The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news this Wednesday, the Soviets in a tit for tat action expelled a U.S. embassy military attache, Space Shuttle Discovery resumed its flight schedule after mechanical problems were solve, and Dick Cheney's confirmation hearings ended. A favorable committee vote is expected tomorrow. We'll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Charlayne Hunter-Gault is in New York tonight. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: After the News Summary, we'll have a News Maker Interview with a key player in the administration's decision to ban imports of assault rifles like the AK-47. He's Stephen Higgins, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol & Firearms. Then we'll look at the tragedy of inattention to the worsening famine in the Sudan with Congressman Gary Ackerman and Frank Wolf, and an AID official, Julia Taft. And finally we get an update on the Oliver North Iran/Contra trial with NPR's Nina Totenberg.NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: The Soviets today ordered the expulsion of an American Embassy official in Moscow. A foreign ministry spokesman said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Daniel France Van Gundy had been spying. Van Gundy is 42 years old. He's an assistant military attache at the U.S. Embassy. He was given 48 hours to get out of the Soviet Union. U.S. officials denied Van Gundy was guilty of espionage and charged it was simply retaliation for the U.S.'s expulsion order last week against a Soviet diplomat in Washington accused of spying. Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Also in Moscow, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev today called chronic food shortages the Soviet Union's biggest wound. In a speech to the Communist Party's Central Committee Gorbachev called for urgent steps to revitalize the country's state supervised agriculture. A major part of his reform proposal included abolishing the state's super agriculture ministry and allowing individuals or collectives to work state owned farmland for a fee. Meanwhile, in Hungary, tens of thousands of people participated in rallies throughout the country to call for more democracy and a Soviet troop withdrawal. It was the first time in the 41 years that the anniversary of the month long revolt against Austria in 1848 was a legal public holiday.

MR. LEHRER: The confirmation of Dick Cheney to be the U.S. Secretary of Defense looked like a quick certainty today. The Senate Armed Services Committee concluded its hearings on the nomination, a vote was scheduled tomorrow and all words from committee members about the Wyoming Republican Congressman were favorable.

SEN. SAM NUNN, [D] Georgia: No impediments that I know of have been placed in the way of this nomination. As I said at the very beginning, I think Dick Cheney is well qualified, a person of honor and integrity. We found nothing in the financial report, nothing in the FBI report, nothing in our questioning of him that would in any way interfere with his ability to be the Secretary of Defense.

MR. LEHRER: President Reagan approved a secret deal in 1985 that gave Honduras millions of dollars in military aid in exchange for its assistance to the Nicaraguan Contras. That was the story told today by former National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane. He told it to the jury in the Oliver North trial in Washington. McFarlane said the deal was so secret nothing was ever given in writing to the President of Honduras. McFarlane was asked about the deal by North's defense lawyers. Nina Totenberg will have more on the trial after the News Summary.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Also in Washington a government health report released today detailed significant health differences between black and white Americans. The report said that blacks are dying younger than whites, twice as likely to die in infancy, and among women, fewer blacks receive early prenatal care. The Bush administration today also moved to fulfill a campaign promise by sending Congress legislation to help low income parents make child care arrangements. The President called for a tax credit of up to $1,000 for each child under age four in low income working families, and he urged lawmakers to act promptly.

MR. LEHRER: U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist made a pitch today for a pay raise. He made it at a rare news conference held at the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington. He told reporters all judges in the federal judiciary should be given a 30 percent pay hike.

WILLIAM REHNQUIST, Chief Justice: The issue is adequate pay for judicial officers. This is the single greatest problem facing the judicial branch today. Failure to adequately address this issue would pose the most serious threat to the future of the judiciary and its continued operations that I have observed during my lifetime. Without redress, the federal judiciary as we know it cannot continue to meet the high standards the public has come to expect from it.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: A fuel tank problem aboard the space shuttle has been eliminated and Discovery will be able to complete its five day mission. Today the crew continued to send back dazzling pictures of Planet Earth. Their photo assignments included signs of environmental damage in various parts of the world and close-up view of the State of Florida from 172 miles above. This shot includes Tampa Bay, Lake Okachobee, parts of Orlando, Miami, and the Kennedy Space Center. Discovery returns to earth on Saturday.

MR. LEHRER: The House of Representatives today took action on the Eastern Airlines strike. It voted 252 to 167 for a bill that would require President Bush to appoint an emergency mediation board to work out a settlement in the 11 day old strike. Under its provisions, the employees would return to work for a 26 day cooling off period at their old pay scale. Labor supports the bill. Company management which last week took the company into bankruptcy does not. Mr. Bush is expected to veto it if it should also pass the Senate.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: An anonymous caller claiming to represent a pro-Iranian group today claimed responsibility for last week's pipe bombing of a van driven by the wife of the Captain of the U.S.S. Vincennes. The FBI said it's investigating the call. That's it for the News Summary. Still ahead, the administration's decision to ban importing semiautomatic weapons, famine in the Sudan, and the Oliver North trial. NEWS MAKER - DISARMING PROPOSAL

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: We turn first tonight to assault weapons. Today Colt Industries, one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers, suspended sales of its semiautomatic AR-14 rifle to the general public. This announcement comes just one day after the Bush administration announced a temporary import ban on semiautomatic, military style weapons that have fueled drug related violence across the country. We have a News Maker interview with the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, but first, this set-up report from Jeff Goldman.

