The Families Are Frantic

THE WAR The Families Are Frantic With each hint of progress in the Viet Nam negotiations, there comes a special quickening of hope for several thousand Americans, the families of 1,600 military men missing or imprisoned in Southeast Asia. For them, the maneuverings of international diplomacy--be they new proposals from the North Vietnamese or the prospect of a peace-making presidential visit to China --are translated into a single, very personal reality: the fate of a husband, son, father or brother.

For years the families were largely ignored in the clamor of a widening war. Then, with the decision to withdraw from Indochina, release of the prisoners became a major issue. After an unsuccessful rescue raid on a deserted prison camp at Son Tay last November, the families closed ranks behind the Nixon Administration's insistence that freeing the P.O.W.s was the necessary first item for negotiating a peace in Southeast Asia. But since then, disenchantment and frustration have somewhat eroded the President's support among P.O.W. wives and parents. Following Hanoi's latest proposal, which seemingly offers release of the men imprisoned in North and South Viet Nam in return for total U.S. withdrawal by year's end, a split is developing among the families. To the anguish of both sides, it is close to dividing them on the means to their basic goal: bringing the men home.

Splinter Groups. In May, a new group was formed by families who consider Administration policy toward prisoners an excuse for prolonging the war. P.O.W.-M.I.A. (Missingin Action) Families for Immediate Release--who count some 300 relatives among the supporters of their stance--called a press conference in Washington to demand that the President set a definite withdrawal date in exchange for the release of the prisoners. The group's organizer, Mrs. Harold Kushner of Danville, Va., charged the Administration with "using the prisoner issue to buy time for the South Vietnamese government." Another member was more blunt. Said Mrs. Louis F. Jones: "They cannot use my husband to spread the blood of 45 young men a week on Viet Nam."

Another rare public expression of discontent came in a letter last week to President Nixon. Signed by the relatives of six prisoners, the letter urged Nixon not to reject Hanoi's offer in order to ensure the survival of the Saigon government: "We fear that we will spend years chasing the light at the end of the tunnel, while for our men in the prison camps, one by one the light will go out forever."

The largest organization of prisoner families, the National League of Families of P.O.W.s/M.I.A. has likewise felt the shift in attitude. The league has long guarded its political neutrality, but there are pressures for the organization to take a public position on the negotiations. One league official predicts the formation of splinter groups at the league's convention in September. The meeting, the official concedes, is likely to be a stormy one. Mrs. James Stockdale of Branford, Conn., league founder, acknowledges "a tremendous divergence of opinions." Says Mrs. Stockdale: "There is the whole range--from immediate withdrawal to 'trust the President.' But as time goes on our frustration grows. The families are frantic."

The Administration's cool response to North Viet Nam's most recent proposals has reinforced disaffection with Nixon's policy. Says Mrs. Daniel Glenn of Jacksonville, wife of a Navy pilot shot down four days before Christmas 1966: "All along the President has been hiding under the shield of bringing the men back. Now that there's an opportunity to do so, he's shirking it." Mrs. Robert Fuller, also of Jacksonville, has another view of Administration reaction to demands for a withdrawal date: "I think I would begin to resent the P.O.W.s very much if I had an 18-year-old son who was just saying goodbye. This is why I resent the President giving the people the attitude that the U.S. is still there because of the P.O.W.s. It sort of puts us in the middle."

Support for One President. Nixon's policy is still strong, however. Says Mrs. George Brooks of Newburgh, N.Y.: "I have gone with the Administration right along, and I still am with the Administration." Adds Mrs. Richard Bodden of Downers Grove, Ill.: "We have one President and he is head of the country and has access to most of the knowledge. I have faith."

Through the years of uncertainty about the fate of the men. the families have developed a diplomat's sensitivity to the nuances of negotiating ploys. While the majority views Hanoi's latest offer with sad skepticism, the wariness has begun to extend to the public statements of American officials. Republican National Committee Chairman Robert Dole's recent statement that there were "just" 1,600 men missing in Indochina sent shock waves through the tightly knit family organizations, as did Secretary of State William Rogers' insistence that the U.S. "can't absolutely abandon our national objectives to pay ransom." The deferential briefings from Presidential Adviser Henry Kissinger and Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird are recalled by some with bitterness. How many P.O.W. families share the disenchantment is impossible to determine. But Mrs. Fuller voices a biting new version of the briefings: "Now that I know about 'orchestration' and 'crescendo' and all those beautiful words they use for war--which makes you think you should hear violins instead of tears--I begin to get the feeling lately that I'm in the middle of a scenario, and the President is leading it with a baton."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.