$Unique_ID{bob01029} $Pretitle{} $Title{Iran-Contra Affair: The Report Chapter 6D McFarlane's 1986 Testimony} $Subtitle{} $Author{Various} $Affiliation{} $Subject{mcfarlane north contras testimony country documents resistance support activities congress} $Date{1987} $Log{} Title: Iran-Contra Affair: The Report Author: Various Date: 1987 Chapter 6D McFarlane's 1986 Testimony In the wake of the November 1986 revelations and a full year after he left office, McFarlane testified before several panels investigating the Iran-Contra Affair: the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, the Senate and House Foreign Affairs Committees, and the President's Special Review Board (The Tower Board). Again, Members of Congress - and this time officials on the Tower Board staff as well - were unable to learn the crucial facts about the Government's actions in support of the Nicaraguan Resistance. The former National Security Adviser acknowledged to the panels that North had told him in May 1986 about the diversion of Iranian arms sales funds to the Contras. That aspect of Administration support for the Resistance, by the time of McFarlane's December 1986 testimony, had been revealed by the Attorney General. Beyond that, McFarlane withheld virtually all other relevant information in his possession about U.S. support for the Contras during the period of Congressional restrictions. He concealed new information he learned of North's activities in 1986, and he repeated many of the inaccurate statements that he had made orally and in writing to Members of Congress while he was National Security Adviser. In his testimony before the Select Committees, McFarlane acknowledged that his remarks to investigating panels between December 1986 and February 1987, like his statements about U.S. support of the Resistance in 1984 and 1985, had been "clearly too categorical." McFarlane's Testimony on North's Activities in 1986 On December 1, 1986, while he was testifying before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, McFarlane was asked whether, after his resignation, there were "any indications" about "North's involvement in the funding [of the Contras] either directly or indirectly." McFarlane responded: Well, since leaving Government my only basis for knowing anything more about the issue is what I read in the press and the events that I described this morning about what I was told about the diversion of Iranian money in May of this year. So I have no personal basis for corroborating the press stories that I've seen that have alleged that Col. North has done various things to channel money and to advise and done business with arms merchants. I have no independent knowledge of that and I guess the only thing that I do know first hand from Col. North was what he told me about diversion of Iranian monies. I've described that this morning. In fact, despite his assertion that he had "no personal basis for corroborating" allegations about North, and that "the only thing" he knew "first hand from Col. North" was the diversion, McFarlane had learned directly from North in 1986 about efforts to provide funds and weapons to the Resistance. Indeed, McFarlane had offered to assist. After his resignation, McFarlane communicated regularly with the NSC staff via a PROF machine he was permitted to keep in his home. PROF messages in 1986 show that North freely shared with McFarlane details of the NSC-coordinated Contra operation, despite North's strong desire to hold close information about the project. The following exchange between North and McFarlane about efforts to obtain sophisticated Blowpipe missiles for the Resistance is illustrative. In late March, North wrote to McFarlane about efforts to obtain sophisticated surface-to-air missiles for the Contras: After the House vote on aid to the resistance, I plan to take a few days just to get re-acquainted w/the family. Meanwhile, we are trying to find a way to get 10 BLOWPIPE launchers and 20 missiles from . . . thru the Short Bros. Rep. The V.P. from Short Bros. sought me out several mos. ago and I met w/him . . . a few weeks ago . . . . Short Bros., the mfgr. of the BLOWPIPE, is willing to arrange the deal, conduct the training and even send U.K. "tech reps" fwd if we can close the arrangement. Dick Secord has already paid 10% down on the delivery and we have a [Central American country] EUC [end user certificate] which is acceptable to . . . . McFarlane replied about one week later: I've been thinking about the blowpipe problem and the Contras. Could you ask the CIA to identify which countries the . . . have sold them to. I ought to have a contact in at least one of them. How are you coming on the loose ends for the material transfer? Anything I can do? If for any reason, you need some mortars or other artillery - which I doubt - please let me know. In another message to McFarlane, dated April 21, 1986, North provided details on the resupply operation. "So far," he wrote, "we have seven A/C [aircraft] working, having delivered over $37 M in supplies and ordnance . . . ." In the message, North also discussed the need to obtain new funding for the Contras. "The resistance support acct is darned near broke," he wrote. "Any thoughts where we can put our hands on a quick $3-5 M? Gaston [Sigur] is going back to his friends who have given $2 M so far in hopes that we can bridge things again, but time is running out along w/the money." Sigur recalled making no such approach in 1986. Demonstrating to McFarlane his operational control of the resupply program, North added that he had told Secord to sell "the ship first and then the a/c [aircraft] as a means of sustaining the effort." He then proposed to McFarlane that U.S. businessman Ross Perot be approached for funds. "As you know, we've never asked him for help in this regard, believing that he wd be inclined to talk about it," North wrote, an indication that he and McFarlane had discussed funding alternatives. "It may now be time to take that risk. Any thoughts?" The reference in the PROF to Richard Secord's involvement in the Contra operation is not the only such reference. In February 1986, North sent a PROF