NICARAGUA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP88-01070R000200730007-1
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 27, 2008
• Sequence Number: 7
• Publication Date: June 7, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
STAT
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
ABC NIGHTLINE
7 June 1983
KOPPEL: As we've noted, this latest episode in the conflict between the United States
and Nicaragua began, yesterday when Nicaragua ordered those three U.S. diplomats
expelled and accused then of aspiring to assassinating high level Nicaraguan
officials. Nightline correspondent Jack Smith brings us up to date on what happened
today.
SMITE: The day's events began as the three U.S.'diplomats expelled for allegedly
trying to poison Nicaraguan officials arrived back in Washington at mid afternoon.
Embassy Second Secretary *Armele Rodriguez, accused by the Nicaraguans of directing
the alleged plot. Counselor Linda *Pfifel,who was supposed to have trained Nicaraguan
conspirators and political officer David *G;eeg, who the Nicaraguans claim was CIF
station chief in Managua. Over at the State Department. U.S. officials continue to
reject the Nicaraguan charge as absurd, and this they responded. Nicaragua's new
ambassador here, Antonio *Jusouen was-summoned to the State Department at 3:00 and
ordered to close all of Nicaragua's six consulates in the United States. The
Nicaraguan consulate in New York must shut down tomorrow, so must.the consulates in
Sar. Francisco, Miami, New Orleans, Los Angeles and Houston. The consuls must leave
immediately, their staffs by Friday, a total of 21 diplomats for the three U.S.
diplomats Nicaragua expelled yesteeday. Early this evening the Nicaraguans began to
react. In New York, Nicaragua's U.S. ambassador told a news conference relations with
the U.S. had deteriorated to the point where war is Central America was a possibility.
JJ,VIEF CEA.MORRO (Nicaraguan Amb to UN): We believe that the greatest efforts must be
made to avoid confrontation. For our part we believe that the current policy of the
North American administration bringing Central America in inaudible) to the
possibility of war.
SMITE: As all of this was happening today, the House Foreign Affairs dealt a blow to
administration policy in Central America.. The action is not expected to survive the
full house and Senate, but by 20 to 14, the committee voted to deny funds for the
administraiton's covert operation that keeps as many as 7,000 guerrillas inside
Nicaragua fighting the Sandinista government there. The administration says the
guerrillas are stopping communist arms from entering E1 Salvador. The committee
majority today disagreed- REP. GERRY STUDDS (D-hass.): It has nothing whatever to do
with interdiction of arms,and they are actively seeking to trigger a civil war in
which thousands of innocent__people seen certain to die. REP. HENRY HYDE
Why do we keep making the hemisphere safe for Russians and communism? We do it again
and again in the name of enlightened foreign policy. It boggles the mind. SljITH?
With Central America heating up at home and abroad, the 'administration's new
ambassador at large to the region, Richard Stone, tonight is in Central America. Be
arrives in Nicaragua Friday for the first talks the U.S has had with the Nicaraguan
government in nearly two years, but at a time when relations seem almost beyond
repai:. This is Jack Smith for Nightline in Washington.
KOPPEL: With us now live from Capitol Hill is Republican
Congressman Gerald Solomon
of-New York, a member of the house Foreign Affairs Committee. . he e voted today .against
cutting of funds for covert aid to rebels in Nicaragua, saying the alternative might
mean direct military involvement. And from our bureau in Miami. Wayne
Sm:
h tchief of the 11 who was
o
?
one resigned because he
disagreed with Re gan administration policy in Latin America. Ambassador Smith, it
was that policy hat caused you'to resign about a year ago. What we seem to have now
is much more o the same. A. re you concerned by what seems to be an almost unstoppable
COJWI VUED
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
02 .
downward spiral now? SMITE: Yes, it seems to me that we are left. virtually, without
a position in Nicaragua and if the expulsions reflect the deterioration in relations
between the United States and Nicaragua, the secret war certainly will solve nothing.
It will not get rid of the Sandinista government, it has not interdicted any arms,and
certainly it will not pressure the Sandinistas to hold elections, quite the opposite.
Sc it seems to me that we are left the result of the secret war will be to leave us
without any influence in Nicaragua with no control over the course of events.
RO?PLL: Congressman Solomon, I know that you are in favor of continuing covert
assistance to those contras who are fighting against the Nicaraguan government, but
are you in favor of the kind of action that was taken by the State Department today,
and if so, why? SOLOMON: Absolutely, led. Fi=st of all the trumped up charges were
obviously planned to discredit Special Envoy Senator Stone's expected visit on Friday
to Nicaragua, and this of course has been the action that the Nicaraguan government
has taken all along during their four year history. Secondly, you know, the Reagan
administration did not close down the Nicaraguan Washington embassy, and no personnel
was expelled. So we still have s dialogue going on between the two countries as we
should. The State Department did order six consulate offices closed since they exist
as a courtesy, and the extension of special courtesy is no longer warranted. When you
consider the treatment and the outrageous lies leveled against our embassy personnel
in Nicaragua.