JEFF GOLDMAN: semiautomatic assault type weapons were originally designed for military use. They include weapons like the AK-47 and the Uzie Carbine. semiautomatics are far more powerful than handguns and quickly penetrate just about anything. Because assault weapons are classified as rifles, they are not subject to handgun requirements. A 15 day waiting period and a criminal background check are necessary before purchasing a handgun. With an assault weapon, the buyer does fill out a form but it is rarely checked. semiautomatics have become the weapons of choice in the growing inner-city drug wars. They have also been used in tragic and bizarre shootings like the massacre last January in Stockton, California. Thirty children were shot, five killed, when a drifter opened fire on a schoolyard before shooting himself. California and several other states are now working on legislation to outlaw assault weapons. The Stockton tragedy focused national attention on the availability and misuse of semiautomatics and brought an evolution in the Bush administration's position. The President, a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association, at first took a hard line on banning the sale of assault weapons.

PRESIDENT BUSH: If you're suggesting that every pistol that can do that or every rifle should be banned, I would strongly oppose that. I would strongly go after the criminals who use these guns, but I'm not about to suggest that a semi-automated hunting rifle be banned, absolutely not.

JEFF GOLDMAN: A few weeks later at his confirmation hearing, National Drug Policy Coordinator William Bennett voiced some reservations.

WILLIAM BENNETT, Drug Policy Coordinator: [March 1] I think we need to consider the reasonable right to bear arms with what Chief Daryl Gates has called responsible use of firearms.

MR. GOLDMAN: Last week, President Bush appeared to have relaxed his position.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I've asked Bill, I've said, Bill, work the problem. Find out and I'm not so rigid that I can't if you come to me with a sensible answer that takes care of the concerns I've felt over the years I'll take a hard look at it and I'll work with you to that end.

MR. GOLDMAN: Bennett was sworn in Monday and within 24 hours signed off on at least a temporary solution, the import ban on assault weapons announced yesterday.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Joining us now is Stephen Higgins, the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol & Firearms. Mr. Higgins, only a month ago, the President opposed a ban on semiautomatic weapons. What caused the turnaround?

STEPHEN HIGGINS, Alcohol Tobacco, & Firearms Bureau: Well, I wouldn't see this as a turnaround in that what he's opposing is a ban, but what he's said consistently really are two things. One is we should strongly enforce the laws that we have on the books and then two is that we should make sure that we don't interfere with rights of people to have legitimate semiautomatic hunting weapons. What we're doing is enforcing, No. 1, a law that's on the books and the law says that these guns must, if they're going to come in for import, must come in for sporting purposes. And we've asked the importers during the suspension period to re-establish that. And the second thing is that if these turn out to be hunting weapons, if they turn out to be semiautomatic hunting weapons, that would be a sporting purpose, and we would let them resume the importation, so what we're doing I think is consistent with what he said.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: I want to go beyond that in a minute, but can you just determine for me how you determine sporting purposes opposed to some other purpose.

MR. HIGGINS: I wish there were a very very objective way. The statute is fairly broad in that it just says that they have to be generally recognized as particularly suitable for sporting purpose. Some sporting purposes would be, as an example, hunting, another one would perhaps be combat target shooting and other types of sporting activities, and that's what we're trying to establish.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Excuse me, but my question was, how do you establish that? I mean, the difficulty is the problem of these weapons in the hands of people who are using them for violent purposes against other people.

MR. HIGGINS: Yes, and that's where we've tried to target our resources, but in trying to establish whether they're used for sporting purposes, we've asked the importers to provide us and the information would be information from, for example, game commissions, hunting and game commissions, also from combat shooting groups. They'll be providing us that information. We'll be doing some independent analysis of it and then we'll take their submissions and analyze it and then make a decision as to whether to ban or to continue to allow the import.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How temporary do you think the temporary is going to have to be and what would it take to either make it permanent or reverse it?

MR. HIGGINS: Well, I think it will take us a minimum of two to three months in order to contact the importers, get the information from them, and make some sort of judgment, and that will require some evaluation of that information. Hopefully we'll have enough information at that point to make some sort of judgment. You know, we've had examples of this before. We've had shotguns, semiautomatic shotguns that came into the country that were supposedly for sporting purpose. In checking them out, we found out that they haven't been and we've banned them so that you know, the process could turn out either way.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: How bad is the problem? What impact do you think a temporary ban will have on it, or is that the purpose, to impact the problem at this time?

MR. HIGGINS: Well, I think the purpose of the temporary ban is simply to be sure that before we allow any more of these weapons to come into the country, and this has to be seen in the context, we have pending applications for over 110,000 of the AKS-47 alone, before we continue to allow that many guns to come into this country, we want to make sure that they're going for sporting purpose, and with that many coming in, that's where we have some concerns about how they're being used.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Sen. Metzenbaum today called this move a reasonable first step, but then he went on to reiterate his call for a ban on the sale of all new assault weapons and registering those guns already in circulation. I mean, do you see this as a viable proposal and something that might, in fact, be put into effect?

