It is critical that we ensure that we do everything in our power to bring about an end to a policy which threatens American lives and which continues to bring chaos and confusion to our relations with the nations of Central America.

In addition, it is time to focus on the repercussions of our current policy to innocent citizens of Nicaragua who continue to suffer from the results of continued U.S. financing of the contras. Current figures from the Nicaraguan Government indicate that over 2,123 homes, 62 schools and 31 hospitals have been bombed in the ongoing conflict. Since 1981, 2,032 women, 1,996 children, 176 school teachers and 52 doctors have been kidnaped, killed or wounded. There are 9,132 war orphans and 250,000 displaced persons.

We meet under very difficult circumstances following the tragic death of this American volunteer in Nicaragua. Benjamin Linder was killed almost two weeks ago by U.S. supported contras while working on a rural electrical project in a remote northeast part of Nicaragua. His death, at the hands of U.S. supported and armed contras brings into further question this Administration's emphasis on a policy depending on armed insurgency rather than a negotiated settlement to bring an end to the conflict in Central America. At this point, it is also important to get some answers regarding the circumstances of Mr. Linder's death.

The various reports on Mr. Linder's death from April 29 to May 6, coming from sources such as the Washington Post, the New York Times' the Associated Press and others often contradict each other. For example, and I quote:

"An American volunteer working as a mechanical engineer in a small village in northern Nicaragua was shot and killed by Nicaraguan rebels this morning." Washington Post of April 29.

I quote again: "We do not know anything about this man." That is a U.S. Embassy spokesman quoted in the Washington Post on April 29.

Another quote: "Ben Linder had been told that he and other members of his crew on the El Cua (KWA) hydroelectric project were targeted for death by the U.S.-funded rebels known as contras." Washington Post of April 30.

Another quote of the same date: "Linder had suffered a shrapnel wound to the head, apparently from a grenade and died at the

scene.

"It"-and I quote again—“was not known if he was armed."

Still another of these quotes: "Linder was killed in a fire fight between one of our contra patrols and a group of militia of the Sandinista Army which accompanied the U.S. citizen."

Continuing, "He was said, by survivors, to have been carrying a Kalashnikov assault rifle for protection." Washington Post, May 3. On May 6, the Washington Post is quoted as follows: "An autopsy report shows the rebels killed his son while he was on the ground wounded." That purports to be a quote from the father, Dr. David Linder.

Another quote: "Linder was killed by a counterrevolutionary group under contract to the U.S. Government."

And he was," Kidnaped and later murdered." That is the Nicaraguan Foreign Minister as quoted in an Associated Press article in the Washington Post.

Despite these conflicting reports and nearly two weeks after his death, the Administration has not replied to questions contained in a letter sent by Members of Congress on April 29th regarding the specific circumstances of Mr. Linder's death. As was stated in that letter, and I quote:

"The United States cannot acquiesce in the murder of any American. Still, less, can we allow a group, armed, trained and funded by the United States Government, to murder our citizens for political reasons.

A copy of that letter in full will be entered into the record of these hearings at this point.

It is time that our questions regarding Mr. Linder's death be answered and that our concerns regarding other Americans in the region be addressed. The conflict in Central America has claimed enough victims.

Let us look at the facts regarding Mr. Linder's death and at the very difficult circumstances in which other U.S. and foreign volunteers work while in Nicaragua and let us try to determine what route we can take to help make this situation safer and to bring to an end the conflict in that region.

Now, turning to our witnesses, I would like to inform each of them that their full written statement will be entered in the record.

I would like to officially welcome all of our witnesses and I also want to express the subcommittee's sympathy to Dr. and Mrs. Linder on the death of their son.

The list of witnesses will include Dr. and Mrs. Linder and Ms. Mary Risacher who is a practical nurse and is, herself, a health care volunteer in Nicaragua and tended to deceased, Mr. Linder, at the time of his death.

Their testimony will be followed by the testimony of Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, Mr. Elliott Abrams, and he is accompanied by Mr. John Adams of the Consular Affairs Section.

