In a 37-year foreign-service career, John D. Negroponte has glided
through sticky episodes with such aplomb that U.S. diplomats call him
"the Teflon Ambassador." But there is one thing he can't seem to shake:
his tenure in Honduras in the 1980s.
Now that Negroponte is the Bush administration's nominee for the
prominent post of ambassador to the United Nations, questions from that
era are again being raised. And this time, with new material and
declassified documents available for his confirmation hearings, some of
those hard questions may be harder to answer.

What signal does it send to the indigenous and the poor for the United States to have a man like this in the United Nations? What is the U.S. thinking?" .

|
|
Nora Miselem
Honduran activist who worked with refugees
|
Back then, Negroponte helped oversee one of the most sensitive
operations of the Cold War, a mission to contain the spread of communism
in Central America. Under his ambassadorship, Honduras became a base for
a covert military operation to unseat the leftist Nicaraguan government
next door.
In the process, Negroponte had to protect the reputation of Honduras
as a democratic ally, even as its government used violent means to
silence its political opponents. That balancing act led the embassy,
under his leadership, to conceal the truth from an already skittish U.S.
Congress that could have easily withdrawn its financial support.
Negroponte failed to report human rights violations in the early 1980s
in Honduras, including one U.S.-backed operation that resulted in the
execution of nine prisoners and the disappearance of an American priest,
according to interviews--including ones based on newly discovered
Honduran military correspondence--and declassified documents obtained by
The Times.
Negroponte quashed a U.S. Embassy report on the executions for fear it
would alarm Congress, according to a CIA inquiry. And embassy staffers of
the time say they were told to downplay reports of a CIA-backed death
squad called Battalion 316 that has been implicated in the torture and
disappearance of nearly 200 political opponents.
In the CIA's 1997 inquiry into whether the embassy covered up human
rights violations in the 1980s, one embassy official told investigators
that information about rights abuses was suppressed for political
reasons. "Reporting murders, executions and corruption," he said, "would
reflect negatively on Honduras and not be beneficial in carrying out U.S.
policy."
The 1997 investigation also found that the embassy was aware of
Honduran military involvement in death squad activities and that
inadequacies and inconsistencies in reporting obscured the scope of human
rights abuses in the country.
Overall, the declassified documents and interviews suggest that
Negroponte consistently acted to protect the brutal actions of a military
whose high command was bent on swiftly crushing any possibility of
leftist revolt. Battalion 316, also referred to as the "Special Unit,"
was only one tool.
Negroponte, however, describes himself as a champion of human rights
in the country, citing two high-profile cases in which he intervened to
free victims. He has also said the abuses he was aware of in Honduras
paled compared with atrocities in neighboring countries.
But critics of Negroponte's nomination to the U.N. say he subordinated
human rights to U.S. strategic policy--and that a U.N. ambassador must
have a stronger, prouder record on an issue so prominent at the world
body.
"When you say 'Negroponte,' it causes terror here for everyone in our
generation," said Bertha Oliva, director of a Honduran group representing
the families of those who disappeared. "For Honduras, it's a humiliation.
It's offensive that the U.S. would name a man like this to the United
Nations."
But Negroponte, called out of retirement for the U.N. post by his
longtime colleague and mentor, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, also
has strong defenders. Former Secretary of State George P. Shultz has
started a letter-writing campaign on his behalf.
Thomas R. Pickering, a career ambassador himself who served as the
envoy to El Salvador while Negroponte was in Honduras, said the attitude
toward human rights questions then was to report only what could be
substantiated. "I think there was more effort in those days in trying to
sift through before reporting a question rather than reporting it quickly
and then sifting through," he said.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher, addressing concerns about
the ambassador's past, said, "We're confident that he can be a forceful
and effective advocate for human rights at the United Nations."
Negroponte declined to comment on the record for this story because,
under Senate protocol, nominees are strongly discouraged from talking to
the media before their confirmation hearings. His hearing has not been
scheduled.
Negroponte was known during his 1981-85 tenure as "the Proconsul," a
title implying that Honduras was his fiefdom. The saying at the time was
that three people ran the country: Negroponte, military chief Gen.
Gustavo Alvarez Martinez and the president--and the president didn't
matter.
Both his defenders and his critics say Negroponte became deeply
involved in the country, going beyond an ambassador's typical diplomatic
duties. But as Negroponte faces renewed scrutiny, critics say that just
as important as what he did as ambassador is what he didn't do.
