| OCR Text |
Show , The .Sail Lake Tribune, A13 Sunday, April 28, 1985 Sandy Grady Reagan Hostility Puzzles Nicaraguas President Ortega r Newspapers MANAGUA, Nicaragua He doesn't pack a .45 on his hip, wear a beard or smoke big cigars. If youre casting a Cold War drama and looking for the stereotypical revolutionary firebrand, Daniel Ortega Saavedra isn't your man. From the moment I shook hands with Ortega, the president of a country at war with the United States, I found him a surprise and an enigma, He looks like a guy who might have been a college shortstop good field, no d hit. He's about 150 pounds in army khakis and black boots. He speaks softly, wears black horn rims, and e moves with a shy, tread. He rarely smiles. Even when he says, Welcome to Nicaragua," he looks down at his boots. This is the fireball who, according to the Reagan administration, threatens a Marxist march to the Rio Grande? Ortega comes off more like a librarian or a Yuppie computer technician. If you were expecting the charm and bluster of your basic American politician or the macho swagger of a Fidel Castro Ortega seems a cold fish. But when he starts talking about the debate raging in Congress over $14 million in U.S. aid to the guerrillas who are killing his people in the north, Ortegas low monotone picks up passion. If the contra aid is cut, we could have our first chance to normalize our national life, Ortega said. You would see immediate changes. But if the war must go on, we will never surrender. It was 9 oclock on a soft Managua night. A U.S. group, including Rep. Bob Rep. Ted Weiss, Edgar, and I had spent the previous 12 hous talking to a spectrum of Nicaraguan leaders. Setting up the meeting with Ortega had been an dance with the Sandinistas. It only took a few hours, though, to see that Nicaragua is a country in trouble. Managua, because of the 72 earthquake, looks likd Dresden after the fireond big vacant lot. Everybombing body tells you the economy is bad. Billboards stand in the rubble blaring. Knight-Ridde- 5-- well-presse- cat-lik- ., all-da- "Everyone to the defense, everything for the war fronts!" The streets rumble with lorries full of soldiers. The dusty rawness and war fever reminded me of grainy photos of Washington in 1860-65- . Ortega, though, is the Mr. Cool In this maelstrom. Hes sitting in a wicker rocker on the patio of the House of Protocol a plush home of the Somoza clan before the 1979 revolution. We could be in Palm Beach or Beverly Hills, except for the Sandinista flag behind Ortega and the young men outside with AK-4- 7 et-issue rifles. What happens if Congress doesnt vote for $14 million in aid to the contras, Ortega was asked. It would be a real blow to them and would bring deterioration to the contras, he said. The violence would continue, but at a lower level. Ortega spoke through an interpreter. Foreign Minister Miquel D'Escoto, a cherubic man educated at Columbia University, sometimes filled in a phrase when the translation stumbled. Maybe he was only holding out a carrot to Congress. But Ortega promised to ease the Sandinistas iron grip if U.S. funds for the rebels diminish. We could make immediate adjustments. We could have more internal dialogue with our opponents, Ortega said. There could be military changes. As you know, 40 percent of our economy for the war. And there would be more freedom for the press. Ortega did not mention evicting Soviet and Cuban military advisers from Nicaragua. And he admitted press censorship might return if President Reagan kept up pressure to topple his government. The president has other ways to hurt Nicaragua, said Ortega somberly. He can find other ways to fund the contras. Ortega spoke in long, numbing detail about the Contadora peace agreements the efforts by diplomats of Mexico, Panama, Colombia and Venezuela who have been trying for two years to settle feud. the Its become a propaganda war, grumbled Ortega softly. Anything Nica Sovi- now-goe- s ragua accepts, the U.S. feels must be wrong. Reagan wants foreign advisers out, but he doesn't want anything concrete about U.S. maneuvers in Central America." "Look, we feel very threatened by those thousands of U.S. troops maneuvering on our border, injected D'Escoto. "There has to be some regulation. Reagan policy," said Ortega with a slight shrug, "is that any real negotiation is a sellout." I detected no anger, no mano a mano ferocity, when Ortega mentioned Reagan's name. Like many Nicaraguans I met, from the leadership to the campesi-nos- , he seems puzzled by Reagans hostilBut ity. Ortega is an analyst who knows both he and Reagan are dancing a ballet of rhetoric. session, Ortega During our one-hono doggedly pursued every question imHe no talk. small no humor, irony, pressed me as being a serious young guy thrust too quickly into a world role. He needs a media consultant to teach him to make eye contact," joked Rep. Edgar later. A British interpreter who works with the Sandinistas told us: "Ortegas basically shy. I think they the Sandinista directorate nine-memb- drew straws to pick him as leader. But on television, he's fiery. I dont see his popularity slipping. In a candid interview at his house earlier, U.S. Ambassador Harry Bergold agreed. I think the Sandinistas lost some of their best leaders, except for Interior Secretary Tomas Borge, in the revolution. This is their second-strinOrtegas read his Marx like all of them, but hes probably the most flexible. His stock is probably still high despite the war and the economy. Thats the mood you pick up in the countryside too. Reagan administration pressure has hit Ortega's country hard. The contras have killed 2,800 people and wounded 2,000 through 1984, by Sandinista figures. There is grousing over shortages. You hear of hundreds of youths in hiding because of the