Foreign Relations of the United States, 1977–1980 Volume XXIV, South America; Latin America Region

217. Telegram From the Embassy in Chile to the Department of State¹

Santiago, June 14, 1978, 2153Z

4515. Subj: Letelier/Moffitt Assassination Investigation. Ref: Santiago 4442.²

1. Foreign Minister Cubillos called me late June 13 and said that, as to my request, he had turned over the package of documents prepared by Messrs Propper and Barcella to General Orozco the afternoon of June 12. After a superficial reading, both he and General Orozco thought that the information was of little value to the GOC’s effort to continue the investigation. He said no new evidence had been presented which would permit them to go ahead with their case. He said that they still were awaiting further information regarding the interview with General Walters.³

2. Regarding my request that Paraguay be called, Cubillos said he had discussed this with Minister of Interior Fernandez, who is General Mena’s supervisor over CNI operations. Cubillos said that the GOC position is that any call to the Paraguayan government would be interference in that country’s internal affairs. He said the GOP is a free agent and can do whatever it pleases. I replied that this answer will not be satisfactory to Washington. I recalled that the GOC had no problem in calling the Paraguayans and asking them for their cooperation at an earlier time, so why not tell them now that the Chilean government would have no objection to their permitting one of their officials to testify.

3. Regarding Colonel Iturriaga, Cubillos said the Chilean government would cooperate strictly within the legal framework, and any request for Col. Iturriaga’s testimony would have to come through judicial channels and would be decided by the Chilean courts. I said that I understood this, but at this moment we wished Colonel Iturriaga to appear before the grand jury. This was not a legal question, but an executive decision to permit him to go. I said I understood that Iturriaga had stated that he was willing to go. Cubillos answered that they had not consulted Iturriaga but simply made the decision that everything had to go through legal channels. He said that he had been under the impression that we wanted Iturriaga for the trial. He promised to give me a definite answer later in the day regarding Iturriaga’s appearance at the grand jury hearing. However he has now left for a 3-day visit to Lima without getting back to me.

4. I told Cubillos I was very disappointed with his information, which would be labeled as lack of cooperation in Washington. I said I would not want to speculate on other unpleasant consequences, but would not be surprised if other measures might be contemplated which are not in the best interests of bilateral relations. I then said that since he had talked to Fernandez, who apparently had made the decision on this issue, I might want to raise this matter with him and, if necessary subsequently with the President. He said I was welcome to do so and that he was sure the President would receive me, but he did not think that anything would change. I said that in my attempt to maintain US-Chilean relations at an even keel and particularly in view of the repeated assurances made by the president that full cooperation would be forthcoming, it would be only fair to stress to Fernandez or to him that the unforthcoming attitude on our two requests would be regarded as lack of cooperation.

5. At this time I am planning to request an appointment with Fernandez first and then, if necessary, Pinochet to renew the request for action on the two points. To make sure the GOC understands the degree of our concern and that I am not free-lancing, I recommend that the Department call in Ambassador Barros immediately at a sufficiently high level and make the points I have already made to Cubillos and will be making to Fernandez/Pinochet.⁴ I think we should be careful in speculating about my possibly being called back for consultation. This card is hard to play more than once, and we may want to save it for the indictment and extradition stage.

6. If, as a result of my meetings with Fernandez and/or Pinochet (aided by the demarche with Barros) we can get the Paraguayan phone call, and if they are still negative on permitting Iturriaga to travel now, I think we should settle for letters rogatory on Colonel Iturriaga—if this can meet the need. Obviously we would have to move quickly on the letters.

7. Regardless of the outcome of discussions this week on our two requests, it is essential that our continued concern over cooperation in this case form part of the conversations with Foreign Minister Cubillos next week in Washington. He arrives June 21 to attend the OASGA. He should be reminded by the Secretary during his bilateral that full cooperation is an absolute must if our relations are to prosper.⁵

Landau

1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780249-0190. Secret; Immediate; Exdis; Stadis.
2. June 12. Landau reported: “I delivered package of documents prepared by Messrs Propper and Barcella to Foreign Minister Cubillos on June 12,” and “told the Foreign Minister that we expected equal cooperation from the GOC. I asked specifically that a phone call be made immediately to Paraguay to inform GOP officials that there was no GOC objection to their testifying.” In addition, “I requested that Lt Col Raul Iturriaga be allowed to testify in the United States.” (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780245-0866.)
3. In telegram 147382 to Santiago, June 9, the text of a memorandum from Propper and Barcella to Orozco was transmitted which read, in part: “I have been advised by the CIA that General Vernon Walters retired from the CIA on July 2, 1976. He was no longer there at the time either mission to the United States by DINA personnel took place. The FBI will interview General Walters for you within the next few days and the interview will be sent to you immediately thereafter.” (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780242-0469)
4. In telegram 155394 to Santiago, June 19, the Department reported on Christopher’s June 15 meeting with Barros. (National Archives, RG 59, Central Foreign Policy File, D780255-0806)
5. Vance did not meet with Cubillos at this time; for their October 1978 meeting, see Document 226. For Vaky’s August 1978 meeting with Cubillos, see Document 221.