Just a few words about What low-intensity conflict means in terms of just shaping though the words itself. It basically has a pentagon term that talks about threats to us interests that are short of conventional war or nuclear war. So it's low intensity conflict low it relative to Conventional armies clashing with each other and relative to a nuclear Exchange. Low intensity conflict also refers to the strategy by which the US government seeks to protect its perceived interests in relation to those threats those non-traditional threats threats other than a nuclear exchange or conventional War. It's also in this is very important. An exercise in doublespeak Orwell would love the term low intensity conflict. The Navy for example refers to low intensity conflict as violent piece. Low intensity conflict, please. Keep in mind causes high intensity pain for those that it targets as its enemies. When I was in El Salvador, most recently I was there in December, but when I was in El Salvador a year ago. I had a conversation with the Salvador and Campesino. He a person of the land who had recently returned from several years at a refugee camp in Honduras. And let me just read a quotation from this Compass Ino. He said by a miracle. I'm able to tell you the story of my grand crime for which they threatened me with death. They took my son who was 18 years old shot him peeled off his skin and cut him into pieces. Then they hung him from a cross in a tree. They cut his testicles off and put them in his mouth. They did this to warn me. Because I was a celebrator of the word of God. That was my crime. We had to leave because they persecuted the whole land. Our crime is to be poor and ask for bread. Here the laws only favor the rich. However, the great majority of people are poor those who have jobs are exploited. They lie in the factory isn't on the farms. Without land we cannot plant. There is no work. This brings more hunger more Misery. We are without clothes schools or jobs. and so we demonstrate But to speak of justice has to be called a communist. To ask for bread is to be called subversive. It is a war of extermination. It is a crime to be a Christian and to demand Justice. In that one story you can understand some of the intensity that I feel about the term low intensity conflict and the strategy behind it one other thing to point out here in terms of the orwellian nature of the term. Low intensity conflict our Pentagon planners tell us and yet the US war against the people of Nicaragua has killed over 29,000 nicaraguans. in a country of just over three million people to give you an idea of what that would mean that would mean more than 2 million u.s. People killed. In the last 6 years. And what they term a low-intensity conflict. As I lived and worked in Central America. I came up against many troubling questions. Questions and I believe cannot be answered aside from an understanding of the logic and practice of our low intensity conflict planters. For example why I ask myself. Did the u.s. Government publicly condemn terrorism? And then higher and fund and train the contras in Nicaragua whose primary tactic was terrorism against civilians. Why was Nicaragua a country of three million people? Or revolution in El Salvador tiny country in Central America a threat to the National Security interest of the United States. How was it the Central America had become the most important place in the world for US policy me. Why did the u.s. Say that it was for peace and Central America and then work to demolish the regional peace initiative initiatives? The contador a peace process the Arias peace plan, why would under those peace plans the u.s. Actually achieved some of its stated objectives. For example, no foreign military bases in Nicaragua something the US said it wanted Nicaragua says we don't want a foreign military base. We are willing to solve or sign a treaty. So why would the u.s. Undermine Regional peace initiatives? That would have established. Goals that the United States had said that it itself was interested in. Why also did the US media adopt so readily and so often the parameters of the debate as was shaped by government officials? Why was my experience when I lived in Central America that those that reach those people who came from the United States who relied upon major US newspapers? And your TV news that they come down with the most distorted view of what was happening in Central America. Why did the u.s. Speak about democracy? And then claim that Nicaragua's elections and 1984 which Got High reviews and the International Community was a sham. In what ways was the United States using elections in places like El Salvador and Guatemala for undemocratic purposes? and then also one final question, why did the u.s. Government in various documents and in practice attack liberation theology attack the theology that was giving new life to the people and new dignity while at the same time offering direct or indirect support for fundamentalist Church sex that basically told the people to be happy until they die because when they die, they'll find joy in heaven Well, those were the questions as well as the kinds of stories that I read from the company known El Salvador. Which have led me on a journey to some very disturbing conclusions. In the book war against the poor and in my remarks this morning. I will share with you my own belief that low-intensity conflict is evil. It is responsible for enormous human suffering throughout the third world not only in Central America and it threatens to undermine and has already begun to undermine this nation's democracy. Yet also conflicts absolutely and completely from my point of view in terms of