Congress that the Salvadorian government is engaged in a quote consistent pattern of human rights violations, and I was wondering if you might be willing to (02:56:22) make a commitment to this committee to indicate that the state (02:56:26) department might change their modus operandi and in verifying any occurrences of human rights violations. Well, one of the things we've attempted to avoid is the build-up of a very large Embassy in in the area, I was just asked a question about our military personnel whether they would go up or not. We've obviously been trying to keep it from from being too high. We have five political officers that are responsible for the entire conduct of relations with this government. In the political field all the reporting on it plus all the investigations we do. I don't know whether we do the best we can on this but frankly, we do not have people who go out with the units as advisors, you know, these are military trainers. They stay behind we don't propose to have them and don't think it'd be good idea to have them. We don't know whether we want to send our political officers off into all the areas where there is firing going on to get more statistics or information. We do try to investigate what we can now I can pledge this. I realized that mr. Chairman one of the things that this certification process imposes on US is an information requirement and and the requirement to get credible detailed information to the degree we can we are doing everything we can to meet that requirement and and I would be glad to discuss with you how he can do more on this but we obviously have a certain number of limits. I think that I was not recommending necessarily that the political officers be involved in doing the count the body counts or the human rights violations or whatever, (02:58:04) but I think that it would be appropriate for the state (02:58:06) department to make recommendations as to how they might change their information basis and perhaps use information from other sources or consolidating because I would think that the members of this committee will continue to be very perplexed by looking at a broad spectrum of different numbers and being caught up in a situation of not really knowing whom to believe so that that is my only request recommendation. I think it would be useful if the state department would put together a paper or a series of Alternatives that would say how you might go about changing your modus operandi. Let me say in this regard that whenever there is an alleged major incidents such as the mossotti incident we go around and we talked to all of the organizations that claim to have some knowledge is for example, we went to talk to the to the Legal Aid Society because it had put out a figure of saying up there was almost a thousand people had been massacred we ask them. How do you know did you send somebody there? No, they hadn't sent somebody there so that eliminates one source of information and we want on the others. We sent our own people there. Of course at the same time to sometimes they do know. Sometimes they have some information. So we do try to do that. But I agree with you that we're going to have to produce more and more detailed information. We will try to do so In your the closing part of your statement you had indicated that your attention is to keep up the pressure in order to promote the full scope of our interests in the region interest We Believe are widely shared in this country. We we touched on the human rights and of things and what I am concerned with is that the comment the defense of our national security interest against the Soviet Cuban challenge, I would like to associate myself with the remarks made by my colleague Congressman Jim Leach from Iowa in exceedingly strong concern about the strength of our own country in terms of National Defense. Although I do not serve on this committee. I have had the the opportunity to deal and travel to the Soviet Union to Egypt turkey and a broad spectrum of other spots around the world and there is no one that you will find in this Congress that feels more strongly than I that we need a strong National Defense, but I will also tell you that in reviewing (03:00:20) Our (03:00:20) budget it has become distinctly clear to me that we have no defense spending strategy that articulates our priorities and I think that when the time comes for the (03:00:33) state department to to be involved in (03:00:35) discussions of military needs I think it's critically important that we might as members of Congress have the benefit of some form of priority list and we need to address where we are going to be spending these dollars as well as already indicated. We are making substantial Cuts in other programs and we don't have enough money to be throwing around when our taxpayers (03:00:57) are looking for the most efficient expenditure their dollars. So I would like to Second the recommendation that we look very (03:01:04) closely at the continued expenditure of dollars in El Salvador in the context of our overall strength of not only our National Defense, but also the strength of our national economy, but Congressman it might be the case that if in fact The number of states closely allied with Cuba and the Soviet Union were created in Central America that the military bill for us would be a lot bigger. It's true. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. The chair is going to have to adjourn the hearings in a few minutes. But the gentleman from New York has requested an additional opportunity to pose some questions to the gentleman from New York is recognized for five minutes. This is Congressman Steven. So Lars Democrat of New (03:01:48) York Secretary were adequately responded to during the previous give and take you indicated that we had come to the conclusion. There were 6,000 noncombatant that's in 1981 based on the researches of the embassy in San Salvador. Was there any dissent or disagreement on the part of the embassy staff with that conclusion? In other words? Were there any people on the embassy staff with thought the figure was higher? (03:02:15) No, the embassy let me be precise is the embassy said that they didn't know what the real number was. First of all quite honest about that. They said this is what we are reporting. We think are our estimate is it maybe it's within 30 percent notice him. (03:02:29) That was a everybody was on board on that 6,000 upper minus 30% More or less (03:02:37) well, and I don't first of all there was no dissent. I don't think there was any effort to in fact poll everybody involved. I don't want to give you that suggestion, but nobody (03:02:45) descended you're not aware of any disagreement within the embassy on that figure. Okay. Now could you tell us whether the definition of a noncombatant death is in any way been changed from 1980 to 1981 terms of the administration's estimates of the number of noncombatant. That's there have been (03:03:03) no, it's the same (03:03:03) methodology. It is the same. So there's no change in the methodology at all. Well, if that's the case, how can you possibly account for the fact that our people have come to the conclusion that they were roughly 6,000 noncombatant that's in 1981. But the Archbishop Rivera Adamas estimated there were 11,700 noncombatant deaths in the legal aid offices of the Archdiocese estimated. There were twelve thousand five hundred that's a difference of roughly a hundred percent. In the estimates and well, I think how do you how do you account for (03:03:40) this? Well, one of the reasons for the difference is that the Legal Aid Society does in fact include as I recall it the combat casualties of both (03:03:52) sides their figures is I understand that apply only to noncombatant (03:03:56) casualties. You would have to take a look at the diagram on the subject. Let me see what I can't check that while we (03:04:03) are I have it. I have the figures right here in the document put out by the Washington office on Latin America says source and Salvador archdiocese legal aid office note these figures refer only to extralegal killings of civilians not engaged in armed combat and for the year 1981 it says twelve thousand five hundred and one. (03:04:27) Let me check for a moment either these figures of those are the Central American University also include combat deaths. However, the we have not been told on what basis the figures of the legal aid office have been made. I repeat to you by the way that it is not represent the the archbishopric anymore. (03:04:52) No, but the Archbishop himself, mr. Secretary estimated 11,700. (03:04:58) No, no what the archbishop's Figures were were based on we've attempted to find out from and the other thing I would say for you and so far in terms of monthly estimate. They've only published the first six months of 1981 so we can make announcer but we have an analysis in detail, which I'll be glad to submit to the committee if I may the So that you can you know make you analysis for himself, but could I repeat the key point which I think is the point that is the most concern to you. And that is what is a trend all of these numbers show the same trend on a month-by-month (03:05:35) basis. Well on the contrary if the figures of the legal aid office in the Archbishop or accurate and if the figures submitted in our human rights report for 1980 are accurate, the number of noncombatant deaths is going up from 9,000 in 1982. Approximately 12,000 in 1981. Whereas the certification claims in effect that they've dropped from nine thousand to six thousand. So the trend seems to be going according to Independent Assessments in precisely the opposite direction of that claim by the president, but let me move to another area the secretary which I think is perhaps even more important than that has to do with the elements in the certification involving free elections and a willingness to enter into With opposition forces and I want to read this to you and then engage in a brief textual analysis to make sure we're on the same wavelength according to the legislation. The president has to certify as a condition for further military assistance to El Salvador that the government in Salvador has demonstrated its good faith efforts to begin discussions with all major political factions in El Salvador, which have declared their willingness to find and Implement an equitable political solution to the conflict with such solution to involve a commitment to a renouncement to further military or paramilitary activity and the elect and be the electoral process with internationally recognized observers. Now, let me ask you this. If just for the purposes of discussion and Analysis the FDR and the fmln indicated that they were prepared to to find and Implement and Equitable political solution involving a commitment to a Announcement of military and paramilitary activity and an electoral process with internationally recognized observers in other words if they made statements which were in Conformity with the text of that requirement at (03:07:35) you you agree sir, they have not yet. (03:07:36) But let's leave that aside for a minute. But if they did and if the government El Salvador indicated that nonetheless, it would not negotiate with the FDR in the fmln. I'm sure you would agree that under those circumstances. It would not be possible to make the proper certification. Would you agree? (03:07:54) No, I think that there are two quite different things here. The language says to this end to the end of free elections indicate its willingness to enter into discussions. We believe that the government has a to this end to the end of Elections entered its will educate its