SUBJECT: CIA Activities in Chile

for opposition political parties, bringing the total amount of covert funding spent during the Allende period to approximately $6.5 million. In late August the Station requested authorization to provide maximum support for the opposition's efforts to encourage the entrance of the Chilean military into the Allende cabinet. The resignation of Army Commander General Carlos Prats (whose actions were strongly constitutionalist) and his replacement by General Augusto Pinochet (not a coup plotter, but apparently willing to concede to a coup) appeared to further unify the Armed Forces and strengthened the institution as a political pressure group. The UP Government appeared to fear a possible military coup and was unsure how to react to such a development.

The Station realized that the opposition's objectives had evolved to a point inconsistent with current US policy and sought authorization from Washington to support such an aggressive approach. Although the US Ambassador in Chile agreed with the need for Washington to evaluate its current policy, he did not concur in the Station's proposal, fearing that it could lead to a de facto US commitment to a coup. In response, CIA Headquarters reaffirmed to the Station that there was to be no involvement with the military in any covert action initiative; there was no support for instigating a military coup.

On 10 September 1973—the day before the coup that ended the Allende Government—a Chilean military officer reported to a CIA officer that a coup was being planned and asked for US Government assistance. He was told that the US Government would not provide any assistance because this was strictly an internal Chilean matter. The Station officer also told him that his request would be forwarded to Washington. CIA learned of the exact date of the coup shortly before it took place. During the attack on the Presidential Palace and its immediate aftermath, the Station's activities were limited to providing intelligence and situation reports.

Allende's death occurred after the President refused an offer from the military to take him and his family out of the country. Available evidence indicates that President Allende committed suicide as putchist troops entered his offices. A credible source on Allende's death was Dr. Patricio Guijon, a physician who served on the President's medical staff. Guijon was in the Presidential Palace, *La Moneda*, with Allende during the assault and claimed that he witnessed Allende shoot himself with a rifle. The Chilean National Commission on Truth and Reconciliation in 1991 also concluded that Allende took his own life. There is no information to indicate that the CIA was involved in Allende's death.

## US Business Involvement

As early as the 1964 Chilean Presidential election, American businessmen with interests in Chile had offered to provide the CIA with funds to prevent Allende from being elected. All of these early offers were rejected.

In early 1970 a Station officer was contacted by a United States businessman employed by International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) urging the US government to provide financial support to one of Allende's opponents, Jorge Alessandri. The Station provided the businessman the name of an individual who could securely funnel ITT funds to Alessandri.

Several months later another ITT representative approached the CIA in Washington to probe whether CIA would accept funds from his company and channel them to the Alessandri campaign. He was told that CIA could not receive and transfer funds to Alessandri on behalf of a private firm. The CIA also told him that, although the US Government was most anxious about a possible Allende victory, it was not supporting any specific candidate in the election. As occurred several months earlier, however, the Station provided this businessman advice on how to funnel ITT funds securely to Alessandri.

http://www.foia.state.gov/HincheyReport.htm

4/22/2002

After Allende's election and before his inauguration, the CIA, under 40 Committee direction, made an effort—in coordination with the Embassy in Santiago—to encourage Chilean businesses to carry out a program of economic disruption.

## Accession of General Augusto Pinochet to the Presidency

Chile's new military Junta—Army General Augusto Pinochet, Air Force General Gustavo Leigh, Navy Admiral Jose Merino, and Carabinero Chief General Caesar Mendoza—was sworn in on the evening of 11 September 1973. The next day, the four drafted an official document constituting the Junta as Chile's supreme power. Pinochet was designated as its first President, and the four verbally agreed to rotate the office. Shortly after, the Junta established an advisory committee, which Pinochet was successful in staffing with Army officers loyal to himself. One of their first recommendations was to discard the idea of a rotating Presidency, arguing it would create too many administrative problems and lead to confusion.

In March 1974, on the six-month anniversary of the Junta's establishment, Pinochet verbally attacked the Christian Democratic Party and stated that there was no set timetable for the return to civilian rule. On 18 December 1974 Pinochet was declared Supreme Leader of the nation.

