Support for this program comes from the NPR news and information fund contributors include the Corporation for Public Broadcasting the Joyce foundation for Midwestern coverage the National Science Foundation for the coverage of Science and the Chubb group of insurance companies worldwide personal and Commercial Insurance Underwriters. This program is a production of national public radio, which is solely responsible for its content. From the Rayburn house office building in Washington DC National Public Radio presents live hearings by the house into American Affairs subcommittee on a to El Salvador. Good afternoon with another life hearing expected to get underway shortly right now. We're waiting for the subcommittee chairman Michael Barnes a Democrat from Maryland to come into the room and convene this hearing today are witnesses this afternoon. The committee will hear from four members of Congress who have just returned from El Salvador and two other public Witnesses now, I will go over briefly who will hear from him and go back to them later today for Congressman will be John murtha a Democrat from Pennsylvania Tom Harkin a Democrat from Iowa Jim Oberstar Democrat from Minnesota and James cone a republican from Pennsylvania. There also will be testimony from to public Witnesses Sheldon Kelly a freelance journalist and Daniel James a form a coalition for free elections in El Salvador. These are there will be two panels basically this afternoon the first one being the for congressman and then the two public Witnesses. So we hope you're able to stay with us and listen to this hearing this afternoon. We've had this is actually the fourth Hearing in this series by the subcommittee on inter-american Affairs. If you heard any of the other hearings, we had they included the administration Witnesses Thomas Anders the assistant Secretary of State for interamerican Affairs and Elliot Abrams, who is the assistant Secretary of State for human rights those two gentlemen, spoke in support of the administration certification of progress on human rights in El Salvador. That was the first live hearing. We carried in the series after that there were two others that we had last week actually in the key witness. I think was a former ambassador to El Salvador Robert White And now this one this afternoon just briefly I'll go over some of the things we will be expecting to hear once this gets underway. The committee room is full. Some of the Witnesses are here, but we're still waiting for a congressman Michael Barnes and other members of the subcommittee to come into the room. I just see you at the congressman Barnes walking in now with his briefcase. So it shouldn't be too long to people to Congressman went down and spent some time in El Salvador. Not a very quick trip as of these trips go that was Tom Harkin and Jim Oberstar. Both of them came back and held a news conference here in the Rayburn house office building in which they were very critical of the administration policy in El Salvador. They basically urge that the administration stop its Aid to El Salvador following the elections March 28th of this month. So those two gentlemen, we expect to hear their criticism voice to you again today John murtha, I believe went down by himself to El Salvador and same with James coin. Republican the only Republican on this panel this afternoon and we're not sure exactly what positions they'll be taking but we'll we'll be hearing them shortly the to public witnesses that will follow these for Congressman one. Sheldon. Kelly is a freelance journalist who has made a number of trips to El Salvador and Daniel James is listed as the spokesman the key spokesman for the Coalition for free elections in El Salvador that organization. I've also asked him if you press conferences of theirs, they're basically very supportive of the administration's policy in El Salvador. They have come out to support in the elections as their name would indicate and then include their group includes a number of former ambassadors to to El Salvador in their group as well as other people having a direct interest. I might say in El Salvador members of the their their Masthead as it is list, the number of people that such as Charles Burrows and former Ambassador who's also With Castle & Cooke and another another Ambassador listed with United Brands. These are course large banana firms American banana companies in Central America. So they have a basically very support attitude of the administration's policy and we'll be hearing that this afternoon once we get underway. Congressman Barnes is sitting now and looking over some notes. So I expect we'll be starting fairly soon. I still don't see all the witnesses here yet, but I assume they'll be in as well. These hearings usually get started over 10 10 x 15 minutes late, but they they do get going and we'll stay with him through the afternoon. Again, you're listening to a live hearing before the house inter-american Affairs subcommittee. The subject is El Salvador and Ani to El Salvador certification of progress in human rights for El Salvador those issues that have been very much before the Congress in these last few weeks. I think it was January when the administration made it certification that this issue has has created quite a bit of controversy and it was these these for Congressman that will be hearing today went down to El Salvador during the last recessed do some fact-finding on their own. I know that Congressman Harkin Andover star did spend a great deal of time talking with the everybody including the president Jose Napoleon Duarte and the head of the Armed Forces Guillermo Garcia as well. As a number of peasant leaders Guerrilla leaders. They toured the countryside in different parts. They spoke with all kinds of people and in for their fact-finding mission, but when they eat when they did come back again as I say, they held a press conference with they were extremely critical of what they consider to be the administration's military strategy and military policy in El Salvador will be hearing that and then of course the subcommittee will be questioning them on that. So if you heard our other hearings we've gone from the administration to some public witness is now to some members of Congress the last week. In fact, there were a number of people we heard that some critical some supporting. I might just go over that list because it was an interesting mixture. We had that Reverend hair of the u.s. Cast Conference Maurice Blackmon from the University of South Carolina was one of the people speaking and they talked about alternatives to US policy in El Salvador