willingness to enter discussion. I raised the question about whether the fmln actually met the latter condition, but it doesn't matter because the government's are created (03:08:17) will get into the specifics in a second and you'll have ample opportunity to Indicate that you think they haven't met them, but I want to get an abstract analysis from you if the FDR and fmln had indicated a willingness to implement an equitable political resolution involving elections and internationally recognized observers and the government nonetheless would not enter into discussions with them. Then you would agree. I'm sure the conditions of the certification of not been met. It's (03:08:44) not a problem. The government has indicated his willingness to talk about (03:08:46) like well, I don't understand why you refuse to answer simple questions because I'm perfectly prepared to get into the substance and I'll do it right now since unfortunately you won't answer in principle, but you insist on answering and practice now, it's your position. I gather that the fmln and the FDR have refused to participate in elections and to implement and Equitable political resolution of the conflict is that the that's the the administration's position my (03:09:13) correctly. We're not basing the the finding or certification on that. I note that they are not actually Favor of Elections is we normally understand them are in favor of a plebiscite and different and I'm sure you would agree that it's different. (03:09:28) Well that I'm not sure that I agree to it. But let me read you a letter which I received today from Ruben Zamora who represents the political and diplomatic Commission of the fmln FDR in our country in response to some questions. I put him and then I'd like to ask you whether you think this response conforms to the actual requirements in the certification secretary. (03:09:58) I'm listening (03:10:00) dear. Mr. Solos answering your request for our position regarding condition number four on the 8th of the Salvadorean government. I would like to State the following one the FDR fmln have in different opportunities declared its willingness to find and Implement and Equitable political solution to the conflict to we have Publicly stated that we are willing and ready to start peace talks without preconditions on any side 3 in our letter to the general assembly of the United Nations. We stated quote. Our desire is peace to obtain it. We proposed a political solution whose objective is to put an end to the war close quote this quote clearly expresses our commitment to stop military activities when the Equitable political solution is achieved even more in press statements. We have declared our willingness to consider a ceasefire as part of the political settlement for in relation to elections the same letter to the United Nations expresses our position when it states quote elections will be an important element as a mess. Chintu elections with quote internationally-recognized observers close quote. I cannot point out point out to any public statements of our fronts on the matter, but I could assure you that there is no objection in principle to this point to finish. Let me inform you that the political and diplomatic Commission of the fmln FDR and its recent plenum in January 1982 analyze the fourth condition and reach the conclusion that we do not see any contradiction a problem between what the Congress approved and our position on a negotiated settlement. Now my question to you, mr. Secretary is this given this statement on the part of a representative of the FDR fmln. Do you believe that this statement conforms with the conditions in the legislation and to the extent it does is it your view that the government in El Salvador is willing to to begin discussions with the FDR in fmln for the purpose of implementing an equitable political solution. And if not then on what basis do you issue a certification that it is willing to begin discussions with all made of major political factions in El Salvador that are willing to agree to the other elements that this letter says they're willing to agree to (03:12:40) well. I'm sorry. I don't have here a an English translation of the of the statement in December that you that you referred to in the letter you've received but the let me give you the Spanish afterwards. You can verify what I'm about to say the what this says on elections is. As you quote it says that that the two organizations think that elections are a valid and necessary election of expression of the popular will fine, but then it goes on to say always and when the conditions exist in the right climate would permit the public to manifest its will freely for this to be realized the you would have to have a democratic government that would guarantee not only the free expression of the popular will but also the Fulfillment of this will without any exclusion. So it says this is the proposal and I wonder whether it is proposal you really regard as elections in this sense in order to respond to actual conditions. We propose the realization of a plebiscite to ratify the new government. The one that we will join to take place no later than six months after the installation the new government then it goes on to say the realization of Municipal elections not National elections not presidential election Municipal elections should take place after the promulgation of a democratic electoral law. Now the we spoke earlier about the parallel with Nicaragua. It's really striking the Nicaraguan government says sure we're in favor of Elections later, you know, it's on our program. It'll happen when conditions are right maybe in 1985 maybe later on. Some people are talking about having Municipal elections there too. But anyway this I don't know what the whether this statement corresponds to the notion of free elections as