Evening star., 1962-09-06
On Tokinq Risks

Some OF the news these days needs
to be read with critical eye And the
main purpose of this comment is to
suggest that fish, not people, are sup
posed to swallow things hook, line and
sinker.
For example, some segments of the
press have described the Russian de-
cision to comply with our request that
they reroute their armored cars to the
Soviet war memorial in West Berlin
as "backdown" on the part of the
Russians. But these reports do not
specify what it is that they are backing
down from. We would suggest, in the
circumstances, that they are not back
ing down from anything but, rather, are
following the dictates Of common sense
in trying to avoid new Incidents with
the West Berliners.
1t is also reported that the Rus
slams, after this alleged backdown, sent
their Migs into the air corridors, and
thereby "hit" the Western allies and
their Berlin occupation in another and
even more sensitive Spot"-their un-
hindered access to Berlin by air. This
resulted, the report says, in a combined
protest by France, Britain and the
United States. Well, maybe so. But the
same dispatch says reports from the
airlines varied considerably" from the
official statement. And they did indeed.
Air France said its crews had not seen
any Migs. A Pan American pilot saw
q Mig 300 feet off one wing. The Mig
Dew under the transport and came up
on the other side, stayed for bit and
then flew off. But the Mig, according to
the Pan Am pilot, gave no signals and
violated no rules. A spokesman for
British European Airways said two Migs
passed a Viscount from behind at a
distance Of 400 to 500 feet. Is this
really hitting" the Western allies in
their most sensitive spot?
1t seems to us that word or two
also should be said about the U-2 Incl
dent. And in saying them, we are under
no illusions about the Russians. They
Will beg, borrow, steal or do whatever
else is necessary in attempting to
maintain their espionage system and
gain access to our military secrets. Pre-
sumably, we will do the same.
Our official comment says that the
U-2 which apparently flew briefly over
Russian-occupied territory was on "a
directed course well outside Soviet ter
rttorial limits" The suggestion is that
navigational error or strong winds led
the pilot off course, and this we take
with a grain of salt. For this is not
greatly dissimilar from the first tale
told about the U-2 which strayed off
course in 1860, and which wound up
being shot down some 1000 miles inside
Russia. This time, at least, our official
version does not claim that the U-2
which flew over Sakhalin was on a
weather survey mission or was testing
the higher atmosphere for radiation.
1t was flying directed course" which
should have kept it well outside" Soviet
territorial limits, whatever the precise
meaning Of that may be.
The essential point is that a choice
must be made. Our U2 planes can fly
weather tests or radiation sampling
tests without going anywhere near So
Wet territory. Or they can also take
Photographic look at something on SAX
halin, for example, without flying over
the island itself. But minor error in
navigation or high winds, in this situa-
tion, might alter the best laid plans
The thing to remember, we think,
is that no one should get unduly excited.
We and the Russians are both engaged
in espionage and reconnaissance. If
the objective is important enough, the
risk must be taken. If the Russians
catch an "off-course" U-2, or If we
catch DR.. Robert Soblen red-handed,
a certain amount Of propagandizing
by the injured" party is to be expected.
What should be avoided is the taking of
unnecessary or foolhardy risks, and as
to this only those in the tight inner
circle can really know what is neceS-
sary and what is not.