Soviet Officials Refuse Formal Assurances on Relaxing Emigraion

Soviet officials continue to refuse to provide "formal assurances" to relax Soviet emigration policy in return for improved trade relations with the United States and believe the U.S. intends to freeze the Soviet Union out of the Middle East political process, Congressional leaders who returned here from Moscow over the weekend said today.

Rep. John Brodemas (D.Ind.), the House Majority Whip who led the 19-member Congressional delegation on the third antiparliamentary exchange between the two countries, outlined the Soviet views at a news conference at the Capitol. He was joined by Reps. Robert Michel (R. III.), the Minority Whip, Richardson Preyer (D.NC) and Jack Edwards (R. Ala.).

Brodemas said that Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko told Rep. Lee Hamilton (D. Ind.), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East, that the USSR is "strongly opposed" to the Egyptian-Israel peace treaty and feels that the U. S. is "deliberately squeezing" the USSR out from the Mideast. Gromyko indicated that the U. S. is not taking into account the "requirement" of the Palestine Liberation Organization and Arab states and told Hamilton the Soviet Union would oppose using the United Nations Emergency Force in the Sinai to police the peace treaty.

Brodemas was asked whether Soviet officials who the Congressmen had met indicated any remorse or bad conscience over Soviet support of the PLO and its terrorism, including yesterday’s killing of Israelis in Nahariya. Brodemas replied "No, no, the answer is no."

Preyer, who headed the delegation’s subcommittee on human rights, said the Congressmen were "unable to reach agreement" with Soviet officials on emigration. He said the Americans indicated to their hosts that "the practical effect of emigration does affect U. S. public opinion on issues such as trade and a strategic arms limitation treaty (SALT)."

The Soviets contended, Preyer said, that the release of the five Leningrad trial prisoners, disclosed last week, was not related to the Congressional visit or to the SALT negotiations. Edwards pointed out that the SALT was "the prime topic" for the Russians.

SUGGESTION OF PRESIDENTIAL WAIVER

Rep. Charles Vanik (D. Ohio), who coauthored the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, suggested to the Russians a Presidential waiver of the assurances from the Soviets of a freer emigration policy. "The Russians seemed interested," Brodemas said. Gromyko wanted to know whether or not. Sen. Henry Jackson (D. Wash.) would support this move. Vanik acknowledged that Jackson was not in agreement, Brodemas reported.

The waiver provision in the Jackson-Vanik Amendment requires the Soviet Union to provide assurance to the President that its emigration practice would lead substantially to freedom of emigration. The President can then inform the Congress he would grant most favored nation treatment to the Soviet Union for a year.

Vanik was reported to believe that if the People’s Republic of China is provided with most favored nation treatment and not the USSR, the results would be disastrous for the U.S. Jackson’s office told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that China is prepared to provide such formal assurances and in any case each country’s situation must rest on its own merits. The JTA was also told by Jackson’s office that "we stand firmly behind Jackson-Vanik. This is no time to tamper with it."

Brodemas also said that when Gromyko was asked for formal assurances, he pointed out that between 1970 and April II of this year 98.4 percent of those who asked for emigration visas were given permission to leave. Gromyko seemed to say, Brodemas observed, that "we can’t agree to linkage but we are letting more people go."

Asked whether Gromyko’s percentages are not "terribly misleading" since the basis for his calculations are unverified, Brodemas replied he "was not justifying Gromyko’s figures." Brodemas said he is "open-minded" and has not decided about a waiver for the Soviets. Michel observed that when the waiver proposal arose, the Soviets indicated they needed additional definitions of waiver.

Preyer said that when the Vanik proposal was raised at a meeting with Soviet refusniks the "reaction was mixed." Dr. Alexander Lerner" took a rather hard line against it, "Preyer said. But" a majority of the refusniks, "while believing the Jackson-Vanik Amendment was responsible for better treatment for Soviet Jews," realized broader issues are involved" and is trusting Congress to act in their best interest. There was no specific mention of the Anatoly Shcharansky case, Preyer said.