party was from the American from the AFL-CIO affiliate, which that has to do with land reform in El Salvador. He spoke in support of the administration's policy and Lionel Gomez a former Land Reform official in El Salvador who is extremely critical and that was quite an interesting hearing. I think all of these have been from the from the first one on if you've stayed with us, they've they've gotten at the issue quite the quite directly and I have been very interesting this whole series series of hearings began because the administration Congress required first of all in it and legislation passed last year that the administration certify as to progress on human rights in El Salvador. In order that in order for American Aid to continue to that country that requirement was passed. It was with the foreign aid authorization act and basically the administration either had to accept it or veto the whole for Nate appropriation Bill course, the president did not be to that. So he accepted those conditions that he had to certify to a number of things happening in El Salvador. One of them of course was that there was progress on human rights in El Salvador another was that the the government of El Salvador was making a good-faith effort to investigate the murders of for American Church women down there in 1980 and died in December 1980 and a number of other issues like that. For example progress on on land reform that that that that reform plan go ahead these sorts of things were included in that that legislation passed by Congress. The president went ahead and made the certification and then the Congress came back with these hearings questioning a lot of these things that the administration had certified to I think the primary issue was this human rights one in which the administration said that the there has been progress in human rights. So basically because the number of killings had gone down from 1980 to 1981 Administration information that it had said that the killings had gone down from $12,000 a year down to six thousand a year. Of course, we heard during these hearings the number of human rights groups and number of people very critical of that saying that the administration had in fact the used figures that nobody else has that the embassy International and a number of other group setting the killing had gone up and that was an issue that we heard debated here before the committee will here probably that that issue touched on again today. I see the committee chairman does appear to be getting ready to begin and we expect to be starting shortly. This is a live hearing again before the house subcommittee on inter American fares the subject Is El Salvador the key Witnesses this afternoon will be for congressman. And here is a subcommittee chairman Michael Barnes a Democrat of Maryland today continues. The subcommittee's review of President Reagan certification en el salvador and United States policy toward that country. This is the final hearing of a series of four such hearings and I believe it will help round out the testimony that we received earlier from the administration and from 10 public witnesses that we heard last week the situation in Salvadoran continues to be very disturbing each day's news brings us a small glimpse of the reality in that war-torn country. However, if Congress is to meet its responsibilities on the presidential certification and also meet its responsibility to keep the American people informed we must seek information and advice from a wide range of experts and Observers. It's my hope that this series of hearings has contributed on both counts. These hearings have only strengthened my own judgment that a negotiated settlement is the best way out in El Salvador. The administration is attempting to perpetuate the myth that if we accept negotiations, we are somehow buying an idea of the left. Nothing could be further from the truth. Negotiations are an American idea Ambassador white when he was in El Salvador worked for negotiations before the left ever accepted the idea members of this committee the house committee on Foreign Affairs proposed negotiations before the left did negotiations are also a Salvadoran idea colonel majano wanted to seek negotiations when he was a member of the Junta in El Salvador. That's why he's no longer a member of the Junta. Finally negotiations are an idea that's compelling to virtually every friendly democracy in the Americas and in Europe. Why don't we take advantage of this growing consensus? And at least try to settle this conflict peacefully one reason we don't is because of another myth of the administration that will only negotiate if the other side surrenders and accepts all are negotiating objectives in advance. In other words will only negotiate when negotiations are no longer necessary this approach completely eliminates any possibility of a peaceful end to this tragic conflict. My my view is that we lose Nothing by agreeing to talk. We need give away Nothing by agreeing to talk. We don't have to stop fighting or Supply on our side. Let's just try to get the parties together and see what happens house concurrent resolution 405 that I introduced along with my colleague from New York Congressman. So Lars urges President Reagan to adopt this approach not to acquiesce in any particular solution. But to try this approach to a solution the resolution already has 62 co-sponsors to avert even greater tragedy in El Salvador. I believe it's important for Congress to adopt this resolution and I believe that it's going to finally I would note that the president of Mexico recently addressed himself to this issue in a very statesmanlike way. President Lopez Portillo said it is evident that the deepening of the war the violence and the tragedy have reached extreme levels Mexico which has for a long time pressed for a negotiated political solution of the Salvadoran conflict sees with extreme preoccupation the everyday more limited possibilities that negotiations could put an end to the Bloodshed that these people subject to the risks of unsustainable triumphs or intolerable interventions are suffering there doubtless exists a compromise between the elections without negotiations and negotiations without elections. He went on to say I think the principal preoccupations of the United States with regard to the possible consequences of a negotiated solution to the Salvadoran crisis can be satisfied Mexico and other friendly countries and allies of the United States could provide assurances in this respect said the president of Mexico. I hope United States will respond favorably to this promising and very constructive by President Lopez. Portillo are first Witnesses this afternoon are particularly able to provide us with an update of the situation in El Salvador having just recently returned from study missions to El Salvador leading off the group of members of Congress who have just returned is one of our colleagues the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania, mr. Murtha, we welcome you to the subcommittee this afternoon. We look forward to hearing your testimony. And as our other colleagues arrived here to be parked. I see mr. Over Stars here. Now it's gone and we're expecting Mister Harkin as well will lead off Master Martha with you and perhaps hear from other colleagues. And then if an if there are any questions for my colleagues on the subcommittee will probably welcome it. This is John murtha Democrat from Pennsylvania to a difficult problem. I went to El Salvador because the speaker was concerned that there was a possibility of an increased number of ground forces or an increased number of military trainers in the air. I it was established very early that no one was recommending that any troops be sent to El Salvador or that there even be an increase in the number of military trainers to El Salvador. I talked to Fresno. I talked to General Garcia talk to Monsignor Thomas talk to a number of businessman and I talked to the country team and also three of the military trainers who were working with the military in in El Salvador. The second thing I asked about was Aid and the consensus was that if American Aid were cut off unilaterally that the country would fall possibly the right would seize power and these are recommendations at these people made to me and it was almost unanimous in their in their perception of what would happen. And then eventually the Communists would take over in their estimation. They also went on to explain that the present time there's a stalemate in El Salvador as far as they're concerned that the military government is controlling the cities and that the guerrillas were increasing their activities on the countryside and and show charge to to indicate that The third thing I talked about with the elections and they felt very strongly that the election would go forward that they would be impartial. The Army told me that they were staying out of the election. This is General Garcia and president Duarte reinforce this argument. He he felt it the Army General Garcia speaking. It said that the Army was just staying out of it and would have died by whatever the results were the election. I asked you a question. I asked a question could these elections be fair and an impartial under the circumstances and the answer was that no one seemed to know what the results would be and that was the best evidence that it would be impartial in advance for international observers to come and observe and observe. The election. The 4th point that I like to make is I think the ISM from the chairman of this committee have had an impact on the government of El Salvador. I think they understand that the human rights violations have to be reduced that they have two people involved in them have to be punished and they have become sensitive to the concerns are the United States. It was very evident to me. The president was he was concerned and even General Garcia presented to me the fact that he the criticism was coming through to the Army and and he gave the example at that very time that they had just where about in and had in fact been indicted or turned over to the justice system the national Guardsmen who had killed the nuns and the Lake Church woman. That one other point about a did I think it's important. I asked everybody I talk to about Aiden and the impact it would have if we were to cut off a general Monsignor the acting Archbishop the Rivera Adamas said to very clearly that as long as the age was coming in from the Communist side and I asked him so there would be no question about it. Should the United States continue military as well as he can on the gate and his answer was that it's a vicious war is brutal, but to he felt very strongly that if they did not continue in this was military and economic aid that the country could not survive. He was in favor of negotiations after the election tonight. I was very careful to write that down because I knew that that was an important point so matter-of-fact. I asked you about the human rights position and he said there is a light light improvements in the human rights situation in El Salvador Archbishop speaking. And what other point that they that was made by President Duarte. He made the point that give them a chance. He said just let us have our free elections and legitimize our establishment. strobist are welcome to the subcommittee. Look forward to hearing your testimony on your person react testifying will be Jim Oberstar a Democrat from Minnesota. To inform the American public of the facts in El Salvador and elsewhere in in Central America. Throughout the past couple of years and I have been very deeply concerned about growing us involvement in the internal conflict in El Salvador throughout that time. I've opposed military assistance to that country. I originally sponsored HR 15092 N US military assistance to El Salvador. And since then I've also co-sponsored HJ res 399 the resolution to declare null and void the president certification under the foreign assistance authorization. I mention that as a preface to my visit to El Salvador with my Are calling a coin and colleague? Mr. Harken? We went there to look into firsthand the certification by the president that Salvadoran government had fulfilled the conditions set by Congress for the continuation of US military assistance and I went with a Viewpoint yet. I think with an open mind and willingness to be convinced by facts. On the spot that there were different interpretations of the issues facing United States and that there might indeed be some justification for the administration's action to certify the continuation of or resumption of military aid. I also went in search of alternatives to our current policy. We traveled under the sponsorship of the Unitarian Universalist service committee without US government funds on a bipartisan basis a unique opportunity to visit troubled country such as this without the cloak of government official dumb and with the freedom to visit with ropes when we would choose to see and thereby get a wider spectrum of viewpoint the proved to be a very helpful means of visiting that confusing area. we saw of indeed a very wide spectrum of people in our four days in El Salvador two days in Nicaragua. We met with the military Junta six and a half hours with President Duarte that we spent three and a half hours with the leaders of the four branches of the Armed Forces. Of course with Ambassador Hinton and the embassy Personnel provided the detailed briefings on their observations and their findings in the country. We visited with General nothing and who was Sean inspection tour of the US military assistance program in El Salvador. We visited with the Archbishop Arturo Rivera dumbass. And other members of the church that the Human Rights Commission of the Salvadoran church and in Nicaragua we visited with Guillermo arango who is leader of the opposition FDR political party. So we did have an opportunity to to see a very wide political military and civilian Spectrum. We also visited the little neighborhood of San Antonio Abad where civilians 20 civilians were massacred by government forces, and we went into the refugee camp located in that neighborhood. We visited two national prisons, both of them unannounced before our arrival was an opportunity once there to visit with prisoners and particularly the main prison outside of San Salvador. We had an opportunity without any Salvadoran government officials present to question prisoners and hear their side of the story. Our Focus was the factual basis on which the president certified on January 28th that the government of El Salvador was in the administration's findings making progress and controlling Violence by the military and other security forces and ending torture of Salvadoran citizens that second Lake concerted effort was being made to comply with internationally recognized human rights. The progress was being made in agrarian and political reform 4th that good faith efforts are underway to begin discussions with all major political factions in El Salvador to arrive at a political solution to the war and V that determined efforts were being made to apprehend the persons responsible for murder of the Ford American women and two American labor officials who are working in The Agrarian reform program. I came in the process of looking into those conditions to appreciate how carefully and how fucked Felicia this committee crafted the language of those conditions. In fact, it was stated To Us by Salvadoran citizens that the the main hope for for progress and the restraint if any existed in that country on the government came from the conditions set by this committee on any future us assistance conditions time directly to Human Rights. I think the committee should take great satisfaction. I only wish that the administration had rigorously followed the letter and spirit of those conditions and looking into the questions of whether El Salvador and made progress in controlling the military violence made progress in respecting human rights and had made progress in good faith efforts to reach a negotiated political settlement. The conditions of committee set represent a sound basis for carrying out US policy, but my opinion based on my observations and facts we observed in that. Of time. The conditions have not been met and indeed have been violated ever since. January 28th I left El Salvador with a sense that the administration's policy is based on an unrealistic perception of the military situation in the country and unrealistic appraisal of the role of President Duarte. And of the effect of US policy on the Civil War and an unrealistic assessment of the significance of the upcoming elections. Our current policy is I see it in that country is based on the hope. First at the March 28th election will take place with high voter participation. with little evidence of fraud or coercion by military forces is that the second lie present Duarte is Christian Democratic party will win the sufficient number of seats in the Legislative Assembly to control the assembly either without help or in a coalition concerned that the election will legitimize the government in the eyes of Salvadorans and Americans for its peers to me. Either of you is that a civilian government will be able to exercise control over the military and to make progress and human rights areas. I would share this on which this committee has set conditions. President Duarte clearly is the administration's great. Hope he is the basis on which the administration argues that we must provide military assistance to this country and and the basis for hope that control can be exercised over the military iPhone frozen. Do I need to be a decent principled man of vision and committed to democratic principles into the Democratic process that he has the greatest claim to legitimacy of any member of the other present hunter that he is a man on which we can rely on to whom we can confide great trust and Hope President Duarte would like to lead a civilian government that can exercise control over the military and end the killing and end the torture. But my opinion is that he can't that the military is in control now and will remain in control following the March 28th elections. And that the state the harsh reality is that the military controls the situation in El Salvador not president Duarte. The election as Bishop Rivera. Merced is being held at the worst possible time in the midst of civil conflict. In the country an armed conflict within the country and which one third of the populace is under gorilla control and very likely will not participate in the elections another substantial proportion of the population for apps of 4th to 1/3 are either in refugee camps or have abandoned the country altogether. Another 1/3 is in area where the voting public is harassed by both the military and the Gorillaz question is what will what will be the outcome of the election under those conditions. I think observers that we talked to in the country including peasantry and said that there will be no mandate that elections will mean very little in fact the elections I think are seen by the Salvadorans as a showcase for others and not for themselves US policy in my opinion effectively undercuts Duarte and the attempt to assert civilian influence. The military is getting its Aid directly from our governor despite their failure to meet the human rights condition set by the Congress. We are sending a message to that country whether you realize it or not in the message being sent is that with all our military assistance. The United States does not care what the military does so long as it claims to be fighting communism. in our meeting with jennel Garcia another military Commanders Jennel, Garcia indicated that that they are making improvements in controlling the violence in controlling