|
Uruguay 1964 to 1970: As American
as Apple Pie
By William Blum
"The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount,
for the desired effect."[1]
The words of an instructor in the art of torture. The words of
Dan Mitrione, the head of the Office of Public Safety (OPS) mission
in Montevideo.
Officially, OPS was a division of the Agency for International
Development, but the director of OPS in Washington, Byron Engle,
was an old CIA hand. His organization maintained a close working
relationship with the CIA, and Agency officers often operated abroad
under OPS cover, although Mitrione was not one of them.[2]
OPS had been operating formally in Uruguay since 1965, supplying
the police with the equipment, the arms, and the training it was
created to do. Four years later, when Mitrione arrived, the Uruguayans
had a special need for OPS services. The country was in the midst
of a long-running economic decline, its once-heralded prosperity
and democracy sinking fast toward the level of its South American
neighbors. Labor strikes, student demonstrations, and militant street
violence had become normal events during the past year; and, most
worrisome to the Uruguayan authorities, there were the revolutionaries
who called themselves Tupamaros. Perhaps the cleverest, most resourceful
and most sophisticated urban guerrillas the world has ever seen,
the Tupamaros had a deft touch for capturing the public's imagination
with outrageous actions, and winning sympathizers with their Robin
Hood philosophy. Their members and secret partisans held key positions
in the government, banks, universities, and the professions, as
well as in the military and police.
"Unlike other Latin-American guerrilla groups," the New
York Times stated in 1970, "the Tupamaros normally avoid
bloodshed when possible. They try instead to create embarrassment
for the Government and general disorder."[3] A favorite tactic
was to raid the files of a private corporation to expose corruption
and deceit in high places, or kidnap a prominent figure and try
him before a "People's Court". It was heady stuff to choose
a public villain whose acts went uncensored by the legislature,
the courts and the press, subject him to an informed and uncompromising
interrogation, and then publicize the results of the intriguing
dialogue. Once they ransacked an exclusive high-class nightclub
and scrawled on the walls perhaps their most memorable slogan: O
Bailan Todos O No Baila Nadie ... Either everyone dances or
no one dances.
Dan Mitrione did not introduce the practice of torturing political
prisoners to Uruguay. It had been perpetrated by the police at times
from at least the early 1960s. However, in a surprising interview
given to a leading Brazilian newspaper in 1970, the former Uruguayan
Chief of Police Intelligence, Alejandro Otero, declared that US
advisers, and in particular Mitrione, had instituted torture as
a more routine measure; to the means of inflicting pain, they had
added scientific refinement; and to that a psychology to create
despair, such as playing a tape in the next room of women and children
screaming and telling the prisoner that it was his family being
tortured.[4]
"The violent methods which were beginning to be employed,"
said Otero, "caused an escalation in Tupamaro activity. Before
then their attitude showed that they would use violence only as
a last resort."[5]
The newspaper interview greatly upset American officials in South
America and Washington. Byron Engle later tried to explain it all
away by asserting: "The three Brazilian reporters in Montevideo
all denied filing that story. We found out later that it was slipped
into the paper by someone in the composing room at the Jornal
do Brasil."[6]
Otero had been a willing agent of the CIA, a student at their International
Police Services school in Washington, a recipient of their cash
over the years, but he was not a torturer. What finally drove him
to speak out was perhaps the torture of a woman who, while a Tupamaro
sympathizer, was also a friend of his. When she told him that Mitrione
had watched and assisted in her torture, Otero complained to him,
about this particular incident as well as his general methods of
extracting information. The only outcome of the encounter was Otero's
demotion.[7]
William Cantrell was a CIA operations officer stationed in Montevideo,
ostensibly as a member of the OPS team. In the mid- 1960s he was
instrumental in setting up a Department of Information and Intelligence
(DII), and providing it with funds and equipment.[8] Some of the
equipment, innovated by the CIA's Technical Services Division, was
for the purpose of torture, for this was one of the functions carried
out by the DII.[9]
One of the pieces of equipment that was found useful," former
New York Times correspondent A. J. Langguth learned, "was
a wire so very thin that it could be fitted into the mouth between
the teeth and by pressing against the gum increase the electrical
charge. And it was through the diplomatic pouch that Mitrione got
some of the equipment he needed for interrogations, including these
fine wires."[10]
Things got so bad in Mitrione's time that the Uruguayan Senate