KOPPEL: Are you,, are you reading something now or are you telling me what's on your
own mind? SOLOMON: I'm telling you exactly what's on my mown mine (sic) and exactly
what I said in the committee meeting this afternoon.
KOPPEL: But you seem to be looking down at notes, forgive at if you're not. SOLOMON:
No I'm not, but my eyes are bothered by these lights here Ted. it's 11:30 at night
here in Wasington.
ROPPEL: Okay fine. SOLOMON: And lastly I think that you will find that those
consulate offices probaby would have been closed anyway because I think you're going
to' see information made in the not to distant future which indicated that these
consulate offices which were meant to deal with consulate affairs with problems with
Nicaraguan citizens of the United States and promoting trade in this country. I think
you're going to find that, you also had considerable intelligence activities going on.
ROPPEL: Well I spoke with a with a senior government official this evening who
curiously enough told me exactly the same thing. But what's so surprising about that?
Isn't that what all embassy and consular officials do? SOLOMON: Well if they do it
they do it in violation of U.S. law, and certainly we're not going to stand for it.
but the fact is we have retaliated, certainly, I don't think these consulate offices
should be existing here. If it's going to promote trade, you know the United States
citizens buy over 5100 million in goods from Nicaragua and when our people are treated
that way, why should we give them the special courtesies that many other countries
don't even. have. They don't have consulate offices spread throughout this country.
KOPPEL: Ambassador Smith, what happens, well first of all let me ask you, do you
think this is prelude toa breaking off of diplomatic relations, and if not, what do
we have left in terms of diplomatic relations with Nicaragua? SMITH: Not necessarily
an immediate prelude. I do think that the expulsions on both sides were unfortunate.
When these things get starred, one side retaliates, then the other side then
retaliates again, and it could very well lead in time to a complete rupture in
GoNZnvMZ~
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
3
relations. But the fact is that the expulsion, as I said, simply reflects the state
of our present relations, which had deteriorated badly, there is now a high state of
tensions between the two countries,-and the unfortu?ante thing is that we are left with
no way of influencing the situation. This was all very unnecessary, and I would
invite you to go back and look at the statement issued by the State Department or. I
believe it was April I or 2 of 1981 in which we stated that we had no evidence, had
had no evidence for some weeks, of a continuing flow of arms that the other forms of
assistance, propaganda and so forth seem to have been suspended. But, we cut off
economic assistance and started our secret war, at least. we did begin the
confrontational approach at that time. That was the beginning of it, and we are now
reaching the denouement, the logical denouement. The secret war was futile to begin
with.
KOPPEL: Excuse me. Were going to--have to take a break for a moment, but When we
come back I'd like to talk about what options, then, are left open to the United
States.
KOPPEL: Joining us again now from Capitol Eill Congressman Gerald Soloman. of New York
and from Miami, Wayne Smith, former chief of the U.S. *Introsection in Havana.
Congressman Soloman, you were upset with your own committee today for voting against
covert aid. Why? . SOLOhAN: Well, I was, Ted, but let me correct a statement that was
made by former Ambassador Smith when he said that there was no evidence on Nicaraguan
intervention in other countries. hr. Smith, even the Democrats, the most liberal
Democrats who oppose any kind of aid against Nicaragua disagree with you, and that's
why in the bill that was reported today out of our Foreign Affairs Committee changed
the covert operation aid over to overt operatior.aid, to I'm afraid you're in the vast
minority. SMITE: Well, you're misquoting me. That's not what I said. Now if. you'll
go back and read.... SOLOhAN: Let me, if 1 could just answer Ted's question.
KOPPEL: Well, I'll tell you what. Since you've rephrased my question to answer
Ambassador Smith, let's give him a chance to answer yours. SOLOl1AN: All right.
Fine.
KOPPEL: Go ahead, Ambassador. SMITE: I did not say that Nicaragua has not given any
assistance. What I said. was that at our behest they appeared to have suspended that
assistance back in 1981,.a.nd we acknowledged as much. The Reagan administration in
its statement of April 1.?1981, stated that the flow seemed to have been suspended.
We went right.....
KOPPEL: You're not maintaining.... You're not maintaining now, Ambassador, are you,
that there is no assistance from Nicaragua to El Salvador, are you? SHIM No, I'm
not saying that at all. Of course there has been some. I'm not saying that at all,
and I will to further and say that the Reagan administration's way of addressing the
problem certainly has not solved it.