a terror against the populist. But the very incident of San Antonio about itself is a contradiction and a very powerful contradiction to that statement. I'll not go into my prepared statement has some details on the San Antonio bought incident, but it indicates that what was present in San Antonio Abad was clear evidence of a government cover-up of a massacre of innocent civilians that is not making progress toward control of the violence in that country. There is no system of military Justice in El Salvador in order for a military person to be tried. They must first be discharged and then turn over to the courts of common crimes in the. Since. This one too has taken office October 15th, 1979. Only 56 people have been turned over from the military to civilian jurisdiction to date. None has been convicted. We Face some very important decisions clearly the military cannot win the war without continuing and substantial infusion of American Military assistance. The left has accelerated its program of economic disruption disruption of the voting process destruction of buses nightly bombings in the capital of San Salvador as the governments and military forces weekend its potential position in negotiations is also weekend. My concern is that that position May weaken to the and declined to the point where the left will refuse to negotiate and will continue to press forward toward a military Victory which is contrary to the interests of the United States. I'm also concerned that pressures Were Us intervention to bolster the government forces May reach a point where we might have to consider sending US troops into El Salvador surely if the demands or the interest of jennel Garcia for increased military assistance are met it would require a very substantial increase the number of American Personnel simply to oversee the amount of military aid that we are that we would be sending to that country. Find the question of of the elections. If the right-wing candidate Roberto d'aubuisson wins the election later this month this Administration, I'm sure would find it very hard to justify any further assistance to El Salvador. Even the appearance of a political Center would be gone under those circumstances. Virtually every Observer we talked to asserted that that there would be a general Uprising in the country conducted then instigated by the left. Should the extreme right when another scenario is a mixed government in which Duarte has to form a coalition with with other elements. And again, the military comes out. The winner is they will have the only Power in the country the best we can hope for is that the Christian Democratic party wins a very substantial majority in the upcoming elections say a 40 volt or so with plurality in the in the assembly and then The test will come as to whether you want a can with that kind of a political majority control the military. I have a personal observation. I like to close with I think that US policy should be to encourage immediate negotiations among all political parties in El Salvador the offer a year ago of Archbishop Rivera Adamas to mediate should be renewed by our government and pressed the offer of Mexico's president Lopez. Portillo should be considered should be encouraged and and should be pressed forward because I think that also offers a great opportunity for settlement United States should involve Nations outside the conflict principally operating through the United Nations to participate in the not only the peacemaking but the peacekeeping process external influences such as those of Cuba and Nicaragua should be terminated by a peacekeeping force within the country that can end the conflict interdict the arms flow and bring about a true atmosphere of Peace only. those conditions can you have truly meaningful elections that I think is is the ideal solution to the problem. It is one that I would hope the administration would embrace it is one that I would hope this committee would encourage. We've been going we've been listening to James Oberstar. And now the witness will be has been James Coyne a republican in Pennsylvania. The first Republican on this panel is this afternoon for this opportunity to share with you my perceptions of the course of our policy toward El Salvador. I traveled El Salvador and Nicaragua with Representatives Harkin and over Stars. It guests of the Unitarian Universalist service committee. And at this time I think I would take would be remiss if I did not express my gratitude to that committee and extend my personal thanks to John Mackey award. The international programs director of the you USC will company in us on the trip. My participation this trip was born in my concern and that of my constituents in Pennsylvania's 18th District about the events in El Salvador, Nicaragua and about the US government's response to them. We Begin our journey in El Salvador, and I'm pleased to report that we were well treated by the government of President Napoleon Duarte we met with President Duarte defense minister Garcia US ambassador Hinton General nutting and with church and Business Leaders, we took advantage of the freedom afforded Us by the government to visit the village of San Antonio Abad and Mariana prisons among other locations in San Salvador I was favorably impressed by the sincerity and commitment of President Duarte. I share the view of the administration that he will continue to implement his popular program of political and economic reform and I agree that he deserves our support for the more I concur with President Reagan's belief that the constituent Assembly Election scheduled for March 28th are a critical element to the restoration of democracy in El Salvador the US should continue to support these elections into work to ensure that they are fair and representative. The support a free election should be accompanied by negotiations aimed involving all political groups in the government as suggested by Bishop were very Damas and president Portillo of Mexico. I applaud the president's Caribbean Basin initiative as a recognition that economic growth will promote political stability in this region. And I share the opinion that this program can only be implemented with the coordinated efforts of our American as well as our NATO and Asian allies. My impression of the leadership of El Salvador's military. However is not as favorable after meeting with defense minister Garcia and after visiting San Antonio Abad where the government troops allegedly murdered innocent civilians. I was not convinced that the military command is gaining control over the Salvadoran Frontline forces in order to prevent