message to McFarlane in which he said that he had "asked JMP [Poindexter] for a session w/you and Dick Secord as soon as possible after Dick returns tomorrow night from Eur[ope] where he is setting up an arms delivery for the Nic[araguan] resistance. A man of many talents ol' Secord is." In his testimony before the Select Committees, McFarlane specifically acknowledged that he was aware in 1986 that "Secord was involved in helping the Contras." But on December 10, 1986, testifying before the House Intelligence Committee, McFarlane denied any such knowledge. Representative Brown asked: "Let me ask about Gen. Secord . . . . Were you aware of the fact that he had a role in the Contra supply operation?" McFarlane replied, "No sir." Testimony on Fundraising Activities As described above, McFarlane arranged for two large donations totalling about $32 million from Country 2, telling a high official of that country about U.S. concerns and the Contras' needs, and then providing the bank account number when the country decided to donate funds. The first gift came in 1984 and the second in February and March 1985. In his testimony before Congress following the November 1986 disclosures, McFarlane denied personal knowledge of the donations by Country 2. During McFarlane's testimony on December 8, 1986, before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Representative Mel Levine asked: "There have been also press reports that" Country 2 has been "indirectly involved in financing the Contras. Are you aware of any such activities?" McFarlane replied: "I have seen the reports and I have heard that" Country 2 has contributed. However, he said, "The concrete character of that is beyond my ken." Similarly, McFarlane testified at that session in response to a question from Representative Edward F. Feighan that he had "seen the reports that various countries have" donated funds to the Contras, including Country 2. He testified: "I have no idea of the extent of that or anything else." Acknowledging before the Select Committees that his testimony was "not as full an account as I could have given," McFarlane maintained nevertheless that his earlier testimony was "technically accurate." He told the Committees that even though he had facilitated the donations, he did not precisely know the extent of the contribution or the exact total of the deposits. However, such precision was scarcely the focus of the questions from the Members of Congress. Moreover, the April 11, 1985, North memo which McFarlane reviewed in connection with the summer 1985 Congressional inquiries, described in great detail the extent of the donation. Members of both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees specifically asked McFarlane if he still stood by his 1985 statement that there was no "official or unofficial" relationship involving any member of the NSC staff and fund-raising for the Nicaraguan Resistance. Despite his role in the two contributions from Country 2, and despite the knowledge that North and Sigur said he had of Sigur's discussions with Country 3 about a possible donation - all of which occurred during his tenure as National Security Adviser - McFarlane stood by his statement: "I believe as I did then that that was true throughout my time and association with the NSC." On December 18, in his second appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee following the November disclosures, McFarlane acknowledged for the first time that he "believe[d]" Country 2 had donated funds. He knew of the donation, he testified, only because Secretary Weinberger told him: "I think that is the only one I ever heard about but I was told by the Secretary of Defense that there had been a contribution by [Country 2], and I don't know that I could put a date on it." Six weeks after this testimony, McFarlane wrote the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee to correct his statements. In his letter, he described the 1984 donation, maintaining, as he did before the Select Committees, that he had not solicited the gift. McFarlane did not mention the second contribution from Country 2. He wrote: "At no time from that moment [spring 1984] to this date, have I ever sought, brokered or otherwise managed donations from anyone." Testimony on 1985 Activities As McFarlane acknowledged before these Committees, the documents he gathered in response to the summer 1985 Congressional inquiries, "raise[d] legitimate questions about compliance with the law." In his testimony following the diversion disclosure, McFarlane not only withheld his concerns about the documents, but asserted that they proved that North had fully complied with the Boland Amendment. For example, on December 10, 1986, before the House Intelligence Committee, responding to questions from Representative Dick Cheney, McFarlane testified that in the summer of 1985 he "went to considerable length to determine whether" North had violated the Boland Amendment. A document search, he said, "turned up two or three inches of paper, that reported on contacts that did occur between Colonel North and myself, indeed the President and Contra leaders." He continued: [F]rom the sum total of these documents, it was clear that the activities were to meet with Contra officials, civilian officials, tell them in so many words where we were, that we did not have Congressional support for military help, that we would try to get it, continue working with the Congress, that we couldn't provide it in the short term but we hoped that they would use the time until we could get it, to strengthen their political organization, bring in people like Cruz and others to develop a political program . . . but we couldn't do anything to help them. McFarlane also told the Tower Board that "neither the documentary record nor interviews with Colonel North showed any evidence" that North had provided military or fundraising support to the Contras. As noted above, the documents about which McFarlane was concerned in August 1085 were not so innocuous. Summer 1985: Inquiry of the Intelligence Oversight Board The flood of press allegations about possible NSC violations of the Boland Amendment