Congressional Record, 8/11/1986, John Kerry's speech,132 Cong Rec S 11175, Vol. 132 No. 110

I am posting the entire text of John Kerry's speech without comment. I have marked any mention of Vietnam in bold font.

MR. PRESIDENT, THERE ARE THOSE WHO HAVE ARGUED IN THE COURSE OF THE LAST FEW WEEKS THAT THE SENATE HAS INDEED EXPRESSED ITS WILL ENOUGH TIMES, THEREBY QUESTIONING WHY IT IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A LENGTHY DEBATE. BUT I THINK THAT THE OPENING STATEMENTS THUS FAR FROM THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE WHO IS MANAGER FOR THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE, THE SENATOR FROM IOWA, THE SENATOR FROM RHODE ISLAND, THE SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN, AND OTHERS HAVE ALL BEGUN TO OPEN A FRAMEWORK AS TO WHY IT IS THAT THE U.S. SENATE SHOULD PROBABLY BE DEBATING CONSIDERABLY LONGER THAN WE HAVE AVAILABLE TO US.

THIS IS A MATTER TODAY OF LIFE AND DEATH, IF NOT FOR AMERICANS TODAY, POTENTIALLY IN THE NEAR FUTURE. BUT IT IS CERTAINLY A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH FOR NICARAGUANS, COSTA RICANS, HONDURANS, AND FOR OTHERS WHO ARE CAUGHT UP IN THE TURMOIL, THE IMMEDIATE TURMOIL, AND THE IMMEDIATE CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE OR DO NOT MAKE HERE IN WASHINGTON.

AS ONE WHO SERVED IN SOUTHEAST ASIA DURING THE YEARS OF THE VIETNAM WAR, I RECALL ALL TOO WELL THE FEELINGS OF PEOPLE THERE ABOUT THE ARROGANCE THAT THEY FELT WAS EXPRESSED IN OUR WILLINGNESS TO VIETNAMIZE THE WAR BY WHICH WE WERE WILLING TO SEE BODY BAGS, AS LONG AS THEY WERE NOT OUR BODY BAGS, AS LONG AS THEY DID NOT COME BACK TO OUR HOMES, AS LONG AS IT WAS NOT OUR MOTHERS, FATHERS, BROTHERS, AND SISTERS WHO WERE SUFFERING THE GRIEF OF THESE LOSSES.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE DEBATING NOW, BECAUSE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ARE BEING KILLED AS A RESULT OF UNITED STATES POLICY IN CENTRAL AMERICA.

THE SENATE IS FACING WHAT MAY BE THE WATERSHED VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT A PEACEFUL SOLUTION CAN BE FOUND TO THE CENTRAL AMERICAN CONFLICT. LET THERE BE NO MISTAKING THAT WHAT WE ARE BEING ASKED TO DO BY OUR VOTES BY THIS ADMINISTRATION. IT IS TO APPROVE A PROGRAM OF LETHAL MILITARY AID IN A MANNER THAT CARRIES WITH IT A PROMISE OF ESCALATION AND INCREASED AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE WAR AGAINST NICARAGUA, AND WITH IT, OBVIOUSLY, THE POTENTIAL PRICE TAG TO THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS OF A HALF-BILLION DOLLARS OR SO JUST OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS .

THIS IS NOT A VOTE ON SIMPLY ANOTHER $100 MILLION. IT IS A VOTE OVER A TRANSITION IN OUR POLICY WHEREBY WE ARE ONCE AGAIN UNLEASHING THE CIA, WHEREBY WE ARE ONCE AGAIN INVOLVING AMERICAN SUPPLY LINES AND ADVISERS IN A WAY THAT PUTS THEM INTO HARM'S WAY AND MAY ULTIMATELY RESULT IN LARGER AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT.

MR. PRESIDENT, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A POLICY OF WAR, NOT A POLICY OF PEACE. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FOREGOING ANY POSSIBILITY OF REALLY PUSHING A CONTADORA PROCESS TO WHICH THE ADMINISTRATION PAYS LIP SERVICE; WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROLONGING THE CONFLICT, INCREASING THE TENSIONS, COMPLICATING IF NOT TERMINATING NEGOTIATIONS, ISOLATING US FROM OUR FRIENDS, AND DIVIDING AMERICANS.

AND FOR WHAT? THIS SENATOR ASKS FOR WHAT, AND THIS SENATOR ASKS WHY. WHY WILL THE UNITED STATES, THE GREATEST POWER ON THE FACE OF THIS PLANET, AVOID A MORE LEGAL AND A MORE TEMPERATE APPROACH TO THE PROBLEM OF NICARAGUA, NOT ONLY IN THE INTEREST OF SEEKING A SOLUTION, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF BRINGING AMERICA TOGETHER RATHER THAN DIVIDING IT, IN THE INTEREST OF TRYING TO BUILD THE KIND OF CONSENSUS ON WHICH IN THE 1950'S AND 1960'S AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY WAS BUILT?

A NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL YESTERDAY, I THINK, LAID OUT THE CASE AGAINST CONTRA AID VERY WELL. IT SAID:

YET MANY AMERICANS REMAIN PASSIONATELY OPPOSED TO THE CONTRA WAR, AND RIGHTLY SO, FOR THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISES REMAIN UNREALIZED.

CONGRESS MAY VOTE DOLLARS TO THE CONTRAS BUT THE COUNTRY HAS NOT RALLIED TO THEIR CAUSE. IT CANNOT SENSIBLY DO SO IN THE FACE OF A POLICY WITH SUCH INCOHERENT INTENT AND SUCH BLOODY EFFECT.

WHY THE SKEPTICISM? A SHORT ANSWER IS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS CAUGHT UP IN A WEB OF CONTRADICTIONS. HIS PURPOSE, UNSTATED, IS NONETHELESS EVIDENT: THE DESTRUCTION OF A MARXIST REGIME. UNWILLING AND UNABLE TO DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THAT GOAL, HE REFUSES TO PURSUE THE ALTERNATE COURSE, CONTAINING THE SANDINISTAS WITHIN NICARAGUA.

MR. REAGAN'S BEST ARGUMENT IS SUPPLIED BY THE SANDINISTAS THEMSELVES. SINCE SEIZING POWER IN 1979, THEY HAVE INDEED BETRAYED THEIR DEMOCRATIC PROMISES. THEY PUT OFF ELECTIONS, STIFLED THE PRESS, HARASSED OPPONENTS AND MADE COMMON CAUSE WITH LEFTIST GUERRILLAS IN EL SALVADOR. MOST RECENTLY, AFTER THE HOUSE VOTED AID FOR THE CONTRAS, THE COMMANDANTES BANISHED A CATHOLIC BISHOP AND SUSPENDED THE ONLY OPPOSITION NEWSPAPER, LA PRENSA.

THESE ARE SINS AGAINST DEMOCRACY. BUT WHICH OF THESE SINS JUSTIFY WAGING WAR? IF TYRANNY AND ABUSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS ARE IN THEMSELVES A CASUS BELLI, AMERICA WOULD BE AT WAR IN MUCH OF THE WORLD. THREATS TO NATIONAL SECURITY MAY WARRANT WAR, BUT AS A LAST RESORT. THERE ARE, SHORT OF THAT, A DOZEN WAYS FOR THE UNITED STATES TO MAKE ITS INFLUENCE FELT FOR DEMOCRATIC PURPOSES.

MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THE ENTIRE TEXT OF THAT EDITORIAL BE REPRINTED IN THE RECORD AT THIS POINT.

THERE BEING NO OBJECTION, THE EDITORIAL WAS ORDERED TO BE PRINTED IN THE RECORD, AS FOLLOWS:

WHY KILL NICARAGUANS?

PRESIDENT REAGAN URGES THE REPUBLICAN SENATE TO GIVE HIM $100 MILLION IN AID FOR THE "CONTRA" REBELS IN NICARAGUA AND HE'S LIKELY TO PREVAIL. THE BIG TEST, AFTER ALL, WAS IN THE DEMOCRATIC HOUSE, WHERE HE WON IN JUNE, AFTER A SPEECH IN WHICH HE PROMISED THAT THE CONTRAS WOULD CLEAN UP THEIR ACT AND AMERICAN DIPLOMACY WOULD SEEK "REAL DEMOCRACY." YET MANY AMERICANS REMAIN PASSIONATELY OPPOSED TO THE CONTRA WAR, AND RIGHTLY SO, FOR THE PRESIDENT'S PROMISES REMAIN UNREALIZED.

CONGRESS MAY VOTE DOLLARS TO THE CONTRAS BUT THE COUNTRY HAS NOT RALLIED TO THEIR CAUSE. IT CANNOT SENSIBLY DO SO IN THE FACE OF A POLICY WITH SUCH INCOHERENT INTENT AND SUCH BLOODY EFFECT.

DESPITE MR. REAGAN'S POPULARITY, THE CONSERVATIVE MOOD AND PALPABLE PROVOCATIONS FROM MANAGUA, THE CONTRA WAR HAS NOT CAUGHT ON. POLLS CONTINUE TO SHOW THAT A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS DISAPPROVE OF ARMING THE REBELS, AND DOUBT DIRE ADMINISTRATION WARNINGS OF A RED TIDE SWEEPING UP TO THE FRONT PORCHES OF HARLINGEN, TEXAS.

WHY THE SKEPTICISM? A SHORT ANSWER IS THAT THE PRESIDENT IS CAUGHT UP IN A WEB OF CONTRADICTIONS. HIS PURPOSE, UNSTATED, IS NONETHELESS EVIDENT: THE DESTRUCTION OF A MARXIST REGIME. UNWILLING AND UNABLE TO DO WHAT IS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THAT GOAL, HE REFUSES TO PURSUE THE ALTERNATE COURSE, CONTAINING THE SANDINISTAS WITHIN NICARAGUA.

MR. REAGAN'S BEST ARGUMENT IS SUPPLIED BY THE SANDINISTAS THEMSELVES. SINCE SEIZING POWER IN 1979, THEY HAVE INDEED BETRAYED THEIR DEMOCRATIC PROMISES. THEY PUT OFF ELECTIONS, STIFLED THE PRESS, HARASSED OPPONENTS AND MADE COMMON CAUSE WITH LEFTIST GUERRILLAS IN EL SALVADOR. MOST RECENTLY, AFTER THE HOUSE VOTED AID FOR THE CONTRAS, THE COMMANDANTES BANISHED A CATHOLIC BISHOP AND SUSPENDED THE ONLY OPPOSITION NEWSPAPER, LA PRENSA.

THESE ARE SINS AGAINST DEMOCRACY. BUT WHICH OF THESE SINS JUSTIFY WAGING WAR? IF TYRANNY AND ABUSE OF HUMAN RIGHTS ARE IN THEMSELVES A CASUS BELLI, AMERICA WOULD BE AT WAR IN MUCH OF THE WORLD. THREATS TO NATIONAL SECURITY MAY WARRANT WAR, BUT AS A LAST RESORT. THERE ARE, SHORT OF THAT, A DOZEN WAYS FOR THE UNITED STATES TO MAKE ITS INFLUENCE FELT FOR DEMOCRATIC PURPOSES.

MR. REAGAN'S HOSTILITY TO NICARAGUA IS SURELY ANIMATED BY ITS TIES TO HAVANA AND MOSCOW AND ITS COMRADELY HELP FOR GUERRILAS ELSEWHERE. BUT THE SANDINISTAS INSIST THEY ARE PREPARED TO BARGAIN ON SECURITY ISSUES. WHY NOT TEST THAT WILLINGNESS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE DRAFT CONTADORA TREATY, FASHIONED BY LATINS, THAT HAS BEEN ON THE TABLE FOR YEARS? IT CALLS FOR A REGIONAL REDUCTION OF FORCES, A VERIFIABLE BAN ON FOREIGN BASES AND ADVISERS, MUTUAL RESPECT FOR FRONTIERS AND ADVANCEMENT OF DEMOCRACY.

SPEAKING BEFORE THE HOUSE VOTE IN JUNE, MR. REAGAN SEEMED FAVORABLE TO THIS DIPLOMATIC COURSE. HE ACKNOWLEDGED ABUSES BY THE CONTRAS AND PROPOSED A MONITORING COMMISSION. BUT HOWEVER WELCOME, THE COMMISSION SEEMS UNLIKELY TO REFORM AN ARMY WHOSE HIGH COMMAND IS DOMINATED BY FORMER SOMOZA NATIONAL GUARDSMEN SCORNFUL OF ANY CIVILIAN AUTHORITY.

THE PRESIDENT INSISTED HE FAVORED ANY SETTLEMENT OR CONTADORA TREATY "THAT WILL BRING REAL DEMOCRACY TO NICARAGUA." THE TRICKY "REAL" ASIDE, THAT SEEMED TO HOLD SOME HOPE, BUT IT QUICKLY FADED AFTER THE HOUSE VOTE. WHEN SECRETARY OF STATE SHULTZ MET IN COLOMBIA LAST WEEK WITH CENTRAL AMERICA'S LEADERS, CONTADORA WAS BARELY MENTIONED. THE ONLY ANSWER TO THE REGION'S PROBLEMS, INSISTED MR. SHULTZ, IS A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IN NICARAGUA.

THAT IS NOT A PRESCRIPTION FOR COMPROMISE, BUT FOR WAR WITHOUT END, SPREADING EVER MORE DESTRUCTION AND DEATH OVER A COUNTRY THE UNITED STATES CLAIMS IT WANTS TO SAVE. IF THE PRESIDENT HAS A DISCERNIBLE PURPOSE, SENATORS MIGHT FIND IT TOLERABLE THIS WEEK TO VOTE YES. BUT HE CANNOT SEND ENOUGH FORCE TO WIN THIS SORDID WAR; HE KNOWS THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WOULD NOT STAND FOR THAT. ALTERNATIVELY, HE MIGHT USE THE CONTRAS TO STRENGTHEN HIS NEGOTIATING HAND. BUT REPEATEDLY, HE SHRINKS FROM THAT.

HIS ONLY POLICY AMOUNTS TO "STAY THE COURSE." TOWARD WHAT? WITHOUT A SOUNDER ANSWER, FOR AMERICA TO KEEP ARMING THE CONTRAS IS TO MAKE MORE NICARAGUAN PEOPLE SUFFER AND DIE, FOR NO GOOD REASON. MR. REAGAN CAN CALL THAT FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM IF HE LIKES; IT STILL AMOUNTS TO WANTON, BLOODY WAR.

MR. KERRY. MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS NOT JUST HOW MANY EX-SOMOCISTA GUARDS MAKE UP THE CONTRAS, NOT JUST ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE CONTRAS CAN EFFECT NEGOTIATIONS; WE ARE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE INVOLVED IN EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES THAT INVOLVE GUNRUNNING OR DRUG SMUGGLING.

WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A FUNDAMENTAL FLAW IN THE APPROACH THAT UTILIZES THE CONTRAS AS A REALISTIC MEANS OF DEALING WITH THE SANDINISTAS.

I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO VERY CAREFULLY READ AN ARTICLE THAT APPEARED RECENTLY IN THE WASHINGTON POST ENTITLED "CONTRA SEE AID BRINGING VICTORY IN YEAR."

THE GROUNDWORK IS BEING LAID IN THAT ARTICLE, I SUGGEST, MR. PRESIDENT, FOR FUTURE INVOLVEMENT BY THE UNITED STATES BECAUSE AS THE CONTRA LEADERSHIP BEGINS TO PROMISE A VICTORY THAT THEY HAVE PROMISED EVERY YEAR SINCE THEIR INCEPTION, THEY BEGIN TO LEAD US FURTHER INTO THE PROCESS WHERE IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT VICTORY, WE BECOME INVOLVED.

MR. PRESIDENT, WE CLEARLY HAVE INTERESTS IN CENTRAL AMERICA. I KNOW IT IS FASHIONABLE IN THIS DEBATE TO GET CAUGHT UP OVER THE CONTRAS AND SOME WOULD ACCUSE THOSE WHO OPPOSE AID TO THE CONTRAS OF NOT TAKING NOTE OF THE ABUSES OF THE SANDINISTAS. BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT ANY DEMOCRAT OR ANY INDIVIDUAL, WHETHER DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN, WHO IS OPPOSED TO THIS POLICY, IS SOMEHOW MYOPIC WITH RESPECT TO OUR INTERESTS IN CENTRAL AMERICA.

YES, WE DO HAVE IMPORTANT INTERESTS IN CENTRAL AMERICA, AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO SET OUT THOSE INTERESTS BEFORE WE MAKE A JUDGMENT ABOUT HOW WE CAN BEST ACHIEVE THOSE INTERESTS.

I THINK IT IS SAFE TO SAY, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT WE ALL AGREE THAT WE DO NOT WANT SOVIET MISSILES THAT COULD THREATEN THE UNITED STATES BEING BASED IN CENTRAL AMERICA AND NICARAGUA.

WE DO NOT WANT, NOR SHOULD WE HAVE TO ENDURE, SOVIET OR CUBAN MILITARY ADVISORS IN CENTRAL AMERICA AND PARTICULARLY IN NICARAGUA.

WE WANT THE SOVEREIGN INTEGRITY OF EACH NATION IN CENTRAL AMERICA PROTECTED.

WE WANT, AT A MINUMUM, A NEUTRAL NICARAGUA AND AT VERY BEST WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A NICARAGUA THAT IS POSITIVELY AND DEFINITELY ALIGNED WITH THE UNITED STATES.

WE WANT, TO A DEGREE THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE IT AND EFFECT IT ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD, A PLURALISTIC, DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY IN NICARAGUA.

SO THE FIGHT, I THINK, MR. PRESIDENT, IS NOT OVER THESE GOALS. IF I HAVE LEFT OUT A GOAL, I WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME ANYONE SAYING WHAT GOAL THERE IS BEYOND THOSE I HAVE DESCRIBED THAT WOULD MERIT THE UNITED STATES SETTING ITSELF UP TO A POTENTIAL OF MILITARY INVOLVEMENT.

THE FIGHT IS NOT OVER THESE GOALS. AMERICANS ARE IN AGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT OUR INTERESTS ARE IN CENTRAL AMERICA.

THE FIGHT IS OVER WHETHER OR NOT THE CONTRAS CAN, BY ANY SENSE OF THE IMAGINATION, CONTRIBUTE ANYTHING TOWARD THE FULFILLMENT OF THOSE GOALS, TO THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THOSE GOALS, OR TO THE PROTECTION OF THOSE INTERESTS.

I WOULD SUGGEST VERY RESPECTFULLY, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT IT IS SUCH A FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED POLICY THAT NOT ONLY DO THEY NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THOSE GOALS, BUT SUPPORT FOR THE CONTRAS CONTRIBUTES IN FACT TO THE DETRIMENT INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES AND BUILDS AND CREATES A SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY BY WHICH THE VERY THINGS WE ARE TRYING TO PREVENT WILL HAPPEN.

YOU CAN TRACE THE HISTORY OF SOVIET INVOLVEMENT WITH THE HISTORY OF AMERICAN INTRANSIGENCE IN THE NEGOTIATING PROCESS AND SEE HOW IT IS THAT AS AMERICA STEPS UP OUR EFFORTS, SO IT IS THAT THEY ASK FOR AND RECEIVE GREATER QUANTITIES OF WEAPONS FROM THE SOVIET UNION.

WHY NOT THE CONTRAS? WHY ARE THE CONTRAS, THEN, IN LIGHT OF THOSE STATED GOALS, NOT THE WAY TO PROCEED? I THINK THERE ARE UNCOUNTED NUMBERS OF REASONS, BUT I AM GOING TO SUGGEST AS MANY AS 13 TO MY COLLEAGUES?

NO. 1, BECAUSE THE CONTRAS VIOLATE AMERICAN STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR AND DECENCY AT HOME AND ABROAD. I SHALL DESCRIBE LATER THE WAYS IN WHICH I THINK THEY DO SO;

BECAUSE THE CONTRAS DRAG THE UNITED STATES ITSELF AND INDIVIDUAL AMERICANS INTO ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES BOTH AT HOME AND ABROAD;

BECAUSE THE CONTRAS THEMSELVES ARE ENGAGING IN ACTIVITIES THAT BREAK OUR LAW AS WELL AS INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DO INJURY TO THE UNITED STATES;

BECAUSE FAR FROM BEING FREEDOM FIGHTERS OR A PARTY TO AN INTERNAL ARMED CONFLICT, THEY HAVE BEEN GUILTY OF THEIR OWN FORM OF TERRORISM DIRECTED AGAINST THE CIVILIAN POPULATION OF NICARAGUA;

BECAUSE, AS MANY HAVE SAID, THEY CANNOT WIN;

BECAUSE THEY UNDERMINE THE NEGOTIATION PROCESS IN GENERAL AND THE CONTRADORA PROCESS IN PARTICULAR;

BECAUSE THEY INCREASE THE MILITARIZATION OF THE REGION RATHER THAN DIMINISHING TENSIONS WITHIN COUNTRIES WHO CAN ILL-AFFORD SUCH A WASTEFUL EXPENDITURE OF SCARCE RESOURCES;

BECAUSE THEY ISOLATE US FROM OUR OWN ALLIES;

BECAUSE THEY AFFORD CHEAP VICTORIES TO OUR ADVERSARIES, PARTICULARLY A CHEAP VICTORY ON A DAILY BASIS TO THE SOVIET UNION;

BECAUSE RATHER THAN FOCUSING ATTENTION ON ECONOMIC MISMANAGEMENT AND ON THE ABUSES OF THE SANDINISTAS, WHICH ARE REAL, THEY ALLOW THE SANDINISTAS TO FOCUS THE ENERGY OF THEIR NATION ON WAR AND ON OPPOSING THE COLOSSUS FROM THE NORTH;

AND BECAUSE THEY ARE THE PRIMARY INSTRUMENT OF OUR POLICY IN NICARAGUA, THE CONTRAS PLACE IN JEOPARDY THE LONG-TERM INTERESTS IN THE REGION AND THROUGHOUT LATIN AMERICA;

BECAUSE, WHAT IS WORSE, THE CONTRAS BRING WITH THEM AN INEVITABILITY OF GREATER AMERICAN INVOLVEMENT;

BECAUSE, FINALLY, MR. PRESIDENT, AND I THINK THIS IS PERHAPS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING OF ALL, THERE ARE BETTER ALTERNATIVES BY WHICH WE COULD PURSUE A SENSIBLE POLICY IN CENTRAL AMERICA WITHOUT DIVIDING AMERICANS, WITHOUT BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDITIONAL KILLING, AND WITHOUT LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR THE FIRST INSTANCE IN WHICH THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS EVER OVERTLY SOUGHT THE OVERTHROW OF A GOVERNMENT WITH WHOM WE HAVE DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS AND ARE SUPPOSEDLY AT PEACE.

THUS, I THINK, MR. PRESIDENT, ANY PROPOSAL THAT SUGGESTS THAT THE CONTRAS ARE A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE FOR OUR POLICY IN CENTRAL AMERICA IS A FLAWED AND MISTAKEN AND TRAGIC ASSUMPTION.

LET ME EXAMINE SOME OF THE REASONS I HAVE STATED IN GREATER DEPTH AND I SHALL NOT GO INTO GREATER DETAIL.

THE SENATOR FROM IOWA HAS ADEQUATELY DRAWN A PICTURE OF WHERE THE CONTRAS CAME FROM, HOW THEY WERE FUNDED, HOW THE CIA AIDED IN THEIR TRAINING THROUGH ARGENTINA, HOW THEY WERE FIRST SET UP TO INTERDICT WEAPONS, AND HOW, NOW, THEY SIT IN HONDURAS WITH A LEADERSHIP THAT DOES NOT WANT TO LEAD THEM INTO NICARAGUA AND THAT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVIDE A PURPOSE AND A DEMOCRATIC COHESION TO THEIR EFFORTS. WHEN ONE LOOKS AT THE NATURE OF THE CONTRAS IN THIS COUNTRY, IT IS POSSIBLE TO SEE WHY THE UNITED NICARAGUAN OPPOSITION, OR UNO, AS IT IS COMMONLY KNOWN, WHICH SUPPOSEDLY REPRESENTS THE EXILED NICARAGUAN COMMUNITY, INCREASINGLY WITHIN THAT EXILE COMMUNITY ARE THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE LEADERSHIP OF UNO ITSELF.

DURING THE MONTHS-LONG INVESTIGATION WHICH MY OFFICE HAS BEEN CONDUCTING INTO THE CONTRA PROGRAM, WE HAVE RECEIVED CONSIDERABLE INFORMATION FROM FORMER FDN MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS REGARDING ALLEGATIONS INVOLVING DRUG TRAFFICKING, CORRUPTION, HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS, ILLEGAL GUNRUNNING IN THE REGION. THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERABLE INFORMATION REGARDING THESE ALLEGATIONS THAT HAS APPEARED IN THE NEWS MEDIA NATIONALLY, INFORMATION WHICH LATER IN THIS DEBATE, CONCEIVABLY TOMORROW, I SHALL GO INTO.BUT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT THAT JUST IN THE PUBLIC STATEMENTS, MR. PRESIDENT, THERE IS ENOUGH CAUSE FOR CONCERN.

THERE HAS BEEN A TRIAL IN COSTA RICA IN WHICH, IN THE COURSE OF THE TRIAL, IN THE COURSE OF THE WIRETAPPING, IT BECAME EVIDENT THAT MEMBERS OF THE CONTRAS WERE INVOLVED IN DRUG TRAFFICKING. YET WE HERE IN THE SENATE, NOTWITHSTANDING THE KNOWLEDGE THAT THE GREATEST PRIORITY OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES IS NOW TO STOP PEOPLE RUNNING DRUGS AND THE VICE PRESIDENT IS AT THE HEAD OF HIS TASK FORCE AND NANCY REAGAN IS BUSY HAVING PEOPLE AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND THEY ARE TALKING UP HOW WE HAVE TO STOP THE DEMAND IN THE UNITED STATES -- HERE WE ARE WITH COUNTLESS STORIES OF DRUG RUNNING ALL ACROSS THE UNITED STATES -- SAN FRANCISCO, MIAMI, WASHINGTON. CBS NEWS HAS RUN THESE STORIES; COUNTLESS NEWSPAPERS HAVE. AND CONGRESS SORT OF SITS HERE, WILLY-NILLY, AND SAYS, OH, WE ARE NOW GOING TO NOT JUST GIVE THEM THE $27 MILLION OF HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE; BY GOD, WE ARE GOING TO REWARD THEM AND GIVE THEM LETHAL AID BECAUSE THEY ARE SUCH NICE PEOPLE.

THIS IS FROM CBS NEWS WITH DAN RATHER, MIKE O'CONNOR REPORTING FROM CENTRAL AMERICA, SAYING THAT THE WIRETAP SHOWS DRUG DEALERS HAVE TIES TO THE HIGHEST LEADERS IN COSTA RICA. EDMUNDO CHAMORRO, BROTHER OF THE TOP MILITARY MAN, WAS CONSULTED ABOUT VEHICLES FOR OBTAINING FAVORS FOR THOSE AWAITING NARCOTICS SENTENCES IN COSTA RICA. BUT THE CONTRAS WERE NOT CHARGED. CHAMORRO SAYS GONZALEZ HAS LEFT THE MOVEMENT AND THE CONTRAS AND THE DRUG SMUGGLERS WERE NOT AVAILABLE.

IT GOES ON THROUGH OTHER ARTICLES, A MERE SMIDGEN OF A BOOK FULL OF ARTICLES FROM AROUND THIS COUNTRY BY REPORTERS WHO HAVE BEEN PURSUING THIS STORY. BUT CONGRESS DOES NOT SEEM INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE STORY.

"CONTRA FUNDS TRACED TO DRUG TRADE" IS THE HEADLINE IN THE HARTFORD COURANT IN AN AP STORY. "NICARAGUANS ENGAGED IN COCAINE TRAFFICKING."

ANOTHER STORY FROM THE SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER: "NICARAGUAN EXILES COCAINE CONTRA CONNECTION." A BIG STORY ABOUT HOW MR. NORWIN MENESES WHO HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH MEMBERS OF THE FDN AND DIRECTLY HOW MONEYS FROM DRUG TRAFFICKING HAVE BEEN GOING TO SUPPORT THE CONTRAS.

MR. PRESIDENT, THESE ARE NOT THE MORAL EQUIVALENT OF THE FOUNDING FATHERS; THESE ARE THE MORAL EQUIVALENT OF MOBSTERS AND IT OUGHT TO BE INCUMBENT UPON CONGRESS TO FIND OUT WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE WE ARE GIVING MONEY TO BEFORE WE GIVE IT TO THEM.

THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY THINGS WE KNOW ABOUT THE CONTRAS. WE KNOW ABOUT GUN RUNNING, ABOUT DEFRAUDING OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. A GAO REPORT SAYS THAT $27 MILLION IN HUMANITARIAN AID WENT TO THE CONTRAS AND ONLY 40 PERCENT CAN BE ACCOUNTED FOR. MUCH OF THE MONEY HAS GONE DIRECTLY INTO CONTRAS BANK ACCOUNTS AND OUT OF THE COUNTRY, MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO TRACE.

THE STORIES GO ON TO SHOW HOW THOUSANDS OF ITEMS WERE BILLED WHERE THERE WERE ONLY HUNDREDS OF ITEMS PURCHASED; HOW WHOLE AMOUNTS OF MONEY WERE NEVER DISTRIBUTED TO DIRECTLY BENEFIT CONTRA FIGHTERS; HOW EQUIPMENT THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BOUGHT WAS NEVER BOUGHT.

WHAT DO WE DO? WE TURN AROUND AND SAY, WELL, WE WILL GET THE CIA INVOLVED. THEY ARE THE GUYS WHO GOT US IN HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE, THEY ARE THE ONES WHO GOT US TO THE WORLD COURT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

MR. PRESIDENT, THERE IS MUCH MORE TO BE SAID ON THIS, BUT I QUESTION WHETHER THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, WHO ARE WATCHING PROGRAM AFTER PROGRAM, WHETHER IT IS BUDGET CUTS FOR PEOPLE TRYING TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO COLLEGE, OR WHETHER IT IS HEALTH MONEY, MONEY FOR THE HANDICAPPED, AID TO FARMERS, DROUGHT AID IN THE SOUTH, WILL BE HAPPY TO KNOW THAT ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE GOING TO REWARD THOSE WHO BILK THE HARD-EARNED MONEY OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS FOR PERSONAL GAIN.

THAT IS THE CHOICE OR PART OF THE CHOICE THAT WE ARE MAKING HERE ALSO.

THEN THERE IS THE ISSUE OF HOW THESE PEOPLE BEHAVE OUT IN THE FIELD, MR. PRESIDENT. LET ME READ A STORY FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES:

"A NICARAGUAN REBEL TELLS OF KILLINGS AS A DEVICE FOR FORCED RECRUITMENT."

IS THAT NOT A WONDERFUL WAY TO BUILD UP THE CONTRAS INTO A SIGNIFICANT FORCE ABOUT WHICH THE UNITED STATES CAN BE PROUD? HOW WONDERFUL IT IS TO CALL THESE PEOPLE FREEDOM FIGHTERS.

LET ME TELL YOU WHAT THEY DO, MR. PRESIDENT. AND I READ FROM THIS ARTICLE FROM MIAMI DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 1985:

A FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE LARGEST NICARAGUAN REBEL GROUP SAYS IN A COURT AFFIDAVIT THAT THE REBELS ROUTINELY FORCIBLY RECRUITED NEW FIGHTERS BY PUBLICLY KILLING SANDINISTA OFFICIALS AND THEIR SYMPATHIZERS IN MANY SMALL NICARAGUAN TOWNS. IN AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE WORLD COURT THAT IS TO BE MADE PUBLIC ON THURSDAY, EDGAR CHAMORROS, WHO WAS A LEADER OF THE NICARAGUAN DEMOCRATIC FORCE UNTIL LAST FALL, SAID THAT THE FORCED RECRUITMENT WAS WIDESPREAD AND THAT IT WAS DONE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND ACQUIESENCE OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY. REBEL UNITS "WOULD ARRIVE AT AN UNDEFENDED VILLAGE, ASSEMBLE ALL THE RESIDENTS IN THE TOWN SQUARE AND THEN PROCEED TO KILL IN FULL VIEW OF THE OTHERS ALL PERSONS WORKING FOR THE NICARAGUAN GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING POLICE, LOCAL MILITIA MEMBERS, PARTY MEMBERS, HEALTH WORKERS, TEACHERS, AND FARMERS ON GOVERNMENT COOPERATIVES. IT WAS EASY TO PERSUADE THOSE LEFT ALIVE TO JOIN," HE ADDED.

MR. CHAMORROS' AFFIDAVIT ALSO STATES THAT TWO OFFICIALS FROM THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL ASSURED THE REBELS 16 MONTHS AGO THAT THEY WOULD TAKE OVER SUPERVISION OF THEIR MILITARY OPERATIONS JUST AFTER CONGRESS VOTED TO FORBID FURTHER AMERICAN AID.

MR. PRESIDENT, THERE IS FAR, FAR MORE TO COVER REGARDING THESE KINDS OF ALLEGATIONS THAN THIS SENATOR CAN COVER IN THE BRIEF TIME THAT WE HAVE FOR THIS DEBATE. BUT SUFFICE IT TO SAY THAT AS A FORMER PROSECUTOR WHO SPENT A PERIOD OF TIME TRYING TO PROSECUTE DRUG RUNNERS AND MURDERERS AND OTHERS, AS A SENATOR, I AM DISTURBED WHEN I SEE THE REPETITION OF THESE ALLEGATIONS, WHEN I SEE PEOPLE FROM DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE COUNTRY CORROBORATING WHAT OTHER PEOPLE HAVE SAID. AND WHEN I BEGIN TO SEE THAT REPETITION AND THAT CORROBORATION, THEN I SUSPECT THERE IS MORE THERE THAN MERE SMOKE. BEFORE WE AGAIN REWARD THESE PEOPLE WITH $100 MILLION AND ALLOW THEM TO GO BACK AND RECRUIT SOME MORE PEOPLE BY KILLING, WE OUGHT TO THINK TWICE.

I AM RECALLING THE WORDS OF THE ROMAN HISTORIAN TACITUS WHO SAID OF THE ROMANS' PILLAGE AND RAPE AND MURDER IN THOSE DAYS, "THEY MADE A DESERT AND THEY CALLED IT PEACE."

I WONDER, MR. PRESIDENT, AS WE LOOK BACK ON VIETNAM AND THE VILLAGE OF BIEN TRE THAT WE DESTROYED TO SAVE, WHETHER THAT IS OUR INTENTION IN CENTRAL AMERICA. WILL WE TEACH MORE AND MORE CONTRAS HOW TO KILL AND DESTROY AND BY SO DOING WE WILL LIBERATE THE NICARAGUANS SO THAT THOSE WHO ARE LEFT ALIVE MAY, INDEED, ENJOY THE PURSUIT OF LIFE AND LIBERTY?

I DO NOT THINK THAT IS IN THE GREATEST STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR OF THE UNITED STATES, MR. PRESIDENT. THAT IS NOT WHAT I WAS RAISED TO BELIEVE AND I DO NOT THINK THIS SENATE SHOULD SO EASILY SIT OR STAND AND VOTE AND MAKE BELIEVE THAT BY GIVING THESE PEOPLE GREATER LICENSE AND BY ARMING THEM WE ARE SOMEHOW SOLVING THE PROBLEMS OF THIS REGION.

TIME AND AGAIN THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS POINTED OUT THAT REFORMS WERE GOING TO BE UNDERTAKEN; TIME AND AGAIN VERY LITTLE HAS HAPPENED, MR. PRESIDENT. JUST LAST MAY, WITH GREAT FANFARE, AN AGREEMENT WAS SIGNED WHICH WOULD GIVE THE UNO TROIKA, IF YOU WILL, OF CALERO, CRUZ, AND ROBELO EQUAL POWER, BUT WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THAT? AS TIME MAGAZINE POINTS OUT MOST RECENTLY:

POLITICAL UNITY CONTINUES TO ELUDE THE REBELS. LAST MAY WASHINGTON PRESSURED THE CONTRA'S THREE CIVILIAN LEADERS INTO ANNOUNCING THAT THEY WOULD SHARE ALL DECISIONMAKING. SINCE THEN ADOLFO CALERO, THE MEMBER OF THE TRIO WITH THE CLOSEST TIES TO THE CIA AND CONTRA MILITARY, IS RUMORED TO HAVE STRUCK OUT ON HIS OWN. AS TOP CALERO AID ARISTEDES SANCHEZ SAID -- --

AND HE POINTED OUT IN THE PRESTON ARTICLE IN THE WASHINGTON POST -- --

WE ARE FIGHTING TWO WARS HERE, ONE IN NICARAGUA AND THE OTHER IN MIAMI.

THE ADMINISTRATION CONTINUES TO MAINTAIN THAT THERE IS NOT ANY CORRUPTION AMONG THE TOP LEADERSHIP AND AMERICAN TAXPAYERS' DOLLARS PREVIOUSLY MADE AVAILABLE HAVE NOT BEEN DIVERTED. BUT WHO KNOWS, MR. PRESIDENT, WHO KNOWS? AND THE WEALTH OF EVIDENCE AND DOCUMENTATION SAYS OTHERWISE.

THE PRESIDENT ON JANUARY 24 OF THIS YEAR SUBMITTED A REPORT TO CONGRESS SAYING THE CONTRAS WERE CLEANING UP THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS ACT, AND HE SAID SINCE THE SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS OF THE PREVIOUS REPORT UNO HAS CONTINUED AND EXPANDED ITS EFFORT TO IMPROVE ITS FRONT'S RECORD ON HUMAN RIGHTS. TOWARD THAT END UNO HAS ESTABLISHED AN AUTONOMOUS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, ACCORDING TO TIME MAGAZINE, LAST WEEK A HIGH-RANKING CONTRA TOLD TIME THAT BOTH CALERO AND BERMUDEZ HAVE DECIDED TO SHUT DOWN THE CONTRA'S HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE. "I THINK THEY FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF IT."

