UNITED NATIONS

Security Council Distr. - GENERAL s/15422 23 September 1982 ENGLISH ORIGINAL: SPANISH

LETTER DATED 21 SEPTEMBER 1982 FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF TO THE UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY 03UNCIL

I have the honour to refer to the note dated 23 August 1982 (S/15384) from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of , Dr. Mgardo Paz Barnica, to the then President of the Security Council, Mr. Noel Eorr, in which he accuses Nicaragua of a series of harassments against his country.

The Covernmentof National Reconstruction of Nicaragua finds it surprising that the Government of Honduras should claim to be the victim of frontier tensions, since, as we stated in our note of 16 August (S/15365), those who died as a result of the well-known criminal incursions carried out from Honduran territory by former guards of the Somoza r&gime were Nicaraguan citizens, and not Hondurans.

Consolidation of social tranquillity, reconstruction of our economy and defence of our frontiers are absolute priorities for the people and Government of Nicaragua. It is therefore absurd to suggest that Nicaragua would be interested in jeopardizing its efforts and diverting its limited human and material r@.@ourc@s by launching campaigns against its neighbours.

Nicaragua did not invent the causes of the malaise in other countries and has no intention of providing grounds for accusations whose purpose is to promote and justify the increasing intervention of the in the internal affairs of .

Against this background, it is astonishing that the Government of Honduras should presume to urge the Security Council to "encourage the use by Nicaragua of diplomatic means to promote and ensure peace in the Central American region", in view of the well-known gestures for peace and dialogue which Nicaragua has made to the Council and to the international community on a number of occasions.

Even more incomprehensible is the fondness foe "negotiation and Eree exchange of views" expressed by the Gcwernment of Honduras in its latest note, in the light of the unwillingness of Minister Paz Barnica to accept the invitation issued on 24 August last by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Miguel D'Escoto Brockmann, to a meeting at Managua. In view of the gravity of the frontier situation, Minister D'Escoto, r@C@ntly, in a message dated 4 September to Minister Paz Barnica,

82-25060 0315m (E) / . . . S/15422 mglish Page 2 repeated the previous invitation, in the hope that our Government would receive from Honduras a proposal for the date of such a meeting, so that it could be held as soon as possible.

In addition to these initiatives, which faithfully attest to the willingness of the'Government of Nicaragua to make every effort to contribute to the improvement of relations with Honduras, there was the communication of 6 August 1982, annexed hereto, from the Co-ordinator of the Governing Junta of National Reconstruction, Commandant of the Revolution Daniel Ortega Saavedra, to His Excellency Roberto Suazo Cdrdoba, President of the raepublic of Honduras, inviting him to a meeting to consider all the concerns and proposals which the two Governments might wish to put forward, including the comprehensive peace proposal formulated by Honduras. We understand, as stated by Foreign Minister Paz Barnica himself, that his peace proposals are of a multilateral character and logically require the concurrence of all the countries of the region. My Government has no difficulty with such a" approach, since we are prepared to consider any serious formula that would contribute to peace in Central America.

It should be recalled that, at the meeting between the Heads of State of Honduras and Nicaragua at the Guasaule frontier post on 13 May 1981, the two Gweenments reiterated their firm "conviction that the solution of any problem must be sought through dialogue" and that, in compliance with that pledge, the Co-ordinator of the Governing Junta and the Minister for Foreign Affairs of my country went to for talks with Honduran authorities.

14y Government is understandably concerned at the obvious inconsistency between the unwillingness of the Government of Honduras to continue a bilateral dialogue, on the one hand, and the publicizing of its peace proposals and of false accusations, on the other. Such a policy does not contribute in any way to a relaxation of tensions in the region.

I should be grateful if you would circulate this note and its annexes as a Security Council document.

(Signed) Javier CHAMORRO MORA Ambassador Permanent Representative of Nicaragua to the United Nations

/ . . . S/15422 English Annex I Page 1

Annex I

Letter dated 6 August 1982 from the Co-ordinator of the Bverning Junta of National Feeconstruction of Nicaragua to the

I have the honour to refer to recent developments in the Central American area, and particularly in the HondurarrNicaraguan frontier region, which in the view of the Government of Nicaragua merit the most thorough attention.

As you know, in recent months the situation on our common frontier has increasingly deteriorated and there have been a further series of incidents the gravity of which we need hardly stress, but which constitute a distinct threat to peace between our countries and for the Central American region as a whole.

In these circumstances, and in the belief that it is oniy through dialogue that the problems affecting our two nations can be overcome, I have the honour to invite you to a meeting at Managua aimed at finding answers, through a free and open exchange of views, to the problems which exist between Honduras, and Nicaragua.

It would logically follow from the above that we should take up as agenda items at that meeting all the concerns and proposals which your (33vernment and mine might wish to put forward, such as the seven-point Honduran peace proposal and the seven-point Nicaraguan peace proposal. The meeting would also be attended by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and representatives of the :anned forces of our countries.

The Government of Nicaragua is sure that this initiative, which is designed to strengthen the cause of peace, will be favourably received, in a resolve to obtain for our peoples the security and well-being to which they are entitled.

The date of the meeting and other details would be established by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, through the appropriate channels.

(Signed) Daniel ORTEGA SAAVEDPA s/15422 mglish Annex II Page 1

Annex II

Cxnmuniqu6 issed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Nicaragua on 2 September 1982

lbe Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the &public of Nicaragua, taking into account the serious political situation in the’Centra1 American region, deems it appropriate to state the following%

The government of National Reconstruction considers that the views expressed recently at the Commonwealth Club of San Rancisco, California, by the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs of the Reagan Mministration were completely illogical, not only because they were abusive and frivolous but also because they ~entailed inconsistency and distortion. It is even more incomprehensible why this statement was entitled “Suilding peace in Central America”, when in the light of developments in the region it is easy to see that what is being established there are the bases for an ignominious war, designed and conceived in advance by the Reagan Administration even before it assumed power. A glance at the famous Santa Fc peper, which constitutes the keystone of Ulited States foreign policy, shows how the bellicose and threatening philoaoghy of that Mministration has gradually been developed.

NOW, high officials of the Ragan Wministration, and the Assistant Secretary in his speech at the Commonwealth Club, are seeking to distort the truth by presenting erroneous accounts of what really happened as regards efforts to achieve peace in the region. hoping to make the Nicaraguan 03vernment appear intransigent and unwilling to engage in a dialogue.

The facts a’re as follows. In September 1980, members of our Governing Junta met with Resident Carter in the YJlite House and an effective dialogue was begun. This mutual readiness to readjust and inwove relations between Nicaragua and the Vlited States underwent an abrupt change when the Reagan Administration took office in January 1981.

Since then, the Government of Nicaragua has sought on many occasions to pursue those contacts at the highest level with a view to finding political solutions to our differences.

It was not until August 1981, after months of insistent effort, that Assistant Secretary of State lhomas Enders came to Nicaragua and met with members of OUT Governing Junta) despite the arrogance of this official, we felt that it was an appropriate opportunity to initiate contacts with a view to achieving. peace. A process of exchanging notes was begun, in which Nicaragua and the United States presented their respective proposals.

In October 1981, while both countries were involved in this process, the Ulited States launched aerial and naval manoeuvres, known as “Operation Hal&o Vista”, only a few kilometres from our land and sea frontiers, in which members of the armed forces of the United States and Wnduras participated. / . . . s/15422 English Annex II Page 2

On 31 October 1981, we submitted a note commenting on the United States proposals. There were no more replies from the United States. Washington inexplicably withdrew from this exchange; needless to Bay, it gave no explanation of any kind. lhat was a signal for the bloody destabilising activities planned for the end of the year, known as "Navidad Poja".

At the beginning of 1982 Nicaragua continued its efforts to achieve peace in the region, despite the fact that the Reagan Administration had approved SUS 19 million for the purpose of destabilising our country, and moreover violated our sovereignty, penetrating our air space and maritime space with dozens of spy flights and warships.

On 20 February 1982 the Frente Sandinista de Liberaci6n ~acional submitted at the meeting of the Latin American Political Party Conference in Managua a new peace plan for the region, which among other things mentioned the desirability of signing with our neighbours non-aggression pacts based on non-intervention in internal affairs and mutual respect. hrmasis was placed on readiness to maintain friendly relations with the mited States and to initiate new talks on any subject Of mutual concern, aimed in particular at a negotiated solution of the conflicts affec,ting us.

zhus far, all the efforts made by our Government to initiate a dialogue with united States have remained fruitless. The attitude of the Reagan Administration has been inflexible and obstinate, as is shown inter alia by the following8 first, it has never intended to engage in a serious and responsible dialogue, and, secondly, the process of e.xchanges of notes is used as a propaganda tribk to cast a smoke-screen over its true intentions, which are to strike at and destabilise, and finally to destroy, our revolutionary process.

Despite the foregoing, the Government of National Reconstruction, taking a mature and consistent approach, continues to support the proposals submitted by the President of Mexico, Mr. Jose Ldpez Portillo, on 21 February 1982 in Managua, which contain three main points:

1. The United States must renounce any threat or use of force against Nicaragua.

2. If the counterrevolutionary Nicaraguan bands in Honduras are disarmed and their training in the United States is prohibited, Nicaragua must simultaneously renounce the acquisition of weapons and aircraft and reduce the size of its armed forces.