prompted no investigations by executive branch law enforcement agencies. Only one small executive oversight organization, the Intelligence Oversight Board, responded to the widespread charges. In late August 1985, the Board conducted an inquiry into NSC staff activities. After a brief investigation by its counsel, Bretton G. Sciaroni, the Board concluded that Oliver North had not provided military or fundraising assistance to the Nicaraguan Resistance. Sciaroni began his inquiry with a 30 to 40 minute interview of Paul Thompson. Shortly before that interview, Thompson turned over to McFarlane the NSC file documents on North's activities. Those documents included the six "troubling" memorandums that indicated, as Thompson later put it, that "if he [North] was in effect doing what was reflected in the documents, he was perhaps not aware of the constraints of the . . . Boland Amendment." In his interview with Sciaroni, Thompson made no mention of North's activities as depicted in the memorandums. Indeed, he denied that North had provided "military support" to the Contras and asserted that North had limited himself to providing political encouragement and "moral support" while funds were unavailable. Although the Committees cannot be certain what Thompson knew directly of North's activities, it is clear that his denials cannot be squared with the memorandums he had given McFarlane. Furthermore, Thompson withheld from Sciaroni the six "troubling" memorandums included in the batch he gave McFarlane. During their meeting, Thompson provided Sciaroni an inch-thick pile of documents and told him he was producing "the relevant documents for my review," according to Sciaroni. The only documents to which Sciaroni would not be permitted access, Thompson told him, were North's personal working files. Thompson also told Sciaroni that the pile of documents he was turning over were the same as those that had been "shown to the Hill." Missing from the pile were many of the documents Thompson himself acknowledged raised questions about North's activities. Sciaroni's next investigative step was to talk with North. During a 5-minute discussion, North gave Sciaroni a "blanket denial" of charges that he was actively involved in aiding the Contras. Although North did not recall the conversation with Sciaroni, he was clear in his testimony that he had no intention of being candid with the Intelligence Oversight Board Counsel: "I am sure if he asked me" about supporting the Contras, "I denied it, because after all we viewed this to be a covert operation and he had absolutely no need to know the details of what I was doing." Still, Sciaroni stressed in his testimony that he was justified in expecting cooperation from NSC staff officers. Both Thompson and North, he said, "understood who I represented, the mandate of the Board to look into matters of legality, amid the seriousness of the allegations that had been raised." His investigation was "all anomaly" in that he had no legal authority over the NSC staff, and therefore, Sciaroni said, he "was relying upon the good will of other officers at the White House." Once again, however, North chose to conceal. This time, the object of his deception was a board established by and operating within the executive branch, an entity privy to intelligence information and programs of the highest sensitivity. Summary While exercising its responsibility to oversee the implementation of the law cutting off aid to the Nicaraguan Resistance, Congress tried repeatedly through 1984 and 1985 to learn how the Resistance was staying alive and whether the U.S. Government was involved with the Contras' survival. The President, the Vice President, the National Security Adviser, and officials on the NSC staff were aware that a multimillion dollar donation from Country 2, facilitated by McFarlane, was largely responsible for the Contras' survival. North, Poindexter, and perhaps other high Administration officials, were aware that the NSC staff was directly providing lethal support to the Nicaraguan Resistance. McFarlane denied knowledge of North's activities, but documents he reviewed following Congressional inquiries show that North actively assisted the Contras' military effort. Yet Congressional inquiries on U.S. support for the Contras were invariably met with categorical denials. So too were inquiries made by the media. In both cases, the information sought related not to sensitive operational details, but to a controversial foreign policy issue. The question repeatedly asked was whether it was the policy and practice of the U.S. Government during this period to provide lethal support to the rebels fighting in Nicaragua. It was to that question that Administration officials repeatedly responded with denials. The record leaves no doubt that some of the officials making these denials did so as part of a deliberate attempt to deceive Congress and the public. North, who testified, "I didn't want to show Congress a single word on this whole thing," admitted that the letters sent to Congress over McFarlane's signature were "false." In meetings with Members of Congress, McFarlane repeated the statements in the letters. He acknowledged in testimony before these Committees that he had been "too categorical." Poindexter testified that his intent during this period was to "withhold information." And it is difficult to reconcile CIA Director Casey's testimony in this period with his knowledge of the facts as demonstrated by the documentary evidence, and with his pledge to the Senate Intelligence Committee that he would abide by a new spirit of cooperation. Other officials who denied the existence of U.S. support, including the State Department officials who testified before Congress in 1984 and 1985, and the press liaison of the NSC staff, were unaware of the truth, themselves victims of concealed information. As 1986 began, a new National Security Adviser was supervising the NSC staff, promoted from within. But the covert Contra operation continued, as did the overriding concern to keep the fact that the United States was providing lethal aid to the Contras secret from Congress and the American people.