The third and final panel will consist of Bishop Thomas Gumbleton of the Catholic Diocese in Detroit who has been actively associated with the Witnesses for Peace organization.

Also, Mr. Michael Ratner, who is an attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York City and, finally Mr. Michael Waller, who is Director of Publications, for the Council for InterAmerican Security.

And now an opening statement by the ranking Minority Member, Mr. Lagomarsino.

Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Today's hearing, which focuses attention on the personal tragedy of an American family, causes great concern on this side of the dias. And we do not want in any way to diminish the loss of the Linder family and the sorrow we all feel for their son's tragic death.

But in holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman, I think you must be prepared for issues to be raised that some may well charge as being insensitive. Many Americans of pure motive and sincere conviction volunteer for and support causes that they believe in. It has always been so. In so doing, it does not prevent others who are not of such

pure motive from manipulating them or taking advantage of circumstances surrounding their activities. Such certainly seems to be the case here.

Nicaraguan President, Daniel Ortega, used Mr. Linder's funeral as an opportunity to blame resistance to the Sandinistas on U.S. actions rather than the failure of the Sandinistas to fulfill their own promises to their own people.

Also, none of us here is in a position to draw conclusions about Mr. Linder's motives for being in Nicaragua. But one must worry about the motives of those in charge of Mr. Linder's activities and why, where help was needed in so many places in Nicaragua, it was necessary or desirable to assign him to be in a dangerous combat zone?

And, two, and from what the Chairman related, the quotes and so on and what we have all heard and seen, the circumstances-the full circumstances of Mr. Linder's death are unclear from the conflicting reports of the wounds he received.

While some may attempt to portray the killing as a cold-blooded act, with evidence of torture and mutilation, there is no, at least at this point, no such final conclusive evidence.

We have been told by former Sandinista officials of cases where Sandinista soldiers have carried out killings and mutilations who then attempted to attribute them to the contras. With the conflicting evidence here, it is not possible yet to draw conclusions about just exactly how Mr. Linder was killed.

The death of Mr. Linder, as tragic as it is, does not, however, lessen our disappointment for the manner in which this subcommittee has proceeded in its expression of concern about American lives lost in Central America. We have heard a lot about this case and properly so.

Where, however, was the shock and outrage over the death of Gregory Fronius, the American trainer killed in El Salvador by the Sandinista-backed FMLN or the condolences and sympathy extended to his mother, Mrs. Mary Asbury, or for the deaths of the Americans, both Marines and American businessmen killed in the Zona Rosa killings in El Salvador, or for the Canadian journalist, Peter Berta, killed by the Sandinistas while traveling with the contras in Nicaragua? Many of us in the Congress knew him and had the opportunity to talk with Peter when he visited Washington last year.

At this point in the record, I would like to ask unanimous consent to insert an article written by Mark Falcoff entitled "Revolutionary Tourism" which was published in the magazine, "Public Opinion" in the summer of 1986.

He states in his article, quote: It is no accident, as Marxists like to say that the Sandinistas have found such a large and important constituency in the United States. They have actively sought it and cultivated it. To an extraordinary degree, the Nicaraguan leadership regards public opinion in the United States as a second front in its war with the Reagan Administration. Perhaps something even more than that.

1 See app. 1.

As Commandante Tomas Borge, Nicaragua's fearsome Interior Minister, has said, "Nicaragua's objective war is one fought inside the United States." End of quote.

I still have a hard time believing, Mr. Chairman, that any members of Congress have so lost their perspective that a Marxist-Leninist regime in Nicaragua, violating all of the promises it made and repressing its people, is considered the hero, and the United States Government is considered the villain.

And, although it may be denied that is the reality of this hearing, I think that it can be said there certainly is that perception. Mr. and Mrs. Linder, I am sure I speak for all of the other Republicans on this subcommittee and the full committee and the whole House, for that matter, when I extend to you my sincere condolences and heartfelt sympathy.

Mr. CROCKETT. The committee will recess momentarily to take care of a vote on the floor. I would urge each of us to return as promptly as possible. We have a fairly large agenda.