draft. Inflation runs wild (on the black market, a U.S. buck brings 600 cordobes. The official ex at the boot tops. Even if the war ended today, we'd have our economic problems. In 10 years Id hope to consolidate our goals pluralism, a mixed We dont just economy, want to end hostilities but have normal relations with the United States. We need U.S. aid and trade. Even if the guns stop, our future depends on an understanding with the United States." Hanging in the air were the unspoken words: It depends on what Reagan does next. No wonder Daniel Ortega seems a nervous young man. change rate is 50 cordobes to a dollar). But support for Ortega & Co. seems high ironically, in part because of Reagan-induce- d war fever. In short, Reagan's plan to topple the Sandinistas isnt working. Another $14 million for the rebels wouldn't matter. To change governments here, I suspect hell need and 100,000 U.S. troops. seemed momentarily baffled Ortega by one last question: Where did he think Nicaragua would be 10 years from now? Its hard to think long term when you live under war stress, he said, frowning down . FBI Leaves Calling Cards Dissent On Nicaragua Getting Police Notice By Don Edwards The Washington Post WASHINGTON Please call me about Nicaragua. This will be a friendly chat. - FBI and other Intelligence agents across the country have begun leaving their calling cards in the mailboxes of citizens concerned with the direction of U.S. policy in Central America. Agents have also been visiting people at work and talking to neighbors and friends. Active opposition to U.S. policy is apparently not a prerequisite for a visit. A law student in New York who merely attended a meeting on Nicaragua was rewarded with an FBI visit. According to FBI Director William H. Webster, his agents have made at least 100 d whose such visits. Webster level-heade- The writer, a Democratic representath e from California, is chairman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on civil and constitutional rights. Reagan and Kohl Demonstrate Lack Of Historical Understanding in Visit By Christoph Bertram Special to The Washington Post In the midst of the debate over HAMBURG, West Germany President Reagans forthcoming visit to West Germany, a friend who survived Hitlers concentration camp on May 8, 1945, rang to say how angered he was by the whole undignified prospect. Memories of the unspeakable atrocities suddenly had been reawakened in his mind by the discussion over whether the president should visit a German military cemetery or a former concentration camp or both. Why can't we pay tribute to all the dead?" he asked. The sad truth is that the politicians in Bonn and Washington have been unable to come up with the simple answer to this simple question. Instead, they have displayed an unedifying lack of histori- cal understanding. Ronald Reagan and Helmut Kohl had in mind to mark the day in to look forward, not back, to emphasize what a "positive way Christoph Bertram is political editor of the German weekly Die Zeit. unites and not what separates Americans and Germans. But what they have produced is the exact opposite. Rather than healing old wounds, they have opened them up again. Rather than increasing understanding, they have increased misunderstanding. And in the process they have failed all those, not only in the United States but in Germany as well, who have tried to meet the challenge of the past by confronting it. not by sweeping it aside. I was 7 years old when the German Reich collapsed on May 8. 1945. 1 remember the sense of both defeat and liberation at the time. But I also remember, as do many of my generation, the agonizing years later when we realized there was no way for any German of any age to start out with a clean slate. The 12 years of Hitler, and the millions slaughtered, could not be to us wiped out like an unpleasant memory. Rather, it became clear that this is an inescapable part of our existence as Germans. Not but by accepting the past have we been able to become Not again a member of the community of civilized nations. but by accepting the past have wc come to accept our own nationality. idea of a historic harmony is. therefore, an The Reagan-Koh- l insult not only to those who suffered and died in the camps. By originally envisaging no more than a visit by the president and the t hanecllor to the military cemetery of Bitburg. the White House and 1 the chancellery have suggested that May 8, 1945, was just one more of which there are many in European history -of those dates when the successes of victors and vanquished commemorate past ritual: politicians depositvictories and defeats in that a guard of honor ing wreaths on the tomb of the unknown soldier, of music, the sounds to the down and patriotic up marching slowly flags flying But the mere idea that this could be the way Reagan and Kohl would act in May, had it not been for the recent protests, demonstrates the very shallowness of the original plans. World War II was not just another European war. It was the darkest hour of European civilization. Its end brought to an end the world's most atrocious It also laid the regime and the world's hitherto most deadly conflict. basis for a democratic West Germany and a united West. - well-know- n half-staf- In the need to explain this the obvious lies the other embarrassment of the whole undignified affair. Why did those responsible for the proceedings fail to grasp the obvious when they sat down to plan the president's visit? The disturbing answer is that 40 years after May 8, 1945, they simply failed to recognize the significance of the anniversary. The Americans clearly wanted to spare German feelings. The Germans were not too eager to be reminded of the past. And both resented the Soviet efforts to turn the occasion into an celebration. Neither had enough historical respect and political acumen to recognize that the visit would backfire if it were no more than a public relations exercise. n Now the confusion is complete and there is no way out but to go ahead. To cancel the entire visit, as some in the United States have been demanding, would produce deep bitterness and resentment in West Germany, where people rightly feel they should not be judged only by the more distant past, but also by the 40 years since then. To cancel the commemoration of those killed in the distort history no less than to deny respect to those killed in the camps. And to add, under pressure, as the president has now done, the visit to Belsen to that of Bitburg. smacks of political maneuvering, not of statesmanship field-woul- Symbols arc among the most precious commodities of politics The president's visit to Germany could have set a convincing symbol. true both to the past and to the present in German-Americarelations Both Ronn and Washington, however, have dismally failed in this task to the anger and sadness of Americans and Germans n alike 4 t it n f. k stewardship of the FBI I greatly value says that the agents are always polite and that the visits are never threatening. But no matter how friendly the visits may be, they raise several troubling questions. First, why now? The proper role for the United States in Central America is one of the most hotly debated issues facing us today. Many Americans have serious doubts about the wisdom and efficacy of our policy in N'caragua, El Salvador and other countries in the region. More and more people are traveling to Nicaragua to see for themselves what is going on there and to form their own opinions. But when an FBI agent comes to your door, no matter how polite he or she is, there's a subtle message that you've done something wrong. You've travelc I to a country whose leadership our president would like to see cry uncle." Youve been to a meeting. You've questioned American foreign policy. At the very time when national debate is most intense and public participation is most important, you're being told subtly not to debate and not to participate. This leads to my second question At whose direction is this happening? Webster " says the FBI has received specific from the National Security Council and the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct a number of interviews. Does this mean that the NSC. composed of the president, the vice task-ings- president and the secretaries of defense and state, or the director of Central Intelligence, a presidential appointee, has instructed the FBI to target opponents of U.S. policy in Central America? All too frequently in our recent past, makers of foreign policy have sought to enlist the FBI in squelching domestic opposition. We cannol allow a return to such practices. Third, what is the sense of it all? Does the administration really feel that the Sandinistas are a threat to our national security? And even if they were, what does the administration hope to learn from the people it has been questioning? A person genuinely and actively opposed to U.S. policy in Central America is unlikely to answer questions posed by an FBI agent, while a person only peripherally involved is unlikely to know much of value to our intelligence services. In most of the cases that have come to our attention, the person has answered the FBIs polite request for a chat with a polite no." Does the FBI agent then file a report: Subject contacted. Refused to cooperate"? How about the woman who suggested that the Detense Investigative Service agent who called her reread the Constitution? Is there now a file on that woman stating. Subject contacted. Refused to cooperate. Cited the Constitution?" If the Nicaraguan government has launched a hostile intelligence operation in this country, will we crack it by interviewing members of humanitarian groups and Americans who have traveled to Nicaragua? For the third year in a row, the administration is asking Congress to approve substantial increases in the FBIs foreign counterintelligence budget. If the current corps of agents has time to attend public meetings on Nicaragua and to visit travelers returning from Central America, it suggests that the FBI has altogether enough agents already. The apparent futility of this pattern of questioning brings me back to my first question: Why now? At the very time that Central American policy and aid to the contras are being debated and decided. FBI agents arc visiting citizens involved in the debate, It seems inevitable that there will be a chilling effect and some will withdraw from the debate. 1 do not believe that the FBI should be made a party to this. Let the FBI pursue directly any Nicaraguan agents operating in this country. But let it not, by virtue of "friendly" visits, beor create the perception come involved in what rethat it has become involved mains a debate on foreign policy The Way II Was Here are briefs from The Salt Lake Tribune of 100, 50 and 25 years ago. April 28, 1885 Phil Gaueh is up from Marvsvale. bringing two hundred and forty pounds of quicksilver. retorted in a crude way from ore taken from the surface of the ledge. April 28, 1955 Governor Henry H Blood will be the principal speaker at the annual membership banquet and installation of officers of the 4 Ogden chamber of commerce Monday 6 30 p m in the Hotel Ben Lomand. April 28, at 10 Muffie is a calico cat who believes in the law of the litter rather than the litter of the natural law, of course law And according to natural law a rabbit is no less a prey of the cat than is a rat. But Muffie was ast in a more gentle mold than the ordinary cat When a day-olmothetless rabbit was introduced to her litter Muffie accepted the mite into her family d r |