low intensity conflicts worldview, and it's practice its Theory and its execution with every value that Christians and other of people of Faith hold dear. low intensity conflict requires an active resistance two US Government policies for the sake of human decency For the sake of millions of poor people who are suffering throughout the third world for the sake of our own democracy. And for the Integrity of our own faith. One of the things that is clear to me in my experience of low intensity conflict. Is that the worldview that shapes it? Is an absolute conflict with the biblical worldview. Let me just paint a little bit of the background one statistic. I would ask you to keep in mind. Throughout our world, which is a world of grave Injustice. It is now estimated that somewhere around 40 million people die from Hunger each year. Forty million people from Hunger or hunger related causes that is the equivalent of 300 jumbo jet aircraft crashing every day for a year. Can you imagine a situation in which 300 jumbo jet aircraft would crash every day that we would not start asking ourselves questions and maybe we already are by the way about airplane construction airplane safety international air safety standards air traffic controllers. We would be raising all kinds of why questions. Because the reality is that the world needs to change if those 40 million and really two-thirds of the world's people are to have the opportunity to live lives of dignity. Our setting is really one in which the poor are victimized in two ways their victimized by an international economy that is structured which ignores their needs. And Stomps on their very desire for freedom. And the poor are victimized by internal and Justice within their nations in which the government's and most countries that the u.s. Allies itself with have no real commitment to provide for or give enough freedom and give enough access to resources for people to lift themselves out of poverty and to again live lives of dignity. So the poor are victimized twice by an international economy that needs changing. And by their own domestic situations that need changing. UNICEF recently did a study that said that the poorest countries sent twenty billion dollars out in interest payments the small number of the world's poorest countries, 20 billion dollars out and interest payments to the rich and the way they paid for that was they cut their health budgets and half they cut their education budgets in order to pay the bankers and half a million children died last year the result of those policies what I'm trying to paint as a picture here of a world that desperately needs changing and to tell you that low intensity conflict is the u.s. Strategy to block those changes. Let's review a little bit of the worldview that shapes low-intensity conflict. First low-intensity conflict planners tell us that peace does not exist. Peace is an illusion. The United States is a country that is at war is always at War will always be at War and must be actively engaged in fighting Wars or we will have our national security interests undermined. The closest they get to talking about peace are things like the Navy talking about violin piece or they seek a kind of peace through Perpetual Warfare. Again Orwell would be very comfortable. a second part of the world view there is no such thing as an authentic indigenous Revolution. There is no such thing as a justifiable Revolution from the perspective of our war planners. All revolutions are manipulated from the outside. third part of the world view non-alignment is a contradiction in terms. Third world countries can't possibly be non-aligned. They are given two choices. You can be a puppet of the United States or you will be our enemy. This is the restricted and narrow worldview that shapes the policy that I were further described. A fourth part of the world view is that any threat to a US interest? No matter how small is seen as a direct tack again attack against the United States. Nicaragua's Revolution can possibly be an indigenous Revolution and the nicaraguans can't possibly be fighting for Freedom. They can't possibly be trying to reorganize their economies and ways that meet their needs they are attacking the United States according to this worldview. A fifth part of the world view is that any threat to a US interest no matter how small anywhere in the world is seeing as an attack against the entire global system. Again, why is Nicaragua country of 3 million people of whom 75 percent are women or children under the age of 15 this incredible threat to the United States. It's because from the point of view of low intensity conflict planners what's going on in Nicaragua is not just a challenge to us interests in Nicaragua. It is a threat The credibility of the United States is at stake in the whole world the entire global system. That we dominate is under attack. Another part of the world view is that they have redefined World War 3. What they've said is that World War 3 is already being fought and where we are fighting them is not in a direct conventional or nuclear war against the Soviet Union. We are fighting World War 3 in the third world. Maxwell Taylor who I probably owe the title to my book war against the poor a quote that he made in assessing the threat faced by the United States in the post Vietnam War period when he said quote as the leading have Nation we may expect to have to fight to protect our national valuables against envyus Have Nots end quote from the point of view of low-intensity conflict planners World War 3 is in fact a war against the poor throughout the so-called third world. And one note of caution here. Many of us in this room. I would