written into the law and I we haven't attempted to base our Our certification on that Congressman so large we have attempted to base it on the point that regardless of what the FDR fmln stand for regardless of how you interpret or I interpret anybody else interprets this language. I've just summarized regardless of that the fmln and the FDR have not been prepared to respond to the call of President Duarte, which he again originated on January 28th. Please let me finish have not yet been prepared to respond to the call to participate in the elections and it says to this end will hold discussions to the end of the elections (03:15:24) Miss secretary, perhaps one of the reasons they haven't responded. Is it on June 4th of 1981 Colonel Gutierrez stated categorically that the FDR could not participate in the elections because it is not a political party but is rather the Democratic facade of the guerrillas and I think there may be conflicting (03:15:45) stairs, but that was well before the language was Pastor even drafted and this that we are trying to certify and it's well before many statements by the government since then including the one I just cited to you (03:15:58) well, (03:15:59) but could I miss more fundamental question now, mr. (03:16:02) So much. Mr. Secretary. I'm asking the questions and I let you finish and I appreciate it. If you let me put this question to you. Do you can deceive ministration consider the FDR in the fmln major political factions within the terms of this (03:16:16) legislation. I would imagine so we have we done okay, but I assume so (03:16:22) well, if the fmln and the FDR are considered major political factions, then you would agree that and I know you believe that they have not indicated a willingness to participate in elections as we understand that etcetera what a renounce violence but if they did those things and if even then the government in El Salvador was not willing to enter into discussions with them surely you would agree at that point that the conditions of the certification of not been (03:16:49) met but the government is willing to enter into (03:16:51) discussions with the of that act and the fmln (03:16:54) to that end to the end of Elections, which is what the law says. (03:16:59) Well, then why haven't negotiated discussions begun (03:17:03) because the fmln FDR do not want to talk about elections. (03:17:08) Well, then how do you account for the fact that on October 8th the hunter issued a statement in which they said and I quote it is clear that there is no chance of dialogue and negotiations with arms sectors and therefore any possibility of mediation is excluded. (03:17:23) But the law doesn't talk about negotiations. It doesn't talk about mediation. It talks about discussions. What's that offend of (03:17:30) Elections? What's the difference between discussions and negotiations? And the (03:17:33) discussions are 2 and N the law specifies what the end is Congressman so Lars free elections (03:17:40) and my understanding is based on the letter that I received today that the FDR and fmln if this statement represents their point of view and it's the latest statement we have that they are prepared to accept within the definition of the law. A solution which involves a commitment to an electoral process (03:18:03) Congressman. So Lars, are you are you proposing then to have a representative? Not necessarily the most authoritative representative of the of the FDR interpret the law. (03:18:14) I think the interpretation of the law is up to the president and the Congress and maybe the courts. Okay, but clearly if they indicate a willingness to participate in elections, which they say they do in this letter it would seem to me that it is clear that they have fulfilled that element of the conditions. However, we obviously have a disagreement on this point secretary just one other question here. And that is that relates to Future Aid you have decided to give I understand 55 million in military assistance to the government of El Salvador through the utilization of section 506 of the foreign assistance Act. And the number of us are somewhat concerned above and beyond whether we think this additional age should be going to El Salvador that it's being provided in a way which more or less n runs the ability of the Congress to make a determination about whether it should be forthcoming. Now there's only 20 million left in the 506 account and I assume it's unlikely that you're going to use all of it for El Salvador. Presumably you'd like to keep something in reserve for emergencies elsewhere in the world. Could you give the committee some assurances that as we approach continuing developments in El Salvador that if the administration decides that additional levels of a door required in El Salvador, I'm talking now of military aid that it will not use the authorities provided in section 6 14 which give the president the right to provide up to 50 million dollars in military assistance to any one country or 250 million dollars. If he feels it's imperiled by the international communist conspiracy without the need for authorizing and appropriation legislation and that if the administration does come to such a conclusion that additional military aid is needed it will submit its request to the Congress so that we can debate the issue in the house and the It and make this a genuinely National determination because while we may disagree about merits of the particular case, I would hope we could agree that on an issue of such profound importance to the country that if we've learned any lesson from our experience in Indochina. It's at this decision ought to be a national decision with the approval and acquiescence of the Congress rather than a decision, which is made through the use of various legislative loopholes (03:20:44) Congressman so Lars, we do think that