Another Bright, Shining Lie? -- Families Of Vietnam Mias May Have Been Purposely Misled

WASHINGTON - For 22 years, Sharon Walsh clung to a tiny thread of hope that her husband had survived being shot down in Vietnam. As it turns out, that hope was based on a commander's well-intentioned lie.

The commander admits he was certain that Lt. Col. Richard Walsh of Minneapolis had died. But he reported Walsh missing in action rather than killed, following what he describes as his squadron's unofficial policy and what he knew to be Walsh's wishes.

The Air Force officially denies that could have happened, and the lie came as a shock to Sharon Walsh. ``It had never occurred to me,'' she said.

But disclosures surrounding the Walsh case, first described by the Star Tribune of Minneapolis, indicate that some pilots during the Vietnam War were reported as missing in action, not killed, to protect the emotions and finances of their survivors.

Families of MIA pilots qualify for substantially higher benefits than survivors of those listed as killed.

As of yesterday, 27 U.S. military personnel - nearly all pilots or air crew members - were listed as missing in action in the Persian Gulf War.

For benefits purposes, the status of almost 2,400 Vietnam War MIAs was changed to ``presumed dead'' in the late 1970s.

The Air Force and Navy say a downed pilot is listed as missing in action if there is reason to hope he may have survived. But officials maintain that pilots are not asked how they want to be reported.

``I think that would be totally inappropriate,'' said George Atkinson, chief of the Air Force missing persons division. ``We don't base those kinds of decisions on the druthers of the person.''

``I find it abominable if an individual would have that knowledge . . . that they're withholding it from the families,'' said Mary Currall of the National League of Families of American Prisoners and Missing in Southeast Asia.

An Air Force historian who requested anonymity said that pilots in Vietnam routinely were asked about their preferences for casualty status. Most selected ``MIA,'' he said.

It was ``accepted procedure'' to list a downed pilot as MIA unless there were witnesses or physical evidence that he died, he said.

That was the basis for the hope that led Sharon Walsh to France and Vietnam to question diplomats and officials about her husband after he disappeared in 1969.

She didn't learn that her husband apparently had asked to be listed as missing, not killed in action, until a Star Tribune reporter recently called the squadron commander, retired Lt. Col. Walter Stueck of Georgetown, Texas.

Stueck, who was flying near Walsh, reported to superiors at the time that there was a chance Walsh could have escaped alive.

``I flat-out lied,'' Stueck told the newspaper. ``This is what he (Walsh) wanted.''

He said he actually watched the plane all the way to the ground and was sure Walsh died but felt bound to report him as missing.

That, he said, was because pilots in the squadron signed forms saying how they wanted their status reported if they were shot down and not recovered.

Stueck said he drew up the forms after another squadron pilot was shot down and the others debated the financial and emotional effects of MIA and KIA listings.

The family of a pilot listed as missing would continue to receive his full pay and benefits, while the family of a pilot listed as dead would get a lump-sum settlement and less than half the compensation that MIA survivors receive.

Stueck said he asked the men to discuss the matter with their next of kin, so they would know what was written between the lines of official communications.

Walsh, 41, chose to be listed as MIA, but Sharon Walsh said he never told her about his squadron's unofficial policy.