3. Nicaragua could sign non-aggression pacts,with its neighbours and the Mited States.

However, the United States has at no time expressed any genuine interest in that initiative, thus confirming our suspicion that it has never been interested in dialogue and that its only goal is to pursue a policy of aggression and interference in the area in accordance with its global geopolitical interests.

/ . . . S/1542 2 hglish Annex II Page 3

Through the aforementioned speech by Assistant Secretary hders, the Reagan Administration is also seeking deceitfully to present to the world the image of a Government concerned about the course being taken by the Sandinist Popular Revolution and sharing that concern with its allies in the region. The intention is very clear: to disseminate, on the one hand, the idea that the United States has nothing to do with developments in Central America and, on the other, the ides that its presence in Central America is a response to the fear expressed by its friends and allies in the area in view of the armed intimidation to which they are subjected by Cuba and Nicaragua.

Nothing could be more false than these arguments, for it is the intransigent and aggressive policy of the Reagan Administration, which is using sectors of the Honduran Army and counterrevolutionaries based in that sister country and in Miami, as a bastion, that is creating a climate of destabilisation and tension in Central America.

In order to substantiate these assertions, it will suffice to recall some of the recent statements of, and actions planned and encouraged, by the United States Government in the region8 these also reveal the level of United States involvement and responsibility, which are the real causes of tension and crisis in Central America.

1. (XI lf February 1982, a United States newspaper, the Washington Post, reported a plan by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to spend $19 million on COVert aotivit+s in Nicaragua. This included the establishment of a paramilitary force of more than 1,000 men near the Honduras-Nicaraguan border.

2. ” On 3.March 1982, a delegation of United States officials headed by Leslie Brown, I$?puty Director of the Office of Political and Affairs of the Separtmentof State, met in Tegucigalpa with officials of the Honduran GOvernment to consider the use of military forces in that country.

3. On 1 April 1982, General Gustavo Alvarez announced that he would allow United States eroops to enter Honduras to defend his country in case of armed aggression.

4. Cm 19 March 1982, Chris Arcos, First Secretary of the United States Embassy in Tegqcigalpa, announced that 72 members of the American armed forces were present in Honduras to improve the defensive capability of the Honduran Army.

5. Pccor$ing to information received in the Nicaraguan Fareign Ministry, RC-5 spy aircraft of the United States Air Force are based in Honduras.

6. On 29 April 1982, naval manoeuvres known as 'Ccean Venture" began with the direct participation of the United States .

7. On 22 April 1982, FranCiS West, reputy Secretary of Defense, told the Sub-Committee for Inter-American Affairs of the House'of Representatives of the United States C$ongress that the Reagan Administration intended to use air bases in Honduras bn the pretext of dealing with a purported Cuban attack in the region and / . . . s/15422 English Annex II Page 4 for that purpose the United States Government would spend $21 million on what it called a modest improvement in certain airports on the Atlantic coast of Honduras. 8. The United States Ambassador to the Government of Honduras, Negroponte, affirmed that military aid to Honduras will increase by $14.5 million and that the are at a disadvantage when compared with the Nicaraguan MmY. 9. During the months of July and August, combined military manoeuvres took place in Honduran territory. ltwse manoeuvres are an open provocation to the Nicaraguan Government and also provide support and encouragement for the counterrevolution. 10. At the end of July 1982, a high official of the United States Dnbassy in Managua announced that joint military manoeuvres in which units of the Honduran and united States Armies would participate would be held next November. 11. Cnly recently United States congressional circles began to learn of the existence of a "package" of slightly over $60 million which the Reagan Wministration was allocating to the Honduran armed forces without the knowledge of Congress, on the ground that that sum would come from surpluses of military aid approved for other countries and not used, whose reallocation to Honduras did not require congressional approval. 12. Ep to February 1982, gangs of former Somoza guards operating from Honduran territory murdered 200 Nicaraguan citizens, many of them innocent peaSantS. From February onwards, these activities increased quantitatively and qualitatively. As a result there have so far been 70 dead, including Nicaraguan militia, literacy workers, members of health brigades and members of the Sandinist People's Army and the Frontier Guard. These attacks were aimed at the destruction of productive centres and the infrastructure in order to add to the misery and destruction of our people. Such are the results of the specialized training received by these gangs in Florida and California in United States territory at a cost of $19 million. This sum is being used by the most reactionary sectors of the Reagan Administration to finance the counterrevolution. All these facts reveal clearly that the present crisis and the increase in military tensions in central America are the result of the policy of the Reagan Administration and that, consequently, peace and d&ente in the region must necessarily depend on a change of policy and attitudes by the Wited States towards the region and particularly towards the NicaragUi?A revolution. This change in attitude will undoubtedly facilitate understanding between the countries of the region.

For this reason the Government of Nicaragua is prepared, and calls upon the Vnited States Government, to sign a bilateral non-aggression pact between our tW0 countries to lay the bases for a regional understanding. / . . .