During this period, CIA, in coordination with the Department of State, determined that no new or expanded covert action activities were to be carried out until the 40 Committee provided new authorization. Although covert action spending was authorized for previously obligated expenditures and commitments in programs described above, no new initiatives were authorized. By June 1974 CIA covert action plans for Chile had been officially terminated, and payments ceased.

Although some of these residual propaganda operations may have benefited Pinochet and the putchists indirectly, officers of the CIA and the Intelligence Community were not involved in facilitating Pinochet's accession to President nor the consolidation of his power as Supreme Leader. For most of the period, CIA had no covert action authority for Chile. While the CIA had liaison relationships with various security services over the years, there is no indication that any service asked for, or that the CIA offered, any assistance to promote Pinochet to the Presidency.

## Violations of Human Rights Committed by Officers or Covert Agents and Employees of the CIA

In January 1974 CIA issued a directive to all CIA staff to collect clandestine information on torture in Chile; this message directed CIA staff to work through all available agents and channels of influence to induce the Chilean Government to modify repressive measures, particularly to eliminate torture. CIA actively used its contacts, especially with members of services notorious for human rights abuses, to emphasize that human rights abuses were detrimental to the government's credibility within their own country, damaging to their international reputation, and unacceptable to the US Government. In some cases, such contacts enabled the CIA to obtain intelligence on human rights abuses that would not have otherwise been available.

Given the wide variety and nature of CIA contacts in Chile, the issue of human rights was handled in various ways over the years. Some examples:

* Before the 1973 coup, the issue of human rights was not addressed in liaison contacts and

4/22/2002

intelligence reporting.

* One CIA contact was known to be involved in an abortive coup attempt on 29 June 1973, and another was involved in the successful 11 September 1973 coup.

* In October 1973, the CIA had credible information that a high-level contact was involved in specific human rights abuses; contact was severed.

* Although the CIA had information indicating that a high-level contact was a hard-liner and therefore more likely to commit abuses, contact with him was allowed to continue in the absence of concrete information about human rights abuses.

* CIA maintained indirect contact with a source in close contact with human rights violators. There was no evidence that the source engaged in abuses, but he almost certainly knew about the practice. The intelligence value of the contact was sufficiently important that the contact was not dropped.

* In the case of an individual about whom the CIA had information concerning a corruption issue that may have been related to human rights issues, a decision was made to seek contact given his position and potential intelligence value.

* In more than one case, in light of the contacts' service affiliation and position, it seemed likely that they were involved in, knew about or covered up human rights abuses. However, because such contacts allowed the CIA to accomplish its intelligence reporting mission and maintain a channel through which to voice concerns about human rights abuses, contact was continued.

* In a few cases, although the CIA had knowledge that the contact represented a service with a known history of human rights abuses, contact was continued because refusing such contact would have had a negative impact on the CIA intelligence collection mission.

* In some cases careful checks of contacts' human rights records were not conducted, and a deliberate risk-versus-gain decision was not made. In such cases, if a contact was deemed to have intelligence value, continuing contact was authorized.

* Information concerning human rights abuses of then current and former CIA contacts was disseminated to the intelligence and policy communities.

## Relationship with Contreras

During a period between 1974 and 1977, CIA maintained contact with Manuel Contreras Sepulveda, who later became notorious for his involvement in human rights abuses. The US Government policy community approved CIA's contact with Contreras, given his position as chief of the primary intelligence organization in Chile, as necessary to accomplish the CIA's mission, in spite of concerns that this relationship might lay the CIA open to charges of aiding internal political repression. From the start, the CIA made it clear to Contreras that it would not support any of his activities or activities of his service which might be construed as "internal political repression." In its contacts with Contreras, the CIA urged him to adhere to a 17 January 1974 circular, issued by the Chilean Ministry of Defense, spelling out guidelines for handling prisoners in a manner consistent with the 1949 Geneva Convention.