MR. HIGGINS: Well, I've tried to make it a practice for ATF as a bureau to do the best job we can enforcing the laws that we have without trying to predict what Congress or the various states should do, so I really leave that to Congress and also to the administration, President Bush and others to make that decision.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Why didn't this ban extend to domestic producers in this country?

MR. HIGGINS: The law is different for domestic producers. The only restriction for domestic producers is that they not produce automatic weapons, if they do, they have to be registered. But for imported semiautomatic weapons and also for handguns, there's a requirement that they can only be imported if they're imported for sporting purposes or used for sporting purposes. That same restriction doesn't exist for domestic weapons.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: But today the Colt Industries, which as I said earlier is a domestic gun manufacturer, announced its suspension of sales of its semiautomatic A-15s to the general public. What's your reaction to that? Was that something that you sort of wished might happen, or were surprised it happened, or thinks a good idea or what?

MR. HIGGINS: Well, you know, that's an interesting move and I've only heard about it over the wire services and indirectly, but it was a surprise I think. To me it sounds like a fairly good corporate decision in terms of saying, let's let this issue be studied in some sort of dispassionate manner without all the attention it's getting, and I know that those people who, for example, favor additional controls probably are applauding the Colt decision.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Let me ask you this question. Have you given any thought to what is going to happen to the semiautomatic weapons who are already in the hands of people who are using them in inappropriate and violent ways? Is this temporary period likely to have, do you see it likely to have any impact, and have you given any thought to how you deal with that down the line?

MR. HIGGINS: That is a good question. And there was one point I wanted to make, is we have given it a lot of thought. A lot of accounts today indicated this was something, a decision we just jumped to in terms of doing, but we've actually been considering this for several weeks and I think Director Bennett to his credit has kind of acted as a broker here to bring everybody together, but it's a decision we've been considering. We've also been thinking for some time about, you know, should we consider to bring these in. I see the legislation that has been proposed as an example, the Metzenbaum legislation would say that if you change the ground rules for these guns, what do you do with those that are in existence and it would require for them to be registered much in the same way as automatic weapons are registered today. We have a file, but in this case you're talking about, if the Metzenbaum bill passed, that would be millions of these weapons, so that would be, you know, a fairly large recordkeeping job.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: If you don't ban them completely, I mean, won't you have, the statistics indicated that the incidence of use I believe is something like three times what it was three years ago, I mean, don't you has as least as much violence as you have now without any action towards reining those guns in?

MR. HIGGINS: And certainly you do. The numbers you cited are about right. We've got about 110,000 waiting to be approved and we've had about say 90,000 that have come in during the last three years. Only a small percentage of these, and I think I should be fairly candid on it, only a small percentage of these weapons will turn up to be used in crime.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Is that right? What percentage is that?

MR. HIGGINS: Well, we've just completed a year long tracing study and of the guns that were used in crime last year that we traced, and we only traced a small percentage of what state and local officials would seize during crimes and what we would get during our investigations, we probably had about 1 percent of the guns were AKS-47s. About 10 percent of the guns that were used in crime were either semiautomatic either pistols or rifles. It's much higher than that in some areas of the country. It's a particularproblem in Los Angeles and Southern California, it's much higher. In Washington, D.C., principal crime guns are semiautomatic, 9 millimeter, and similar type weapons.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Well, Mr. Higgins, we'll be watching with interest to see how this turns out. Thanks very much for being with us.

MR. LEHRER: Still to come on the Newshour tonight, the tragedy in the Sudan and the latest in the Oliver North trial. But first this is pledge week on public television. We are taking a short break now so your public television station can ask for your support. That support helps keeps programs like this on the air. CONFIRMATION HEARING EXCERPTS

MR. LEHRER: For those stations not taking a pledge break, the Newshour continues now with excerpts from the confirmation hearings of Health & Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan. He testified before the Senate Finance Committee on February 23rd. At that hearing, he was asked to clarify his views on abortion and the use of fetal tissue for medical research.

DR. LOUIS SULLIVAN, Secretary of Health & Human Services: [February 23, 1989] I will actively encourage adoption and other alternatives to abortion. I am opposed to abortion except in the case when the life of the mother is threatened or in cases of rape or incest. I support a human life amendment, embracing the exceptions just noted. Like President Bush, I would welcome a Supreme Court decision overturning Roe vs. Wade.

SEN. WILLIAM ARMSTRONG, [R] Colorado: I do want to direct your attention to a newspaper article which occurred on the 18th of December in the Atlanta Journal. In that article, you were reported as favoring fetal experimentation. Was that article accurate and do you, in fact, favor fetal experimentation as reported in that article?

DR. LOUIS SULLIVAN: Sen. Armstrong, as I recall that interview, when that issue arose, I expressed at that time, as I have continued to express, reservations about any blanket prohibition concerning research because we have, as I indicated in my opening statement, we have as a society reaped the benefits in improved health care and new technologies as a result of our broad research effort. On the specific issue of fetal research, this is an issue that I know has had a commission reviewing that's work it's way - - [network difficulty]. I review those recommendations once they come to me.