was compelled to undertake an investigation. After a five-month
study, the commission concluded unanimously that torture in Uruguay
had become a "normal, frequent and habitual occurrence",
inflicted upon Tupamaros as well as others. Among the types of torture
the commission's report made reference to were electric shocks to
the genitals, electric needles under the fingernails, burning with
cigarettes, the slow compression of the testicles, daily use of
psychological torture ... "pregnant women were subjected to
various brutalities and inhuman treatment" ... "certain
women were imprisoned with their very young infants and subjected
to the same treatment" ...[11]
Eventually the DII came to serve as a cover for the Escuadrón
de la Muerte (Death Squad), composed, as elsewhere in Latin
America, primarily of police officers, who bombed and strafed the
homes of suspected Tupamaro sympathizers and engaged in assassination
and kidnapping. The Death Squad received some of its special explosive
material from the Technical Services Division and, in all likelihood,
some of the skills employed by its members were acquired from instruction
in the United States.[12] Between 1969 and 1973, at least 16 Uruguayan
police officers went through an eight-week course at CIA/OPS schools
in Washington and Los Fresnos, Texas in the design, manufacture
and employment of bombs and incendiary devices.[13] The official
OPS explanation for these courses was that policemen needed such
training in order to deal with bombs placed by terrorists. There
was, however, no instruction in destroying bombs, only in making
them; moreover, on at least one reported occasion, the students
were not policemen, but members of a private right-wing organization
in Chile (see chapter on Chile). Another part of the curriculum
which might also have proven to be of value to the Death Squad was
the class on Assassination Weapons -- "A discussion of various
weapons which may be used by the assassin" is how OPS put it.[14]
Equipment and training of this kind was in addition to that normally
provided by OPS: riot helmets, transparent shields, tear gas, gas
masks, communication gear, vehicles, police batons, and other devices
for restraining crowds. The supply of these tools of the trade was
increased in 1968 when public disturbances reached the spark-point,
and by 1970 American training in riot-control techniques had been
given to about a thousand Uruguayan policemen.[15]
Dan Mitrione had built a soundproofed room in the cellar of his
house in Montevideo. In this room he assembled selected Uruguayan
police officers to observe a demonstration of torture techniques.
Another observer was Manuel Hevia Cosculluela, a Cuban who was with
the CIA and worked with Mitrione. Hevia later wrote that the course
began with a description of the human anatomy and nervous system
...
Soon things turned unpleasant. As subjects for
the first testing they took beggars, known in Uruguay as bichicomes,
from the outskirts of Montevideo, as well as a woman apparently
from the frontier area with Brazil. There was no interrogation,
only a demonstration of the effects of different voltages on the
different parts of the human body, as well as demonstrating the
use of a drug which induces vomiting -- I don't know why or what
for -- and another chemical substance. The four of them died.[16]
In his book Hevia does not say specifically what Mitrione's direct
part in all this was, but he later publicly stated that the OPS
chief "personally tortured four beggars to death with electric
shocks".[17]
On another occasion, Hevia sat with Mitrione in the latter's house,
and over a few drinks the American explained to the Cuban his philosophy
of interrogation. Mitrione considered it to be an art. First there
should be a softening-up period, with the usual beatings and insults.
The object is to humiliate the prisoner, to make him realize his
helplessness, to cut him off from reality. No questions, only blows
and insults. Then, only blows in silence.
Only after this, said Mitrione, is the interrogation. Here no pain
should be produced other than that caused by the instrument which
is being used. "The precise pain, in the precise place, in
the precise amount, for the desired effect," was his motto.
During the session you have to keep the subject from losing all
hope of life, because this can lead to stubborn resistance. "You
must always leave him some hope ... a distant light."
"When you get what you want, and I always get it," Mitrione
continued, "it may be good to prolong the session a little
to apply another softening-up. Not to extract information now, but
only as a political measure, to create a healthy fear of meddling
in subversive activities."
The American pointed out that upon receiving a subject the first
thing is to determine his physical state, his degree of resistance,
by means of a medical examination. "A premature death means
a failure by the technician ... It's important to know in advance
if we can permit ourselves the luxury of the subject's death."[18]
Not long after this conversation, Manual Hevia disappeared from
Montevideo and turned up in Havana. He had been a Cuban agent -
a double agent - all along.
