Senate Approves Gregg as Ambassador to South Korea

The Senate approved the nomination of Donald P. Gregg Tuesday as U.S. ambassador to South Korea, despite Democratic accusations that he had lied to cover up President Bush’s alleged complicity in the Iran-Contra scandal.

The 66-33 vote for Gregg appeared to bring down the curtain on a two-year effort by Democrats to link Bush directly to the scandal. It also was a setback for Sen. Alan Cranston (D-Calif.), who led an aggressive campaign to defeat the nomination.

Cranston and other Democrats charged that Gregg, a 30-year CIA veteran who was the foreign policy adviser to Bush while he was vice president, was deeply involved in Ronald Reagan Administration policy to provide assistance to the Nicaraguan resistance, despite legislation enacted by Congress outlawing direct U.S. aid.

Moreover, Democrats alleged that Gregg--in the words of Sen. Albert Gore Jr. (D-Tenn.)--”lied repeatedly and brazenly, time after time” to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee when he insisted he had no knowledge of the Reagan Administration’s efforts to supply the Contras without informing Congress.

Gregg’s supporters argued that Democrats opposed Gregg only in an effort to dredge up the Iran-Contra scandal one more time to embarrass Bush. “That is what this was all about--get George Bush, tear him down,” declared Sen. Jesse Helms (R-N.C.).

But Cranston insisted that the opposition to Gregg had nothing to do with the scandal. “We are not eager to rehash Iran-Contra,” he said. “We are not eager to raise questions about what George Bush knew about the disastrous Iran-Contra scandal and when he knew it.”

Nevertheless, Gregg’s opponents conceded privately that the vote was a test of whether members of the Senate supported Bush’s claim that he knew nothing about the scandal before it became public knowledge.

And while Democrats were skeptical of Gregg’s contention that neither he nor Bush knew about it, they were unable to find any irrefutable evidence linking either man directly to the Iran-Contra affair.

Cranston argued that the Bush Administration had thwarted Senate efforts to get to the bottom of the controversy by refusing to provide classified government documents that could have shed new light on the roles of Gregg and Bush.

Senate requests for documents were turned down by the National Security Council, the CIA and the State Department. In addition, former White House aide Oliver L. North refused to comply with a committee subpoena for the relevant pages from handwritten notebooks he kept.

Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.) said that he--like many of his fellow Democrats--found Gregg’s testimony “highly implausible” and even “incredible.”

Gregg told the Senate committee that he “never discussed the Contras” with Bush, nor was he aware of the illegal supply operation--even though he talked frequently with North and others who were deeply involved in it.

In addition, as Democrats frequently noted, the nominee suggested that his aide and his secretary had meant to write the word “copters”--meaning helicopters--instead of the word “Contras” that appeared on two briefing papers for Bush. Mitchell described Gregg’s explanation as “pathetic” and Cranston called it a “comical theory.”

“What does he take the Senate for and what do we take him for?” asked Gore. “Are we to seriously accept a baldfaced presentation of that kind? It’s absurd on its face.”

Democrats also questioned Gregg’s testimony that he never discussed the resupply of the Contras with his friend and former CIA colleague, Felix Rodriguez, who was deeply involved in the effort and frequently visited Bush’s vice presidential office. Neither he nor Rodriguez could explain handwritten notes that Gregg made on the subject during a meeting he had with Rodriguez.

Gregg also insisted that even after he discussed the resupply with Rodriguez in August, 1986, he did not report it to Bush. He said that Bush did not learn about it until the vice president read a New York Times story based on an interview with Gregg in December, 1986.

Democrats argued that even if Gregg were telling the truth about his knowledge of the Iran-Contra scandal, he had demonstrated faulty judgment by failing to recognize that the Administration was involved in an illegal resupply operation and by failing to tell Bush.

“Either he was too clever to be caught, or too naive to know what was going on under his nose,” Gore said.

But Gregg’s supporters insisted that the nominee would never have allowed illegal activity by top government officials to go unchallenged, if he had known about it. Republicans defended the nominee’s reputation as a highly experienced public servant whose previous experience as a CIA official in South Korea would enable him to be an excellent ambassador.