KOPPEL: All right. Now let's get back to my original Question. Why are you upset,
Congressman, that the.... First of all you think that the whole house is going to
uphold this? SOLOhAN: I certainly do not, and I'm glad to hear former Ambassador
Smith correct his statement, because.... SMITH: I'm correcting yours. SOLO!iAN:
...there's a lot of classified-information here which would prove him wrong, but let
me just say this. 1 think the-congressional blockage of covert activities in Central
America, which is stemming the flow of arms and weapons and manpower into El Salvador
and Honduras, I think is selling the United States of America down, the drain, and I
CONTINUED
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
think it is aiding and abetting the spread of international communism, not only
throughout Central America but throughout the entire Western Hemisphere. The bill
that was reported today tonverts all of the aid that we are presently giving from
covert to overt, and I maintain that direct overt aid would lead the United States of
America into direct war, even possibly using U.S military men, manpower, and 1 think
that's absolutely wrong. What's the other alternative? The other alternative to
either against covert or overt aid is no involvement whatsoever, and I can tell you
that if that happens you're going to see Guatemala, Costa Rica, Columbia, Panama, all
of the Central American countries fall, and that two things might happen. One, our
entire national security would be severely under direct possible attack with possible
ballistic missiles sitting 400 miles off our shore, and let the American taxpayer
think about this. Even if we weren't directly involved with possible national
security problems, what would happen to the millions, the millions of refugees and
illegal aliens coming into this country, and who would pay that cost, .and what would
be the result of American working people losing their jobs because of the inflow of
millions of more people like we had.with the Haitians, like we had with the Cubans?
This country won't stand for that, and we're not going to jeopardize it. We're going
to defeat that bill in the House of representatives, not even to speak of the Senate.
ROPPEL: Well, now, Congressman, you've certainly painted a dire enough picture. I
mean what with the ballistic missiles and the huge additional unemployment, and you
think that can be stopped by covert assistance? SOLO",AY': I think that covert
assistance, when you have arms and weapons coming across the border into honduras or
into E1 Salvador, I think that when you can blow a bridge, not the United States, but
the rebels, the insurgents, when they can blow a bridge, when the can dynamite a road,
when they can sabotage or, airplane, which is bringing weapons into E1 Salvador, it's a
heck of a lot cheaper than it is going into an overt war that possibly would effect
U.S. military personnel.
KOPPEL: Ambassador Smith, you see those as the options? ShITB: No. certainly not.
If the secret war were the answer, then we should see some improvement in the
situation after almost two years. Rather than that we see that the situation is
deteriorating. First of all, the secret war obviously was not beg= -to interdict
arms, but the administration cannot point to a single rifle or a single bullet that
has been interdicted as a result of this operation. As a matter of fact, according to
various members of the admistration, when they want to emphasize the flow they say
that it has increased, and what's the secret war for. I certainly is gonna get rid of
the Sandinistas. I would say that the Reagan administration's policies in Central
America are leading to exactly the kind of situation that the congressman has just
outlined. They're leading us to a foreign policy disaster of the first magnitude.
KOPPEL: All right, Congressman, we have just a few seconds left for this segment.
Summarize your response, if you will. SOLO?1AN: I would say.... I would say this,
that certainly the other eight countries that agreed to the San Jose agreement, who
signed that pact, to the other four countries, hexico, Columbia, Panama, who signed
the *Contadero pact, these countries think the Reagan administration are going in the
right direction. SMITH: No, they do not. SOLOTIAN: Even the countries that don't.
that don't share our political views, and yet the Nicaraguans refused to sit down and
negotiate at all. SMITH: (Inaudible).
KOPPEL: 'll tell you what. .Gentlemen, let at just interrupt for a second because
I'm not sure on what basil, Congress;man, you suggest that the countries that
participated in the *Contadero conference approve of our policy. Where, where did
cbr*77vcTM
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-0107OR000200730007-1
 Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-01070R000200730007-1
they say that? SOLO?AN: They want them to sit down on a multi-lateral basis and
sego:late, but the Nicaraguans don't -want to do that. They want to negotiate
bilaterally with Honduras.
ROPY" : I understand that. Where did they, where did they enunciate their approval
of U.S. covert activities in Central America? SOLOMAN: They did not. They, they
stated their approval of multi-lateral negotiations between the Organization of
American States. That's what the San Jose pact was all about. That's what the
*Cor.tadero pact was all about, and the Nicaraguans refused to cooperate in either of
those two areas.
KOPP=L: All right, gentlemen, a lot more to?ta
lfi about, and. ? wish we could, buL _I m
afraid were out of time on this segment. Thank you both very much indeed./~
Approved For Release 2008/06/27: CIA-RDP88-01070R000200730007-1