guess have been concerned about the Hostile relationships between the United States and the Soviet Union. We're concerned about the military buildup of the Reagan Administration. We were concerned about the bellicose terminology used by that Administration references to the evil empire and all those terms. But I want to tell you that while I embrace and support the warming relationships between the superpowers. There is a danger. Because it is my judgment and looking at what is happening and reading the documents that what is really going on here is a costly effective analysis within the Pentagon and our military planners who are saying the real locus of our enemy is now the third world if we are going to defend our quote-unquote national interests, we're going to need to shift resources away from Europe. We're going to need to improve our relationships with the Soviet Union so that we can free up the resources to more effectively wage war throughout the third world. We need to be very very cautious and outspoken as we Monitor and try to encourage this warming relationship, but we need to be careful that it doesn't end up in an East-West alliance against poor. Final statement about the worldview of low-intensity conflict one definition of it is that it's Total War at the Grassroots level. Well intensity conflict wages war against the whole human person. It is designed to influence the hearts and Minds The Economic and political Destinies of people and Nations. It is a sophisticated form of totalitarianism. It's very important to understand that low-intensity conflict is not something entirely new. The US has had strategies and many experiences of intervening in third world countries for many many years. But low-intensity conflict has shifted and evolved in relation to the successes and failures of past efforts. And one of the things that shape present low intensity conflict strategy present us War making strategy more than anything else. Was the experience of Vietnam? Repeatedly, you will hear you as planners writing and talking about needing to overcome the Vietnam syndrome or to structure our war-making capacity in ways that will get around the Vietnam syndrome the Vietnam syndrome, meaning the reluctance of the u.s. People to commit their power and their troops and their money for interventions in the third world. let me just recount some of the lessons that were learned first lesson is that we're going to be fighting Wars. We have to fight Wars not just to control territory, but we need to try to control people's hearts and Minds. This elevates the economic Warfare psychological aspects of warfare in addition to our traditional understanding of military power and its use in Warfare the goal of low intensity conflict and third world settings is to try to separate the people separate the vast majority of people from Progressive social change movements to try to get the poor and other people who would have a natural alliance with groups that are still seeking to fundamentally restructure their societies to try to break that Alliance to try to separate them mentally spiritually and physically from the groups that really want to restructure societies. Let me just offer you a couple of ways, but the Practical examples of how that was attempted by the US and El Salvador. One was through a cosmetic Land Reform the mayor may remember a few years ago. The United States pushed a land reform in El Salvador it forced the government in El Salvador to implement not a deep Land Reform but a cosmetic one. Why did we do that? Because the fmln the Rebels the groups that are fighting have armed struggle against the US backed government in El Salvador has tremendous support among campesinos and for years and years and years has been calling for a radical and reform. So the idea was we'll carry out a land reform that will remove the people give them a reason to pull back their support from the progressive social change movement. Well, the problem with cosmetic reforms is that they don't convince a lot of people often times. If a reform isn't real if you're doing things out of image you can end up with problems. And so that didn't work very well and that was followed by a different strategy of trying to separate people from revolutionary movements and that strategy was to bomb the hell out of them. You had massive massive bombings in the countryside and El Salvador literally millions of Salvadorans displaced from their home. Some of them living in our communities some in Los Angeles some in other parts of the country some displaced within their own country. Playing with people's hearts and Minds trying to take them take away their support either forcibly or in subtle ways through cosmetic reforms from Progressive social change movements. A second lesson and the most important one I think for us to understand those of us in this room. Is that the challenge facing us policymakers and Military planners and the post-vietnam period is how to fight Wars to defend perceived interests while letting other people do the dying. How do we protect our interests and the third world the argument goes but let other people do the bond dying let non us people the idea behind low-intensity conflict, which is really high intensity suffering is for us not to experience too much of the suffering directly. As one Observer has noted low intensity conflict is really low visibility Warfare. It's trying to keep us Warfare strategy invisible from the US people. And how do we do that? Well, one of the one of the lessons is that we don't have a lot of US soldiers directly involved. You don't want us people coming back in body bags because when they were coming back in body