MR. PRESIDENT, DO WE REALLY HAVE A COHERENT POLICY WITH RESPECT TO NICARAGUA? MORE IMPORTANTLY, ARE THE GOALS THAT ARE SOUGHT BY OUR EVER-CHANGING RATIONALE OF THE ADMINISTRATION ACHIEVABLE? THE CONTRA POLICY HAS BEEN SUBJECT TO EXTRAORDINARY CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS FROM THE ADMINISTRATION SINCE ITS INCEPTION IN 1981. AND WHEN THE ARMS INTERDICTION PROGRAM DID NOT WORK AS THEY FIRST SAID, THEN THEY BECAME THE PRIMARY INSTRUMENT FOR FOCUSING EFFORTS AGAINST THE SANDINISTAS, TO KEEP THEM PREOCCUPIED WITH THEIR INTERNAL PROBLEMS. THEN OUR CONTRA POLICY CHANGED AND IT BECAME ONE OF PRESSURING THE SANDINISTAS TO NEGOTIATE. BUT WHEN THE SANDINISTAS CAME TO NEGOTIATE AND DID NEGOTIATE, LO AND BEHOLD, THE ADMINISTRATION FOUND YET ANOTHER REASON FOR SAYING WE NEED THE CONTRAS. AND THEN THE RATIONALE BECAME SOMETHING ELSE WHEN THE SANDINISTAS DECIDED THAT THEY WOULD SIGN THE SEPTEMBER 1984 CONTADORA AGREEMENT.

LAST YEAR THE ADMINISTRATION PROMISED THE SENATE BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS. WHERE ARE THOSE BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS, MR. PRESIDENT? IN ORDER TO GET $27 MILLION OF HUMANITARIAN AID, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES SENT A LETTER TO US IN THE SENATE, TO THE MAJORITY LEADER, SAYING, "I AM GOING TO START BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS IF YOU GUYS WILL JUST GIVE ME $47 MILLION," SIGNED "SINCERELY, RONALD REAGAN." THE MAJORITY LEADER STOOD UP AND EXPLAINED THAT THAT MEANT THAT ALL SENATORS VOTING WERE GOING TO HAVE THE ASSURANCE THAT THE PRESIDENT WAS, INDEED, GOING TO HAVE THESE NEGOTIATIONS.

WE NEVER HAD THESE NEGOTIATIONS, MR. PRESIDENT. WE HAVE NEVER RESUMED BILATERAL NEGOTIATIONS. AND SO WE SEE THE PRESIDENT AGAIN MOVING AWAY FROM THAT PROMISE AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO TURN AROUND AND REWARD THE FAILURE TO FULFILL THAT PROMISE WITH NOT ANOTHER GIFT OF HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE BUT INSTEAD LETHAL ASSISTANCE. NOT EVEN THE LATEST RATIONALE HAS NOW MADE THAT MUCH MORE SENSE, BECAUSE AFTER THE SANDINISTAS MADE IT CLEAR THEY WERE WILLING TO SIGN THE JUNE 6 CONTADORA AGREEMENT, THE ADMINISTRATION HAS FOUND A NEW REASON TO TURN AWAY FROM THAT PROCESS BY SAYING THAT THE SANDINISTAS HAVE TO, IN FACT, BECOME A DEMOCRATIC REGIME IN TOTALITY AND MUST IMPLEMENT ALL OF THOSE CHANGES TO PLURALISM AND REQUIREMENTS OF DEMOCRACY BEFORE, IN FACT, THE CONTRAS WILL NOT BE FUNDED.

WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT IS THE CATCH-22 OF THIS PROCESS, AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN SEEKING -- A WAY OF FRUSTRATING THE CONTADORA PROPOSALS AND THE CONTADORA PROCESS. BECAUSE OF THE RESTRAINTS ON TIME, I CANNOT GO INTO THE WHOLE HISTORY OF CONTADORA AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED, BUT THERE ARE MANY WHO BELIEVE, AND MUCH EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE, INCLUDING EVIDENCE FROM A RECENTLY FIRED AMBASSADOR TO HONDURAS WHO SAID THAT, TO HIS AMAZEMENT, HE FOUND THAT THE UNITED STATES WAS NOT PURSUING A POLICY OF PEACE THAT HE THOUGHT WE WERE.

MR. PRESIDENT, MAY I ASK HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE REMAINING?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER. THE SENATOR HAS 1 HOUR AND ONE-HALF REMAINING. I GATHER THAT MEANS HE HAS 30 MINUTES REMAINING.

MR. KERRY. I THANK THE CHAIR.

MR. PRESIDENT, NO ONE WILL ARGUE, AS I SAID EARLIER IN MY REMARKS, THAT THE SANDINISTAS HAVE IN FACT LIVED UP TO THEIR PROMISES AND THEIR REVOLUTION.

THEY CONTINUE TO HARASS THEIR OPPONENTS WITH INCREASING FREQUENCY. THEY HAVE SUSPENDED THE PUBLICATION OF THE ONLY OPPOSITION NEWSPAPER IN NICARAGUA, LA PRENSA. THEY RECENTLY BANISHED A CATHOLIC BISHOP IN THE AFTERMATH OF THE HOUSE VOTE, AND THEY HAVE MADE A MISERABLE MESS OF THEIR OWN ECONOMY AND OF MUCH THAT HAS TO DO WITH CIVIL RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS.

BUT, MR. PRESIDENT, AS THE NEW YORK TIMES SAID, THESE ARE OFFENSES AGAINST THE NOTION OF DEMOCRACY. THESE ARE NOT THE REASONS THAT A NATION LIKE OURS CREATES A MERCENARY ARMY AND SETS ITSELF UP IN A POSITION TO TAKE ARMS AGAINST A NATION THE SIZE OF 2.7 MILLION PEOPLE, A NATION THAT IS HARBORED IN THE CONFINES OF A TERRITORY SMALLER THAN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, A NATION THAT IS INCAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT THE THREAT THAT THE PRESIDENT HAS TALKED OF ON NATIONAL TELEVISION, OF BEING IN HARLINGEN, TX, IN 2 DAYS.

MR. PRESIDENT, AMBASSADOR JOHN FERCH, TO WHOM I REFERRED EARLIER, WHO WAS IN HONDURAS, STATED THAT HE ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION MEANT WHAT IT SAID ABOUT NEGOTIATING; THAT THE UNITED STATES WANTED TO PUT PRESSURES ON THE SANDINISTAS SO THAT WE COULD NEGOTIATE, AND HE THOUGHT THE TIME WAS RIPE FOR DIPLOMACY. HE WAS FIRED BECAUSE IT FINALLY DAWNED ON HIM -- AND THESE ARE HIS WORDS, NOT MINE. HE SERVED WITH GREAT DISTINCTION FOR 27 YEARS IN THE FOREIGN SERVICE. HE WAS A REAGAN ADMINISTRATION AMBASSADOR TO HONDURAS -- HE SAID THAT IT FINALLY DAWNED ON HIM THAT THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION WAS SEEKING A MILITARY SOLUTION IN NICARAGUA, DESPITE PUBLIC PROTESTATIONS THAT A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT WAS THE PRIORITY OF THE UNITED STATES IN THE REGION.

I THINK WE SHOULD HEED THE WARNING OF OUR FORMER AMBASSADOR. HE SAID: "THE HUNDRED MILLION WE ARE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE IS NOTHING MORE THAN A DOWNPAYMENT ON WAR."

HE SAID THAT UNLESS THE ADMINISTRATION SEIZES THE MOMENT AND PRESSES FOR NEGOTIATIONS, THE $100 MILLION WOULD GO FAST. "IT IS REALLY JUST THE FIRST STEP. THE LOGIC OF IT ALL MEANS THAT THE NEXT STAGE IS AN EXPANDED MILITARY OPERATION."

MR. PRESIDENT, THAT IS WHAT THE SENATE IS BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON THIS WEEK. WE ARE VOTING ON A DOWN PAYMENT, A MINISCULE AMOUNT COMPARED TO WHAT WILL BE COMING DOWN THE ROAD IN THE MONTHS AHEAD. WILL IT BE ANY EASIER A FEW MONTHS FROM NOW TO TURN OFF THIS SPIGOT?

I HAVE ALREADY HEARD MY DISTINGUISHED COLLEAGUES WHO SUPPORT THIS AID TALK OF THEM AS FREEDOM FIGHTERS, TALK ABOUT THE NEED TO PREVENT THIS MARXIST-LENINIST BEACHHEAD, WHY WE MUST PROCEED FORWARD.

I CAN ALREADY HEAR THE RHETORIC OF NEXT YEAR AND THE RHETORIC OF THE YEAR AFTER, WHEN THEY COME TO US AND SAY: "WAIT A MINUTE, MY COLLEAGUES. WAIT JUST A MINUTE. THIS IS THE U.S. SENATE THAT VOTED $100 MILLION IN AID. THIS IS THE U.S. SENATE THAT SAID TO THESE PEOPLE, 'WE ARE YOUR HOPE. WE ARE BEHIND YOU. WE ARE GOING TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO TURN THE EVENTS IN NICARAGUA."'

SO, JUST AS IT WAS WITH THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT LEAVING VIETNAM AND ABOUT WHO LOST CHINA AND ABOUT ALL THE OTHER RECRIMINATIONS OF AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY, WE FIND THAT THE TIME WILL COME ON THIS FLOOR WHEN PEOPLE WILL SAY: "IF YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO GIVE THIS MONEY, THEN THE BLOOD OF THE CONTRAS WILL BE ON YOUR HANDS AND THE BLOODBATH OF CENTRAL AMERICA WILL BE ON YOUR HANDS"; AND THAT HYSTERIA WILL BEGIN TO GRIP US.

NOW, BEFORE THAT HAPPENS, WHILE WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, WE, IN THE SENATE, OUGHT TO STATE, AS WE KNOW, THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAN THE FUNDING OF OUR OWN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

WHEN DO WE REACH THE POINT WHEN WE WILL SAY TO THE ADMINISTRATION THAT THEY DO NOT REALLY HAVE A POLICY IN LATIN AMERICA OR CENTRAL AMERICA AND THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THAT TODAY? THAT IS WHY, AFTER ALL THOSE IMPOSING ADVERTISEMENTS OF RUSSIAN HELICOPTERS, AND AFTER ALL THOSE DEEP BASS VOICES OF ADVERTISERS ON TELEVISION TALKING OF THAT GREAT THREAT, AND EVEN AFTER THE PRESIDENT'S DISCUSSIONS ON NATIONAL TELEVISION -- AFTER ALL THAT HAS BEEN SAID AND DONE, THE AMERICAN CITIZEN IS FURTHER AWAY FROM THE POLICY OF THE PRESIDENT THAN WHEN WE STARTED.

OPPOSITION TO THIS INCIPIENT WAR HAS GROWN, AND THE AMERICAN CITIZENS, ONCE AGAIN, IN 1986, AS THEY WERE IN THE 1960'S, ARE AHEAD OF THE U.S. CONGRESS.

IF MY COLLEAGUES WANT TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AND VOTE NO, THEN I THINK THAT IS SIMPLE; BUT IF THE VOTE IS YES, THEN THE SENATE SUPPORTS AN EVER-EXPANDING MILITARY CONFLICT.

MR. PRESIDENT, I HAVE NOT HAD THE EXPERIENCE OF MANY OF MY COLLEAGUES IN THE U.S. SENATE. I AM NOT PRESCIENT WHEN IT COMES TO ISSUES OF FOREIGN POLICY, AND I HAVE MUCH TO LEARN. BUT SOME OF WHAT I HAVE LEARNED, I HAVE LEARNED IN PERSONAL WAYS. I LEARNED AS THE SON OF A FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER WHEN I LIVED IN OTHER COUNTRIES AND TALKED TO PEOPLE IN THOSE COUNTRIES. I LEARNED AS A SOLDIER IN ANOTHER COUNTRY WHEN I SAW WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU TRY TO FORCE YOUR WILL ON A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHOSE LANGUAGE YOU CANNOT SPEAK AND WHOSE CUSTOMS ARE DIFFERENT FROM YOURS.

OUT OF THAT ALSO COMES A SENSE OF WHAT THIS COUNTRY IS BEST AT, WHAT WE ARE ABOUT.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE ABOUT, AND ONE OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES WE HAVE, AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR POLICY THROUGH THIS CENTURY AND BEFORE, IS THAT WE HAVE A SPECIAL PLACE IN THE WORLD; THAT OTHER COUNTRIES VIEW US DIFFERENTLY FROM OTHER NATIONS; THAT WE HAVE A BURDEN THAT GOES WITH OUR POWER; THAT PEOPLE LOOK TO US FOR A RESPONSIBLE EXERCISE OF OUR POWER; AND, MOST IMPORTANT, I THINK OTHER NATIONS LOOKS TO US TO UPHOLD THE INSTITUTIONS THAT WE HELPED TO CREATE. THAT IS PART OF THE TRADITION OF THE UNITED STATES, A ROLE THAT WE ASSUMED IN THE AFTERMATH OF WORLD WAR II, MOST ESPECIALLY ONE THAT HAS BEEN CONSISTENT WITH TRADITIONAL AMERICAN VALUES AND TRADITIONAL RESPECT FOR THE RULE OF LAW AND ADHERENCE TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLES.

I THINK IT IS THIS SENSE OF OUR ROLE AND OUR AFFECTION AS AMERICANS FOR THE RULE OF LAW AND FOR HOW WE PROTECT INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES THAT HAS BROUGHT US TO THE POINT THAT WE BEGAN TO UNDERSTAND BETTER THAN OTHER PEOPLE THE BUSINESS, IF YOU WILL, OF CONSTRUCTING A GLOBAL ORDER OF EXTRAORDINARY SWEEP AS A MEANS OF DEMONSTRATING TO THE WORLD THAT WE HAVE LEARNED SOMETHING FROM THE LESSONS OF HISTORY; THAT WE FOUGHT WORLD WAR I AND WORLD WAR II FOR SOMETHING BIGGER THAN JUST OURSELVES; THAT WE FOUGHT IT TO UPHOLD THOSE NOTIONS ABOUT DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM AND INDIVIDUAL LIBERTIES.

PART OF WHAT WE CREATED WAS THE UNITED NATIONS. PART OF WHAT WE CREATED WAS A SENSE THAT WE WERE GOING TO TRY TO HAVE A RULE OF LAW, OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THAT ALL NATIONS, OURSELVES INCLUDED, WERE BETTER OFF WHEN WE ADHERED TO THAT LAW, AND THAT IT WAS ADHERENCE TO THAT LAW THAT GAVE US STRENGTH.

MR. PRESIDENT, IT IS INTERESTING THAT THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS BEGINS: "WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS," NOT UNLIKE OUR OWN CONSTITUTION. THAT CHARTER WAS A STATEMENT OF CONTRACTUAL LAW BY WHICH WE WOULD VOLUNTARILY ENTER INTO IF YOU WILL, TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS. SO WE ESTABLISHED THAT.

THROUGHOUT THE 1950'S AND 1960'S, WE WERE MOST EFFECTIVE WHEN WE BEHAVED IN A WAY THAT ACTED IN CONCERT WITH THAT RULE OF LAW.

HOWEVER, ON MAY 13, 1985, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES, OUR GOVERNMENT FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE AN INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL TO RESPOND TO CHARGES AGAINST US IN CONNECTION WITH THE CHARTER OF THAT TRIBUNAL.

WE COMPOUNDED THE PROBLEM BY NOTIFYING THE COURT THAT WE WOULD NOT ANY LONGER BE BOUND BY ANY COMPULSORY JURISDICTION OF THE COURT. WHY WAS THIS? SUPPOSEDLY, THERE WAS A DIRECT DANGER TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES. NO, THERE WAS NOT SUCH A DIRECT THREAT TO OUR SECURITY. WE DID SO BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT OF NICARAGUA FILED A SUIT AGAINST US FOR SOMETHING THAT ALL AMERICANS KNOW WAS WRONG: BECAUSE WE HAD THE GALL TO MINE THE HARBORS OF NICARAGUA, A COUNTRY WITH WHICH WE WERE NOT AT WAR. THE KIND OF THING THE UNITED STATES HAS ALWAYS CONDEMNED OTHER NATIONS FOR DOING, WE WENT AHEAD AND DID. NICARAGUA, OBVIOUSLY, HAD STANDING IN THE WORLD COURT.

I ASK MY COLLEAGUES, DOES NICARAGUA PRESENT THE KIND OF THREAT THAT MERITED THE UNITED STATES TURNING ITS BACK ON AN INSTITUTION OF WORLD ORDER? NOT IF YOU BELIEVE FORMER CIA DIRECTOR AND FORMER DEFENSE SECRETARY JAMES SCHLESINGER, WHO WROTE IN THE SUMMER 1985 EDITION OF "FOREIGN AFFAIRS":

WHILE THE SANDINISTA REGIME IS A GEOPOLITICAL NUISANCE WHICH WE WISH WOULD WITHER AND DISAPPEAR OR MODERATE IN BEHAVIOR, IT CAN SCARCELY BE DESCRIBED AS A MAJOR THREAT TO THE REPUBLIC. IT REMAINS AN IMPOVERISHED COUNTRY, ALMOST LIKE AN ALBANIA SITUATED IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE.

MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK MY COLLEAGUES TO THINK BACK ON THE TRADITION OF THIS COUNTRY.

FROM PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON WE HEARD:

COOPERATION IS POSSIBLE ONLY WHEN SUPPORTED AT EVERY TURN BY THE ORDERLY PROCESSES OF JUST GOVERNMENT BASED UPON LAW, NOT UPON ARBITRARY OR IRREGULAR FORCE. WE HOLD, AS I AM SURE ALL THOUGHTFUL LEADERS OF REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENTS EVERYWHERE HOLD, THAT JUST GOVERNMENT RESTS ALWAYS UPON THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED AND THAT THERE CAN BE NO FREEDOM WITHOUT ORDER BASED UPON LAW AND UPON THE PUBLIC CONSCIENCE AND APPROVAL.

FROM FRANKLIN ROOSEVELT IN HIS FIRST INAUGURAL ADDRESS WE HEARD:

IN THE FIELD OF WORLD POLICY I WOULD DEDICATE THIS NATION TO THE POLICY OF THE GOOD NEIGHBOR -- THE NEIGHBOR WHO RESOLUTELY RESPECTS HIMSELF AND BECAUSE HE DOES SO, RESPECTS THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS -- THE NEIGHBOR WHO RESPECTS HIS OBLIGATIONS AND RESPECTS THE SANCTITY OF HIS AGREEMENTS IN AND WITH A WORLD OF NEIGHBORS.

OR FROM DWIGHT DAVID EISENHOWER:

IN A VERY REAL SENSE, THE WORLD NO LONGER HAS A CHOICE BETWEEN FORCE AND LAW. IF CIVILIZATION IS TO SURVIVE, IT MUST CHOOSE THE RULE OF LAW.