SEN. ROBERT DOLE: There are a few cynics in this town and they're not all in the media. [Network Difficulty]

DR. LOUIS SULLIVAN: I believe that we have to have a government that to work best we have to have representation of all segments of our society and certainly having been very active in the black community and knowing the concerns and the problems in that community, I think I have a special sensitivity there, but I have a broader sensitivity looking at all segments of our society, but certainly I am black and I am proud of that fact but I think that I am equally, if not more proud of what I have been able to accomplish and what I would hope to accomplish as the Secretary of Health & Human Services if confirmed by this committee.

SEN. GEORGE MITCHELL, Majority Leader: I know the administration's budget calls for a $5 billion reduction in Medicare in the next fiscal year unspecified and we'll have to decide that. I don't know what we're going to end up. I'd have to say candidly I doubt we'll achieve the $5 billion level of reduction, although there clearly will be some and I don't know where it's going to come.

DR. LOUIS SULLIVAN: The issue of restraining health care costs is a major one. I think all of us, public servants, health professionals, hospital administrators and the public at large have to participate in. There have been a number of studies that have questioned, for example, the rate of surgeries of various kinds. Also, as a physician, I can tell you that physicians, themselves, are going to have to participate in the effort to restrain costs. I've long maintained that being a physician is really a profession of high calling where one should not be motivated primarily by one's income. I certainly support the fact that being a physician and the years of training certainly justify a good income, but certainly not excessive income, so I think that my colleagues in the health professions are going to have to adjust to the fact that we have limited resources, we do have a responsibility to the public to provide those health benefits to which they are entitled, and I think we all will have to participate in this, though it's going to hurt a little I think on all sides.

MR. LEHRER: Today Sullivan said government statistics compiled in 1986 showed a continued gap between the life expectancies of blacks and whites in this country. Sullivan said a black child born in 1986 could expect to live 69.4 years. A white child born in the same year has a 75.4 year life expectancy. FOCUS - THE FACE OF FAMINE

MR. LEHRER: We go next tonight to the dying in the Sudan. One million people in that African nation have died in the last five years. Most are victims of a civil war. Some have died in fighting, others of starvation. The war is being fought between the government based in the Arab/Moslem Northern part of the country and African Christians and other non-Moslems who operate in the Southern part. The fighting began in 1983, when the government instituted Islamic law over the entire country. The problem has been compounded during the past year by plagues of famine, flood, drought and locusts. Each side in the fight has made it worse by preventing food shipments from getting through to territory controlled by the other side. It's gotten so bad in the South that tens of thousands have walked hundreds of miles to Sudan's famine stricken neighbor, Ethiopia, in search of relief. Here is a series of news reports over the past year about the tragic situation.

MIKE WOODRIDGE, BBC: [April 1988] The refugees' flight from civil war, a trek up of to three months across the slump and scrub of famine stricken Southern Sudan has left many looking like this on their arrival in Ethiopia. What has shocked seasoned relief workers is that even refugees in their late teens and early twenties who would normally be expected to survive the hardships longer have become so weak and emaciated. It's thought that as many as 8,000 have died before reaching Ethiopia. Survivors have spoken of the route being littered with the corpses and skeletons of adults and children. This new influx of Sudanese refugees into Ethiopia appears to have been partly prompted by the activities of militias armed by the Sudan Government. Yolton Yah says these are the scars of an attempt on his life by militiamen after they'd killed his children and his brother and seized female members of the family. All the refugees say they kept themselves alive by eating roots, wild fruit, and the leaves of trees.

MIKE SMART, BBC: [August 1988] Hundreds of thousands of acres lie devastated by the worst floods in Sudan's history. Thousands of homes in the capital Khartoum have been swept away, making a quarter of the city's 4 million population homeless. Power, communications and fresh water supplies have all been cut for the third day running, paralyzing a country where disaster, natural and man made, has become a way of life. People here say they've not seen any government official since the floods began. That they say is because this is Shanty Town and there many here taking refuge from the civil war in the South of the country. The fate of these people depends on the help they get now. There are many rumors about where the international aid is going. There have been suggestions that the North Sudanese will distribute it to their own at the expense of refugees from the South, that the government won't be able to resist the temptation to use some of it to supply the army in its civil war in the South of the country. The army is perhaps the only effective organization in the Sudan at the moment who's been given the task of all the distribution.

RODERICK PRATT, WTN: [January 1989] In spite of the risks, refugees continue to flee Southern Sudan. A Sudanese doctor at one camp says the fighting in their homeland amounts to extermination.

DOCTOR: I would describe what is happening as genocide. People are being indiscriminately bombed, killed, massacred, and they are driven from their places to go and find security, but when they go to find security, they die in thousands due to lack of food.

MR. PRATT: Many refugees suffer from tuberculosis; food doesn't help. Every day more are buried. Their main hope is an end to the civil war in the Sudan, but now there's no sign that'll come.