bags, then there was no longer as much indifference in this country family started to speak out husbands and wives and mothers fathers. Secondly under this category of not not one of your wine to have other people doing the dying and keeping the visibility low is no draft. Don't have a draft because if you have a draft all of a sudden college campuses, which are at least until recently have been largely asleep on many of these issues are going to wake up. If you have a draft third, it's much much more intelligent and less politically costly to have the National Guard going down in the National reserves trained for the eventuality of a possible introduction of US troops than it is to have a draft and so we send the national guard down for training. Also related to this is the US has shifted quite dramatically in the past 10 years and developed many many many strict or quick strike forces capable of intervening in a quick strike way in a country rather than get bogged down with US troops in a ground war as we did in Vietnam. So we've reshaped our military putting greater emphasis on those kinds of units that can move in quickly. Basically within the framework of low-intensity conflict the introduction of a large number of US troops is viewed as a last resort. That doesn't mean it won't happen. But it means it's not the preferred strategy. It means other things probably haven't gone very well or that we would introduce them only at a decisive moment in a conflict in which we've used the peoples of Central America for example as cannon fodder and maybe now we can move our own troops in for a short period of time for a decisive strike. This also helps explain why so much of the u.s. Warfare under low-intensity conflict is covert involving secret teens involving all kinds of ways of trying to avoid public scrutiny. One other observation before moving on to the next lesson. Low intensity conflict is counting on the racism of the u.s. People. It is a fundamentally racist strategy that says that we will tolerate the death of almost any number of people as long as it's not us people and as long as they're not white that it doesn't matter if our policies have Latin Americans and Central Americans killing each other. They're counting on our races and that they can get away with the most horrendous horrendous policies with human consequences again, I'll ask you to keep in mind the quotation. I read from the Campesino as Vivid as that that we simply won't care. As long as it doesn't involve us white boys dying in Central America. A third lesson in the post-vietnam period from our military planners is that the u.s. People must be targeted as the enemy? As our military planners look at Vietnam. They say that the people in these pews lost the war. That somehow we didn't conceal enough or we didn't win the hearts and minds of the u.s. People enough to keep the war going. As one low-intensity conflict supporter from the Rand Corporation States quote. Our most pressing problem is not in the third world, but here at home in the struggle for the minds of the people if we lose our own citizens, we will not have much going for us unquote. Well in order not to lose the u.s. People our government engages constantly in lies distortions and deception. Low, visibility Warfare low-intensity conflict itself is designed to keep us uninformed about what's happening. There are also efforts to actively deceive through leaks to the press and well-orchestrated disinformation campaigns. The US government is capable of flooding the u.s. Press with the images that shapes the boundaries of the debate on issues related to Central America, for example, the Pentagon and the state department each issue more than 600 press releases every year. The White House issues 15 to 20 press releases every day and I would ask you and you read the newspapers and you see the reporting how much of our information is filtered through those channels. It's also true that the Central Intelligence Agency plants false stories many of them overseas that get picked up by US News wires and printed stories that the CIA itself has written to deceive. According to former Central Intelligence Agency officials that I met during my time of working in Central America. They indicated that there are many many writers who write four major US newspapers who were on the payroll the Central Intelligence Agency They also indicated that their experience and these these in some cases where people that had more than 20 years of experience with the Central Intelligence Agency. They indicated that the fundamental purpose of the CIA and their experience. Was not to gather information. It was this information in service to Illegal presidential objectives. There was also the Reagan Administration. upgraded The propaganda Ministry designed to deceive us. The Reagan Administration transferred several of its key specialists in propaganda Warfare overseas and brought them into an organization or a group called The Office of public diplomacy. Which relates as an information channel to the US people. They had a lot of work to do. You may remember that when the contras that was being revealed the u.s. Back contras were running drugs into the United States with help from some government officials US government officials that very quickly paper is started appearing in papers at the sandinistas in Nicaragua were involved in drug running. We all those stories not to reality but probably to the work of the office of public diplomacy. You may remember that Nicaragua had elections in 1984 and almost nobody knows and this country about those elections part of that is thanks to the office of public diplomacy who brought us. We they've been