Operation Overflight (44 page)

It took the CIA just two paragraphs to get itself off the hook, to gloss over the fact that we were almost totally unprepared for the possibility that one of the U-2s might go down in Russia.

What followed interested me greatly.

“The pilots' contracts provided that they perform such services as might be required and follow such instructions and briefings in connection therewith as were given to them by their superiors. The guidance was as follows:

“a. If evasion is not feasible and capture appears imminent, pilots should surrender without resistance and adopt a cooperative attitude toward their captors.

“b. At all times while in the custody of their captors, pilots will conduct themselves with dignity and maintain a respectful attitude toward their superiors.

“c. Pilots will be instructed that they are perfectly free to tell the full truth about their mission with the exception of certain specifications of the aircraft. They will be advised to represent themselves as civilians, to admit previous Air Force affiliation, to admit current CIA employment, and to make no attempt to deny the nature of their mission.

“They were instructed, therefore, to be cooperative with their captors within limitations, to use their own judgment of what they should attempt to withhold, and not to subject themselves to strenuous hostile interrogation. It has been established that Mr. Powers had been briefed in accordance with this policy and so understood his guidance.”

My actual instructions, obtained only after I had brought the issue to the fore, were much more concise: “You may as well tell them everything, because they're going to get it out of you anyway.”

There was no indication in the wording that I had failed to heed this suggestion or gone far beyond what I was required to do.

“In regard to the poison needle,” the statement continued, “it should be emphasized that this was intended for use primarily if the pilot were subjected to torture or other circumstances which in his discretion warranted the taking of his own life. There were no instructions that he should commit suicide and no expectation that he would do so except in those situations just described, and I emphasize that even taking the needle with him in the plane was not mandatory; it was his option.”

I was glad to have that on record. And I was not displeased by what followed.

“Mr. Powers' performance on prior missions has been reviewed, and it is clear that he was one of the outstanding pilots of the whole
U-2 program. He was proficient both as a flyer and as a navigator and showed himself calm in emergency situations. His security background has been exhaustively reviewed, and any circumstances which might conceivably have led to pressure from or defection to the Russians have also been exhaustively reviewed, and no evidence has been found to support any theory that failure of his flight might be laid to Soviet espionage activities.”

Though I was unaware of it at the time, that last statement was open to question. As will be noted, there did exist some rather astonishing circumstantial evidence which indicated that my flight may have been betrayed before I even lifted off the ground.

As for the exhaustive review of my background, I had learned of this during the debriefings, from one of the men conducting the investigation. “I'll bet we know more about you than you know about yourself,” he remarked, adding, “The amazing thing is how clean you came out. I've been doing this sort of thing for a long time, and you're the closest to Jack Armstrong, the All-American Boy, I've seen.” I think he meant that as a compliment.

The statement then reviewed at some length the details of my May 1, I960, flight, concluding: “In connection with Powers' efforts to operate the destruct switches, it should be noted that the basic weight limitations kept the explosive charge to two and a half pounds and the purpose of the destruct mechanism was to render inoperable the precision camera and other equipment, not to destroy them and the film.”

That was a bit vaguer than I would have liked. Since there was so much criticism on this point, I'd hoped that the agency would make it very clear that even had I activated the switches, the plane itself would not have been totally destroyed.

The statement then concluded that the one hypodermic injection I had been given probably wasn't truth serum but a general immunization shot; that despite repeated requests to contact the American Embassy or my family, I had been held incommunicado and interrogated for about one hundred days. Paraphrasing me, it observed: “He states that the interrogation was not intense in the sense of physical violence or severe hostile methods, and that in some respects he was able to resist answering specific questions. As an example, his interrogators were interested in the names of people participating in the project, and he states that he tried to anticipate what names would become known and gave those, such as the names of his commanding officer and certain other personnel at his home base in Adana, Turkey, who would probably be known
in any case to the Russians. However, they asked him for names of other pilots, and he states that he refused to give these on the grounds that they were his friends and comrades and if he gave their names they would lose their jobs and, therefore, he could not do so. He states they accepted this position. It is his stated belief, therefore, that the information he gave was that which in all probability would be known in any case to his captors.”

That bothered me. All the emphasis was on those few questions I had refused to answer. Of far greater importance were the many questions I
had
answered—
incorrectly
. The doors I had closed with a simple “I don't know,” the blind alleys up which I had led them when it looked as if they were getting too close to the truth.

Except for the single example of the names of the pilots, there was no indication that I had withheld information from the Russians.

I could understand why the information I held back couldn't be specified. If mention was made that I had lied about the altitude of the U-2, for example, the Russians might reexamine the whole subject and possibly—through radar plots of this and other flights—determine what the actual altitude had been, thus, conceivably, someday placing the life of another pilot in jeopardy. It was the same with the number of overflights and their targets, my atomicweapons training, the “special” missions, and so on.

Nothing would have been compromised by making the simple statement: “In the opinion of the experts who debriefed him, Powers withheld information vital to the security of the United States.” Just that and nothing more would have made all the difference.

I was not interested in being proclaimed a hero. I had done only what I felt was right. But then, neither did I like the implication left by this vague, evasive wording. As a “clearance,” it was smudged, equivocal.