About half a year later, 31 July 1970 to be exact, Dan Mitrione
was kidnapped by the Tupamaros. They did not torture him. They demanded
the release of some 150 prisoners in exchange for him. With the
determined backing of the Nixon administration, the Uruguayan government
refused. On 10 August, Mitrione's dead body was found on the back
seat of a stolen car. He had turned 50 on his fifth day as a prisoner.
Back in Mitrione's home town of Richmond, Indiana, Secretary of
State William Rogers and President Nixon's son-in-law David Eisenhower
attended the funeral for Mitrione, the city's former police chief.
Frank Sinatra and Jerry Lewis came to town to stage a benefit show
for Mitrione's family.
And White House spokesman, Ron Ziegler, solemnly stated that "Mr.
Mitrione's devoted service to the cause of peaceful progress in
an orderly world will remain as an example for free men everywhere."[19]
"A perfect man," his widow said.
"A great humanitarian," said his daughter Linda.[20]
The military's entry into the escalating conflict signaled the
beginning of the end for the Tupamaros. By the end of 1972, the
curtain was descending on their guerrilla theatre. Six months later,
the military was in charge, Congress was dissolved, and everything
not prohibited was compulsory. For the next 11 years, Uruguay competed
strongly for the honor of being South America's most repressive
dictatorship. It had, at one point, the largest number of political
prisoners per capita in the world. And, as every human rights organization
and former prisoner could testify, each one of them was tortured.
"Torture," said an activist priest, "was routine
and automatic."[21]
No one was dancing in Uruguay.
In 1981, at the Fourteenth Conference of American Armies, the Uruguayan
Army offered a paper in which it defined subversion as "actions,
violent or not, with ultimate purposes of a political nature, in
all fields of human activity within the internal sphere of a state
and whose aims are perceived as not convenient for the overall political
system."[22]
The dissident Uruguayan writer, Eduardo Galeano, summed up his
country's era of dictatorship thusly: "People were in prison
so that prices could be free."[23]
The film "State of Siege" appeared in 1972. It centered
around Mitrione and the Tupamaros and depicted a Uruguayan police
officer receiving training at a secret bomb school in the United
States, though the film strove more to provide a composite picture
of the role played by the US in repression throughout Latin America.
A scheduled premier showing of the film at the federally-funded
John F. Kennedy Arts Center in Washington was canceled. There was
already growing public and congressional criticism of this dark
side of American foreign policy without adding to it. During the
mid-1970s, however, Congress enacted several pieces of legislation
which abolished the entire Public Safety Program. In its time, OPS
had provided training for more than one million policemen in the
Third World. Ten thousand of them had received advance training
in the United States. An estimated $150 million worth of equipment
had been shipped to police forces abroad.[24] Now, the "export
of repression" was to cease.
That was on paper. The reality appears to be somewhat different.
To a large extent, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) simply
picked up where OPS had left off. The drug agency was ideally suited
for the task, for its agents were already deployed all over Latin
America and elsewhere overseas in routine liaison with foreign police
forces. The DEA acknowledged in 1975 that 53 "former"
employees of the CIA were now on its staff and that there was a
close working relationship between the two agencies. The following
year, the General Accounting Office reported that DEA agents were
engaging in many of the same activities the OPS had been carrying
out.