MR. LEHRER: But just today newspapers in the Sudan said the government has agreed to a cease-fire with the rebels. There has also been action here in Washington. Yesterday Congress passed a resolution calling for a cease-fire and condemning the Sudanese Government and the rebels for using food as a weapon. It also called on the Bush administration to reassess its aid programs to Sudan and to "exercise vigorous international leadership to bring about an end to the war. The author of that resolution was Congressman Gary Ackerman, Democrat of New York. He's in a studio on Capitol Hill with Congressman Frank Wolf, Republican of Virginia, who made an extensive trip to the Sudan in January, and here in the studio, Julia Taft, Director of the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance in the Agency for International Development. She has just returned from a trip to Sudan and Ethiopia, where she met with government and rebel leaders. First on this question of the cease-fire today, is there anything that you can add to that, Mrs. Taft? Does that sound real to me.

JULIA TAFT, Agency For International Development: I think that Sedik Almadi has been trying for quite some time --

MR. LEHRER: That is the Prime Minister of Sudan.

MS. TAFT: That is the Prime Minister of Sudan, right -- has been trying for some time to identify a new cabinet and a new government to come to some solution on the policy with regard to the rebels. If he's called for a cease-fire, that's a very encouraging sign. Of course, he's going to have to show widespread support within the various factions in Sudan that they also support a cease-fire before the SPLA will probably take it seriously.

MR. LEHRER: Congressman Ackerman, how do you read the cease-fire news?

REP. GARY ACKERMAN, [D] New York: I think it's no news at all. As a matter fact, it happens to be very very old news. Sedik Almadi even by his own television commentators refer to him in their native language as "Mr. Chatterbox". This is a proposal that was proposed by the rebels in the South back in November which he was taking a look at, and then the Islamic fundamentalist party headed by his brother-in-law rejected, he walked away from it, the whole thing fell apart. Now what's happening is the rebels in the South are winning. People have walked away from the table. He is now saying he is going to take another look at. He has been completely unreliable, he has been a major stumbling block. He has been starving his own people to death. He has been heading a genocide of Islamic Arabs against black Africans, and I don't think that we can believe anything that he has said.

MR. LEHRER: Anything that you want to add to that, Congressman Wolf?

REP. FRANK WOLF, [R] Virginia: Well, I think it is very important because for the first time we will have the opportunity for an open roads policy, we'll have the opportunity for an open sky policy. The United Nations and the International Red Cross will be permitted to have cross border operations. So it can be very significant. It is now incumbent upon us, and I think this administration has done an excellent job to put pressure on the SPLA to make sure that they agree, but I think this is --

MR. LEHRER: What's the SPLA?

REP. WOLF: The SPLA are the guerrillas and this is an opportunity to make this work because the rainy season will come by the beginning of May and that time it will be too late to put the food. So I think we have to operate on the premise that make 'em stick to it and make the SPLA stick to it and let's put the food there where it will help and save lives.

REP. ACKERMAN: I think the key to it is trying to make 'em stick to it, but the problem has been we have unfortunately not been willing to do that historically. We have supported the government over there. We have kept this guy in business. We have given him $1.7 billion of aid, military and otherwise, over the past decade which he has used basically as a political weapon, starving his own people. We have not put his feet to the fire. It has taken this resolution of Congress to try to -- which by the way enjoys broad bipartisan support in the Congress -- to try to get the administration to take a fresh look at what we're doing over there.

MR. LEHRER: Mrs. Taft, do you agree with the Congressman, that the U.S. Government has not been keeping this man's feet to the fire in the Sudan?

MS. TAFT: I think we have been doing it publicly and privately for quite some time. My office, which has been involved in coordinating the relief, has spent over $77 million in the past year on just these relief kinds of issues. The amount of federal government aid to the Sudan Government is extraordinarily limited. There has been no military assistance program for two years and the amount of development aid that goes in is virtually nil.

REP. ACKERMAN: Director Taft, we have given these people $1.7 billion. Don't say it's limited. We have given American taxpayer dollars to this abomination of an excuse for a government over there, our best friends in the region, because they presume to be a democracy. We have given them more money than we have given to any sub Saharan nation in the entire continent.

MR. LEHRER: Let her respond.

REP. WOLF: If I could cut in, let me just say, I happened to have spent eight days in the Sudan, in Khartoum, in Ethiopia, in the very camp that you had newsreel films behind the lines of the SPLA. When I got back, I met with Sec. Baker the day that he was sworn in. Sec. Baker was very knowledgeable on this issue, he cared very very deeply, he then assessed to put together a team, Julia Taft was part of that team, whereby they have come up with a very strong and very consistent policy, and there may have been some problems in the past, but since the Bush administration has come, and they have moved very very aggressively, and I might say Julia Taft should take a lot of credit for it, after Sec. Baker made that decision, issued the statement, and I talked to him personally, he cares very very deeply about this, they went ahead, and so a lot has happened as a result of Sec. Baker's effort, the Vice President, now President Bush, Julia Taft, and AID. They've done an excellent job. We've got to keep the pressure on and not debate this thing because we want to make sure that we get the food in there and save lives.

MR. LEHRER: Congressman Wolf, let me ask you this. When you were there, did you have the feeling that the leadership of the Government of Sudan had the message from the U.S. Government that this has got to stop, you've got to quit killing your own people?