genuine unforeseen emergency did occur at the end of last year and would have in fact come come forward with his decision earlier in December. If and we were not up against the Congressional recess and and would have been put you and us in a position of springing it on you just as you are about to leave our from Tom, so we wanted to foreshadow it by saying we thought more military resources were needed at that at that time and did so publicly And then produced it here when Congress came back the let me say that you know in as regards the use of this of this of this section. It clearly was intended by the Congress as well as by the administration to deal with these emergencies by our budgetary process. The original budgetary estimates were actually submitted I think in January of 1981 12 months ago and the world does change a lot the I don't I don't see that. There's any point in attempting to to make artificial restrictions on what the president and the administration might or might not do in given circumstances. But frankly, this is this is designed to be a military assistance program that we think fits what we foresee. We explicitly stated in our certification that we think one of the emergencies is the attempt of the insurgents to disrupt the elections IE we see a coming emergency as well as ones that have already existed and we've argued on that basis it's sick (03:22:28) Secretary of that one final effort to see if there's some common ground between us even if we disagree on the specifics of this certification would it be fair to assume based on the unwillingness of the administration so far to provide direct military assistance to Guatemala where the Strategic Stakes are even greater than they are in El Salvador presumably because of the human rights record of the government in Guatemala that if at some point in the future the administration came to the conclusion that the human rights situation in El Salvador was getting far worse was visibly deteriorating that these massacres which allegedly taken place turned out to have really taken place and if instead of a declining number of non-combatants This is a sharp increase in noncombatant deaths with a healthy percentage being attributable to the security forces in the armed forces that under those circumstances in the context of a clearly unmistakably deteriorating human rights situation in El Salvador that for the same reasons. We have refrained from providing military assistance to the government in Guatemala until now with the Strategic Stakes are considerably higher we would at that point refrain from providing military aid to the government in El Salvador. (03:23:48) Congressman solar as I said at the start of this hearing that we shared the goals with the Congress that are expressed in this legislation and I meant to say a number of times but let me say again that we intend to be very serious about applying them because they're our goals to we will apply the law there is a periodic certification process in the law and we will respect that (03:24:12) stream and I want to thank you very very much for indulging my propensity toward loquacious interrogations, even though I'm not a member of the subcommittee and I thank you very much for this opportunity to participate. I want to subscribe entirely to your opening statement. I think you've done a marvelous job in constructively and creatively responding to this issue was the chairman of the subcommittee over the course of the last year and I think the interests of the American people have been well served by the role you've played in this issue. (03:24:45) Well, thank you John. New York for his comment, the gentleman of course is one of the principal authors of the legislation that that causes us to be here this afternoon. So if I have been patient with the gentleman's exceeding the five minutes by by some short time, it's be it's because the gentleman has provided outstanding leadership on these very important issues. The gentlelady from Ohio is indicated. She has one further question. This is Congressman Mary Rose. Oakheart a Democrat of Ohio. Will you supply my (03:25:31) office with a list this week on the individuals you have interviewed or intend to interview relative to the murders of the American (03:25:40) missionaries? Excuse me. Congresswoman congresswoman Lee the investigation is an investigation by the El Salvador government. They have asked for our assistance. We've got it all the interviews have been done by salvadorians in the whole purpose of this is in fact, I take it the whole purpose of the legislation overall. It is to make sure that the Salvadorian government enforces justice and human rights in their own country the (03:26:28) we need to interview others that may become forward to our American (03:26:33) embassies. We have it made we have to feel the need to call on the (03:26:40) individuals that have been rumored or named it (03:26:44) all. Why don't we (03:26:46) just leave it up to the El Salvador and government to do (03:26:49) no. No, the a very large number of interviews have been made most of them by the Salvador government but some by us too, but most of them joined the we will be glad to give you We've got to inform you in private of whom we have contacted and who has been context be glad to do that. But as may I say again in private? Okay good. secretary Mr. So Lars has provided the chair with a copy of the letter that he received today from the FDR fmln representative Ruben. I Zamora and unless I hear objection from my colleagues on the subcommittee. I'm going to put it in the record and I would request you provide the subcommittee with your reaction to the letter specifically the point that mr. Solaris addressed namely whether or not this additional statement by the FDR fmln in the opinion of the state department meets the requirements of