AGAIN FROM PRESIDENT EISENHOWER:

THERE CAN BE NO PEACE IN THE WORLD UNLESS THERE IS A FULLER DEDICATION TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS CHARTER. IF EVER THE UNITED STATES FAILS TO SUPPORT THESE PRINCIPLES, THE RESULT WOULD BE TO OPEN THE FLOODGATES TO DIRECT AND INDIRECT AGGRESSION THROUGHOUT THE WORLD.

FROM JOHN F. KENNEDY:

WORLD PEACE, LIKE COMMUNITY PEACE, DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT EACH MAN LOVE HIS NEIGHBOR; IT REQUIRES ONLY THAT THEY LIVE TOGETHER IN MUTUAL TOLERANCE, SUBMITTING THEIR DISPUTES TO A JUST AND PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT.

THE BADGE OF RESPONSIBILITY IN THE MODERN WORLD IS A WILLINGNESS TO SEEK PEACEFUL SOLUTIONS.

AGAIN FROM PRESIDENT KENNEDY:

PEACE REQUIRES POSITIVE AMERICAN LEADERSHIP IN A MORE EFFECTIVE UNITED NATIONS, WORKING TOWARD THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A WORLDWIDE SYSTEM OF LAW, ENFORCED BY WORLDWIDE SANCTIONS OF JUSTICE.

AND ROBERT KENNEDY, WRITING IN A MAGAZINE IN 1968 ON THE KENNEDY ADMINISTRATION'S QUARANTINE AGAINST CUBA;

IT WAS THE VOTE OF THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES THAT GAVE LEGAL BASIS FOR THE QUARANTINE... IT HAD A MAJOR PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PRACTICAL EFFECT ON THE RUSSIANS AND CHANGED OUR POSITION FROM THAT OF OUTLAWS ACTING IN VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW INTO A COUNTRY ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH 20 ALLIES LEGALLY PROTECTING THEIR POSITION.

MR. PRESIDENT, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REMEMBER IN THOSE YEARS WHEN I CAME BACK FROM VIETNAM AND OPPOSED THE WAR WAS THE DEGREE TO WHICH THIS COUNTRY WAS DIVIDED, THE DEGREE TO WHICH THAT WAR WAS ABLE TO TEAR AT THE VERY FABRIC OF OUR SOCIETY.

WE HAVE AN OPTION NOW WHICH WE COULD EXERCISE IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THE THINGS THAT WOODROW WILSON, PRESIDENT KENNEDY, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, ROBERT KENNEDY, AND ALL THE OTHERS REFERRED TO. WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO TO THE VERY ORGANIZATIONS THAT WE HELPED TO CREATE AND TO APPEAL TO THEM TO ASSIST, TO HOLD NICARAGUA TO A STANDARD OF BEHAVIOR.

I REFERRED BACK TO THOSE YEARS OF VIETNAM, MR. PRESIDENT, BECAUSE THAT TAUGHT US SOMETHING ABOUT NOT HAVING A CONSENSUS IN OUR FOREIGN POLICY. YOU CANNOT PURSUE POLICIES OF WAR AND CONFLICT WITHOUT BRINGING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BEHIND YOU. WHILE THERE ARE MANY LESSONS FROM THAT WAR AND NOBODY KNOWS ALL OF THEM, ONE OF THEM ON WHICH WE CAN CERTAINLY AGREE AS AMERICANS IS THAT NEVER AGAIN SHOULD WE PURSUE THAT KIND OF POLICY WITHOUT HAVING BROUGHT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INTO THE PROCESS, WITHOUT GIVING AMERICANS AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE AND UNDERSTAND WHY IT IS THEIR SONS AND DAUGHTERS MAY HAVE TO GO OFF AND DIE SOMEWHERE. THAT IS NOT WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN CENTRAL AMERICA, MR. PRESIDENT, AND THIS IS NOT WHAT WE ARE DOING.

I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE MANY REASONS TO DOUBT WHETHER OR NOT NICARAGUA WOULD ADHERE TO EVERY SINGLE PART OF AN AGREEMENT. I DO NOT TRUST THEM. I WILL NOT TAKE THEM AT FACE VALUE. THAT IS WHY WE NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT BECAUSE WE DO NOT TRUST PEOPLE AND WE DO NOT TAKE THEM AT FACE VALUE.

I DO, MR. PRESIDENT, THINK IF THIS COUNTRY HAD A CONTADORA AGREEMENT IN WHICH ALL THE NATIONS OF THE REGION HAD SAID, "WE WILL ADHERE TO THIS STANDARD OF BEHAVIOR," WE WOULD BE FAR BETTER OFF IN THE WORLD COMMUNITY IF THEY DID VIOLATE IT TO HOLD UP THAT DOCUMENT AND SAY TO THE WORLD COMMUNITY, "HERE IS VIOLATION OF ARTICLE I, ARTICLE II, ARTICLE III, AND WE DEMAND THAT NICARAGUA BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW."

MR. PRESIDENT, IT IS IRONIC THAT AT THE VERY TIME THAT NICARAGUA SAID, "WE WILL SIGN THE AGREEMENT OF CONTADORA," AT THE SAME TIME THE PRESIDENT WAS SAYING WE CANNOT DO THIS BECAUSE WE WILL NOT ACHIEVE OUR GOALS, THE VERY DOCUMENT THAT NICARAGUA WAS WILLING TO SIGN WAS A DOCUMENT THAT WOULD HAVE PROHIBITED THE BUILDUP OF ANY MILITARY, THAT WOULD HAVE PROHIBITED THEM FROM BRINGING IN SOVIET HELICOPTERS, THERE WOULD NOT BE A SOVIET HELICOPTER IN NICARAGUA TODAY LEGALLY UNDER THIS DOCUMENT IF WE HAD PERMITTED THEM TO SIGN IT.

IF WE HAD HELPED THAT PROCESS TO COMPLETION, THEY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ANY CUBAN OR SOVIET ADVISERS BUT WE DID NOT, WE FRUSTRATED IT.

MR. PRESIDENT, NOT ONLY DID WE FRUSTRATE IT BUT I THINK MEMBERS OF THIS SENATE MAY RECALL, I DO NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHERE IT IS IN MY NOTES HERE, BUT A DOCUMENT OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL, IN WHICH THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL GLOATED OVER THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO FRUSTRATE THE CONTADORA PROCESS.

THERE IS AN INTERNAL MEMORANDUM THE NSC IS QUOTED AS BEING EXULTANT OVER THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO BLOCK THE 1984 SIGNING OF THE CONTADORA AGREEMENT.

MR. PRESIDENT, LAST YEAR THE UNITED STATES PUT AN EMBARGO ON NICARAGUA, AN ECONOMIC EMBARGO.

AT THE SAME TIME, AS WE DID THAT WE WERE POINTING OUT TO AMERICANS THE DANGERS OF THE PLO IN NICARAGUA, OF THE LIBYANS, OF THE BULGARIANS, OF THE NORTH KOREANS, OF THE CUBANS, AND THE RUSSIANS. IT IS VERY INTERESTING TO NOTE, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT WHEN WE PUT THAT EMBARGO IN NICARAGUA IT WAS NOT THE PLO OR THE LIBYANS OR THE CUBANS OR THE SOVIETS WHO PICKED UP THE LOSS OF TRADE WITH NICARAGUA. NO, MR. PRESIDENT. IT WAS OUR ALLIES. IT WAS JAPAN, AND ITALY, AND THE NETHERLANDS, AND OTHERS WHO TURNED AROUND AND SUPPLIED NICARAGUA, NOT THE PEOPLE THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE MOST FEARFUL OF. WHAT THAT INDICATES IS THAT OUR OWN ALLIES DO NOT SUPPORT THE KIND OF UNILATERAL ACTION THAT WE TOOK IN CENTRAL AMERICA, AND THAT IS EVEN THE CASE OF MARGARET THATCHER, WHO HAS BEEN PROBABLY THE SINGLE BIGGEST BOOSTER AND SUPPORTER OF MOST OF THE POLICIES OF THE PRESIDENT. EVEN THE PRIME MINISTER STOOD UP AND SHE SAID SHE THOUGHT THE ECONOMIC SANCTIONS WAS THE WRONG WAY FOR THE UNITED STATES TO GO.

MR. PRESIDENT, IF WE WERE TO PURSUE A POLICY WHEREBY WE WERE TO GO THROUGH THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES AND GO THROUGH THE UNITED NATIONS, WE COULD BUILD A CONSENSUS IN THIS COUNTRY, WE COULD ALLOW AMERICANS TO SEE THAT WE ARE TAKING EVERY STEP AVAILABLE TO US IN THE EFFORTS TO BE ABLE TO NEGOTIATE AN AGREEMENT. THEN, MR. PRESIDENT, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HOLD THAT DOCUMENT UP TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY AND SAY TO THEM, "LOOK, NICARAGUA PERSISTS." THEN WHAT WOULD WE DO? IS IT A MERE DOCUMENT? ARE WE STUCK WITH A PIECE OF PAPER ABOUT WHICH WE CAN DO NOTHING? NO, MR. PRESIDENT, BECAUSE THE FACT IS THAT WE HAVE AMPLE RECOURSE UNDER THE TREATIES THAT WE HAVE ALREADY SIGNED AND HAVE IN EFFECT, AND WE HAVE AMPLE RECOURSE UNDER THE CONTADORA AGREEMENT ITSELF.

I WOULD LIKE TO READ A FEW OF THE DOCUMENTS.

MR. PRESIDENT, MAY I ASK HOW MUCH TIME I HAVE REMAINING?

