U.S. vs. U.S.S.R.: Two on a Seesaw

Soft words and a smooth swap: then a chilling summons

It was another of those seesaw weeks in U.S.-Soviet relations. First, Jimmy Carter spoke soothingly at a press conference of his "deep belief that the underlying relationship between ourselves and the Soviets is stable" and that he and Soviet President Leonid Brezhnev want "to have better friendship." Next, both governments calmly carried out a trade: the U.S. released two accused Soviet spies from jail in New Jersey, while the Soviets set free an American charged with currency violations in Moscow. But then Soviet authorities suddenly summoned two American reporters to a Moscow court and charged them with "denigrating the honor and dignity" of Soviet TV officials.

The Soviet move against the two newsmen, the New York Times's Craig R. Whitney and the Baltimore Sun's Harold D. Piper, was unwarranted and unprecedented. The complaint charged them with slander in their coverage in May of Dissident Zviad Gamsakhurdia's purported confession of anti-Soviet activities, even though their dispatches appeared only in the U.S.

Gamsakhurdia, who was a member of a group monitoring Soviet response to the 1975 Helsinki accord that is supposed to guarantee human rights, had advocated secession of his native Republic of Georgia from the Soviet Union. Tried and convicted of anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, he was sentenced to three years in prison. As part of its coverage of the trial, Vremya broadcast a taped confession by Gamsakhurdia. Whitney and Piper both wrote stories quoting Gamsakhurdia's friends as contending that the broadcast confession did not reflect his real views and seemed to have been fabricated.

During a 15-minute court hearing, Piper and Whitney were given two days to prepare written answers and a list of defense witnesses. Back in court at week's end, they protested to Judge Lev Almazov that they had not had time to obtain lawyers or analyze the charges. Almazov, who appeared irritated because prolonging the case would delay his vacation, set the trial for July 7. Complained Whitney after the hearing: "The way we were treated raises serious doubts about whether participating in this trial is advisable. If we are not able to defend ourselves, then the aim of this trial is not justice. There is some obscure political purpose." U.S. Ambassador Malcolm Toon told U.S. correspondents in Moscow that he thought the Soviet intent was clear: "This is an effort to get a message across to you people that unless you confine your quotations to official Soviet sources, you run a risk of being charged with slander."

Most foreign correspondents in Moscow agreed with Toon that the action was a new effort to intimidate them and to discourage their reporting on Soviet dissidents. Yet when asked by newsmen in Washington whether reporters covering the 1980 Olympics in Moscow will be similarly harassed, Soviet Ambassador Anatoli Dobrynin snapped: "You know perfectly well what is slander and what is not." He said there will be "no harassment that will hurt doing your job as newspapermen."

State Department Spokesman Hodding Carter III warned that the summonses hindered the "ability of U.S. journalists to function freely" in Moscow. He added: "We hope the Soviet authorities will reflect very carefully on the broader implications of this issue." The State Department's initial retaliation in the case was low-key. U.S. officials quietly summoned eight Soviet correspondents in Washington to "have their credentials reviewed." Some were out of town, but two very nervous Tass reporters and one from Izvestiya appeared at the office of Kenneth Brown, director of the Office of Press Relations, for a solemn 35-minute chat.

Brown made no direct threats against the newsmen, but, said one U.S. official, "the warning should have been implicit."

If the broad significance of Moscow's chilling move against the U.S. reporters was not yet known, the joint release of two accused Soviet agents in exchange for the freeing of American F. Jay Crawford was an upbeat note. The alleged spies, United Nations Employees Rudolf Chernyayev and Valdik Enger, had been indicted in New Jersey by a grand jury on charges of obtaining U.S. Navy secrets.

In pressing charges against the two, the U.S. breached an international gentleman's agreement under which foreign spies are merely expelled. Last week the spy charges were not dropped, but the two Russians were released in the custody of Soviet Ambassador Dobrynin, who pledged to present them for trial--if, as seems uncertain, a trial is held.

In return, Crawford was released in Moscow in the custody of Ambassador Toon. During his 15 days in jail, his precise job with International Harvester Co. had been somewhat inflated in Moscow.

Actually, he is a mechanic who services tractors sold by International Harvester to the U.S.S.R. The charge against him was that he had "systematically sold to individual Soviet citizens large amounts of foreign currency at speculative prices," a crime punishable by up to eight years in prison. His arrest stirred concern among some U.S. executives that doing business with the U.S.S.R. might become risky.

U.S. diplomats were surprised by that cautious reaction. Said one U.S. officer in Moscow: "There has been an amazing lack of vigor, courage and activity on the part of the business community in backing up Crawford."

As he emerged from a Soviet jail, Crawford's eyes brimmed with tears, and his voice cracked as he faced newsmen and insisted: "I am innocent of all charges." If so, Crawford, and the American reporters, seem to be mere citizen pawns caught in the Kremlin's power plays. -

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.