law embodied in the in the certification requirement in our letter inviting to be glad to do so, mr. Chair. Thank you. Mr. Secretary in our in our letter inviting secretary Hague to To appear or to designate someone to appear at this hearing we requested that the statement include a detailed description and Analysis of the training being provided for Salvadoran military personnel in the United States. I won't ask you to go into that. But you do have it for the for the committee. May I give it to you if I promise not to read it? We let me ride but I'll be very pleased to accept it in writing and we'll include that in the record of the hearing at the risk of prolonging the discussion. Let me just ask one further point and you've been very patient with the committee this afternoon and responding to everyone's questions, mr. Secretary, but setting aside for the moment the issue of the certification requirement and the and the statute is enacted by Congress. What is the objection that that the Administration has two discussions or talks taking place at this time among the various parties in Salvador. What's to be lost by representatives of the various parties sitting down in a room and talking. What's the downside of that? Potentially the something might come of it that could be extremely positive. Well, mr. Chairman. It's really question that should be addressed at two parties that involved the we've essentially been opposed to that taking place the and why are we opposed to it? Well, there there is a process of political change which is underway which involves the creation of a constituent assembly and Constitution and election of a president. The insurgents have been invited to be part of that. They refused they do not want in their view to legitimatize that in any way very much the same reasons that representative Fenwick said they did not want to let the Land Reform go ahead and I come back to this basic question, which I'd have to say again is why are they attacking the elections rather than just not participating they seem to be afraid of them in some way. The insurgents on their side said yes, we would like to sit down and we will tell you what we will ask in the in those discussions and the government is not prepared to sit down and talk about the sharing of power between it and the insurgents outside of a democratic process. Now I noted in your own remarks about the certification procedure in December that you said we were not talking about power sharing in the certification procedure that that was not the the question at stake and indeed if I read your language correctly. We've looked at it very hard you are talking about discussions about elections the way to that is open. Mr. Chairman now, if it is not taken before the elections what then there is the constituent assembly maybe the constituent assembly should here in some way the views of the the insurgents if they care to to I'm forward maybe there are other ways of doing what you want. But at the present time the road to discussion about elections is open, but in surgeons not want to take it. Do you know why well, if I might just respond, I think that you're you're making a blanket statement that the the road to such discussions is open when in fact it's open only if one side is willing to concede defeat in the in the military confrontation that's on the way the the position of the government of Salvador is very clear. We will talk to them only when they give up when they lay down their arms and and agree to participate under our terms. The left says that it's prepared to talk without any preconditions whatsoever. What I'm suggesting ought to be our policy is to say anybody who's willing to talk without preconditions. Let's get them in a room and let them talk. There's no no particular harm that would come from that and potentially something very positive might emerge from it. The the the FDR fmln is made very clear that the points that they suggest they would like to see discussed if such discussions take place do not constitute preconditions. They've they've said that this is just some of the things they would like to see discussed of discussions take place, but they've made it clear they're willing to talk without preconditions. I think our posture is is a difficult one to to explain and defend to the American people that we are opposed to talks taking place under the under the present circumstances and I again urge that we at least consider whether it's possible to take one further step toward seeking a resolution to the tragic situation in that country. We do not see mr. Chairman that in fact successful talks can take place about disrupting this entire political process making it unnecessary for the insurgents to submit to any Democratic process. And thereby as far as I can see depriving the whole process of meaning. I think that we should go after whatever you're assuming what the what the discussions will know. I'm I'm I'm reflecting what is in this rather detailed December statement. Have you had a chance to read I've read it in some detail and two languages the and the those are subjects which the government of El Salvador in our view should not be prepared to discuss. Well, I think we both recognize that the gun if the government of Salvador were prepared to sit down at the table, it could raise whatever it wished to raise just as the other side can raise whatever it wishes to raise but one side has established preconditions. The other side says it hasn't if your assumption is and I gather it is your assumption that they don't really mean they have no preconditions. That's not what they're really saying. It'd be very easy to call that bluff by simply saying, okay, we'll talk. Well, no, I think the way then what is being said is that if you want a few prepared to talk about how to get into this Democratic process what