, S/15422 English Annex II Page 5

With regard to the fraternal countries of the Central ?merican area, OUT actions have been consistent with our will for peace.

With regard to , on 7 October 1981, the Co-ordinator Of the Governing Junta of National Reconstruction, addressing the General Assembly at its thirty-sixth regular session, strongly supported the French-Mexican proposal for a negotiated political solution to the Salvadorian conflict. He also announced, or presented, a Farabundo Marti para la Liberacidn National-Frente Democra'tico Rsvolucionario peace proposal in which the organisations concerned proposed to the Ulited States Government effective measures for solving the problem afflicting that fraternal country. Suspiciously enough, almost one year later we heard the Reagan Administration speak at the Commonwealth Club of "a reconciliation process", when thousands of Salvadorians have been, and continue to be, assassinated, victims of the mistaken policy of extermination which the Dnited States has been supporting through the Government of that country.

We call on the Reagan Administration to be consistent with its much-talked-of desire for reconciliation within the Central American countries and thus to proceed publicly to support dialogue and negotiation between the forces which are now fighting in El Salvador. With regard to Honduras, despite the continuing actions of Somosa bands and military units from that country against our territory , we have also taken concrete steps, On 6 May 1981, Nicaragua proposed to the Government of Honduras a meeting at the highest level; this meeting was held seven days later at "El Guasaule" and was attended by the then President of Honduras, Policarpo Paz Garcia, and the Co-ordinator of the Governing Junta of National Reconstruction of Nicaragua; at that meeting, the Government of Nicaragua proposed that the Commanders-in-Chief of the armies of both countries should meet at a later date in order to seek concrete means of helping to resolve the frontier problems created by the incursions of said bands into Nicaraguan territory. Likewise, on 6 August1982, our Government invited the President of Honduras, His Excellency rroberto Suazo adrdoba, to a meeting in Managua to seek a solution to existing problems by means of an open and frank dialogue. On 24 August 1982, Ebeeign Minister D'EscOtO addressed a note to Foreign Minister Pas Barnica of Honduras, inviting him to discuss problems of common interest. Ihis meeting has not come about either. With regard to Costa Rica, the Government of National Reconstruction has made definite efforts to preserve the good relations we have always had and has put forward a series of initiatives to find a solution to existing problems. To this end, we enthusiastically put forward the initiative to establish a Joint Commission to discuss problems of common interest.

/ . . . S/15422 hglish Annex II Page 6

We invited the Foreign Minister of Costa Rica to visit Nicaragua as ~1 sign of our Government's interest in improving relations; this invitation was acaeptcd and we are waiting for a suitable date to be set.

We also invited the Minister of Public Safety of Costa Rica, who met with the Minister of the Interior of Nicaragua on 6 August last. Fbllowing this meeting, a Joint mmmuniq& was issued reflecting the interest of both parties ih sQlving any difference that may exist between the two nations.

All the abovementioned actions are clear and real indications of our readiness, on the basis of a bilateral non-aggression pact between thb CSnttal American countries, to take effective and concrete measures to reduce arNlments in the area as a step to achieving a firm and lasting peace.

!Fne Government of National Rxonstruction will continue to make bveQeffort necessary to achieve peaceful and normal coexistence between the Governments of Nicaragua and the mited States. ¢ initiatives testify to this.

During the recent talks between the Vice President of the Unit@StateS, Mr. George Bush, and a member of the Governing Juntaof National Reco&trUction~ Mr. Rafael Cdrdoba Rivas, at the inauguration of the new President of on 7 August, Nicaragua proposed that a high-level meeting should be h&d and that the agenda should consist of the 8 items put forward by the United Stdtes end the 13 items put forward by Nicaragua in the informal written exchanges hehd at the ambassadorial level. We also proposed that the meeting should take place in a country which has offered to co-operate in solving bilateral differen& - for instance Mexico, Canada, Venezuela, or Spain. We further pointdd gut that this meeting could be held with or without publicity, whichever was deehed desirable.

At the same time, we again proposed - as we did earlier to the United States Dzpartment Of state - that a meeting should be held between the Nicaragban Minister for Foreign Affairs, Miguel D'Escoto, and Secretary of State George Shuts to pave the way for a frank and constructive dialogue. We are still awaiting the ansivers to these two suggestions and we believe that this is a good opportunity tier the Reagan Administration to demonstrate, in practice, that it is genuinely Lntercsted in dialogue and in solving the grave problems affecting the region.

Cnce again, we call on the United States Government to reflect and do bet aside its threatening, arrogant and aggressive attitudes. We reiterate dui conviction that only through sincere dialogue between our two Gwernmentd, without any pre-conditions, shall we be able to make an effective contribution td the establishment of solid bases for a lasting peace, which is the essential Bl&wnt for the stability and progress of our peoples. Peace in Central America demands this.