In addition, some training of foreign policemen was transferred
to FBI schools in Washington and Quantico, Virginia; the Defense
Department continued to supply police-type equipment to military
units engaged in internal security operations; and American arms
manufacturers were doing a booming business furnishing arms and
training to Third World governments. In some countries, contact
between these companies and foreign law enforcement officials was
facilitated by the US Embassy or military mission. The largest of
the arms manufacturers, Smith and Wesson, ran its own Academy in
Springfield, Massachusetts, which provided American and foreign
"public and industrial security forces with expert training
in riot control".[25]
Said Argentine Minister Jose Lopez Rega at the signing of a US-Argentina
anti-drug treaty in 1974: "We hope to wipe out the drug traffic
in Argentina. We have caught guerrillas after attacks who were high
on drugs. The guerrillas are the main drug users in Argentina. Therefore,
this anti-drug campaign will automatically be an anti-guerrilla
campaign as well."[26]
And in 1981, a former Uruguayan intelligence officer declared that
US manuals were being used to teach techniques of torture to his
country's military. He said that most of the officers who trained
him had attended classes run by the United States in Panama. Among
other niceties, the manuals listed 35 nerve points where electrodes
could be applied.[27]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Philip Agee, after he left Ecuador, was stationed in Uruguay from
March 1964 to August 1966. His account of CIA activities in Montevideo
is further testimony to the amount of international mischief money
can buy. Amongst the multifarious dirty tricks pulled off with impunity
by Agee and his Agency cohorts, the following constitute an interesting
sample:[28]
A Latin American students' conference with a leftist leaning, held
in Montevideo, was undermined by promoting the falsehood that it
was nothing more than a creature of the Soviet Union - originated,
financed and directed by Moscow. Editorials on this theme authored
by the CIA appeared in leading newspapers to which the Agency had
daily access. This was followed by publication of a forged letter
of a student leader thanking the Soviet cultural attaché
for his assistance. A banner headline in one paper proclaimed: "Documents
for the Break with Russia", which was indeed the primary purpose
of the operation.
An inordinate amount of time, energy and creativity was devoted,
with moderate success, to schemes aimed at encouraging the expulsion
of an assortment of Russians, East Germans, North Koreans, Czechs,
and Cubans from Uruguayan soil, if not the breaking of relations
with these countries. In addition to planting disparaging media
propaganda, the CIA tried to obtain incriminating information by
reading the mail and diplomatic cables to and from these countries,
tapping embassy phones, and engaging in sundry bugging and surreptitious
entry. The Agency would then prepare "Intelligence" reports,
containing enough factual information to be plausible, which then
made their way innocently into the hands of officials of influence,
up to and including the president of the republic.
Anti-communist indoctrination of secondary-level students was promoted
by financing particular school organizations and publications.
A Congress of the People, bringing together a host of community
groups, labor organizations, students, government workers, etc.,
Communist and non-Communist, disturbed the CIA because of the potential
for a united front being formed for electoral purposes. Accordingly,
newspaper editorials and articles were generated attacking the Congress
as a classic Communist takeover/duping tactic and calling upon non-Communists
to refrain from participating; and a phoney handbill was circulated
in which the Congress called upon the Uruguayan people to launch
an insurrectional strike with immediate occupation of their places
of work. Thousands of the handbills were handed out, provoking angry
denials from the Congress organizers, but, as is usual in such cases,
the damage was already done.
The Uruguayan Communist Party planned to host an international
conference to express solidarity with Cuba. The CIA merely had to
turn to their (paid) friend, the Minister of the Interior, and the
conference was banned. When it was shifted to Chile, the CIA station
in Santiago performed the same magic.
Uruguay at this time was a haven for political exiles from repressive
regimes such as in Brazil, Argentina, Bolivia and Paraguay. The
CIA, through surveillance and infiltration of the exile community,
regularly collected information on exiles' activities, associates,
etc., to be sent to CIA stations in the exiles' homelands with likely
transmission to their governments, which wanted to know what these
troublemakers were up to and which did not hesitate to harass them
across frontiers.
"Other operations," wrote Agee, "were designed to
take control of the streets away from communists and other leftists,
and our squads, often with the participation of off-duty policemen,
would break up their meetings and generally terrorize them. Torture
of communists and other extreme leftists was used in interrogation
by our liaison agents in the police."
The monitoring and harassment of Communist diplomatic missions
by the CIA, as described above, was standard Agency practice throughout
the Western world. This rarely stemmed from anything more than a
juvenile cold-war reflex: making life hard for the commies.
Looked at from any angle, it was politically and morally pointless.
Richard Gott, the Latin America specialist of The Guardian of London,
related an anecdote which is relevant:
In January 1967 a group of Brazilians and a Uruguayan asked for
political asylum in the Czech embassy in Montevideo, stating that
they wished to go to a Socialist country to pursue their revolutionary
activities. They were, they said, under constant surveillance and
harassment from the Uruguayan police. The Czech ambassador was horrified
by their request and threw them out, saying that there was no police
persecution in Uruguay. When the revolutionaries camped in his garden
the ambassador called the police.[29]
Postscript: In 1998, Eladio Moll, a retired Uruguayan navy rear
admiral and former intelligence chief, testifying before a commission
of the Uruguayan Chamber of Deputies, stated that during Uruguay's
"dirty war" (1972-1983), orders came from the United States
to kill captive members of the Tupamaros after interrogating them.