security guarantees you need? How you can be sure your voice will be heard in a responsible manner how you be sure that the election will be stolen if you win it, etc. Etc. The right of that all of that is open. What they they do not open it now unless unless they're prepared to quote renounce violence, but lay down their arms and give up the opportunity that you know, how can you participate in a democratic process while you are simultaneously fighting it isn't that and it seems to me then the whole question is but the discussion, excuse me, if I just finish this thought because maybe we're not communicating the the the the point is that the discussion should be about how this could be accomplished cisely renouncing violence and participating nicely. But you see precisely condition of renouncing violence should not take place before the talks. Well, I the formulation is exactly the the fmln FDR's not prepared to talk about those two things together. It's prepared to talk about the other things. Well, they have not said that mr. Secretary and that's not what the statement that they've put out said. In fact the statement very specifically states that they (03:36:16) are prepared to talk without without (03:36:18) preconditions and what they want to talk about the other The the the government is not prepared to talk in any shape or form or to listen in effect while proposals have made for sharing power and that is a difficulty you a designer who are assuming and the government is assuming that the points that are delineate it in the in the December paper are the only things that could be discussed in such a meeting. I don't make that assumption and I think it's terribly unfortunate that that assumption prevails in our policy and the policy of Salvador because I think it obviates the possibility of a political resolution one would think for example that the first item of discussion in such talks would be the possibility of a ceasefire. Now the statement of the fmln says that a ceasefire could be affected some time down the line but certainly not any early stage. Well no point in pursuing this this afternoon, but well, I think only this is that you have here a political process which The fmln FDR feels that it would legitimatize in some way by taking part in it wants to destroy it you are then asking that the government step outside of that of all these efforts that are two administrations have supported so much towards gradually getting toward something that is democratic in our sense and go to an immediate coalition government. I don't see that. I'm not suggesting that at all. Mr. Secretary house. I'm suggesting that there is no harm whatsoever to our interests or to the interest of the government of Salvador in agreeing to walk into a room and sit down and listen and talk. There's no precondition as to what will emerge from those discussions something positive might not you're making the assumption that nothing will come of it if your assumption is correct. So be it so some time has been wasted. But other than that nothing has been lost. Well, I think to to conclude this far on our side. Anyway, I would say that we do very much support discussions about elections and the renunciation of violence and all the conditions that would go with it. If I could be clear from the point of view of the administration about how to achieve all those things we very much support that I'd like to I'd like to record to show that well, mr. Mr. Secretary subcommittee is again grateful for your taking so much time. I don't know that you certainly haven't had the chance to do any work in the last in the last 48 hours because you've spent the the great bulk of it appearing before congressional committees, hopefully in the next day or two, you'll be able to get back to your office and work on some of these problems that you've been you've been discussing with with members of Congress. We thank you for your for your time and your continued cooperation with the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to be heard. Thank you very much. Mr. Chair. Chairman Michael Barnes congressman from Maryland chairman of the house inter-american Affairs subcommittee has adjourned today's hearing the witness or the main witness. Today was Thomas Enders assistant Secretary of State for international or from inter-american Affairs. I'm Richard Firestone and with me is Henry true a diplomatic correspondent of the Baltimore Sun. This is the second day that mr. Endres has been up here on the hill yesterday before the Senate and a house committee and today a house subcommittee after two days of testimony. What is the significance Andre of El Salvador, (03:39:53) which I think this has been a fascinating two days. I believe El Salvador is now grained in our Consciousness. It's going to be with us, I think for a while now we've gone through Cycles in the past including those cycles of violence that led to the legislation that was being debated here today, but it is always faded from the public Consciousness before I think this time it's going to be with us. We'll have Reason for Congress to be debating and apart from what happens in El Salvador when the administration produces new legislation as part of its Regional Aid package which will include some money for El Salvador, but I think otherwise it's going to be with us. Anyhow, I think we've had mr. Endres before three committees. Now a good part of secretary hague's testimony this morning was devoted to El Salvador. So it's there we have seen I think a great variety of attitudes expressed in the Congress and they range all the way from the passionate opposition to Administration policy on the part of Congressman studs of Massachusetts. We've had those members of Congress who basically support the administration position. Although I'd have to say that no one really came