Allen's Just Desert

SOON AFTER President-elect Reagan had named Richard V. Allen as his National Security Adviser last January, a reporter asked Allen how he would aviod upstaging the Secretary of State. In a prophetic statement, Allen answered, "What you're seeing is a disappearing act." That, of course, is exactly what we're seeing these days.

Every day, it seems, a new revelation spills out, throwing the embattled Allen into an even more precarious position. First came the news that Japanese journalists had left $1000 with Allen as gratitude for setting up an interview with Nancy Reagan. Reports then spread that the Japanese had also given Allen a couple of expensive watches. That was followed by rumors of the company Allen had founded, suggesting that he was profiting from business that the company was currently doing with foreign clients.

Despite the damaging effects of these allegations, it would be more puzzling if the President dismissed Allen. A Justice Department investigation has already concluded that Allen violated no laws in receiving the $1000. Of course, Allen will not come off scot-free; he showed extraordinarily bad judgment in not immediately returning the money, and the FBI is still investigating Allen's acceptance of the two watches.

But even if Allen is completely cleared of these charges, there is still no guarantee that he will resume his old job: The White House recently announced that, in addition to the Justice Department probe, Allen must pass a new test by the presidential counselor's office to see if White House "regulations" were broken. And there have been reports that Nancy Reagan, chief of staff James A. Baker and his deputy Michael K. Deaver have urged the President to fire Allen for exercising bad judgment, regardless of the question of law violation. One must remember that Allen is not the only aide guilty of this flaw. Budget Director David Stockman showed far worse judgment than Allen when he made a mockery of Reagan's economic program with his damaging comments to the Atlantic Monthly. Likewise, Secretary of State Alexander Haig has often embarrassed the president with his antics, the most recent being his statements to the press that certain people in the White House were out to get him. For a president who has tolerated this much from his staff, to be keeping Allen at such a distance seems odd.

Clearly the decision to fire or keep Allen will have nothing to do with his guilt or innocence. And it won't focus, as some White House staffers have suggested, on his having lost effectiveness. Stockman's indiscretions certainly hampered his effectiveness, but instead of facing special tests, he was merely "taken to the woodshed"; the week after we were treated to newspaper pictures showing the budget director working alongside Republican congressmen. Firing Allen will be, instead, the result of White House infighting. It is no secret that Allen and Haig share a mutual dislike. The two have been bickering and fighting ever since Reagan took office, and Haig is much more crucial to Reagan's foreign policy than Allen. Moreover, White House aides leaked stories throughout the summer that Allen was doing a shabby job running the NSC and was "on the outs."

If the White House were really interested in hanging on to Allen, the president would be staunchly backing him as he did David Stockman. Instead, his aides are dropping heavy hints that they want Allen out, although presidential counselor Edwin Meese III is reportedly Allen's strongest backer within the administration. This is the reason for the double standard, and why Reagan partisan James J. Kilpatrick, for example, wrote a column entitled "Why Allen Should Be Fired."

THIS IS NOT TO SAY that Allen deserves to hang onto his job. In addition to the Japanese incident, he has often undermined the president's position with his constant bickering with Haig. He also is not as indispensable to the Reagan administration as Haig and Stockman, and thus cannot afford the mistakes they can.

But the administration should quit pretending that Allen's problems have anything to do with his acceptance of the $1000, and the news media should stop deluding the public by reporting it as such. If the Justice Department completely clears Allen of any wrongdoing in the whole affair, and the White House is still intent on firing him, it should come out and say that Allen simply can't handle the job.

Using a special White House test to get rid of Allen is a feeble and cowardly way around the truth. The White House seems to be saying it will find a way to make Allen look guilty if the Justice Department does not. The fact that Allen cannot get along with Haig or run his department well is one thing. It is quite another if he is illegally accepting money. By using the Japanese incident as the reason for a possible Allen departure, Allen's enemies will stain not just his reputation as a political player, but his name, his family and his integrity as well. In light of the Justice Department's conclusions so far, that is something that not even Richard Allen deserves.