Spaniards Relive Train Bombings as Panel Struggles to Find Answers

A plaque has gone up in Puerta del Sol, the rambunctious heart of this capital, in memory of the people killed in the spring’s devastating train bombings. It’s next to the plaque honoring the 1808 Spanish rebellion against Napoleon.

And, at the hard-hit Atocha rail station, a virtual memorial with a computer display has replaced the candles, flowers and handwritten notes that sprouted that March morning of mass murder.

Slowly, Madrid finds ways to recover.

The tough questions, meanwhile, are being asked inside a high-ceilinged hearing room about halfway between Puerta del Sol and the Atocha station, at the Spanish parliament, known as the Cortes. There, a committee interviews witness after witness for hours on end to determine how the nation could have been blindsided by the worst terrorist attack in its history.

The train bombings occurred three days before an election in which the right-wing, pro-U.S. ruling party was ousted by an angry public in a stunning upset.

The then-opposition Socialist Party is now the government. It has been especially eager to hold the hearings, in which a commission made up of 16 parliament members from various parties questions former and current police chiefs, intelligence agents, politicians and coroners. Every session, complete with angry exchanges, is broadcast live on television.

The hearings have turned into partisan battles as commissioners also try to find out to what extent the then-government or its opposition manipulated the traumatic event to gain an advantage in the election.

For Spaniards, the bombings during rush hour March 11, which killed at least 191 people and injured 1,900, were their version of America’s 9/11. Even the shorthand forces a comparison: in Spain, the U.S. attacks are known as 11-S (S for September), and the assault on Madrid is known as 11-M (M for March).

And so, inevitably, similarities are noted between the hearings here and those held by the U.S. commission that recently completed its report on the Sept. 11 attacks. There is certainly a familiar ring: Underestimated threats. Flawed intelligence. Poor coordination among law enforcement agencies. Purloined documents.

Today, it is generally agreed that the train bombings were the work of a militant Islamic organization inspired by the Al Qaeda terrorist network. For many hours after the bombings, however, the government of then-Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar blamed the Basque separatist organization ETA, even though the attack was on a scale never before attempted by that group.

Critics insist that Aznar deliberately attempted to submerge mounting evidence pointing to Muslim militants because he was afraid that the electorate would blame him for having brought terrorists’ wrath upon the country. Spaniards overwhelming opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning, but Aznar ignored public opinion and sent troops to support the U.S.-led occupation forces.

One day last week, the former head of national intelligence testified that the Aznar administration refused to include his agency in the investigation of the bombings.

To an astonished audience, Jorge Dezcallar said he learned of the discovery by police of a van containing key evidence, including tapes in Arabic of verses from the Koran, detonators and other clues, when he saw it on television. Discovery of the van was considered a turning point in the case.

The national intelligence service was not brought in to the case until March 16, two days after the election, Dezcallar said.

The chief prosecutor of Spain’s High Court, Eduardo Fungairino, testified that Islamic terrorism was something that didn’t interest him before March 11, because it seemed to be “second-class terrorism.” When questioned about his lack of knowledge about important details in the case, Fungairino said he rarely read newspapers out of concern for his “mental hygiene.”

Another surprise came when the commission learned -- from Aznar -- that the former prime minister had left office with secret documents in his possession. On a tour of South America promoting his new book, Aznar told a Colombian radio interviewer that he kept a number of national intelligence documents made available to him while in power.

Commission members summoned the current head of intelligence, Alberto Saiz, to explain. An uncomfortable-looking Saiz said he had written a letter to Aznar “reminding him of his legal obligations regarding privileged information.”

But Agustin Diaz de Mera, former director-general of the national police, lauded Aznar as an unparalleled champion in the fight against terrorism and denied that the former government at any time concealed the truth about the suspects in the bombings.

“We said what we knew with complete clarity and transparency,” he testified.

The hearings are being broadcast live on a private TV news channel from morning until late into prime time, and they dominate newspaper headlines almost every day. Some Spaniards are riveted, but others find the process a painful reminder of an atrocity they’d rather forget.

Marga Latorre, an office administrator, watches the broadcasts religiously and takes notes.

“After the bombings, there was so much manipulation and hiding of the truth,” she said. “I want to see the questions asked and hear the answers. I want to see what way [the commission members] are leaning and then draw my own conclusions.”

Esther Losada, who also works in an office, is following the proceedings at a greater distance.

“One [participant] says one thing, another says the opposite,” she said wearily. “I just want it all clarified.”