out very strongly in favor of the administration the strongest I guess here today was Congressman daughter and from California, but I believe the Congress overall reflects something of the attitude of Congressman Mica from Florida who expressed his total frustration. He said he will he didn't hear the pox on both your houses. He was saying in El Salvador, he understood the US strategic interests there, but he couldn't bring himself to support either the government in El Salvador or the Insurgency and in effect. He was saying produce them Alternatives give us something new to work with and I think that's the kind of frustrations that's running through this whole thing and I believe we are now going to hear far more about El Salvador on a continuing basis than we have in the (03:41:38) past. Let's backtrack just briefly the legislation that was being discussed today. It's not new legislation. This is money that is a discretionary for the administration to spend. Well, there are (03:41:49) several. There are several elements of this the administration already has in the budget about a hundred and forty million dollars which includes 26 million in military aid some 112, I believe in economic support and then some additional commodity Credit Corporation credits for El Salvador that's there the 55 million that they were discussing today in terms of military aid. Or El Salvador is actually to be used at the administration's discretion. It does not have to come to Congress for new approval of that money, which is already in the budget to be used by the president when he sees fit. However, if the administration tries to spend that kind of money at any sort of great length without the endorsement of Congress Congress can get terribly nasty about that sort of thing. And in matter of fact, it has been known to do such things as hold appointments hostage and to hold other bills Hostage to that sort of Executive Administrative Administration. Actually. I don't think that will happen in this case but where it will come up is when the administration submits a new package proposal for several Latin American countries, which was the regional Aid programmes which will include about 100 million additional for El Salvador and that of course will continue the debate. (03:43:09) I heard a Vietnam mentioned here now that before the hearings began people were King about how this the fear the Congress has is that it might be used as it was in Vietnam by the administration are these real fears of Congress and and on the other side what are the fears of the administration have they gotten into something that they'd rather not be in right now (03:43:30) the administration recognizes the analogy although it publicly disclaims them and you can understand why as a matter of fact the Vietnam analogy breaks down on any kind of detail. I'm reminded of the radon Ela Pongo airport near San Salvador last week. The there was a comparison made between the historic radon pleiku in Vietnam in 1965. Well as I suggested the analogy breaks down in detail because at that time in Vietnam, there were 24,000 Americans on Of the Insurgency in El Salvador. It has not only heavy arms supplies from from Cuba. No one really seriously questions that but it makes its argument to Americans with great sophistication. You will have heard mr. Barnes and mr. Endres debating back and forth today whether or not the Insurgency is truly willing to discuss movement forward to elections. Nobody's position on that is really clear the administration quite obviously feels that this is just a way to get in the foot in the door and the Insurgency in El Salvador is not really serious about participating in elections as they have been laid out by the government in El Salvador, but that is an argument that appeals to a great number of Americans. We've been down that road a number of areas before and I think I can say without exception it has turned out that the insurgency's of the left have always said, ah now we have That let's take the next step standard negotiating procedure as a matter of fact, whether you come from the right or the left, but the administration regards that kind of approach to the problem as a as a concession, which it is not willing to make until the Insurgency suggest that it's willing to take part in the elections as they have been prescribed to put down its weapons and effect to declare a ceasefire while the political process continues. I think the we've been down that road in Vietnam also if you'll recall and look what happened and I'm sure people are the administration can see that far down the road in Central America. But again, in this case, we are probably saddled with strategic interests on the part of the United States that are even greater than those that were involved in Southeast Asia. So what do you do about it? And that is the nature of the quandary that is before the Congress and before the administration and it's one that you and I and our business are going to be dealing with I think far more intensively over. The next several weeks and months (03:46:07) and in what way how do you think that this issue will manifest itself is the administration going to be asking for additional monies from Congress in the near (03:46:14) future. I don't think any beyond what we've talked about. Yes, but there's plenty of there are plenty of there for the debate. (03:46:20) I see thank you very much. It's Henry Truitt of the Baltimore Sun that concludes our coverage of this hearing by the house inter-american affairs subcommittee. Our technical director today is Lauren Kelly. I'm Richard Firestone. My thanks to Henry Truitt diplomatic correspondent for the Baltimore Sun and from Washington DC. Good evening. This program has been made possible by funds provided by The Corporation for Public Broadcasting. This is NPR National Public Radio.