linked to this. They brought us the big crisis. Remember the big crisis as the election results in the United States were about to come in Nicaragua is charged with getting sophisticated Jets from the Soviet Union. They're on their way and Republicans and Democrats are tripping over each other saying who can justify the bombing of Nicaragua's Harbor sooner, etc, etc. And it turned out that that ship contained toys for the upcoming Christmas in Nicaragua. a senior Us official quoted in the Miami Herald as a quotation that indicates how we are now targeted as the enemy quote. The office of public diplomacy was carrying out a huge psychological operation of the kind the military conducts to influence the population in denied or enemy territory in quote. U.s. People are now defined as the enemy. Another part of the propaganda was the u.s. Partly with the humanitarian Aid that we sent quote-unquote humanitarian Aid to the contras some of that money ended up going to Robert Owen who ran a group called idea Incorporated and he was hired to create a positive image for the contras. Keep in mind. Robert Owen was one of the principal links between the White House and Oliver North and the contras Robert Owen was also working with Dan Quayle. lots of lots of interesting connections a fourth lesson in this may be one of the hardest ones for us people to come to terms with but one of the most important is in the aftermath of Vietnam and the post-vietnam assessment. It was concluded that terrorism has a central role to play in US policy. That the US must use terrorism and manage terrorism, but it must do so for specific political objectives. One of the great ironies here. Is that low intensity conflict planners use terrorism as the new propaganda were to try to mobilize the US people. Terrorism is beginning to replace the Soviet Union's monolithic communism as the rallying cry for us. But what's so ironic about that is that terrorism has been assigned a central role within us strategy. Again, terrorism must be linked to specific political objectives. In El Salvador, for example terrorism has been managed in 1980 1981 1982 with a period of tremendous social turmoil in which the people of El Salvador were about to throw out a u.s. Bad government a very similar situation as had happened in Nicaragua Archbishop Romero and others in the church were mobilizing popular organizations were building and what happened period of utter massive Terror against the Salvadoran people. Romero was assassinated the for church women were killed and literally thousands of el Salvadorans workers comp a see no students mutilated butchered showing up on the street daily literally cutting off the heads of the popular movements and trying to so tear in the minds of people to discourage them from organizing. 1983-1984 new phase in the management of tear. This idea was that you move to selectively tear that after they experience of 80 and 81 and 82 in the massive Terror against the people that you would have in the minds of lurking in the minds of the people if I get involved in organized, and I know what's going to happen to me. If you go and you meet with the US Embassy in El Salvador, which I have many times, they will tell you'll bring out a chart and they'll say these aren't exact figures but they'll say in 1980 1981 1982. There were X numbers of bodies in the streets. And this last year there were only why number and it's much why is much less than x we are working for human rights in El Salvador? What they're not telling you is that you don't have to kill as many people constantly to try to intimidate them that the lessons from the past will stick at least that was the hope what is happening in El Salvador today that despite the repression despite the selective repression of the last few years. The popular movement is building. The fmln is getting stronger the student organizations and workers and segments of the church are clamoring for change their building and strength and all of a sudden the death squads that the u.s. Had disappeared but never disappeared. They were told to engage in selective not massive Terror are coming out again. What happens Dan Quayle goes down to El Salvador recently and says we're very concerned about the death squads. Why are they concerned about the death squads are concerned about the death squads because Congress is going to vote on more a to El Salvador, but that concern for the death squads will not last beyond the next vote. Why are the challenges that I would he offer to the press in this country is to be honest about terrorism to be even-handed about how terrorism is Despicable, but how it is. So Central to US policy. unspoken unspoken in this Society the evidence in Nicaragua is compelling that the u.s. Chose and groom the contras as terrorists. For example, a secret us defense intelligent report name the first control organization a terrorist group. The CIA and others knew that the chief of intelligence for the largest Contra group The fdn. participated in the planning of the assassination of Archbishop Romero William Casey CIA director at the time went to Argentina and recruited the Argentinian generals who were fresh from a terror campaign against their own people to train the contras as a way of trying to conceal direct u.s. Involvement in the early stages former control leader Edgar Chamorro in testimony before the world Court says that he complained many times to us officials about the role that of the about the terrorism of the contras against civilians and Nicaragua. And what was he told according to Chamorro he was told that the only way to win the war was through terrorism. This is a very important point the contras are