REP. WOLF: I think they now have the message. The conditions in Khartoum are a mess. The telephones don't work, the electricity doesn't work. They have demonstrations in the streets every day for food. The people of Northern Sudan and around Khartoum are now beginning to say, hey, our life is a mess because we're spending $1 million a day on this war and they're beginning to get the point. Everyone that we spoke to, a wide array of parties, now think it's time to have a cease-fire and bring about peace, and I don't think we should give Sedik Almadi any credit. I think he's only doing this because of the pressure of the United States, the pressure of Sec. Baker, the pressure of the Bush administration, Julia Taft, and also the pressure of my good friend here, Mr. Ackerman, his resolution, and also the pressure of Sen. Simon over on the Senate side to bring this about, but I think they now have the message and it's our job to push them and push them so we put food in there and we can save all these lives.

REP. ACKERMAN: I don't believe that they have gotten the message. If you take a look at what's going on in Khartoum, itself, which is in the Northern part of the country, where there is not a war going on, where the government is firmly in control, you have 1 million people who are living literally, not figuratively, but literally in a garbage dump, a million people with nothing to eat. The government can very easily feed these people. They are doing nothing. There is no effort being expended.

MR. LEHRER: Why? Why are they not feeding these people in particular?

REP. ACKERMAN: They're not feeding these people because they're black Africans and they'd rather --

REP. WOLF: Well, let me say -- I agree with my colleague. Mr. Ackerman is exactly right and they have not up until now done very very much. They have also not been very good. They have expelled the private voluntary organizations. They have expelled World Vision. They have expelled Catholic Relief. They have expelled Lutheran World Services. What I am concerned with, I saw all those kids dying and I want to do everything that I can now to take advantage of this opportunity to have an open roads policy, have the United Nations involved, bring the International Red Cross back in, have AID continue to have these cross border operations and take advantage because we want this to be a bipartisan thing. We also want to do everything we can to have the United Nations and the East, that is, the Soviet Union put pressure on the SPLA, because it takes two to resolve this. Let the Government of Sudan do it, butlet's put pressure on both, the SPLA, whereby they will allow food to come into the South.

MR. LEHRER: Let's go to Mrs. Taft now. You've heard what the Congressmen have said. You've got some things to defend, but you also, you don't feel you do --

MS. TAFT: I think that they've hit on a number of very important points in that we don't understand in the West how can there be a surplus of sorghum in the country and have people starving, how can the government not take care of the people in Khartoum? These are very valid issues and one that's we've engaged in publicly very strongly. Last week, there was a UN conference sponsored with the Government of Sudan in which all of the donor countries, more than 25 donor countries, and all of the international private voluntary agencies met for two days and hammered out an action planned for how assistance would be provided, how we would make sure that the private relief agencies were allowed to stay and expand their operations, how we could make sure that the government was held accountable for allowing relief to go forward, and we got assurances from the government and from Sedik and many members of his ministries that they would, in fact, do a number of things to ensure the free flow of food and a period of tranquility which will allow the assistance to go forward.

MR. LEHRER: How do you enforce that now?

MS. TAFT: The United Nations is augmenting their staff there. We are getting additional funds for the International Committee for the Red Cross for a massive airlift. We currently have, there are six major aircraft there now that are pre-positioning food. We have spent millions of dollars working with voluntary agencies and I think that the challenge over the next month and a half before the rains come is ensuring that the government does not obstruct nor the military does not obstruct the flow of this food, nor the rebels --

MR. LEHRER: Just a minute, Congressman, just a moment please. What about Congressman Ackerman's specific thing that there are 1 million people living in a garbage dump in the Northern part of the country that is not affected that much even by the war, is the U.S. Government aware of that, and what are we doing about that?

MS. TAFT: We are aware of it. We have funded some assistance programs. It's been very difficult to get the Government of Sudan to encourage the delivery of food and assistance to those people. I just saw them last week. It is a devastating problem.

MR. LEHRER: What did you say to the government officials there after you saw that? I mean, can you describe what you did as an official of the U.S. Government?

MS. TAFT: I met with Sedik Almadi and I said that this was an unconscionable effort and that he must not, however, in trying to deal with that problem take those people and send them back to Southern Sudan. There was an effort about two weeks ago to start an evacuation of those people and putting them in the very same areas where we are trying desperately to provide food who currently need it.

MR. LEHRER: Where there are people -- millions of people on the verge of death already.

MS. TAFT: Exactly and they are not going to be doing that, that has been stopped. They have been working with the UN and with some private voluntary agencies to try to come up with resettlement plans for these people. These people are pastureless and they are rural people. They are in the city now, they can't work, they have nothing going for them. It is a major problem and this is totally misunderstood by the West, by us and we have condemned it. One of the things that I think will help very much, having had so much media coverage from the International Conference last week, is that the U.S. is not the only one pounding the table demanding receptivity. Many of the other donors are seeing for the first time the magnitude of the problem.

MR. LEHRER: Yes, Congressman.

