Some of the Americans living in or visiting Nicaragua choose not to register with the Embassy. The U.S. government offers all American citizens the same protection, regardless of whether they oppose our policy or not. Once Americans travel to a foreign country they are subject to local jurisdiction, and the U.S. role is to make certain that its citizens receive fair treatment according to local law. The host country is responsible for maintenance of law and order and for the safety of persons living within its territory. We believe the Government of Nicaragua fails to fulfill its responsibility when it encourages and permits Americans to travel or to live in combat zones. If U.S. Position on Americans in Nicaragua. In our view the assistance U.S. citizens provide to the government of Nicaragua strengthens it and helps it deny the citizens of Nicaragua their political rights. However, the right to express a dissenting political opinion is a basic tenet of American democracy and one of the great strengths of our society. the Nicaraguan people enjoyed the liberty Americans enjoy, then Nicaragua would not now be in the grip of a bloody civil war. Unlike the Sandinistas who do not recognize the right of dissent in their country, we recognize and respect the right of Americans to disagree with American policy. We do not plan to seek any restrictions on the right of Americans to travel to Nicaragua or offer their services to the Nicaraguan government. We do, however, urge that Americans voluntarily restrict their activities to non-combat zones. I would hope that the tragic death of Benjamin Linder will serve to alert other Americans of the dangers they face in areas of conflict. I would also hope that the Government of Nicaragua will discourage, rather than encourage the travel of Americans into combat zones. Further investigation. I do not mean to suggest in any way that the book on the Linder killing is closed. We will continue to investigate, continue to demand a copy of the autopsy report, continue to try to interview eye witnesses. are hopeful that the Government of Nicaragua will grant the request of the ANPDH to enter Nicaragua to conduct an investigation. We will do all we can to make the FDN unit available to the ANPDH. We Mr. CROCKETT. Mr. Abrams, do Americans violate any law of our country or any policy by going to Nicaragua? Mr. ABRAMS. No. There are no restrictions-legal restrictions on travel to Nicaragua. Mr. CROCKETT. And are they not entitled to the same protection and cooperation from our Embassy in Nicaragua that they are entitled to in any other place whose government we recognize and exchange diplomatic offices? Mr. ABRAMS. They are entitled to it. It is very difficult to give it to them because the Government of Nicaragua does not cooperate with us as much as some other governments do in providing, for example, consular services to Americans. Mr. CROCKETT. I think that is the same reason you gave for not investigating Mr. Linder's death. Mr. ABRAMS. No. The reason for not investigating—— Mr. CROCKETT. There was nobody in Nicaragua that would cooperate Mr. ABRAMS [continuing]. It is that it is too dangerous to send American Embassy officials to the area. Mr. CROCKETT. But you have sent Embassy officials to the area; have you not? Mr. ABRAMS. I do not believe we have. I believe that the Ambassador-the Ambassador's view was that at the time that the journalists were going in, it was too dangerous. The Bocay Valley is the area of greatest combat right now. Mr. CROCKETT. Was the funeral held in this area? Mr. ABRAMS. Pardon? Mr. CROCKETT. Was the funeral held in this area? Mr. ABRAMS. No, it was not. It was held in Matagalpa, which is a much safer location. It is interesting. It appears that the Government of Nicaragua did not wish to hold the funeral in that location because it was too dangerous. It is the most highly conflicted area in Nicaragua, today. Mr. CROCKETT. Tell me. Has the State Department asked both sides, the contras and the Government of Nicaragua, to take any steps to prevent or to reduce the likelihood of injury or death to American volunteers? Mr. ABRAMS. Yes. We have certainly-we have raised this a thousand times in the context of general human rights questions with the resistance forces. We have raised it as recently, I guess, as last week, the last time, with the Government of Nicaragua asking them to please try to discourage rather than to encourage American citizens from going into high risk areas, combat areas. Mr. CROCKETT. Now, the place where Mr. Linder's death occurred was a civilian project. Has our government, at any time, requested the contras to take precaution against attacking civilian projects where there are likely to be American citizens? Mr. ABRAMS. We have certainly discussed the question of attacking what you call a civilian project. Most-there would be very few, as a percentage number, that would have Americans. But, in any event, the purpose of not attacking civilian targets is not to kill civilians, whether they are Americans or Nicaraguans. Mr. CROCKETT. Mr. Lagomarsino. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Abrams, have you ever been called to testify on the death of Gregory Fronius or the Americans, military and civilian, killed in the Zona Rosa massacre? Mr. ABRAMS. No. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. According to the Geneva Convention, what protection must be afforded civilian non-combatants in a war zone? Mr. ABRAMS. Well, the Geneva Convention does not, I think, in its terms apply to the kind of internal conflict that exists in Nicaragua. I think it is fair to say that the laws of war generally require that you not try to hide behind civilians or use civilians as a kind of shield in a conflict. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. If an individual wears an Army uniform from time to time and carries a weapon, what does that say about his non-combat status? Mr. ABRAMS. Well, I think-to take this particular case, the facts, as they have been reported in the U.S. press indicate that Mr. Linder was in the middle of a group of armed, uniformed men, which would, under the general laws of war, be an appropriate target for groups that are at war with each other, from either side. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Several reports I saw have said that Mr. Linder had a weapon. Whether he was armed at the time I guess is not known. I saw one report that also said that he had a military uniform although he was not wearing it at the time. He was wearing an ammunition belt, apparently. Mr. ABRAMS. There are these reports. And, you know, I do not think we have a wholly reliable version of the facts. I do not think I have seen any reports that he was in uniform. I think I have seen a report that he was wearing khaki-colored clothes, which might have been mistaken for one. We have seen reports that he was armed; reports that he was not. I think one thing everybody seems to agree on is that the group, of which he was a part, was an armed and uniformed group of Sandinista military personnel. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Is there any way of tracing how private organizations in the United States either receive money from foreign governments or, conversely, how much they might be contributing to foreign governments? Nicaragua, to be specific. Mr. ABRAMS. No. As long as it is legal-that is to say, in the case of Cuba, for example, where there is a total embargo, transferring money comes under the control of the Office of Foreign Asset Control, the Treasury Department. In the case of Nicaragua, there is no such restriction, I think. And we make no effort to do so. It is, in fact, legal for Americans to transfer money to Nicaragua or to support the Government of Nicaragua. So, there is no basis, I think, for the Department of State to try to investigate those affairs. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Do you have any kind of estimate how much it might be? Mr. ABRAMS. The amount of money? I do not have an estimate. We estimate there are something like 1,500 Americans living in Nicaragua with somewhere between 500 and 1,000 there at any given time, traveling. But those are really estimates. We do not know. A large number, a large percentage of the Americans in Nicaragua and Mr. Linder, unfortunately, fell in this category, do not register with the Embassy. I say, unfortunately, in part because one of the advantages of registering with the Embassy is that when you do, the Embassy will give you the travel advisory. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. How do you determine at what point Americans-whether it is in Nicaragua or Angola or anywhere else, are in violation of the Neutrality Act? Mr. ABRAMS. It is not easy to violate the Neutrality Act. The Neutrality Act, as I recall it, requires that you launch an armed expedition from the United States against a foreign government. For example, if you leave the United States and launch it from Mexico, it is not a violation of the Neutrality Act. The Neutrality Act is really very narrow in its terms and has hardly ever, since its appearance on the books, about 175 years ago, has hardly ever been applied. But the act of an individual citizen going abroad would be unlikely to violate the Neutrality Act. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Even if he, in fact-I am not even suggesting it happened in this case, but Mr. ABRAMS. Even if you enlisted in a foreign army, to take the extreme case, that would not violate the Neutrality Act. Mr. LAGOMARSINO. Thank you. Mr. CROCKETT. Mr. Gejdenson. PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION TESTIMONY BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE Mr. GEJDENSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me do a bit of unfinished business with you, first. At a previous session of this committee on April 7, in reference to the $27 million in "humanitarian aid," you testified before the Foreign Affairs Committee that information dealing with the precise expenditures of that $27 million were made to the House Intelligence Committee. In a letter from the House Intelligence Committee Chairman, I would say a fair reading of that letter indicates that he does not feel that he was given that full accounting. Are you planning to make an accounting to this committee or to any committee in the Congress- Mr. ABRAMS. I am certainly not planning to make an accounting to this committee. Mr. GEJDENSON. Are you planning to make an accounting-Mr. ABRAMS. We will account to the Intelligence Committee. Mr. GEJDENSON [continuing]. As you told me in the previous time, that you had already made to the Intelligence Committee on what happened to that $27 million? Mr. ABRAMS. We have already done so. I am unaware of any such letter. Mr. GEJDENSON. Well, as of March 17, the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee does not feel that that has occurred. Mr. ABRAMS. Well, I regret that. But, as I say, I have not noted before any such views on the part of any member of either House's Intelligence Committee- Mr. GEJDENSON. Well, I have yet to find somebody in either House that feels that you have done so. But let us go on to▬▬ Mr. ABRAMS. Well, I could introduce you to some, if you would like. COMBAT GUIDELINES OF CONTRAS Mr. GEJDENSON. Let us go on to other issues. What is the present guidelines that you provide through your operations to the contras as legitimate targets? Are there any restrictions on what the contras are allowed to hit in Nicaragua? Mr. ABRAMS. They have their own guidelines- Mr. GEJDENSON. There is no guidance from the United States Government after both our dollars and dollars that you and others have raised for them from other governments go to the contras? You provide them no guidance? Mr. ABRAMS. You interrupted my answer. First, the contras, themselves, have an elaborate system and we can provide for the record a full statement of the code by which they conduct themselves. In addition to which, of course Mr. GEJDENSON. We certainly would like to see that. In addition to which, when we conduct training-as we have done over the past four or five months of resistance military personnel, part of that training is human rights training. In addition to which their own training, which they conduct in Central America, also includes human rights training. You know, one way of putting it is that, obviously, they are supposed to attack-well, let us put it in the negative: Not attack civilians or civilian targets. The area of contention, of course, is the question of these armed cooperatives. But the general rule is a fairly obvious one. Mr. GEJDENSON. So, would you say that hospitals or pharmacies are legitimate targets of the contras? Is that a legitimate target? Mr. ABRAMS. In general, I would say no. Mr. GEJDENSON. Would you say that schools and administrative buildings in towns are legitimate targets? Mr. ABRAMS. I am not so sure about administrative buildings because it depends on their Mr. GEJDENSON. Schools? Mr. GEJDENSON. Individual homes? Are they legitimate targets? Mr. ABRAMS. Well, I suppose that depends on whether-if there is, for example, in an individual home, a meeting of 10 armed uniformed Sandinista soldiers- Mr. GEJDENSON. If it is a husband and his wife, then you would say it is not a legitimate target? Mr. ABRAMS. Sure. Mr. GEJDENSON. And have you expressed these feelings to the contras at any time? Mr. ABRAMS. Sure. Mr. GEJDENSON. And you have, on behalf of this Government, given them a set of guidelines that you feel would be appropriate for this organization, the contras, for whom you have provided funding? Mr. ABRAMS. Well, we have. But we also think their own guidelines are quite good. |