'RETALIATION'

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000707060022-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 23, 2010
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: August 2, 1985
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/23: CIA-RDP90-00552R000707060022-9 STAT
cu CHRISTIAN SCIENCE 'UNI'1'01'
1 August 1935
`Retaliation'
T HE internal debate within the Reagan administra-
tion over the issue of terrorism - whether to
retaliate in kind against terrorist actions - has
not been clarified by reports that the United States has
aided the Salvadorean Army in retaliating against guer-
rillas purportedly responsible for the June 19 murders of
six Americans at two outdoor cafes in San Salvador.
Indeed, the Pentagon's handling of the matter raises
more questions than it answers. Moreover, any inten-
tional or inadvertent exultation by Washington about
"retaliation" against the guerrillas, if in fact such an inci-
dent took place, seems misdirected. There can be no
denying the military necessity for Salvadorean forces in-
tercepting, arresting, or, if necessary, destroying hostile
antigovernment forces in a combat situation. But it is
quite another matter, and more troubling, for the US gov-
ernment to seem to be publicly promoting the destruction
of alleged assailants who may or may not have been in-
volved in a prior terrorist incident.
The anti guerrilla, incident in dispute took place in El
Salvador in late June, when, according to Defense ecre-
tary C Weinberger, Salvadorean troops, aided by
nce re its tttacked encampments o the
C n American Revolution Workers , which
had taken responsibility or killing the six Americans.
becretary Weinberger told the Mutual Broadcasting
System that "with our assistance [El Salvador] has taken
care of, in one way or another, taken prisoner or killed .. .
a number of the people who participated" in the June 19
killings of the Americans. A Pentagon spokesman later
backtracked from Mr. Weinberger's comments by saying
that the defense secretary had not meant to imply that
the guerrillas killed by the Salvadorean forces were the
"actual trigger men" in the cafe shootings. Rather, he
said, they were merely members of the guerrilla organiza-
tion that had claimed responsibility.
Now, what's going on here? Secretary of State George
Shultz, it might be recalled, has been calling for a swift
US response to terrorist actions against the US, even if
"there is a potential for loss of life of ... some innocent
people." Secretary Weinberger, by contrast, has urged
caution and restraint in the use of military force, includ-
ing retaliation. Has Mr. Weinberger now moved closer to
the Shultz position? Or was he merely speaking off the
cuff regarding the Salvadorean antiguerrilla operation?
If this was a retaliatory incident, the words of a
Salvadorean military spokesmen have a particularly un-
pleasant ring to them: The 21 or so rebels killed in the
operation, he says, "weren't the ones specifically respon-
sible for the attack" on the Americans at the outdoor
cafes back in June.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/07/23: CIA-RDP90-00552R000707060022-9