Running the embassy in those politically charged times was not an easy
task: U.S. laws prevent the release of aid to governments that
consistently violate human rights. The previous ambassador, Jack Binns,
recently told The Times that State Department officials told him to stop
reporting through official channels about the emergence of death squads,
for fear that leaks would undermine the U.S. program.
When Negroponte arrived in the country's capital, Tegucigalpa, in
November 1981, he met Alvarez, the man Washington favored to carry out
its mission in Central America. But the army chief, Binns had warned him,
was a man who thought torture and murder were among the most efficient
means to achieve his goals. His obligatory collaboration with Alvarez
would draw Negroponte deep into the secrets of a dirty war--and challenge
him to keep them hidden.
As the military chief, Alvarez was the architect of a secret death
squad that eventually became known as Battalion 316. Negroponte
personally intervened in the cases of at least two people who were
detained and tortured by the battalion--although its role was never cited
in State Department reports. The two victims and others involved in
securing their release say the embassy ordered them not to go to the U.S.
or seek asylum there when they were immediately exiled.
Relations between Negroponte and Alvarez became strained. Alvarez
resented U.S. control over his military, despite the flood of funds and
equipment from the north. And Negroponte became frustrated that he
couldn't rein in the errant general Washington had empowered.
When Negroponte once confronted him at a party about his excesses,
Alvarez walked away, complaining: "I take orders from the president.
We're a sovereign country. I don't take orders from the United States," a
person present at the event recalled. Alvarez was ousted in 1984 and
exiled to the U.S., where he worked as a consultant to the Pentagon. When
he returned to Honduras in 1989, a group calling itself the Popular
Liberation Movement assassinated him.
"The sense was that we didn't have control over him [Alvarez]," said a
U.S. official who worked closely with Negroponte in Honduras. "We
wouldn't know what he'd done until afterward, and half the time we
wouldn't like it. We were constantly being handed surprises, because he
was constantly doing things in a ruthless way and was indifferent to our
concerns."
One of those surprises was the so-called Olancho operation, which
resulted in the disappearance of the American priest.
On July 19, 1983, a band of 96 guerrillas calling themselves the
PRTCH, the Spanish initials for Central American Workers Revolutionary
Party in Honduras, marched from Nicaragua into Honduras to try to incite
a leftist rebellion against the Honduran government.
Included in the band was James Francis Carney, a U.S.-born priest long
associated with leftist causes in Honduras.
With the help of U.S. helicopters, the Honduran military discovered
the band in the remote and mountainous Olancho province in eastern
Honduras. In a letter to Negroponte, Alvarez later thanked the ambassador
for the "aerial transport offered to our troops" in Olancho. It is
unclear whether Negroponte ever received the letter, which was obtained
by The Times from military sources in Honduras, but independent
interviews confirmed its contents.
The U.S. position has long been that the only support given was to
supply food to Honduran troops in the area. But top-ranked embassy
sources acknowledged the aerial support when presented with the letter
recently.
The military--including members of the unit that would become known as
Battalion 316--quickly subdued the ill-equipped, poorly trained
guerrillas. Most of the prisoners were displayed for the media at a news
conference Sept. 19, 1983.
But soon, questions arose about the fate of the rest of the captured
guerrillas, including Carney. The priest's family members contacted the
embassy to demand an investigation into rumors that Carney and other
members of the guerrilla column had been tortured and killed by Honduran
military officials.
Alarmed by the growing tide of accusations, Alvarez wrote Negroponte
on Oct. 15, 1983, to ask him for help in dealing with the attention
raised by the Carney family's persistent questioning.
"There is still a worry in the army over the political turn taken by
the death of the guerrilla priest James Francis Carney," Alvarez wrote.
He then asked for the embassy's cooperation in quieting the
investigation.
Two days after Alvarez wrote to Negroponte, the CIA issued the first
of two sensitive memos on the Olancho operation and Carney's fate,
according to a 1997 report by the CIA inspector general that was
declassified two years ago after Freedom of Information requests by
rights groups and family members. The report was a response to a 1995
series in the Baltimore Sun that asserted that Negroponte had suppressed
information about Honduran human rights violations.
The report, which is heavily blacked-out, said the memos indicated
that Carney had probably starved to death in the jungle. Of equal
concern, the two memos also said that at least nine of the captured
rebels, including the rebel leader, had been summarily executed at the
command of top military officials.
