Washington, Dec 26 Fifty years ago, the US Congress held its first public hearing into secret CIA operations aimed at overthrowing a foreign government. The focus was Chile.
The hearing was led by Senator Frank Church, an Idaho Democrat. He said the step was taken because “the American people must know and be able to judge what was undertaken by their government in Chile.”
Church said the goal was to explain “the nature and extent of the American role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Chilean government.” He called it a matter of “deep and continuing public concern.”
At the same time, Church’s Senate committee released a detailed report titled “Covert Action in Chile, 1963–1973.” The study was based on Top Secret CIA records.
The report found that US covert involvement in Chile over a decade was “extensive and continuous.” It said the CIA first worked to block Socialist leader Salvador Allende from winning the presidency. After his election, efforts shifted to weakening his government.
The committee warned that covert action carries high costs. It said such operations should be used only against “severe threats to the national security of the United States.” It added, “It is far from clear that that was the case in Chile.”
Newly declassified documents released on the anniversary show how the Ford administration tried to block the investigation.
When Congress sought State Department cables, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told aides to refuse. “You shift it to the White House and let the White House refuse it,” he said, according to a secret transcript.
For months, the White House, CIA and State Department delayed responses. They cited staff shortages. CIA Director William Colby later said, “the White House told us not to cooperate. They just didn’t want to turn over documents.”
The White House claimed executive privilege over key records. These included National Security Council meeting notes from November 6, 1970, days after Allende’s inauguration.
CIA Director Richard Helms’ handwritten notes from that meeting were withheld. The notes recorded President Richard Nixon’s instruction: “If there is a way to bring A[llende] down, we should do it.”
Kissinger also concealed transcripts of his phone calls with Nixon and Helms. These “telcons” would have shown his role in shaping US policy toward Chile.
The CIA also withheld records showing payments of $35,000 in “hush money.” The money went to those involved in the killing of Chilean army commander Gen. Rene Schneider, according to the committee.
As the inquiry neared completion, President Gerald Ford intervened. He urged that a separate report on assassination plots remain classified.
On November 1, 1975, Ford signed a decision memo opposing public hearings on Chile. The White House warned that such hearings would “establish a precedent” and have “a shattering effect” on future covert cooperation.
CIA Director Colby later sought compromise. He met Church and Senator Charles Mathias at an informal dinner. The CIA proposed limiting public exposure to Chile alone.
Despite pressure, the committee moved ahead.
On November 20, 1975, it released a report on CIA assassination plots involving foreign leaders. On December 4, Church released the Chile case study and opened two days of hearings.
Analyst Peter Kornbluh later said the hearings “established a historic marker” in efforts to hold the CIA accountable.
Investigators Gregory Treverton and Karl Inderfurth testified. Treverton read Nixon’s September 15, 1970, order directing the CIA to block Allende’s inauguration.
Looking back, Treverton said the process affirmed a core principle. Classified intelligence records, he said, are “government documents, not just the Executive Branch’s.”
Inderfurth said the Chile record remains relevant today. He warned that covert actions harmed Chileans most of all and damaged the image of the United States as a “beacon of democracy.”
The Church Committee’s work later led to permanent intelligence oversight committees in Congress.
Its Chile investigation remains one of the clearest examples of lawmakers forcing transparency on secret foreign interventions — and asserting democratic control over covert power.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor