THE IRAN--CONTRA HEARINGS : Sparring Abrams Balances Apology With Belligerence

WASHINGTON â€”  It was expected to be a knockdown fight, but Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams’ long day before the congressional committees investigating the Iran- contra scandal on Tuesday was more of a technical sparring match.

Abrams parried some hostile questions, attempted to duck others and appeared alternately pugnacious and contrite. He apologized for lying to Congress last year when he falsely claimed that he did not know about any solicitation of foreign governments for aid to the Nicaraguan rebels. He admitted that his public assurances that the Reagan Administration was not involved in the secret effort to resupply the contras were “wrong.� But he also called some of the panel’s questions, in turn, “inaccurate,� “biased� and “bizarre.�

And between rounds, accompanied by his lawyer, his wife and his mother, Abrams repaired to a telephone to ask television-watching aides at the State Department how he was doing.

‘Ahead on Points’

Their verdict? “Elliott’s ahead on points,� said one, both loyal and cautious.

The committees’ view was less favorable. Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Tex.) said Abrams was a “lying son of a bitch,� and Sen. David L. Boren (D-Okla.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, suggested that Abrams should resign.

“What the Administration badly needs now is a person whom Congress can have total trust to be a moving force to build that relationship, and Mr. Abrams can’t take the lead,� Boren said.

Abrams’ meteoric political career probably hangs on the outcome of today’s session. The 39-year-old assistant secretary for Latin America is one of the youngest men ever to reach that rank in the State Department; his combative energy and bluntness have made him one of the Administration’s most visible foreign policy spokesmen.

But those same traits have made him widely unpopular on Capitol Hill, where conciliation is preferred.

‘Word-Dancing’

Also, Sen. Howell Heflin (D-Ala.) told Abrams on Tuesday, mock-admiringly, that like many State Department officials he seemed to have a talent for “word-dancing.�

Much of Abrams’ questioning, in fact, centered on the question of how truthful he had been in past appearances before Congress and how truthful he was being Tuesday.

Abrams attempted to defuse Congress’ anger over his false testimony last year by admitting errors immediately. “I consider this testimony to be a mistake, to be the worst single day I had as an assistant secretary,� he said of his assertion to the Senate Intelligence Committee last November that he knew of no U.S. efforts to win foreign donations for the contras (in fact, Abrams had personally solicited $10 million from the Asian nation of Brunei).

On his declarations last year that contra supply flights had not been organized or aided by the Administration, he insisted that he had been ignorant of the truth.

Little Impression

But the senators and congressmen and their lawyers appeared little impressed by these efforts at contrition.

Remarking on Abrams’ admission that he deliberately had avoided asking Lt. Col. Oliver L. North, the key figure in the Administration’s aid to the contras, too many questions about how the contras were being supplied, Heflin said, “(One) interpretation would appear to be that when it came to Col. North, you could see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, inquire of no evil,� he said. “ . . . I think there is a reasonable interpretation, and I’m sure that there are others, that there’s something about your relationship with Oliver North that you want to hide.