Then, in November 1983, the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security
Command received reports that Alvarez himself had approved the
executions. This information was put into a draft report that was given
to various agencies but never officially disseminated, according to the
inspector general's report.
Negroponte never reported the information, telling associates he had
concerns about the source of the Army report. Significantly, a colleague
said there were questions about whether the killings were carried out by
Honduran soldiers or by still-covert U.S.-backed Contras.
Negroponte was particularly concerned that the Army report, coming on
the heels of the CIA memos, might cause a human rights problem for
Honduras, according to several embassy officials interviewed for the
inspector general's report.
One unidentified embassy worker "actively discouraged" any follow-up
reporting on the accusations because of Negroponte's concerns, the 1997
report said. It quotes another embassy official who "believes that the
Embassy Country Team in Honduras wanted reports on subjects such as [the
prisoner executions] to be benign 'as to avoid Congress looking over its
shoulder' and to keep Congress satisfied with the ongoing implementation
of U.S. policy."
Other colleagues recalled the political pressures of the time.
"It was a very highly charged political environment," an official who
served under Negroponte told The Times. "The dilemma was that anything
could set off the U.S. Congress, it was so divided on the issue [of
Contra support]."
The official, who didn't want to be named because he still works for
the government, said he was directly told by embassy staff not to report
an incident only one time, and was never told to lie. "But he
[Negroponte] made it very clear that you always had to be conscious that
whatever you reported would be political grist," he said.
Negroponte has denied that he suppressed information about human
rights violations. While acknowledging that there were hundreds of
articles in local papers about state-sponsored kidnappings and killings
as well as regular demonstrations in the capital by relatives of missing
people, Negroponte has said he tried to place the country's human rights
performance in a regional context. In the nascent democracy of Honduras,
the disappearance of 112 people in three or four years seemed
insignificant compared with the mass executions happening in neighboring
nations.
But the previously undisclosed letter from Alvarez and CIA documents
raise new questions about whether Negroponte told Congress and the
American public the whole truth about evidence of human rights abuses by
the Honduran military.
In confirmation hearings for a subsequent ambassadorship to Mexico,
Negroponte acknowledged "isolated incidents" of violations but denied
there was a pattern of officially sponsored kidnapping, torture or
killing of political opponents.
"I have never seen any convincing substantiation that they were
involved in death squad-type activities," he testified.
There are many Hondurans who contest that assessment and believe that
the U.S. Embassy could have done more to halt the Honduran military's
transgressions.
One of those is Zenaida Velasquez, whose brother was kidnapped in
1981.
Velasquez helped form an organization for people whose family members
had disappeared. In 1983, they met with Negroponte to appeal for his
help.
"A word from the ambassador was like an order. We went there to beg
him," she said. "He shrugged, as if to say, 'I had nothing to do with
it,' and in the end, he didn't even offer to look into it. He was a cold
character."
Many of those who endured torture or prolonged captivity have since
channeled their energies to bringing to light the wrongs committed in
Honduras while Negroponte was ambassador. They see Negroponte's
nomination for the U.N. post as a rejection of the justice and
accountability they have worked so hard to achieve during the last 20
years.
Luis Manuel Figaroa was taken into custody July 21, 1983, while trying
to cross from Honduras into Nicaragua. Because he was a nationalized
Honduran born in Nicaragua, Figaroa said, Honduran border officials were
suspicious of his passport. For the next six months, Figaroa said, he was
tortured.
"For me, Negroponte is a criminal," said Figaroa. "He knew of the
problems here. He knew what Alvarez Martinez was doing. He knew all this
and did nothing about it."
Nora Miselem, 46, was a Honduran activist who worked with refugees
fleeing the violence in El Salvador. She was kidnapped in July 1982, she
said, and held for nearly a month.
She said her torturers in Battalion 316 attached electrical wires to
her breasts and vagina and administered shocks. They threatened her with
rape, she said, and took credit for killing one of her children, who had
died in a hospital years earlier.
Miselem blames Negroponte for creating a climate in which Honduran
officials knew they could act with impunity.
"What signal does it send to the indigenous and the poor for the
United States to have a man like this in the United Nations?" she asked.
"What is the U.S. thinking?"
Miller reported from Tegucigalpa and Farley from the United Nations.
Times staff writers Norman Kempster and Doyle McManus in Washington and
special correspondent Alex Renderos in San Salvador contributed to this
report.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
###