The relationship, while correct, was not cordial and smooth, particularly as evidence of Contreras' role in human rights abuses emerged. In December 1974, the CIA concluded that Contreras was not going to

4/22/2002

improve his human rights performance. However, Contreras' assistance in the first quarter of 1975 in gaining the release of some PDC members who had been arrested and mistreated by another Chilean security service offered small hope that he would use his influence to end abuses. In retrospect, however, Contreras' role in this effort probably reflected interservice rivalry and Contreras' personal efforts to control the entire Chilean intelligence apparatus.

By April 1975, intelligence reporting showed that Contreras was the principal obstacle to a reasonable human rights policy within the Junta, but an interagency committee directed the CIA to continue its relationship with Contreras. The US Ambassador to Chile urged Deputy Director of Central Intelligence Walters to receive Contreras in Washington in the interest of maintaining good relations with Pinochet. In August 1975, with interagency approval, this meeting took place.

In May and June 1975, elements within the CIA recommended establishing a paid relationship with Contreras to obtain intelligence based on his unique position and access to Pinochet. This proposal was overruled, citing the US Government policy on clandestine relations with the head of an intelligence service notorious for human rights abuses. However, given miscommunications in the timing of this exchange, a one-time payment was given to Contreras.

In addition to information concerning external threats, CIA sought from Contreras information regarding evidence that emerged in 1975 of a formal Southern Cone cooperative intelligence effort—"Operation Condor"—building on informal cooperation in tracking and, in at least a few cases, killing political opponents. By October 1976 there was sufficient information that the CIA decided to approach Contreras on the matter. Contreras confirmed Condor's existence as an intelligence-sharing network but denied that it had a role in extra-judicial killings.

Former Allende cabinet member and Ambassador to Washington Orlando Letelier and his American assistant, Ronni Moffit, were killed in a carbombing in Washington on 21 September, 1976. Almost immediately after the assassination, rumors began circulating that the Chilean government was responsible. CIA's first intelligence report containing this allegation was dated 6 October 1976. During October 1976, the Department of Justice and the CIA worked out how the CIA would support the foreign intelligence (FI) aspects of the legal investigation. At that time, Contreras' possible role in the Letelier assassination became an issue.

By the end of 1976, contacts with Contreras were very infrequent. During 1977, CIA met with Contreras about half a dozen times; three of those contacts were to request information on the Letelier assassination. On 3 November 1977, Contreras was transferred to a function unrelated to intelligence so CIA severed all contact with him.

Nonetheless, CIA intelligence reporting continued to follow Contreras' activities closely. After a short struggle to retain power, Contreras resigned from the Army in 1978. In the interim, CIA gathered specific, detailed intelligence reporting concerning Contreras' involvement in ordering the Letelier assassination. While some of this material has been released, some remains classified and another portion has been withheld at the request of the Department of Justice, which continues to pursue the investigation.

## Intelligence Reporting

Throughout the post-coup period, the CIA collected and disseminated to the intelligence and policy communities extensive reporting concerning human rights issues in Chile. Some of this information came from contacts with mixed reputations. The intelligence included a wide variety of information,

4/22/2002

including:

* Debates in 1973-88 within the Chilean military and security services about the appropriate level of force to be used in confronting what they viewed as the subversive threat posed by leftist political groups and splinter terrorist organizations;

* The identities and activities of sub-units within the Chilean security forces charged with conducting special political activities or activities against the left, and whose association with extremist groups with violent tendencies made them most prone to systemic abuses;

* Debates within leftist political groups and splinter terrorist organizations concerning the use of violence in confronting the government; and

* Training, capabilities, readiness and deployment of the various "self-defense" groups within the Socialist and Communist Parties of Chile and splinter terrorist organizations of the Movement of the Revolutionary Left, the Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front and the Lautaro Youth and Worker/Peasant factions of the United Popular Action Movement.

In the days and months immediately following the 1973 coup, the CIA provided extensive reporting on what the government characterized as activities necessary to restore order. There were widely varying reports on the numbers of persons killed and arrested. CIA reporting confirmed that the military was deliberately not disclosing accurate figures and detailed the differing opinions within the military Junta regarding whether to summarily execute extremists and subversives or allow them trials and sentencing. There was also extensive reporting on:

* Application of "military justice" to civilian detainees and the types of punishment they were likely to face;

* Prison camp locations and the names of specific persons being held in them, including the fact that some of these locations were secret;

* Efforts of leftists to flee the country or gain asylum in foreign embassies; and

* Assessments of the effect government repression was having on the left's capabilities and efforts to regroup.

