Evening star., 1953-08-23
POWs-
Pentoeon Is Cautious
About 'Proeressives'
By WiIIiom Hines

progressive" American prisoners of
war. and hope the public will react
with equal prudence.
Since the big POW exchange be-
gan August 5, dispatches from Pan
munjom have been full of stories Of
captured GIs acting as stool pigeons
for the Reds. At least one man,
accused by his fellows as an in
former, was reported afraid to sail
home with other prisoners lest he
be pushed overheard in midocean.
Acting with extreme caution, the
military is listening, making notes
and quietly investigating. But for
being convened. In fact, one high
Pentagon source says, it may be
years-and the accused may be back
in civilian ife-before anything is
done about the charges.
Attorney General Herbert Brown
ell, whose Office would have to prose-
cute any treason trials that might
arise, last week asked the American
public not to make any snap judg-
mentS about returned POWs.
'ReOetionories' VS.. 'Proeressives'
According to returned POWs, the
Red camps were split into two
groups, a large one made up OF
prisoners who resisted Red indoc-
trination and smaller one that
co-operated with the Communists to
a greater or smaller degree. A few
went over to communism so whole
heartedly. their fellows say, that
they have chosen not to come back.
Old soldiers both in and out of
the service caution against giving
too much spur of-the-moment Gre
dence to tales of cooperation with
the enemy. They liken such charges
to rumors common in barracks dur
ing World War II that So-and-so
was buttering up to the captain. In
most cases, So-and-So had merely
decided to avoid resisting authority
and make the best of what he re-
garded as a bad situation.
There is a world of difference,
authorities emphasize, between Cd
attending indoctrination lectures,
reading Communist propaganda and
p obeying camp orders and (2) active
ly helping the Reds by spying and
informing. But the difference fire.
Quently was not discernible from
the point Of view of a fellow-pris-
oner who decided to fight city
hall" and had a hard time as a
result.
This Is one Of the reasons the
military Is moving 50 slowly.
The Provoo cose
Undoubtedly, Pentagon offlcialS
believe, some POWs turned on their
fellows In confinement and CO.
operated fully with the Reds. But
on the basis Of past performance
Of Americans in prison camps, mil
ttary authorities are inclined to be-
1ieve the number is small. Only a
few cases came out of World War II,
the most notable being that of John
David Provoo, an Army sergeant
who acted as the American "hatchet
man" in Japanese prison camp.
Most accusations leveled against
other men were found to be "grudge"
charges and were never brought to
trial.
In World War II the Army had no
specific article Of war covering mis-
conduct as a prisoner. The Provoo
case was tried in a civil court in
New York under the Federal treason
statute. At that time, the 96th Ar
ticle Of War, a general statute cov-
ering offenseS bringing discredit on
the military service" was considered
to cover such breaches of law.
Article los
The Uniform Code of Military
Justice, signed into law by former
President Truman on May S, 1850,
included for the first time a specific
section on misconduct as a prisoner.
It is Article los, which provides:
ANY person subject to this code
who, while in the hands of the
enemy in time of war Cd for the
purpose Of securing favorable treat
ment by his captors acts without
proper authority in q manner con-
trary to law, custom or regulation,
to the detriment of others Of what
ever nationality held by the enemy
as civilian or military prisoners; or
(2) while in q position Of authority
over such persons maltreatS them
without justiflable cause shall be
punished as court-martial may
direct"
Life imprisonment is the maxi
mum punishment under this article.
Theoretically. the military could
try under Article los any duly ac-
cused former POW, even If he had
been discharged from the service.
A case now before the U. S. District
Court for the District Of Columbia
may decide, however, whether the
military has the right to arrest a
civilian-and without an arrest
there can be no trial.
This bridge is one the military
will cross when it comes to 1t. Ap-
parently, except In the most ex-
treme cases, the services will not
hold a man beyond his enlistment
expiration date "for the convenience
Of the Government" In order to
court-martial him.
Treason TrioIs Unlikely
With Article los on the books, it
is unlikely that any former prison.
ers will be charged. as Provoo was,
with treason. The new article is
specifically directed at the offenses
now being charged by returned
POWs, and 1t Is far easier to make
stick than treason, which is mar
rowly defined by the Federal Con-
Stitution. A circumstantial case