Out of court
Sir: Mr John Ashe's excuses for Soviet actions against Gerald Brooke (Letters, 16 February) should not remain unrefuted.
(1) It is completely untrue that 'in the Soviet code, the lines between treason, sabotage, political agitation and espionage are less definite than many of us would suppose.' Sir, I do not pretend to know what Mr Ashe or any one else 'supposes,' but—if
we prefer to remain within the realm of fact—
Articles 63, 64 and 70 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR contain very explicit definitions of each of these `anti-State acts.' There is even an official 'List of Items of Information which Constitute State Secrets'—something much more precise than, for instance, the provisions of the Official Secrets Act. It is true, of course, that for fifty years the Soviet government has consiltently disregarded its own laws, including the Constitution itself, but that is hardly what Mr Ashe meant (2) Agreed: Brooke's confession was 'abject.' But it was a confession of anti-Soviet propaganda, not espionage. This was the whole point of my article. Or does Mr Ashe—unlike the Soviet Criminal Code —regard the two offences as interchangeable?
(3) I certainly cannot assure Mr Ashe that the KGB does not hold Brooke's confession to 'tech- nical espionage,' whatever that may be. Indeed, I would not be surprised were they to make Brooke confess to every crime under the sun. Such cases are not entirely unknown. All I can say is that so far they have not produced any such 'document,' and I fail to understand why Mr Ashe should seek to anticipate their actions.
(4) 'Was there to be no transmission of intel- ligence on the return journey?' muses Mr Ashe. Anything, I suppose, is conceivable if one is blessed
with a sufficiently fertile imagination, only I do think—with all due respect—that Mr Ashe should leave these insinuations to the Soviet professionals. They have always been quite good at it.
(5) Mr Ashe enjoins me to be 'realistic,' and give `due weight' to the Soviet authorities' view of the case.' I think I fulfilled both these requirements when I wrote: 'Soviet Russia being what it is, the authorities can certainly get him convicted on any charge they choose and for any term they decide.' However, if Mr Ashe expects me to share the Soviet authorities' desire to insulate their subjects from any unauthorised foreign contacts, I am afraid I cannot oblige.
Mr Ashe speaks of his 'sympathy' for Brooke and even of his support for 'the Brooke lobby' (a peculiar expression, is it not?) If this be so, I hate to think of what somebody who is not in 'sympathy' with Brooke might write about him.
Tibor Szarnuely The University of Reading, Faculty of Letters, Whitekoights Park, Reading
Previous page
