Testimony of Mr. Robert J. Destatte,
Senior Analyst, Research & Analysis Directorate,
Defense Prisoner of War and Missing in Action Office,
before the
Committee on International Relations,
House of Representatives, Congress of the United States
November 4, 1999
"The CUBAN Program": Torture of American Prisoners by Cuban
Agents"
Good morning Chairman Gilman and distinguished Committee Members. I join Deputy
Assistant Secretary of Defense Jones in saluting the American heroes who shared with the
Committee this morning their experiences as victims of what has become known as the
"Cuban Program." Thank you for the opportunity to present an overview of the
historical record of efforts by the Department of Defense and other Federal agencies to
answer questions about the "Cuban Program." I ask that my statement, in its
entirety, be entered into the record of this hearing.
I would like to begin with a brief description of the "Cuban Program."
What Was The "Cuban Program"?
American POWs coined the term "Cuban Program" to describe a program in which
a small team of Caucasian interrogators brutally beat and tortured 19 American aviators in
a camp our POWs nicknamed "the Zoo," in Hanoi, between July 1967 and August
1968. One of the POWs, USAF Major Earl G. Cobeil, eventually died from the beatings.
The Caucasian interrogators spoke English fluently, but with a Spanish accent, and
spoke knowledgeably about Central America and the Southeastern United States. In an
exchange with one of our POWs, a Vietnamese guard referred to the Caucasian interrogators
as Cubans. These and other factors led many POWs and analysts, including me, to believe
that the interrogators were Cubans, possibly Cubans who had lived in the United States.
The POWs nicknamed the chief Caucasian interrogator "Fidel." They nicknamed
his principal assistant "Chico."
Several days before the "Cuban Program" ended a third man the POWs nicknamed
variously "Pancho" and "Garcia" appeared to replace "Fidel."
The POWs observed another man who might have been Cuban working as an electrical
technician in the POW camp during the closing months of the program. They also heard the
voice of a woman they believed was Cuban on the camp radio for about two weeks near the
end of the program.
When did the Department of Defense first learn about the "Cuban Program"?
The DOD first learned about the "Cuban Program" in March 1973 when the
reports of the first post-homecoming debriefings began arriving at DIA's POW/MIA office.
How did the Department of Defense respond to these first reports?
By 19 March 1973, nearly two weeks before the last POW was released, the DIAs
POW/MIA Office had brought this issue to the attention of senior DOD officials.
By the 23rd of March, the US government had established a coordinated effort
to learn the identity of the "Cubans".
That effort involved the DIA, each of the Armed Services, the National Security Agency,
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Senate
Internal Security Subcommittees Chief Investigator.
In April 1974, the CIA informed the Defense Intelligence Agency that CIA analysts had
tentatively identified the interrogator nicknamed "Fidel" as one Luis Perez,
also known as Luis Perez Jaen, a Captain in the Cuban Ministry of Interior. This Captain:
- was in Hanoi during the "Cuban Program,"
- had a history of interrogating foreigners in Cuba, and
- was in the US during 1956-1957, buying and shipping arms to Cuba.
- possessed most of the physical and personality traits of "Fidel" that our POWs
had described.
The CIA provided DIA a copy of a photograph of Luis Perez Jaen that was published in
the Cuban newspaper "Oriente" on 25 February 1959. The photograph, which we have
shared with the Committee, depicts Perez Jaen wearing a military cap and a full beard.
Between November 1975 and mid-1976 US Air Force investigators asked seven victims of
the "Cuban Program" to examine this photograph of Luis Perez Jaen. Six of these
men could not state positively that he was the interrogator they nicknamed
"Fidel," primarily because the photo depicts him wearing a full beard. One of
the seven men, Colonel Donald Waltman, wrote in a 16 April 1976 note to a US Air Force
investigator: "I say yes, that's Fidel; or at least a guy who looks too much like
him. I have to try to imagine him clean shaven, and when I do its him. (Maybe because I'd
like to I.D. him so damn bad). Its the most look like Fidel picture I have seen."
Also in April 1974, the CIA informed the DIA that "Chico" might be a Cuban
named Veiga (first name unknown), an employee of the Cuban Department of State Security.
Reportedly, Veiga had studied at Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, during 1958-59. An
extensive follow up investigation by US Air Force investigators failed to confirm the
identity of this person.
Other names have been suggested over the years; however, subsequent investigations
either ruled them out or proved inconclusive. For example, the DIA POW/MIA Office provided
historical information about the "Cuban Program" to the FBI when it investigated
a 1987 report that a Cuban employee of the United Nations might be one of the Cuban
interrogators. The FBI worked closely with returned POWs in that investigation; however,
the POWs could not positively identify the Cuban at the United Nations as one of the men
who tortured them in Hanoi.
Recent news stories suggest that the Cuban Minister of Education, Fernando Vecino
Alegret, is the interrogator our POWs nicknamed Fidel. Fernando Vecino Alegret first came
to our attention shortly before he visited the U.S. in November 1978. At that time federal
law enforcement and intelligence agencies examined the possibility that he was the
interrogator named Fidel. We have been searching our historical files for any record we
might have received from those agencies concerning Fernando Vecino Alegret. Two days ago
we discovered a still classified September 1973 report that described Fernando Vecino
Alegret as an engineering graduate who studied at the University of Havana during
1962-1965. The report also stated that he founded the Cuban Military Technical Institute
(ITM) in September 1966, and that he was its director from September 1966 until January
1973. We have not yet had time to confirm the origin and reliability of that report;
however, if the information in the report is accurate, there is little chance that
Fernando Vecino Alegret could be the interrogator "Fidel."
Among the names we have received, the two names the CIA suggested in April 1974 remain
the most likely candidates for the interrogators nicknamed "Fidel" and
"Chico."
What Was The Purpose Of The "Cuban Program?"
The only information we have concerning the purpose of the Cuban Program comes from the
American POWs who were victims and two Vietnamese military officers.
The preponderance of information in our files suggests that the "Cuban
Program" was a Cuban assistance program that went awry and that the Vietnamese
terminated the program shortly after the interrogator nicknamed "Fidel" beat
Major Cobeil into a near catatonic state from which he never recovered.
Has The Department Of Defense Kept The Congress Informed?
The Department of Defense has kept the Congress informed about the "Cuban
Program" from the very beginning. For example, the DPMO's predecessor office, the
Defense Intelligence Agency's Special Office for POW/MIA Affairs, presented testimony
about the "Cuban Program" to the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee during
hearings on 2 July 1973, about three months after the last American POW was released. A
former POW who was a victim of the program, US Navy Lieutenant Commander Larry Spencer,
also testified before the subcommittee.
Later, the DIA's POW/MIA office provided historical information to the
subcommittees Chief Investigator, Mr. Alfonso L. Tarabochia, who conducted an
independent effort to identify the interrogators.
By September 1974, Mr. Tarabochia had tentatively concluded that "Fidel"
possibly was a Cuban named Pedro Fumero. Unfortunately, the returned POWs who were victims
of "Fidel" could not identify Fumero as one of their interrogators.
The DPMOs DIA predecessor office also provided an appraisal to the Chairman of
the House Armed Services Committee on 6 October 1977. More recently, the DPMO provided
updates on the "Cuban Program" to Congressman Dornan on 23 March 1987, 22 August
1996, and 11 and 17 September 1996.
Has the Department of Defense kept the public informed about this issue?
The story about the "Cuban Program" is not new. For example, I have here
eight news articles about the "Cuban Program" published in 1973, 1977, and 1981
in Washington, DC, New York, Baltimore, Denver, and Des Moines. These articles are based
on information released by the DPMO's predecessor, the DIA's POW/MIA office, and personal
accounts by POWs who were victims of the program.
What about the recent article in the Miami Herald?
I would like to comment briefly for the public record about recent press reports about
the "Cuban Program." News reports published in the Miami Herald on 22 August
1999 and the Seattle Times on 28 October 1999 suggested that this issue was
"Concealed for decades by official U.S. secrecy and
the full story of Fidel and
the so-called Cuba Program is finally becoming public." The same articles speculated
that the reason the story has drawn little attention is "Perhaps
because most
POWs obeyed Pentagon orders to keep quiet, to protect POWs who might remain in Vietnam and
perhaps because Fidel's identification as a Cuban was then only an unconfirmed allegation
by the POWs."
The facts are that Department of Defense officials asked the POWs who were returning
during Operation Homecoming in 1973 to not speak out publicly about the torture until
after the last POW was released. The last POW was released on 1 April 1973. The first
stories by returned POWs about the "Cuban Program" appeared in American
newspapers the next day, on 2 April 1973.
Some of the sources cited in the articles portray DPMO's role incorrectly. We are not a
counterintelligence office or a law enforcement office. Our mission is humanitarian. It is
to account for American servicemen who were lost while serving abroad. All American
victims of the "Cuban Program" are accounted for.
Successive Administrations, the Congress, the Department of State, the DIA, the DPMO,
the Pacific Commands Joint Task ForceFull Accounting, the U.S. Army Central
Identification Laboratory, the National League of Families--literally thousands of
Americans--have worked hard for many years to build and sustain programs that today are
allowing us to account for Americans lost in the old Soviet Union, North Korea, Southeast
Asia, and other areas in the world.
As DASD Jones stated earlier, our mission is humanitarian and it is worldwide. Our
ability to accomplish our mission is dependent wholly on the willingness of foreign
governments to allow our POW/MIA specialists to have access to their citizens, records,
and territory.
Suggestions that DPMO should investigate war crimes risk undoing the results of years
of hard work and jeopardize our ability to accomplish our humanitarian mission.
What Is DPMO's Role With Regard To The "Cuban Program"?
DPMO is a central repository for historical information concerning the American POW/MIA
issue. As DASD Jones stated earlier, DPMO stands ready to share historical information and
knowledge about the program with appropriate US agencies.
Conclusion: The history of this issue is that the POW/MIA office informed
senior Department of Defense officials immediately upon learning about the actions of the
presumably Cuban interrogators. Those officials immediately directed appropriate
intelligence and investigative agencies to try to identify those interrogators. In 1974
CIA analysts tentatively identified two Cuban officials as the interrogators nicknamed
"Fidel" and "Chico." Their victims, however, were not able to confirm
the identities. We also have kept the Congress and public informed. We will remain a
repository of historical information about all aspects of the POW/MIA issue, and remain
ready to share that historical information with appropriate federal intelligence or
investigative offices. However, as DASD Jones stated earlier, we believe that DPMO should
not become involved in efforts to investigate the "Cuban Program" and jeopardize
our accounting mission.