I read on, as the report now approached its summary judgment:

“All the facts concerning Mr. Powers' mission, the descent of his plane, his capture, and his subsequent actions, have been subjected to intensive study. In the first place, Powers was interrogated for many days consecutively by a debriefing team of experienced interrogators, one of whose duties was to evaluate Powers' credibility. They expressed the unanimous view that Powers was truthful in his account. Secondly, an intensive inquiry was made by government officials into the background, life history, education, conduct, and character of Powers. This team included doctors, specialists in psychiatry and psychology, personnel officers, his former colleagues in the Air Force and on the U-2 project. All these persons were of
the view that Powers is inherently and by practice a truthful man. Thirdly, Powers appeared before a board of inquiry and testified at length, both directly and under cross-examination. The board agreed that in his appearance he appeared to be truthful, frank, straightforward, and without any indicated attempt to evade questions or color what he was saying. In the board's judgment, he reflected an attitude of complete candor. In the fourth place, when during his examination before the board a question was raised as to the accuracy of one of his statements, he volunteered with some vehemence that, although he disliked the process of the polygraph, he would like to undergo a polygraph test.”

The word “like” was definitely an exaggeration.

“That test was subsequently duly administered by an expert, and in it he was examined on all of the factual phases which the board considered critical in this inquiry. The report by the polygraph operator is that he displayed no indications of deviation from the truth in the course of that examination. In the fifth place, a study of the photograph of the debris of the plane and other information concerning the plane revealed, in the opinion of experts making the study, no condition which suggested an inconsistency with Powers' account of what had transpired. The board noted the testimony of Russian witnesses at the trial in Moscow which dealt with the descent and capture of Powers and with technical features of the plane and the incident.

“The testimony was consistent with the account given by Powers. Powers was able to identify a spot near a small village where he thought he had landed. This location checked with prior testimony given by Powers as to physical features, directions, and distances, and also corresponded with earlier independent information not known to Powers that certain of the persons who captured him lived in this same small village. Some information from confidential sources was available. Some of it corroborated Powers and some of it was inconsistent in parts with Powers' story, but that which was inconsistent was in part contradictory with itself and subject to various interpretations. Some of this information was the basis for considerable speculation shortly after the 1 May episode and subsequent stories in the press that Powers' plane had descended gradually from its extreme altitude and had been shot down by a Russian fighter at medium altitude. On careful analysis, it appears that the information on which these stories were based was erroneous or was susceptible of varying interpretations. The board came to the conclusion that it could not accept a doubtful interpretation
in this regard which was inconsistent with all the other known facts and consequently rejected these newspaper stories as not founded in fact.”

Finally the bogus story was laid to rest. Yet there was not a hint as to who had perpetrated this fiction in the first place. Or why.

The final paragraph of the statement read:

“On all the information available, therefore, it is the conclusion of the board of inquiry which reviewed Mr. Powers' case and of the director of Central Intelligence, who has carefully studied the board's report and has discussed it with the board, that Mr. Powers lived up to the terms of his employment and instructions in connection with his mission and in his obligations as an American under the circumstances in which he found himself. It should be noted that competent aerodynamicists and aeronautical engineers have carefully studied Powers' description of his experience and have concluded on the basis of scientific analysis that a U-2 plane damaged as he described would perform in its descent in about the manner he stated. Accordingly, the amount due Mr. Powers under the terms of his contract will be paid to him.”

“POWERS CLEARED BY CIA,” the headlines would read.

Yet I wondered.

Three

T
here's been a change in plans,” one of the agents informed me excitedly. “You're going to the White House before you go to the Senate. You have an appointment with the President.”

Nervous enough before, I was doubly so now. The newspapers had made much of President Kennedy's greeting the two RB-47 pilots but “snubbing Powers.” This meeting, I realized, could do much to allay the criticism. It also meant that the attorney general had apparently gotten the message. The likelihood of my actually being brought to trial was, I felt, quite remote. Still, that it had even been considered bothered me.

We were awaiting the arrival of the limousines to take us to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, when another message came through. One of the agents gave me the news. “The White House called. The appointment has been canceled.”

Why? He didn't know; there had been no explanation.

With my appearance before the Senate to begin in just a couple
of hours, I hadn't the time to worry about it. To mask my disappointment, I told myself that maybe it had been postponed until after the hearing. But I didn't really believe that. Something had happened.

I wished they hadn't brought it up in the first place.

Thoughtfully, the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, Richard B. Russell of Georgia, had provided the agency with a list of questions he would ask me at the start, to put me at ease. Then I would be asked to describe exactly what had happened on my May 1 flight. Beyond that I'd be on my own; the committee members were free to ask whatever questions they wished.

CIA Director McCone had given his closed-door testimony that morning, at the same time the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Forces committees had jointly released my CIA clearance, thus providing groundwork for my testimony.

As we drove to the Old Senate Office Building, I scanned the list. What part of Virginia are you from? Where did you attend grammar and high school? Where did you go to college? I was admittedly shy; the mere thought of appearing before a large crowd frightened me. This little bit of prebriefing was helpful, and I was thankful to Russell for being so considerate.

We made it out of the automobile and into the building without being spotted. But as we were walking down the corridor to the Senate caucus room, one of the TV reporters recognized me. Within seconds the cameras were focused and questions were coming from every direction.

I thought: This is the first time I've ever been on TV! But, before I could panic, I remembered: No, it isn't. There was Moscow. You should be a seasoned performer by now.