"The guidance that was sent from the US," said Moll, "was
that what had to be done with the captured guerrillas was to get
information, and that afterwards they didn't deserve to live."
[30]
This is a chapter from Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions
Since World War II by William Blum
Notes
1. Manuel Hevia Cosculluela, Pasaporte 11333:
Ocho Años con la CIA (Havana, 1978), p. 286.
2. A.J. Langguth, Hidden Terrors (New York,
1978) pp. 48-9, 51 and passim. Langguth was formerly with the New
York Times and in 1965 served as Saigon Bureau Chief for the
newspaper.
3. New York Times, 1 August 1970.
4. Langguth, pp. 285-7; New York Times, 15
August 1970.
5. Alain Labrousse, The Tupamaros: Urban Guerrillas
in Uruguay (Penguin Books, London, 1973, translation from French
1970 edition) p. 103.
6. Langguth, p. 289.
7. Langguth, pp. 232-3, 253-4; Philip Agee, Inside
the Company: CIA Diary (New York, 1975), see index (Otero's
relationship to the CIA).
8. Major Carlos Wilson, The Tupamaros: The Unmentionables
(Boston, 1974) pp. 106-7; Langguth, p. 236. Agee, p. 478, confirms
Cantrell's identity.
9. Langguth, p. 252.
10. Interview of Langguth in the film "On Company
Business" (Directed by Allan Francovich), cited in Warner Poelchau,
ed., White Paper, Whitewash (New York, 1981) p. 66.
11. Extracts from the report of the Senate Commission
of Inquiry into Torture, a document accompanying the film script
in State of Siege (Ballantine Books, New York, 1973) pp.
194-6; also see "Death of a Policeman: Unanswered Questions
About a Tragedy", Commonweal (Catholic biweekly magazine,
New York), 18 September 1970, p. 457; Langguth, p. 249.
12. Death Squad, TSD: Langguth, pp. 245-6, 253.
13. Michael Klare and Nancy Stein, "Police
Terrorism in Latin America", NACLA's Latin America and Empire
Report (North American Congress on Latin America), January 1974,
pp. 19-23, based on State Department documents obtained by Senator
James Abourezk in 1973; also see Jack Anderson, Washington Post,
8 October 1973, p. C33; Langguth, pp. 242-3.
14. Klare and Stein, p. 19.
15. New York Times, 25 September 1968, 1
August 1970; Langguth, p. 241.
16. Hevia, p. 284, translated from the Spanish and
slightly paraphrased by author; a similar treatment of this and
other passages from Hevia can be found in Langguth, pp. 311-13.
17. New York Times, 5 August 1978, p. 3.
18. Mitrione's philosophy: Hevia, pp. 286-7 (see
note 16 above).
19. Poelchau, p. 68.
20. Langguth, p. 305.
21. The Guardian (London) 19 October 1984.
22. Lawrence Weschler, A Miracle, A Universe:
Settling Accounts With Torturers (Penguin Books, 1991) p. 121
23. Ibid., p. 147, said to Weschler by Galeano.
24. Nancy Stein and Michael Klare, "Merchants
of Repression", NACLA's Latin America and Empire Report
(North American Congress on Latin America), July-August 1976, p.
31.
25. DEA, arms manufacturers, etc.: Stein and Klare,
pp. 31-2; New York Times, 23 January 1975, p. 38; 26 January
1975, p 42; Langguth, p. 301.
26. Argentine Commission for Human Rights, Washington,
DC: Report entitled "U.S. Narcotics Enforcement Assistance
to Latin America", 10 March 1977, reference to a May 1974 press
conference in Argentina.
27. San Francisco Chronicle, 2 November 1981.
28. Agee, pp. 325-493, passim.
29. From Gott's Introduction to Labrousse, p. 7.
30. Cable News Network en Español, 23 July
1998; El Diario-La Prensa (New York) 24 July 1998; Clarin
(Buenos Aires) 22 July 1998, p. 45
Connexions
Links - Connexions
Directory A-Z Index - Connexions
Library
Periodicals
& Broadcasters Online - Volunteer
Opportunities - Publicity
& media relations resources
Connexions
E-mail:
www.connexions.org
|