CIA also received information on "Plan Z"—purportedly drawn up by Allende's Popular Unity coalition in the late period of the Allende Government to assassinate important political and military persons opposed to its leftist agenda. When allegations of the existence of "Plan Z" first surfaced, the CIA noted that it probably was disinformation manipulated by the Junta to improve its image and to provide justification for its activities. Allegations that reports about "Plan Z" were part of a joint CIA-Chilean operation are inaccurate, although military officers with whom the CIA had contact prior to the 1973 coup were involved in the drafting the "White Book," in which allegations of "Plan Z" were a main feature.

The CIA first reported human rights abuses by the Junta on 15 September 1973, just days after the coup. CIA reported that the Chilean security interrogation units were dealing with suspected opponents in an extremely rigorous manner. A 22 September report noted that prisoners at the National Stadium were harshly treated in the first days after the coup. On 28 September, CIA reported that 27 cadavers, some showing signs of torture and mutilation, had been recovered from the Mapocho River. On 9 October, the CIA reported that Soviet non-diplomatic technicians in Chile had been repeatedly

4/22/2002

threatened and verbally abused; some of those later tried were beaten or injured. On 25 October, CIA reported that General Sergio Arellano Stark had given instructions resulting in the summary execution of 21 political prisoners. On 3 November, the CIA reported that, despite a government decree to end summary executions, 20 bodies were found shot in the San Carlos Canal. On 12 November, the CIA reported concerns within the PDC about human rights abuses. On 18 January 1974, CIA reported that Chilean politicians across the political spectrum were weighing the possibility of bringing the issue of government human rights abuses to the attention of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.

It was apparent that the 17 January 1974 Chilean government circular prohibiting torture and providing instructions for the handling of prisoners was a public relations ruse. CIA reporting indicated that the Chilean security forces did not, and probably would not, observe the stated policy. Although the State Department and Embassy had the primary role in human rights reporting, the clandestine nature of Chilean security services' human rights practices required CIA collection efforts. In late January 1974, the CIA directed that all appropriate CIA officers task their clandestine assets to report on torture in Chile.

Over the next 17 years, the CIA reported information available from its contacts concerning human rights abuses in Chile. As the left later regained strength, intelligence reporting included the plans, intentions, capabilities and terrorist acts of the left. During the transition from military to civilian rule, intelligence reporting followed the political issue of how human rights investigations and prosecutions would be handled.

A review of CIA's files has uncovered no evidence that CIA officers and employees were engaged in human rights abuses or in covering up any human rights abuses in Chile.

## Death/Disappearance of US Citizens

Allegations of CIA complicity in the death of American citizen Charles Horman, Jr.—an expatriate who supported Allende and was murdered in the aftermath of the coup in 1973—are unfounded. Similarly, CIA had no prior knowledge of the circumstances leading to the death in Chile of US citizen Frank Teruggi in 1973 or the disappearance of US citizen Boris Weisfeiler in 1985.

Nevertheless, some clandestine contacts of the CIA were involved in human rights abuses. The CIA, at the direction of and with the full concurrence of senior US policymakers, maintained official contacts with various security services. At the same time, the CIA maintained clandestine contacts with selected members of the Chilean military, intelligence and security forces, both to collect intelligence and carry out the covert actions described above. There is no doubt that some CIA contacts were actively engaged in committing and covering up serious human rights abuses.

As a result of lessons learned in Chile, Central America and elsewhere, the CIA now carefully reviews all contacts for potential involvement in human rights abuses and makes a deliberate decision balancing the nature and severity of the human rights abuse against the potential intelligence value of continuing the relationship. These standards, established in the mid-1990s, would likely have altered the amount of contact we had with perpetrators of human rights violators in Chile had they been in effect at that time.

4/22/2002