violations of human rights and to Salvador instead of citizens. Furthermore as a result of my private meeting with President Duarte. I concluded that the military is not representing the will of the civilian government. When I confronted the president with the informal weapons request of Defense Minister Garcia, which weed worth receive the previous morning, he was shocked and he assured me that such a massive allocation of military age was totally unnecessary in recognition of this demonstrated Gap and communication between the civilian and the military leaders. We must clarify that our support is for the government's efforts to achieve a political and economic solution and not for the military's attempts to achieve a victory in the battlefield. I'm opposed to military aid to El Salvador because I believe that this Aid will only further strengthen the military faction of the government at this time, which is not supportive of a solution based on reconciliation. Itchy through peaceful means Our delegation then travel to Nicaragua in order to confer with Saint Denis to leaders about the status of relations between our countries during our stay we met with commandant a Daniel Ortega as well as opposition leader Alfonso. Rebelo a business leader Enrique Dreyfus as well. As other Church officials. Our visit was framed by a background of strident anti-American rhetoric due in part to the public commemoration of Augusto sandino, the founder of the Sandinista movement. I was dismayed to find the United States is being used as a scapegoat for the failings of the sandinistas government much as we have been playing for the shortcomings of the regime in Iran. In meeting with the leaders of the sandinistas government, I encountered unwillingness on their part to diminish belligerent accusations leveled against the United States the sandinistas government clearly prefers to tilt or the Soviet Union and Cuba has may have enjoyed broad support at the Inception of their rule. It is clear that the support is now eroding the sound of these the government has lost the confidence of the middle class and the leadership of the Catholic Church groups have condemned the government in it for it's refreshing and sadly they have become victims of the Santa nista Reddit Oracle abuse as a result. I found my interview with Enrique Dreyfuss and Alfonso. Rebello, particularly enlightening. Both of these leaders who suffered personally from Saint Denis to repression confirmed allegations that the repressive policies of a Saint Denis to regime have caused a marked decrease in the popularity of the government and that the government is indeed rapidly gravitating toward the Soviet Cuban sphere. It was my impression that the violations of human rights in Nicaragua are no less reprehensible than those in El Salvador. I am particularly outraged by the suffering that the mosquito Indians have endured at the hands of the government the sandinistas have systematically relocated jail and cause great suffering 2002 Mesquite o Indians in Northeast Nicaragua We heard numerous reports about Indians who were killed by the government soldiers. Furthermore. I was appalled by the extent of Cuba's of involvement in Nicaragua our perception, which was confirmed by the opposition Leaders. With whom I met I support the Reagan administration's clear and direct expression of displeasure with Cuba's intrusion into Nicaraguan Affairs, but I do not Advocate that we can pound this problem with us intervention. I returned from his trip to El Salvador and Nicaragua impressed with the urgency of acting fairly and decisively in response to the regional conflicts in this area. I believe that the president's Caribbean Basin initiative is this type of response and I am strongly supportive of our efforts to promote economic and hence political stability. I cannot support however, the notion that further military aid at this time will be a constructive influence in that process. Finally. I maintain that if we are to continue to employ the human rights records of other countries as a Criterion in the provision of Aid and we must apply that requirement fairly and consistently And thank you very much. Mr. Chambers the opportunity for that these remarks that give us a coin. We've been listening to Congressman James Coyne a republican in Pennsylvania or Final witness here. This panel is first panel will be Congressman Tom Harkin a Democrat from Iowa and here is a congressman I'll try not to take too much time. I and if I start to read a writer talk about some of the things by call you to talk about just going to stop me so we heard that before. As you know, I accompanied both the timers number star and Connor's been going to El Salvador. and quite frankly for me. This is my second trip. My fourth meeting with the Napoleon Duarte whom I've known longer than anyone at this table. And quite frankly I come back with some. Feelings at 2 or mixed it best, but I'd like to relay to you. I'd like to just talk about it a story something that happened to us. I want to talk about the San Antonio Abad situation. I don't know if anyone's cover that they haven't talked about it because I think it indicates a problem that we have with the military there. We met with the members of the military High command and several kernels for 3 and 1/2 hours. They were very generous with their time, but I don't think with her answers. Before we visit with the Armed Forces. We've been well briefed by the US Embassy in San Salvador in by officials of the Catholic Church in El Salvador. We also seen the many press reports on the incident incident in San Antonio Abad. With minor variations the reports of these three sources concerning the incident San Antonio Abad coincided during our meeting with the military High command. I brought up the incident San Antonio Abad and jennel Garcia the head of the military called upon Colonel Palacios the commander of the 1st Brigade that was involved in that incident to tell us what happened. And this is the story we heard from Colonel Palacios. He told us that the first brigade and received reports that uniform and non-uniform gorillas were operating in San Antonio Abad at 11:30 p.m. On January 30th. 4250. Army troops set up an ambush. And somebody saw their troops in a firefight ensued. At approximately 7 a.m. The next morning the 40 250 troops advance from their fixed positions, which he said they never left all night. And went into town and they discover the 20 civilians have been killed in the crossfire. They took these bodies including the bodies of two women to the morgue. Every other report that we've had is