REP. ACKERMAN: We have not been pounding the table, with all due respect, and I have to say that Director Taft happens to be one of the real good people on this issue and my colleague who was there has earned the gratitude of the entire Congress and the American people for verifying what we have suspected, but a million people have died, where have we been? Just to say that we're going to do things now, we don't have the infrastructure. To say that we have six planes, we've only identified two. There are six planes. You would have to make 4,200 trips with those planes to do the kind of feeding. We don't have enough trucks over there. The infrastructure is completely lacking. Everybody knows. We've known this for six months. It's going to rain there in four or five weeks. The roads will be washed out and there is no way to guarantee that we are going to either have the trucks or have the planes or have the money or have the commitment.

MR. LEHRER: Congressman Wolf, is he right?

REP. WOLF: He's partially right and Julia Taft is too. I think, one, we have a bipartisan policy now that supports putting pressure on the Sudanese Government and the SPLA. Now let's talk about both to make sure that they allow food going. Secondly, he's right, not much had been done up until early this year.

MR. LEHRER: Why?

REP. WOLF: I can't say but when the Bush administration came in, Sec. Baker immediately acted and I met with Julia Taft and she immediately acted and they went out there. Thirdly, we've put $70 million worth of food in there. Fourthly, we've got to keep the pressure on in the United Nations, we've got to get the pressure on the Soviet Union to put pressure on the Ethiopian Government, which is a client state, to put pressure on the SPLA, and that one camp that you saw in Gambela is in Ethiopia, and we've got to put pressure on them. We've got to make this worldwide public opinion. I thank you for this show whereby you are showing the American people. Part of the blame is on the media. For about a year the media did absolutely nothing, very few people in the media. Had it not been for a World Vision camera crew taking BBC up in 1984, Ethiopia wouldn't have been covered. This is a story that wasn't covered and yet we lost 100,000 people in Soviet Armenia, and it was on every news show, so the media didn't cover it around the world. Much has been done. This administration's on record working hard, Julia Taft is, my able and good Congressman friend, Mr. Ackerman, who's taken the leadership on this resolution, Congressman Wolpe on the House side, Mickey Leland on the House side, Sen. Simon, Sen. Kassebaum, Sen. Humphrey, we are now coming together, and he's right and Julia's right. Let's keep pressure on the Sudanese Government and on the SPLA and let's save these people and put that food in no matter what anyone says, cross border operations in the air, on the ground, by boat and barge.

REP. ACKERMAN: The problem lies in the fact that all the numbers are right. We have given $77 million for food. The irony to this whole problem is the food is there, it's in the country. There's enough to feed those people that are dying; there is enough to feed the people that have died, a million people. It's not getting out because the policies are not being implemented. We have policies. Sec. Baker has issued a good statement. The President has issued a good statement, but I mean, it's not a matter of us reading somebody's lips. Those people can't read somebody's press release. That food has to be distributed and there are strong impediments to that being distributed and the vehicles are being shot out and we should be telling those people we are going to pull the rug out, we are going to pull the plug out, we're going to cut them off from Uncle Sam's umbilical cord if they don't allow that food to go through.

MR. LEHRER: Are you going to tell them?

REP. ACKERMAN: It's not just speaking softly. I think this resolution says it and I think that we have to say it even more forcefully, they have to know, that they are no friends of ours if they starve their children to death.

REP. WOLF: That's both sides. That's the Sudanese Government and the SPLA.

REP. ACKERMAN: Both sides.

MR. LEHRER: Both sides.

MS. TAFT: We are witnessing a war. We are witnessing perhaps the worst humanitarian crisis in the world that we are at least aware of today and only these people can be fed when the fighting stops. Peace must come and the Bush administration has been very forceful about that. We are doing everything we can to help catalyze the feeding logistics so it will happen.

REP. WOLF: You also need more private voluntary organizations like World Vision and Catholic Relief --

MR. LEHRER: We need more time that we do not have. Thank you, Congressmen, on the Hill for being with us, Mrs. Taft, here, thank you. UPDATE - DAY IN COURT

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Next tonight we look at the trial of Oliver North now in its fourth week in federal court in Washington, D.C. Judy Woodruff is in charge. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: It was Robert McFarlane's fourth day on the witness stand. As Oliver North's boss at the National Security Council, McFarlane may be one of the most important witnesses in the trial of the former White House aide. Here to tell us why is Nina Totenberg, Legal Affairs Correspondent for National Public Radio. Nina, tell us why is McFarlane so important to this trial?

NINA TOTENBERG, National Public Radio: Well, he's important to the prosecution because he's the only person who can establish that letters that McFarlane signed and sent to Congress that contained outright letters, that those letters were drafted by Oliver North, and conversely, for the defense he's important, because the defense is seeking to show that the whole Contra, aid of Contra operation was endorsed at higher levels in the White House from McFarlane on up, and so through McFarlane's testimony, the defense hopes to show that the President and the National Security Adviser knew in at least general terms what Oliver North was doing and that he was thus authorized to do what he was doing.

MS. WOODRUFF: So potentially he helps both sides in the case. Does he help one side more than another, or do we know?

