Exposing Reagan’s Latin American Policies
ROBERT J. HENLE, The Great Deception: What We Are Told About Central America (1986)
The Reagan administration opposed Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista regime led by Daniel Ortega on the grounds that its Marxist ideology threatened the stability of neighboring Latin American countries. Early in his term, Reagan authorized support for a group of rebels known as the Contras, aiding them in the attempt to oust Ortega’s government. Congress banned such aid in 1982, but the administration secretly continued its supply of money and arms by selling weapons to Iran and diverting proceeds to the Contras. This illegal covert operation was ultimately exposed in November 1986, months after Robert Henle’s article condemning Reagan’s Latin American policies.
To anyone who has been following the developments in Central America, the credibility of the White House and the State Department with regard to Central America has reached absolute zero. I now believe nothing they say about Central America, unless there is clear, independent verification.
A few instances selected from many: Early on, President Reagan and then Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig jubilantly displayed photos as proof positive that the Sandinistas were committing atrocities. These photos were subsequently identified as showing Somoza’s1 National Guardsmen committing atrocities.
I was in the live audience in the Old Executive Office Building when Mr. Reagan firmly stated that he “had just received a verbal message from the Pope approving our policies in Central America.” I immediately dismissed this as absurd. A few days later, the Vatican twice flatly denied the assertion.
When Nicaragua instituted a draft, President Reagan distorted this by saying, “They are forcing their [the people’s] children to fight.” All modern states use a draft in time of war: it is the only just means of raising a national army. It was new in Central America, since traditionally only the sons of the poor were impressed into the army. President José Napoleón Duarte has been trying to get a draft in El Salvador.
Some 150,000 families have been forced from their homes near the border by the contras. The Nicaraguan Government established camps to protect them and to provide temporary shelter until they could be relocated. President Reagan distorted this by saying, “They are putting people in concentration camps!” There are no “concentration” camps in Nicaragua.
President Reagan has consistently asserted that the Sandinistas are committing atrocities and the contras are not. While there have been some atrocities committed by Sandinistas, there is universal independent agreement (Americas Watch, Amnesty International, various on-the-spot documentaries, grass-roots verification, e.g., the testimony of Lisa Fitzgerald (The Washington Post, 6/18/83), various U.S. and European reporters, many personal grass-roots contacts of my own, etc.) that these very few cases pale into insignificance beside the continual, deliberate and atrocious actions of the contras. An example of the irresponsibility of the Reagan Administration concerns the coldblooded public murder of 11 civilians by the contras at Cuapa. “According to those on the scene,” President Reagan said, what happened at Cuapa was “a military-to-military engagement” and “there were no civilian casualties.” Americas Watch asked the State Department who “those on the scene” were. It got no answer for months, but after its report was printed, it was told by the U.S. Embassy in Nicaragua that no one from there had gone to Cuapa or otherwise investigated the incident (Anthony Lewis, The New York Times, 3/6/86). More absurdly, President Reagan, with no evidence at all, asserted that these atrocities were being committed by Sandinistas dressed in contra uniforms! Even Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo told a friend of mine that the Sandinistas have practically eliminated the use of torture. Massive evidence shows that the contras regularly torture their victims.
Again, President Reagan has consistently denied that the contras are Somocista National Guardsmen. His latest argument is that the average age of the contras is so low that they could not have been members of the National Guard. The argument is irrelevant. The point is that the top officers, with one or two exceptions, are all National Guardsmen. Everybody knows this; I am sure the White House knows it, too. These officers are the men who control the contra movement. It is laughable to think that they are fighting for democracy. As Edgar Chamorro, who worked with them for three years, said (Letter to the Editor, The New York Times, 1/9/86), all that these officers talk about, and plan for, is the recovery of their property and the restoration of military control in Nicaragua.
President Reagan has asserted that Nicaragua is exporting terrorism. He linked Nicaragua to terrorism in Brazil. The State Department had done this before and was forced to apologize to the Brazilian Government. With President Reagan’s repetition, the Brazilian Government again demanded an explanation. The charge has no ground. President Reagan also linked Nicaragua to terrorism in Colombia. But the Colombian Government, after an investigation, completely exonerated Nicaragua. What happened in Ecuador was not terrorism. It was simply an indigenous rebellion of a dissatisfied “General.” President Reagan asserted a Nicaraguan connection with the murder of four U.S. Marines in San Salvador. No evidence for this has been advanced.