completely at odds with this one the embassy sent an investigator to the morgue that next morning he saw and reported to 17 bodies. Most of these people have been shot in the back of the head and investigator reported that they had powder Burns around each Bullet Hole indicating that the people have been shot at very close range. Later on. We went out to San Antonio Abad without any military without our Embassy people and talk to people who were there and eyewitnesses there separately told us that the army forces have gone to various homes in different neighborhoods and drag people into the streets with a shot Them In Cold Blood. Now the evidence in this case is overwhelming the first brigade of the Salvadoran Army carried out a massacre of unarmed people in San Antonio Abad. Since then the Army High command has covered it up. Totally. It is lied to the Press is lying to the United States government and it slide us members of Congress. The incident such a San Antonio Abad or Not Unusual in El Salvador on a smaller scale. They are daily occurrences. What is unusual? Is it this time? The facts are clearly documented and still the Salvadoran Army refuses to acknowledge the truth. It's a Salvadoran. Army is serious about trying to convince the American people that wants to respect human rights. It should without delay bring charges against the officer who carried out the operation and discipline Colonel Palacios who is responsible for the original cover up. I only highlight that story again. Is it as one incident? To show that the military is not taking any steps. That we can see to control its commanders in the field. Because we get these reports day after day. I can't verify whether every report is true or false, but I can tell you that this one happened in this way because of the overwhelming amount of evidence from our own Embassy people and you can mr. Chairman read the embassy reports and then to hear what the Army told us in the military told us, which is complete Divergence with that. If they're not even willing to admit this one in which we have the overwhelming evidence, of course, you're not going to admit any of the others for the evidences. Perhaps not as overwhelming. We also ask the high command about reports and here I'm going on the Army because I consider that the key element in the problems. We're having in El Salvador. We also ask the high command about reports which were substantiated by the state department of the army of El Salvador. Except in rare cases does not take prisoners. The sub Minister of Defense Colonel Castillo denied this and instead charge that the gorillas kill their wounded so they cannot be interrogated. There's again no question that this is a Lie the army of El Salvador does as a matter of routine shoot the enemy wounded and execute the captured from a military point of view. This is stupid. The moral point of view is barbarous. General bead is Casanova commander of the National Guard. Told us that since October 1979. We're listening to part of a radio transmission to members of Congress telling them about something going on on the floor temporarily stop the hearing here at this afternoon my testimony for the record. I should be included and I know that you might probably have some questions. I don't know if you want us to return I'll be glad to go on. If not, I'll just I'll just good and it here I just I would just some up my statements by saying that to that our visit convinced me that we should not continue to supply military aid to Salvador. I believe it is counterproductive. I believe that this anymore military aid. In fact makes more gorillas rather than fewer Gorillaz. Every time the army takes an unarmed civilian a woman a child in the young man from a house ties our hands behind our backs and shoots them in the head. They make 20 more. Gorillas. And our military aid to the Army without the conditions the stringent kinds of conditions without making them reform themselves and get control over their commanders in the field in my way of thinking you just simply is feeding the fire and is making more gorillas than than it otherwise would so I would just restate my position or 3/8 up to be hot to seize. The vote that says It's Beginning now relates to a subject of some interest El Salvador. So none of us want to want to miss that vote. Then they wouldn't take a couple minutes for questions and then and then get over during your visit you all met with civilian and military leaders in the government. What's your perception about the relationship between them and who's really running things down at is a lot of as you know, a lot of discussion and debate on that issue. What's your sense of it? My opening remarks. My perception is that Congressman James Oberstar Democratic? Minnesota is in control and in command they they have the power in the country right now. Audio it would share on that. Yes. I think I'd like to also, and it's difficult for Americans even understand this because we take it for granted that while we while we may not be able to control the military budget at least we're in control of the military in this country. A notch in your dresser Paradox is very very hard for most Americans understand how they could have in a civilian government where the president doesn't really have control of his own Army. But if you look at the geography of El Salvador how difficult it is Heather the history the isolation of many of the rural areas, you quickly come to the conclusion that especially in the world areas the local militia leader or local. Police chief for Hacienda in the police chief is a of a very unique type of power in that community. And unfortunately at this time they do not feel a subservience to the the president. Hopefully after the elections as civilian government can be created or at least in the assembly which hopefully among its very first act would be to pass laws that brought thee to a military government under its control. That's a big hope but it's something I think we all share. I just filled it up until probably last spring we were on the right track in terms of supporting Duarte and working through Duarte and everything that we did about this time last year. We seem to shift their emphasis away from the body towards a Garcia and the military High command to almost the exclusion Duarte all last year. My opinion is that the general Garcia is in charge and that he does not take orders in Duarte that he takes that he'd give his own orders and that the same with me just Casanova on the National Guard. I would point out that that the moderate army officers that led the coup in 1979 led by Colonel. Majano Adolfo. Majano are no longer there has been exiled to Mexico Annie and there were about 250 officers at that time. That were sort of ended out of the military in the last year 40 of them have come back 40 of those 50 officers that were pushed aside and that October 79 coup have now come back in the military. Last week we had testimony from at least one witness and I think more than one witness that the nature of the government of El Salvador has changed since the since the revolution 2 years ago and that we've seen a rather substantial change in the in the hunt is that sure you've been there a couple of times with you since the since the overthrow 179 the third hunt it has been in power since October of 79 and that first hunt I would point out was Guillermo arango who isn't even allowed back in the country cuz he's on a hit list by the Army. Then there was the second one to the Cayman in January of 1980 than the third hunter that came in and if I'm not mistaken around April 1980, and that's when the market came in and Duarte. It was only made president in December of 1980 by that Hunter. I think through the nature of the Junta has changed remarkably since that first one from October to December of 79 leadership of El Salvador's military is not favorable at the meeting with defense minister Garcia and after visiting San Antonio Abad. I was not convinced that the military command is gaining control over the Salvadoran Frontline forces in order to prevent violations of human rights for Salvadorans citizen. Can you tell us a little bit more what you experienced was that led you to that conclusion and does this mean that you don't believe that President Reagan certification was an accurate portrayal of what's happening in the country. It's difficult for me is if those two I'm Congressman Harkin who has been down there previously. I've only this is my only trip and obviously to to certify that there is an improvement you have to be able to make a comparison between the present State and some previous state. If there has been a significant Improvement in the status of human rights in El Salvador than I would have hate to have been back there a year ago. It has not I don't think it's just a question of semantics there may have been some improvement. I think we heard testimony from a from Congressman murtha. This said it's one of the Bishops attended there was a slight or light Improvement in his mind when I think there's a difference there and we only saw the situation in San Salvador. There may have been more dramatic improvements, but I did not see evidence that would lead me to believe it there had been significant Improvement. But as it is I want to stress. I've only been there for this one visit and IQ. Would not have been Justified based on what you saw. I'll certainly not in the in the situation if the conditions that I saw that there today or this is approximately the same as those that existed year ago and then clearly it would be difficult to construe as significant Improvement having taken place, but I don't consider myself qualified to make that comparison between two different points in time. boat how to insert it in the record a letter to speaker O'Neill from Furman cienfuegos the commander of one of the principal Guerrilla forces that this was the letter that was given to us the night before we left. I just like it out of Jackson it'll be entered in the record at this point. We thank you very much for taking the time to present your views to the subcommittee. I think it's been very helpful. We're grateful to you. The subcommittee will recess for a few minutes and then reconvene with an ex panel Witnesses after the boat. That's going to conclude our live hearing here this afternoon while the subcommittee takes a break and goes to the house floor to vote. Am I just say the resolution that they'll be voting on does concern El Salvador. It's a resolution that says it's the sense of Congress that the President should press for unconditional discussions among the major political factions in El Salvador in order to guarantee a safe and stable environment for free and open democratic election that resolution is expected to pass but the the committee is breaking here and we will leave this life hearing at this time. You've been hearing from for congressman who were in El Salvador just recently during the last recess the first country ever heard from was John murtha a Democrat from Pennsylvania. Mr. Martha said that basically that there have been abuses of Human Rights there but the impact of it cut off of American Military and economic aid would be severe the country would go to the right and the his opinion was that is long. The Communists are still receiving outside support. The United States should continue its support and a he he quoted the Archbishop of El Salvador saying that there could be negotiations after the elections does election scheduled for March 28th this month the second actually the next three congressmen all were in El Salvador together. They were Congressman James Oberstar Democratic, Minnesota Congressman Tom Harkin the Democratic Iowa and Congressman James Coyne a republican of Pennsylvania. I originally said Mr. Coin have gone there by himself, but there's no story went together on a trip and they came back with the very generally the same conclusion. All three said that the US military aid probably is not a good idea the continuation of it. They don't support it. All three said that the military does not have control over the human rights abuses by members of the military that the Duarte government doesn't have control. And that that was basically their opinion. This is sort of an abbreviated hearing we've heard this afternoon and we will be leaving at this point because this resolution could take some time and that there's no telling how long it could go on. So this concludes the NPR's live coverage of hearings by the house inter-american Affairs subcommittee on certification on aid for El Salvador our engineer for today's broadcast was Gary Henderson. Our producer was Warren Kozak from the Rayburn house office building in Washington. I'm Bill muizenberg. Thank you very much for joining us for this program is provided by the national public radio news and information fund contributors to the fund include the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The Joyce foundation for Midwestern coverage the National Science Foundation for the coverage of Science and communications workers of America. This program comes from National Public Radio, which is solely responsible for its content. This is NPR National Public Radio.