not an example of a group that receives funding from the United States, but the US doesn't control all their activities and therefore they engage in terrorism. What Chamorro and others are telling us is that the contras were instructed by US government leaders to engage in terrorism? Now the question is why would the United States fund terrorists and this relates to the fifth lesson that was learned in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. The redefinition of victory victory is now defined within low-intensity conflict as a sliding scale of acceptable outcomes. Let me give you three specific examples related to Nicaragua. It would be called a victory if US military policy and our economic and low intensity conflict strategy and Nicaragua. It would be considered a victory if you could overthrow the sandinistas. That's probably pretty obvious. That was what was hoped for we tried to make the contras into a fighting force that could do that. We tried we gave them all kinds of money all kinds of assistance all kinds of training and yet they were unable to do that for a lot of reasons particularly because of their lack of support within Nicaragua. a second acceptable outcome from us planners was simply to inflict suffering on the Nicaraguan people suffering is now defined as victory the goal of the cultural war in many ways became simply to force the Nicaraguan government away from its economic reforms and into Warfare to force it to divert its resources from development into defending itself and to cause people to suffer William Casey once said quote CIA director at takes relatively few people and little support to disrupt the internal peace and economic security or stability of a small country in court. He said on another occasion that he wasn't sure that the contras would overthrow the sandinistas, but that they would be successful in harassing the government and quote-unquote wasting the country. Suffering is Victory. I can bring you closer to home in December. I had a meeting with Rudy boschwitz his foreign policy eight at the end of the meeting. He said Jack you may not agree with us, but the lesson of the last few years is that if you make people suffer, they're more willing to talk to you on your terms. Suffering is Victory. A third acceptable outcome in terms of redefining victory. Is that in Nicaragua the goal? One of the acceptable outcomes was to force the Nicaraguan Revolution into a closer relationship on the Socialist Bloc. The Nicaragua wanted keep in mind that part of the world view is a non-alignment is a contradiction in terms. One of the things that Nicaragua was absolutely in still. It's very committed to is we don't want to be a tool of the superpowers. We want to free ourselves from the superpowers and we want to have our own Revolution and we wanted to create a new world order in the dominance of those super powers or those Empires is no longer acceptable. Well in Nicaragua free independent improving living standards standing outside of the tube power blocks was the much much more dangerous than to force Nicaragua into a dependency weight relationship on the Soviet Union. Very quickly some examples of the total war and the integrated approach which links together low-intensity conflict links together economic psychological political diplomatic and Military aspects of warfare into a comprehensive package. So quickly some examples of the economic Warfare component. It's very important that we understand we often times have a debate in this country about well, I'm opposed to military assistance to El Salvador, but I'm for economic or humanitarian Assistance, or I'm opposed to military assistance to the contras but humanitarian assistance is okay under low intensity conflict are all part of the same Warfare strategy economic Warfare right away when the sandinistas overthrew the u.s. Bag government in 1979 the US did provide some Aid in a targeted most of that Aid to Big Business. The idea was strengthened the old reactionary forces and try to undercut the groups that are really trying to restructure Society later on when that wasn't working we cut off all food Aid and food sales to Nicaragua. We transferred Nicaragua sugar quota, which was allowed Nicaraguan other Central American country is to import or export sugar to the u.s. At above World Market prices. So we punish Nicaragua by cutting that we work to block International loans to Nicaragua cut off their source of capital for development. We I heard us allies to blockade. We embarked on an embargo against Nicaragua and economic embargo. We her at the United States government harasses private agencies, like Oxfam and others to try to deliver humanitarian assistance to Nicaragua. No Hurricane Relief 840 million dollars in Damage Done to Nicaragua in the hurricane and the US government has not sent one penny and then we wonder why there's refugees coming from Nicaragua to the Border. But perhaps the two most important economic aspects of warfare under low-intensity conflict in case of Nicaragua and Central America has been the use of death as a weapon. Why is Honduras allowed South to become a US military base? Because it's in debt to the United States desperately needs capital and therefore has very little Independence and how many of you know that when the Arias in Costa Rica launched his peace initiative the u.s. Responded by cutting off Aid to Costa Rica for a number of months. As a form of punishment peace was considered dangerous. And also as I've already alluded to the Contra War the Contra War a major aspect of that war is really economic sabotage, not military Victory psychological War constant threats of invasion. Living in Nicaragua my