Another piece of propaganda is that the Latin Americans support aid to the contras and that the neighboring countries fear a Nicaraguan invasion and an exported insurgency. Not a single Latin American leader (with the obvious exception of those in El Salvador and in the military of Guatemala) supports President Reagan. …
The civilian Government of Honduras has displayed increasing concern about the presence of the contras in its country. That Government is in the absurd position of officially denying that contra bases exist in its territory, since their presence violates both the laws of Honduras and international law. But the Honduran Government has opposed transport of supplies through its territory to the contras. It has even returned shipments to the United States. Information from my grass-roots contacts in Honduras indicates that the Hondurans are not worried about an invasion from Nicaragua but are afraid of the contras (who have already committed crimes, including theft and rape, against local Hondurans) and also of the Salvadoran army. The Hondurans are ambiguous about the American military subjection of their country, but the American presence brings dollars into their almost ruined economy. …
The Honduran Government, however, is under terrible pressure from the Reagan Administration. In fact, certain analysts doubt whether Honduras can be considered an independent sovereign state. In Latin America, Honduras is now laughingly referred to as “U.S.A. Honduras.”
Finally, there is the Cecil B. De Mille vision of a red tide sweeping through Central America, overwhelming the Canal Zone and roaring up through Mexico to the Texas border. The only thing this is based on is President Reagan’s imagination.
Suppose we withdrew all support from the contras and, through the United Nations, the International Red Cross and other agencies, helped relocate the contras peacefully elsewhere. (The Government of Nicaragua has often offered amnesty to the rank and file but not to the National Guardsmen in the contras.) Suppose further that the Reagan Administration gave up its hopeless goal of interfering in the internal affairs of Nicaragua and signed an honest peace treaty with Nicaragua. What would the real situation be?
From the standpoint of defense:
1. The Southern Command, which used to have control only of the Canal Zone, is now in charge of all U.S. military operations in the isthmus. In Honduras, we have spent at least $30 million constructing at least eight military bases, an unknown number of air strips capable of receiving our largest fighter planes and transport planes, and we have prepared joint port facilities. We have a U.S. military hospital in Tegucigalpa. Honduras is a huge U.S. fortification and launching pad. If Nicaragua moved to invade Honduras seriously, we could place an enormous expeditionary force in Honduras in a matter of a few days. As one Honduran general said, “They [the Nicaraguans] would never reach Tegucigalpa,” let alone Mexico City or Dallas. (The Mexican Government was indignant with Mr. Reagan’s idea that Nicaragua could be a threat to Mexico.) And, of course, the Rio Treaty would come into play.
2. If Nicaragua moved south, it would have to invade Costa Rica. Again, the United States would move from both Honduras and Panama. The Rio Treaty would be invoked, and all Latin America would be outraged.
President Reagan does not listen to his own military men. U.S. officers in Central America have said (The New York Times, 6/4/85) that American pilots could destroy the small Nicaraguan Air Force, radar, artillery, tanks, supply depots, and command centers and that it would take the United States two weeks to gain control of 60 percent of the Nicaraguan population. Most analysts agree that neither Russia nor Cuba would commit combat troops to Central America. Even if they did, they could not win.
3. But it is far more likely that Nicaragua would make no military moves against its neighbors. (The Nicaraguan Government is young and inexperienced. It has made many mistakes. But it does not consist of utter fools.) In this case, the Contadora peace process could go forward. Most Latin Americans believe that it is the militarism and intransigence of the Reagan Administration that is preventing progress in the Contadora diplomacy as well as stifling the initiative of the new Presidents of Guatemala (Vinicio Cerezo) and of Costa Rica (Oscar Arias Sánchez).
This tale of deception could be extended. It is, however, quite clear that, in regard to Central America, the White House and the Departments of State and Defense have been trying to deceive both the Congress and the American people.
Robert J. Henle, “The Great Deception: What We Are Told About Central America,” America 154 (May 24, 1986): 432–434.
READING AND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS