Games Captors Play

How many times has one of the shadowy groups that hold Western hostages in Lebanon dangled a wisp of hope for the release of a captive, only to snatch it away? This time hope was not in vain. On Sunday, kidnapers set free American hostage Robert Polhill, 55, one of three American teachers who had been seized more than three years ago from the campus of Beirut University College. Polhill, a New Yorker, was released to Syrian army officers near a seaside hotel in Beirut and then driven to Damascus, where he was handed over to U.S. Ambassador Edward Djerejian.

The first hint of a breakthrough had come earlier in the week in the form of an unexpected announcement and a picture of a thin-looking man in a grimy T shirt.In notes delivered to an Arab newspaper and a Western news agency in Beirut, the group calling itself Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine declared it would release one of its captives “within 48 hours.” With the announcement came a photograph of Jesse Turner, one of Polhill’s fellow captives.

Even for Americans weary of the roller coaster of emotions that has been part of the hostage dilemma for years, the new development was tantalizing. Iran’s President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, whose nation badly needs Western technology to rebuild its war-shattered economy, has been nodding his approval for the hostages’ release, a signal to the Shi’ite Muslim groups that hold them, most of which are pro-Iranian. With its Soviet sponsor winding down its support, Syria, which has influence with the IJLP, has also been looking for ways to improve relations with the West.

Reports of informal contacts between Americans, Iranians and various go- betweens have been circulating among diplomats and intelligence agencies in Europe and the Middle East. Diplomatic sources in London say the White House gave its approval to a recent meeting in Geneva between an Iranian government delegation, which included representatives of the IJLP, and a small group of Americans, among whom was former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, who were traveling as private citizens.

But this time the kidnapers were asking for a much more direct kind of contact. They called for John Kelly, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, to fly to the Syrian capital of Damascus “to coordinate some final steps to guarantee success within 48 hours.” Their note also cited unspecified “reciprocal moves” that they expected from the U.S. That was too much for an Administration mindful of the Iran-contra debacle and determined to avoid being drawn into negotiations with the kidnapers. At a press conference in Key Largo, Fla., where he had flown to discuss European affairs with French President Francois Mitterrand, George Bush would not budge. “The U.S. position is clear,” he said with a decided edge in his voice. “We do not meet demands.”

Even so, the President was unwilling to let slip the possibility that a U.S. hostage might be set free. Though Kelly was held back, ambassador Djerejian hastily returned to Damascus from Bonn, where he had been attending a meeting of U.S. envoys. Angered by the U.S. refusal to dispatch Kelly, the IJLP issued a new statement, this time accompanied by a photograph of Polhill. The group announced that it had decided to “postpone this operation until the picture is cleared.” Perhaps to dispel speculation that it had gone soft, it also threatened to attack airports and airlines involved in Jewish emigration from the Soviet Union to Israel.

Any further progress will be complicated by the fact that the American ! hostages are held by several Shi’ite factions, each with its own sponsors and agendas. Even if Iran and Syria are sincere in their desire to speed the release of the hostages, there are serious questions about how much influence either now has among Lebanon’s tangled factions of militant Shi’ite Muslims.

The U.S. has been pushing Syria to take a more active role in securing the hostages’ freedom. It was no accident that President Bush sent Syrian President Hafez Assad a warm congratulatory message on the 44th anniversary of Syrian independence last week. Syria’s influence over Hizballah has been partly limited by the fact that Damascus is a supporter of the Shi’ite Amal, a secular Muslim group that continues to fight fierce battles with the fundamentalist Hizballah. But Hussein Musawi, leader of a pro-Syrian faction within Hizballah, is now believed to have taken control of the American hostages held by the IJLP.

A break in the hostage deadlock in Lebanon would be a sign that President Rafsanjani has been winning the power struggle in Tehran. He still faces opposition from militants led by former Interior Minister Ali Akbar Mohtashemi, who remains fiercely opposed to the release of the hostages because it might lead to improved relations with the U.S. and the return of Western influence in Iran. In the early 1980s, Mohtashemi helped organize the Lebanese Hizballah. After Rafsanjani became President following the death of Ayatullah Khomeini last year, he began seeking to lure Hizballah leaders away from their longtime allegiance to Mohtashemi.

There may have been significance in the fact that in its first note the IJLP pointedly credited Iran for prompting the plan to release a hostage — a declaration the group is likely to have cleared first with Tehran. Since Iran has always preferred to distance itself from the hostage takers, its presumed willingness to be cited may be a sign that it is positioning itself to take credit for any future progress. “For us,” says a French diplomat who went through the experience of helping secure the release of several French hostages, “the key was always in Tehran.” The U.S. can only hope that once the key starts turning, it will not stop.