THE PRESIDING OFFICER (MR. WARNER). THE SENATOR HAS USED 50 MINUTES.

MR. KERRY. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT.

MR. PRESIDENT, I AM READING FROM THE INTER-AMERICAN TREATY OF RECIPROCAL ASSISTANCE, KNOWN AS THE RIO TREATY. THIS IS A TREATY WHICH WE HAVE SIGNED WHICH CENTRAL AMERICAN COUNTRIES HAVE SIGNED TO WHICH WE ARE DUTY BOUND TO UPHOLD.

ARTICLE I OF THIS TREATY SAYS TO WHICH WE ARE A PARTY, "THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES FORMALLY CONDEMN WAR AND UNDERTAKE IN THEIR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS NOT TO RESORT TO THE THREAT OR THE USE OF FORCE IN ANY MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS OR THIS TREATY."

WE ARE IN VIOLATION OF THIS, MR. PRESIDENT.

ARTICLE II: "AS A CONSENSUS OF THE PRINCIPLES SET FORTH IN THIS TREATY, THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES UNDERTAKE TO SUBMIT EVERY CONTROVERSY WHICH MAY ARISE BETWEEN THEM TO METHODS OF PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT AND TO ENDEAVOR TO SETTLE ANY SUCH CONTROVERSY AMONG THEMSELVES BY MEANS OF THE PROCEDURES ENFORCED IN THE INTER-AMERICAN SYSTEM BEFORE REFERRING IT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY."

SO WE COULD GO TO THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES WITH THIS COMPLAINT.

IN ADDITION, THOSE PARTIES HAVE CONTRACTED TO FOLLOW RULE OF LAW AND A PROCESS FOR RESOLUTION OF THE CONFLICT.

ARTICLE VI: "IF THE INDIVIDUALITY OR THE INTEGRITY OF THE TERRITORY OR SOVEREIGNTY OR POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE OF ANY AMERICAN STATE SHOULD BE AFFECTED BY AN AGGRESSION WHICH IS NOT AN ARMED ATTACK OR BY AN EXTRACONTINENTAL OR INTERCONTINENTAL CONFLICT OR BY ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION WHICH MIGHT ENDANGER THE PEACE OF AMERICA, THE ORGAN OF CONSULTATION SHALL MEET IMMEDIATELY IN ORDER TO AGREE ON THE MEASURES WHICH MUST BE TAKEN." THOSE MEASURES, MR. PRESIDENT, INCLUDE FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS TREATY, THE MEASURES ON WHICH THE ORGAN OF CONSULTATION MAY AGREE WILL COMPRISE OF ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: THE BREAKING OF DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS. THAT IS WHAT WE DID WITH CUBA IN THE 1962 MISSILE CRISIS AND THAT WAS EFFECTIVE AND THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES UNANIMOUSLY VOTED TO UNDERTAKE THAT KIND OF ACTION. "THE BREAKING OF CONSULAR RELATIONS, THE PARTIAL OR COMPLETE INTERRUPTION OF ECONOMIC RELATIONS OR AIR, SEA, RAIL, POSTAL, TELEGRAPHIC, TELEPHONE, OR RADIOTELEPHONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND THE USE OF ARMED FORCE."

SO, MR. PRESIDENT, IF THERE IS A TRUE THREAT TO THE SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -- IF THERE IS REALLY THIS THREAT OF NICARAGUA MOVING UP TO ARLINGTON, TX, IF SOMEHOW THEIR TANKS, WHICH CANNOT EVEN CROSS THEIR BRIDGES BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO HOLD THEM, COULD EVER GET OUT OF THE COUNTRY -- WE ARE ENTITLED UNDER OUR OWN TREATIES TO TAKE THE ACT IN SELF-DEFENSE.

SO, MR. PRESIDENT, WE HAVE ADEQUATE LEGAL, DIPLOMATIC AND OTHER MEANS AVAILABLE TO US TO BE ABLE TO PURSUE THIS PROCESS.

WHAT IS MOST TRAGIC ABOUT THE LACK OF SUPPORT FOR THE CONTRADORA PROCESS IS NOT ONLY THE DUPLICITY ABOUT WHICH WE INDICATE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD THAT WE ARE WILLING TO PURSUE NEGOTIATIONS THAT WE ARE NOT REALLY WILLING TO SEE BROUGHT TO FRUITION -- THAT IS ONE PART OF IT -- BUT THE MORE SIGNIFICANT PART OF IT, MR. PRESIDENT, IS THE FACT THAT THIS TREATY, IF SIGNED IN ITS CURRENT FORM IN THE DRAFT OF JUNE 6, 1986, HAS ADEQUATE MEANS OF VERIFICATION, SETS UP A CONTROL COMMISSION WITH ON-SIGHT INSPECTION IN NICARAGUA, PERMITS A PROCESS BY WHICH WE WOULD GAIN THE SECURING OF EACH OF THE GOALS I SET OUT AND EVEN SETS FORTH A STANDARD, THOUGH GENERAL, BUT A STANDARD WHICH NICARAGUA IS SUPPOSED TO ADHERE TO WITH RESPECT TO PLURALISM AND DEMOCRACY.

I THINK MOST AMERICANS WOULD BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD BE FAR, FAR BETTER OFF TRYING TO ENFORCE THOSE KINDS OF STANDARDS RATHER THAN PURSUING THE POLICY WE PURSUE TODAY.

MR. PRESIDENT, I REFER BACK TO MY COMMENTS EARLIER ABOUT THE UNITED STATES BLOCKING THE TREATY. I READ: "ON THE DAY IT WAS ISSUED, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE GEORGE SHULTZ PRAISED THE TREATY DRAFT" -- THIS IS REFERRING BACK TO 1984. AND AT THE TIME THE TREATY FIRST CAME OUT, THE SECRETARY OF STATE SAID THIS IS TERRIFIC. HE CALLED IT "AN IMPORTANT STEP FORWARD." HE NOTED ITS CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE BY COSTA RICA, EL SALVADOR, GUATEMALA, AND HONDURAS. AND THEN HE ADDED, "NICARAGUA, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAD REJECTED KEY ELEMENTS OF THE DRAFT, INCLUDING THOSE DEALING WITH THE BINDING OBLIGATION."

IT CAME AS A COMPLETE SURPRISE TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT WHEN, 2 WEEKS LATER, NICARAGUAN PRESIDENT ORTEGA SENT A LETTER TO THE CONTADORA COUNTRIES AGREEING TO SIGN THE CONTADORA AGREEMENT.

WE INFORM YOU OF THE NICARAGUAN GOVERNMENT'S DECISION TO ACCEPT IN ITS TOTALITY, IMMEDIATELY AND WITHOUT MODIFICATIONS, THE REVISED PROPOSALS SUBMITTED SEPTEMBER 7 BY THE CONTADORA GROUP.

THE NICARAGUAN ACCEPTANCE INCLUDED THE SECTIONS DEALING WITH BINDING OBLIGATIONS TO INTERNAL DEMOCRATIZATION AND TO REDUCTIONS IN ARMS AND TROOP LEVELS REFERRED TO BY SECRETARY SHULTZ:

A STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN, REFLECTING THE DEPARTMENT'S SURPRISE AND CONFUSION AT THIS TURN OF EVENTS SAID, "IT IS NOT AT ALL CLEAR TO ME THAT IN THE LONG RUN NICARAGUA WON'T COME TO REGRET ITS PRECIPITOUS ACTS."

THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, LOSING ITS EARLIER ENTHUSIASM FOR THE AGREEMENT, WAS NOW CALLING IT UNSATISFACTORY AND ONE-SIDED.

IMMEDIATELY AFTER NICARAGUA AGREED TO SIGN, WHAT DID WE DO? THE UNITED STATES INITIATED "INTENSIVE CONSULTATION" WITH COSTA RICA, HONDURAS, AND EL SALVADOR, WHO SUBSEQUENTLY, HAVING SAID THEY WOULD SIGN IT, EXPECTING NICARAGUA TO SAY NO, SAID,"WAIT, WE HAVE GOT TO GET REVISIONS IN THIS DRAFT." AND A MONTH LATER, THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL COULD EXULT IN THAT SECRET MEMO AND I QUOTE FROM THE MEMO: "WE HAVE EFFECTIVELY BLOCKED CONTADORA GROUP EFFORTS TO IMPOSE THE SECOND DRAFT OF THE REVISED CONTADORA ACT." SO, WHILE PUBLICLY CONTINUING TO SUPPORT THE CONTADORA NEGOTIATIONS, THE ADMINISTRATION PRIVATELY REJOICED. AND I QUOTE: "WE HAVE TRUMPED THE LATEST NICARAGUAN-MEXICAN EFFORT TO RUSH SIGNATURE OF AN UNSATISFACTORY CONTADORA AGREEMENT."

IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNEW THAT THAT UNSATISFACTORY AGREEMENT WAS AN AGREEMENT THAT SAID NO CUBAN ADVISERS, NO RUSSIAN ADVISERS, NO OFFENSIVE WEAPONS, NO SOVIET BASES, DEMOCRATIZATION AND PLURALISM AT ELECTIONS, INDEED WOULD HAVE REDUCED THE SIZE OF THE ARMY, AMERICANS WOULD QUESTION SERIOUSLY WHETHER IT IS NECESSARY TO SEND $100 MILLION OF LETHAL AID TO THE KILLINGS IN CENTRAL AMERICA.

LATER IN THE CONTINUATION OF THIS DEBATE, MR. PRESIDENT, I WILL TOUCH ON SOME OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS POLICY. I YIELD, AND RESERVE FURTHER TIME TO MYSELF.