European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - September 01, 1977, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Poge 12 the stars and stripes Anthony Lewis thursday september to 1977 pressure applied on behalf of Richard Helms Griffin Bell who returns this wee from a Brief vacation must Deal soon with what May be the Pri Kliest question he has faced As attorney general whether to let a grand jury indict Richard Helms former director of Central intelligence for per jury the Case is inevitably an awkward one requiring As it does another painful look at what american governments did in the name of intelligence. But it is the More difficult for Bell As it was for the previous attorney general Edward h. Levi be cause an inner Circle of powerful figures in St do is if it uv6 v4sard one i am not Crook i Promise full disc sore expletive deleted Oke Rof  is theses a list congressional privilege but it would distributed by Jos Eles Mes Syndicate William f. Buckley Washington society is applying pressure on behalf of Richard  a company town whose business is government Washington has always had something of a social political establish ment policy makers lawyers and journalists who stay As administrations come and go. The makers of postwar american for eign policy Are a prominent element now and Helms is very much a part of that  was guest of Honor in january 1975 at a private dinner party that was immortalized by a Story in the Washington Post. The guests included Henry Kissinger Robert Mcnamara and Averell Harriman there were toasts of sympathy and support. At other social occasions in Washington officials dealing with the Helms Case have actually found themselves being denounced for persecuting poor Dick  the Effort to protect Helms took extraordinary form the other Day in a newspaper column by Rowland Evans and Robert Novack. It warned that bringing him to trial on perjury charges could expose the nation and its recent presidents to Oblo Quy and end intelligence cooperation with our allies. It quoted an eminent Democrat As saying that such a prosecution would be the single most damaging thing that could be done to this  the column said a seasoned washing ton lawyer with Liberal connections considered the grand jury investigation an  might that possibly be Edward Bennett Williams who is Helms s lawyer it put Down the Justice depart ment lawyers in charge of the grand Uryas Youthful  they Are 36, James Madison s age at the constitutional convention and 30 in any event they act at the attorney general s direction the Helms Case Evans and Novack said presented a Choice Between open government and National Security. If president Carter was concerned about the latter they suggested he should instruct attorney general Bell to prevent an indict ment. The one thought curiously missing from the column was that the Law might have something to do with the Case of Richard Helms. Indeed one could read it without having the slightest idea Why a Law enforcement official As thoughtful and conservative As Edward Levi would have ordered a grand jury investigation an Why the jury is now evidently prepared to return an indictment. In Senate hearings in 1973, Helms was asked whether the Cia under his Leader ship had engaged in Domestic spying on the Antiwar movement. He said it was not involved an answer that the facts of thecia s massive Domestic spying disclosed later showed to be at a minimum Grossl deceptive. In the same hearings sen. Stuart Symington asked whether the Cia had tried to overthrow the government of  Helms answered no  Symington continued did you have any Money passed to the opponents of chilean presi Dent Allende no  in fact the intelligence investigations later showed that the Cia had Given millions in cover funds to anti Allende forces. That testimony widely publicized raised a Legal question that no conscientious attorney general could ignore had Helms under oath told a knowing and de liberate falsehood on a matter relevant to the business of Congress the Issue in Short is one of Law and of Law in More than some narrow technical sense. The Helms Case tests again whether this country believes what it avowed As recently As watergate that the highest officials like the rest of us Are obligated to obey the Law. Of course there s More to the Case than the Basic Issue of principle. The Law of per jury can be Complex. The government if it goes to trial would have to prove what Helms knew when he answered which could involve some evidence of Cia Busi Ness. But disclosure for the limited Pur pose of Law enforcement is a far cry from applying the slogan open government to intelligence generally. And the Issue of principle the application of Law to those especially sworn to uphold it remains. Jimmy Carter of All presidents has the least reason to give Way to establishment opinion on such a question. He would be foolish in the extreme to interfere wit what should be a decision by his attorney general a decision on the Law. C new York times the importance of our presence in Taiwan it is instructive to contrast the symbolic meaning to the United states of oui positions in Panama and in Taiwan. It is being suggested that we Chart a course giving up sovereignly Over the canal zone. Opponents of this course of action cite As among the reasons for not doing so the symbolic loss of prestige to the United states. The Quick answer to that question is that the loss in prestige is of the sort that Marks prestige with Little red pins scattered about the Globe there there there and there the american Flag i flying. There is another kind of prestige that in sures to great countries that transcends marketing class demonstrations of pres Tige in Exchange for fundamentally improved situations. A great country look first after its own Security and then seeks to oblige the licit ambitions of other people in Panama s Case the reunification of their country. In Taiwan our presence is of hug meaning. As Long As our treaty survives we have advised the world that for All that we Are prepared to Deal with the communist superpowers we Are not prepared to appease them by turning Over More human beings for them to victimize. The opinions expressed in the columns and cartoons on this Page represent those of the authors and Are in no Way to be considered As representing the views of the stars and stripes or the United states government. Now senator Kennedy and former Sena Tor Scott would not put it this Way. Senator Kennedy was wonderfully vague about the future of Taiwan. He was Concrete on two Points we should terminate our defense treaty and we should not try to exact fro China the pledge that it would renounce Force in seizing Taiwan. Where he became vague was on what then would protect Taiwan from the colossus on the Mainland. Well such things As an american pres ence in the Pacific the american pres ence in the Pacific to judge from events since 1975, is there for the purpose of guaranteeing that America will never act in the Pacific continued economic Trade wit Taiwan that sort of thing. What would we gain from our withdrawal from Taiwan once again the senators and their support ers Are vague. What we stand to gain is a capitulation to the will of Mainland China. Why is that a gain two Points need to be considered on symbolic the other practical. The symbolic Point is that the termination of the treat would Mark a change in american foreign policy. We entered into the treaty 15 year Sago because we were prepared to make a statement namely that we would defend Taiwan in any War of aggression initiated from the Mainland. To terminate that treaty is to Retreat from that commitment. That pure and simple is what it Means. Now to Retreat from a commitment be cause it is no longer necessary is one thing but what has changed in the interval in chinese Taiwan relations to Retreat from a commitment in Exchange for an enhanced position is another thing but this is not in Prospect. To Retreat simply to Flat Ter the Mainland s vell Eity is abject. The termination of the Taiwan treaty would so be interpreted throughout Asia and quit correctly so. But to Deal with the Concrete we know because or. Kissinger has told us so that As a simple matter of fact the Taiwan question has received the lowest priority in All dealings Between the United states Anechina since the Shanghai manifesto. There in t great pressure from the main Landers to bring on american evacuation. By Leav ing Taiwan however that pressure inbound to increase. So Long As we Are a Mili tary presence in Taiwan there is a reason Well understood publicly for staying on their Side of the Straits of Taiwan. With the american presence removed psychological pressures Are generated to launch an Irr dentist Campaign against Taiwan. The Hawks in China would then insist that there is nothing left to combat than the taiwanese military and that it is humiliating for a great Power not to exert itself to accomplish the reunification of its own country. Note Down the following As a candidate for the worst reasoning of the year. It is the concluding sentence from the new Yor times editorial supporting Kennedy. Our failure to get out of Taiwan would in crease the risk that the present pragmatic successors to Mao tse Tung and Chou in Lai May decide that their american connection is not dependable and therefore not Worth taking political risks to maintain we Are to prove to China that we Are dependable by being undependable. C Washington Star and it Aas the firepower of 750,000,000, 000, 000, 000,000, 000, 000,000, firecrackers