[Recess.]

Mr. CROCKETT. We were not expecting such a large crowd. We apologize for the smallness of our room and your current uncomfortableness. Also, in view of the number of witnesses we have, it is going to be necessary to limit each witness to 10 minutes for their prepared statement. And the Chairman, believe me, will interrupt you at the end of those 10 minutes. Your complete written statement, however, will appear in the record so that to the extent that you can summarize it, you will be that much farther ahead.

We are happy to see that we have almost the entire complement of our Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere and we have been joined by some of our other colleagues. We will be operating under the five-minute rule.

Our first witness is Dr. David Linder. You may proceed, Doctor.

STATEMENT OF DR. DAVID LINDER

Dr. LINDER. Thank you, Mr. Crockett. I would like to thank you and the committee for taking the time to hear my family and others recount the story of Ben Linder, where he was—who he is, where he was and what he was doing there and why and certain facts pertaining to his death.

I gave you a copy of-in your records, a copy of a letter that Ben wrote to us just prior to his death, about two or three weeks prior to his death, and a letter written by Mira Brown, who is a colleague of Ben's who is working in the El Cua area on the same project that Ben was working on. And she, in another recent letter, again describes in detail what life is like in the El Cua (KWA) area. Both are, in their own ways, I think quite dramatic, and complement each other.

I have a prepared statement, but I would also like to say that I will address my remarks, when I can, to answer some of the I think good questions and issues brought up by Mr. Lagomarsino and perhaps clarify some of the issues which he raises.

Before Ben-just when Ben died, Miriam, my daughter, Elisabeth, my wife, and I met very rapidly, as soon as we could get together and we asked ourselves, "What should we do now?" We re

alized that we were going to be looked at very carefully. Some people would like what we did; some people would not like what we did. And in the middle of this crisis in our family, along with this tragedy, we decided that we would do what we thought best for ourselves and our family.

Ben wanted to be buried in Nicaragua and we went to Nicaragua to put him to rest. This was his wish that he made to someone in Nicaragua and we honored it and we felt right in doing it. We went to Nicaragua, not to shake hands with President Ortega, we went there to put Ben to rest. And so we did.

NO NOTE OF SORROW FROM ADMINISTRATION

As to the fact that Mr. Lagomarsino refers to Ben's death as tragic, I know it is. I feel it and others feel it, also. I have-I would like to say, though, that I have no evidence that the United States Government feels it. We have no record or statement that they have sent us a note of sorrow, condolence, regrets of any kind. So, if they call it tragic, I must say I wish they would tell it to me or my family.

I will go on, now. I would like to give you what I assume are the bare-boned facts and let the questions come after that. Ben was born in San Francisco in 1959, and when 11, we moved along with him to Portland, Oregon. He attended the University of Washington in Seattle and received his Bachelor's Degree in mechanical engineering in 1983.

The year prior to graduation, he went to Costa Rica to learn Spanish in preparation for going to Nicaragua upon graduation to seek his fortune as an engineer. He was there three months or so when he received a full salaried position in the National Energy Institute in Nicaragua. This is the national public utilities department of the country. He worked there as a staff engineer until October of 1986.

BEN LINDER IN NICARAGUA

During that time, he first worked on geothermal power and then worked on hydropower in the-at El Cua. And at El Cua in 1981, they started building a small hydropower unit, but the—that was going on very slow in a very fragmented fashion until Ben was assigned to it in 1984 and he took it upon it as a first serious commit

ment.

And he would be in Nicaragua and then go up to this very remote area in northern Nicaragua to El Cua during the day-for specific assignments and then came back. This was the first plant of its kind to be completed since the revolution and it went on line on May 1, 1986.

In December of 1986, Ben left the Nicaraguan Energy Institute to spend all his time to develop a project in the same area where he was working before and this is the El Cua/San Jose de Bocay area. Bocay is farther north, a little farther north than El Cua. Both are remote. It takes three to four hours to get there over a 45mile very bumpy, dirty, dusty road. El Cua is a very primitive community otherwise, with no electricity, a dirt road going through the