Middle East The Sweet Taste of Freedom

By Jill Smolowe

The performances by American educator Thomas Sutherland and British church envoy Terry Waite as they emerged last week from years of captivity testified to the remarkable resiliency of the human spirit. Sutherland, 60, who spent most of his 2,347 days as a hostage in Lebanon tethered by ankle chains to a wall, calmly alternated tales of senseless beatings and profound depression with lighthearted quips about Waite, who, he reported, "snores awfully loudly." Waite, 52, limping from his years in chains, reported, "I was kept in total and complete isolation for four years." Yet 1,763 days in windowless cells neither dimmed his megawatt smile nor diminished his faith in mankind's basic goodness. "I trust the Hizballah," he said of the very people whose double-crossing cost almost five years of his life.

Waite was referring to his captors' pledge to free by the end of November the three remaining American hostages, among them journalist Terry Anderson. There seemed great promise that the hostage drama was coming to an end. In Lebanon, Hizballah said the fate of the remaining Western hostages was no longer linked to freedom for 300-odd Arab prisoners held by Israel's proxy militia in south Lebanon. An announcement by U.S. officials that Washington and Tehran were nearing agreement on payment of $275 million owed to Iran for undelivered military equipment dating back to 1979 sweetened the prospect of a resolution. Both Syria and Iran continued to speed the process along in order ( to gain access to Western economic assistance. Still, the time frame remains iffy: Tehran radio said the hostages would be home by Christmas.

For Sutherland, it was a bittersweet homecoming. Even as he learned that his 88-year-old father-in-law had died just two days earlier, he received word that one of his three daughters was about to give birth. Sutherland seemed forgiving of his captors, allowing, "I don't think they really thoroughly understand what they were doing to us, putting those chains back on our legs every day." Although he appeared healthy, the discovery of an ulcer at week's end delayed his return to the U.S.

Britain's hostage ordeal ended with the return of Waite, the high-profile envoy of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the last British captive in Lebanon. But as bells joyously tolled his freedom, the homecoming unleashed feverish speculation about the role the U.S. -- and maybe Waite himself -- had played in his capture. Did Waite know of Washington's secret arms dealings? And was he a willing agent, or an unwitting collaborator? Before his capture, Waite denied any knowledge of the U.S. arms-for-hostages scheme.

While the Briton began as a globe-trotting negotiator acting for the Church of England, his efforts gradually meshed with the U.S. campaign. Waite's ties to Lieut. Colonel Oliver North, the point man in the doomed U.S. trade-off, are well documented. Not only did the two men meet at least five times, but the U.S. provided Waite with helicopters and other assistance during some of his missions. By 1986, the captors had intertwined Waite's efforts with the secret U.S. operation: each time a weapons shipment was made to Iran, an Iranian official would travel to Damascus, and North would signal Waite that the time was ripe for him to visit his contacts in Beirut. With these pieces in place, a hostage would be released and Waite could claim credit.

Waite may not have known of the arms payoff to Iran, but plainly he cooperated with the U.S. In a December 1985 memo to his superiors, North referred to Waite as "our only access to events in Lebanon." Robert Oakley, the former head of the State Department's Office for Counter-Terrorism, insists, "He knew our efforts were responsible for his results." Waite sometimes briefed American officials in Washington. He also relayed messages between Hizballah and Washington, in a failed attempt to spring the hostages in exchange for assurances that the 17 Hizballah prisoners held in Kuwait . would at least not be executed. Even admirers say that the envoy's vanity was as big as his heart and that he reveled in the high-level contacts and cloak- and-dagger maneuvers.

By the time he made the last of at least five journeys to Beirut, his position as a neutral mediator was seriously compromised. Leaks emanating from the continuing investigation of the Iran-contra affair, linked Waite with the U.S. operation. Despite warnings from his own government and church, he made a final trip in January 1987, largely to clear his name of the Iran-contra taint. Once there, he insisted that he had never discussed arms-for-hostages deals with anyone. "If I had," he told reporters, "then I would be too afraid and I wouldn't be back here now."

As the controversy swirls, the families of the remaining hostages gird for what appears to be the final act of their long vigil. Yet even as the clouds lifted, a Lebanese Shi'ite who is close to the Islamic Jihad kidnappers issued a stern warning. "If the U.S. or Israel attacks Islamic Jihad, there will be clear, definitive and irreversible revenge through assassination," he threatened. "American ambassadors will be assassinated in the Middle East or in Europe." And so, on it goes.

With reporting by William Mader/London, Lara Marlowe/Beirut and Jay Peterzell/Washington