wife Sarah and I went through at least some of the terror with the nicaraguans when tensions would be high in the US was was literally saying that we're going to invade or threatening that kind of invasion along with military Maneuvers On the Border Etc interestingly to note the Invasion of Grenada. Was part of the psychological war against Nicaragua. It was a way of saying the u.s. Can intervene perhaps will intervene we do and we still will do that in the post-vietnam period so you better be ready. It was also a grenade. It was also psychological warfare directed against us trying to have us overcome. Our bad feelings about the US Marines being killed in Lebanon show of power in force to unite the masses. The big crisis was part of the psychological War military Maneuvers and training exercises the u.s. Sponsors Contra radio stations here. We talk all the time of freedom of press and about the Nicaraguan government has restricted the publication of what Prince excetera and what does the US do it funds country radio stations at being propaganda into Nicaragua that says the sandinistas are killing old people making them into soap. The sandinistas are kidnapping our children and sending them to Cuba the sandinistas have taken all of our food supplies and their sewing it to rush and that's why we have food shortages Etc according Edgar tomorrow the Central Intelligence Agency has on the payroll in neighboring countries like Honduras the key journalist key TV and radio reporters to be Manti sandanista propaganda throughout the region to take attention away from the real social causes of turmoil within the central America region. One other note about Nicaragua low-intensity conflict is very very flexible. It's likely that us efforts now may shift away from military harassment of Nicaragua much more to trying to create a u.s. Supported opposition with in Nicaragua create out of the ashes and hunger and poverty that we've created in Nicaragua try to build an alternative political movement in Guatemala low-intensity conflict efforts have focused on the illusion of Civilian government. The election of said a so and under that illusion and protects the US has redeveloped its ties with the Guatemalan military one of the most brutal militaries in the world. It is also focused on small agency for International Development projects aimed at trying to rather than the reform the economy carry out Land Reform try to help small projects that maybe helped a few people without in the society It's not working very well the social causes of the turmoil or ongoing the death squad violence and violence by the military is increasing the military has even threatened a number of Coos against the civilian government and the civilian government's response to that has been to move more closely to the program of the rich in Guatemala. We can expect a great deal more social tension in Guatemala and Honduras is a common joke that says that Honduras is a country which needs to nationalize its own government. It's really true Honduras has allowed itself essentially to become a puppet for the u.s. US policy over the last few years has increased the power of the military. It's a weakened Democratic institutions. It's greatly aggravated social tensions, and we probably increase the likelihood of revolution in Honduras. There are more human rights abuses occurring weekly in Honduras, and there's also a surge and anti-u s-- feeling Recently the Honduran president has become very concerned about Honduras becoming another Lebanon in which Contra force is a foreign force is could be turned loose. They're already the contras and Honduras are not well liked they do a lot of horrible things against civilians in Honduras. And so the Honduran president Define the US was one of the presidents that really pushed for the agreement among the Central American Presidents to get rid of the contras. The question is what cost will we have to pay for that decision it what kind of Leverage were the were the u.s. Use Costa Rica also has suffered as a result of US policy. I mentioned that we've tried to punish Arias for the peace initiative that we don't support continued us Aid when it was turned back on has been made contingent contingent upon the Costa Rican government dismantling many of the social programs that has made the living standards among Your Average Costa Rican higher than other Central American countries. We've also demanded the Costa Rica privatize its economy in ways that are skewing Income skewing power relationships and Costa Rica. So there's a result of US policy again, we may in fact be destabilizing Costa Rica the country we hold up as the model democracy. But El Salvador marks the greatest failure in terms of low intensity conflict the mythical Center that the u.s. Tried to create around Duarte has collapsed. It's crumbled beneath an avalanche Avalanche of corruption economic Decline and a lack of sovereignty in which the Salvador and president has been a clear and willing pain to the u.s. Embassy the Cosmetic economic reforms that I mentioned that we're try to separate the people from a progressive social change movements in El Salvador have failed. The structure is a violence and El Salvador in terms of Economic and Justice are still well. Well in place dissatisfaction is growing popular organizations are building. The fmln is gaining in strength despite 3.2 billion dollars over the last eight years. The US has not succeeded in pacifying the country in fact Opposite is true elections as a strategy that we're a strategy for the u.s. To try to create the illusion of democracy and El Salvador have been discredited. The right-wing Arena party will likely win the presidential election that is held because still in El Salvador. It's impossible for there to be sufficient freedom for the progressive forces to really unite in an election. That means anything and the US look strategy and El Salvador was intended to protect the Privileges of the elites to manage images and to block real reforms. If the Posse that is doomed to failure because it does nothing to address the social causes. That is the one thing I would stress to you. Is that low intensity conflict cannot possibly resolve the real crisis points because it is designed to protect the economic privileges of the relatively well-off and to block the social reforms that poor people need. It's also important to understand that when low-intensity conflict fails in a counterrevolutionary strategy. It almost always degenerates into greater violence in El Salvador. There are three choices for the United States, but I see One is that we push our government to acknowledge its failures to acknowledge that the policy has failed in to commit itself to a negotiated settlement and power-sharing with the progressive forces in El Salvador. That is the only option that holds out the prospect of peace and an end to the war. Unfortunately, whereas Gorbachev and people in the Soviet Union can acknowledge that Stalin was a horrendous dictator. I see no indication of a spirit of repentance among our nation's leaders. Which leaves two other options? the direct introduction of US troops as things began to deteriorate further the us will have to make a decision that is one option that is and will be considered the third option which maybe is more likely is to support a Raina a rain as many of you know, as a party associated with the death squads. They are likely to now control both the presidency and the congress with in El Salvador and I suspect that what is going to happen is that the u.s. Is going to tell a Rana Rana has been saying we want to kill a hundred thousand people in a year and get this war over with enough of low intensity. Let's have really really high intensity for a short period of time. I suspect that the u.s. Is debating right now whether or not to say to a Rayna go ahead and do it. Publicly will condemn you and through the CIA will help fund you keep in mind as a policy unravels. It's going to lead to Greater violence that greater violence will either involve the introduction of US troops or major escalation in the violence against the popular movements. What are the implications of low intensity Conflict for those of us as people of faith and in terms of our tasks? It seems to me that one of the implications is that as people of faith. We need to acknowledge that we have to often bought into the mythology of our country. We have too often made of Our God's patriotism nationalism and we fail to make God the center of our lives. I think we need to acknowledge that within the present structures of violence within the international economy that low intensity conflicts seeks to maintain that we are participating in The Ripping to shreds of the body of Christ rather than a Unity of the body of Christ. And we need to make a commitment to be involved in re-establishing that Unity. I think we need to acknowledge that for many of us. Our affluence is linked to our indifference that in this culture. We simply don't have to care. I think it was Elie weisel pointed out recently. The opposite of love is not hate the opposite of Love is indifference. And I think we also need to acknowledge that our struggle for authentic. Hope must be rooted in Creative actions. It seems to me that our task has been clearly a name for us by the Lutheran Church in El Salvador. I know we have a fair number of lutherans including myself here today Lutheran Church in El Salvador is urging people of faith in the United States to accompany them and they usually mean by accompaniment for things accompany them in prayer. To pray on their behalf and with them to accompany them through material Aid we need to think of ways and that there are ways and will be strategizing about this afternoon of people-to-people direct Aid to the victims of low intensity conflict strategy and Central America and elsewhere. Third they mean opportunities of perhaps literally walking with the people of Central America or the Philippines or elsewhere. For example. Medardo Gomez a Lutheran Bishop is in danger helps to keep him in safety to actually have a u.s. Lutheran or Christian living with him walking with him working in the offices with him because it's more costly in terms of low intensity conflict to kill a US citizen than it is to kill us all adore. But most importantly when they talk about accompaniment. They're talking about political solidarity political work work to change change the policies change the structures demonstrate, right elect demand put pressure on US government officials to call into question and change this policy. Keep in mind if low-intensity conflict is really low visibility Warfare one of our Central task in our congregation is to make this more visible and to make clear that the dangers are not only to Central Americans but to us for the sake of the well-being of the poor for the sake of our democracy and for the sake of the Integrity of our faith. We have a lot of work to do one last word What low-intensity conflict planners can't plan on but they can't put into their computer and have it spit out in a way that will show them exactly what they can do is they can not measure the spirit of the Central American people. They can't measure the the spirit of the resistance in the Philippines and southern Africa and they can't measure the spirit of the people in this room. Thank you.