MS. TOTENBERG: I think we know by now. He's been on the witness stand for four days. Two and a half of them or three and a half of them, two and a half of them before the prosecution, and by the end of that testimony, he was so impossible a witness for the prosecution that the chief prosecutor, John Kecker, began formally trying to impeach his own witness.

MS. WOODRUFF: What do you mean by that?

MS. TOTENBERG: Formally trying to impeach the credibility, challenge the credibility of his own witness. He's a classic person who, I don't want to be too interpretive about this, but who has pleaded guilty to a crime, withholding information from Congress, and to specific lies, that's what's detailed in the information that was filed, along with the plea, and who has not fully accepted the blame for that. He continually will say on the witness stand, this was my responsibility, it was my fault, but at rock bottom he is not willing really to admit that he had done something wrong.

MS. WOODRUFF: Why does that make a difference? Why would then the prosecution want to turn that around?

MS. TOTENBERG: Continually he will say contradictory things, such incredibly contradictory things that the judge will interrupt and say I don't know what you mean, and in fact, the judge said today he had proved such a confusing witness that he gave the defense very broad latitude to use all kinds of classified information in cross-examining McFarlane.

MS. WOODRUFF: Now yesterday McFarlane blew up when the prosecution, the attorney who was there questioning him in direct examination started to ask him some questions. Tell us about that.

MS. TOTENBERG: Well, that's a pretty good example. The prosecutor produced a letter that nobody in the public anyway had known about before that McFarlane wrote the day before he tried to commit suicide in 1987, and McFarlane said that he wrote the letter to get the record straight. He wrote it to the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Lee Hamilton, two years after he had misled Congress about third country contributions to the Contras, and in the letter, McFarlane said that he had had a conversation with a representative of a third country but that the man wanted to contribute from his individual wealth and that McFarlane had not known how much he had contributed and that it was his individual wealth not from a country.

MS. WOODRUFF: Now this important because it was illegal at that time to accept money from a country.

MS. TOTENBERG: Right, and as the prosecutor then pointed out, it was $32 million, McFarlane knew well and good it was $32 million, and he knew it was from a country and the country was Saudi Arabia, and McFarlane flipped, and he said, when Prosecutor Kecker said to him, so this letter that you wrote the day before you tried to kill yourself was just pure nonsense, wasn't it, you say you were trying to set the record straight, but you were still telling lies in this letter, and McFarlane blew up and said on the day before I tried to take my life, I couldn't parse out exactly how much money was given and I was trying to set the record straight about my involvement with third country contributions, and Kecker said, but you said in the letter the words "this was from an individual not a country", and McFarlane still shouting said, "You're right, Mr. Kecker; it was a gloss."

MS. WOODRUFF: So on balance, is it possible to say that McFarlane could end up helping North more than he helps the prosecution?

MS. TOTENBERG: I think he's clearly helping North more than he's helping the prosecution because he's much more willing to help North. He's not nearly so hostile to North's lawyer. He's willing to be a character witness and to assume responsibility for himself and to take it off of his subordinate North.

MS. WOODRUFF: We're now, what, five weeks into this trial?

MS. TOTENBERG: Yes.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is it possible to say that the weight of the testimony so far seems to be falling more one way or another or is it too early?

MS. TOTENBERG: Well, it probably is too early because if the trial goes through to conclusion, it's going to be a very a long trial, but as of now, I would say that the testimony of Robert McFarlane has been a boon to the defense. He has said all the loving, caring, wonderful things that he can about Oliver North, what a great officer he was, how he was the hardest working man he'd ever know, how if he were, if his ship went down he'd want Oliver North in the lifeboat with him, and he chose him for the most difficult assignments and Oliver North had instructions not just from him but from the President to carry out his orders to keep the Contras together body and soul. That is the thrust of the defense and McFarlane and McFarlane is helping the defense as much as he can without completely assuming all blame onto himself.

MS. WOODRUFF: What about the other witnesses, is it possible to say whether the weight of what they're saying is helping or hurting?

MS. TOTENBERG: This is a phenomenal trial in a lot of ways. We've had, I don't know, three, four, five witnesses who've pleaded guilty to felonies, and all of them when they get on the witness stand say they didn't think they did anything wrong, they just pleaded guilty to felonies. And one witness who was not charged with anything, did nothing wrong, that is Joe Coors, the beer man, got off the witness stand after testifying about how he'd been solicited for military aid to the Contras and went over and shook Oliver North's hand and saluted him.

MS. WOODRUFF: Once again, Nina Totenberg, thank you for being with us.

MS. TOTENBERG: Thank you, Judy. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Wednesday, the Soviets declared a military attache at the U.S. embassy in Moscow of spying, gave him 48 hours to get out of the country. The action was in retaliation for the U.S. doing the same to a Soviet diplomat in Washington. Mechanical problems on Space Shuttle Discovery were fixed, the craft and its five man crew went back on the regular flight schedule which would bring it back to earth Saturday, and the Senate Armed Services Committee ended the confirmation hearings of Dick Cheney to be Defense Secretary, a vote was scheduled for tomorrow. It is expected to be favorable. Good night, Charlayne.

MS. HUNTER-GAULT: Good night, Jim. That's our Newshour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow. I'm Charlayne Hunter-Gault. Thank you and good night.