U.S.-Egypt end war games

The United States and Egypt yesterday ended five days of wargames off the coast of Libya that coincided with a series ofconfusing Reagan administration statements about the purportedintentions of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi to launch new terroristattacks and the United States to retaliate.

The exercises, code-named Sea Wind, began Sunday and involved7,500 U.S. servicemen and an equal number of Egyptians.

The war games were seen as part of a highly visible new campaignagainst Gadhafi, apparently launched because America's spring bombingof Libya had failed to bear political fruit in the overthrow of theLibyan strong man.

The campaign will include a previously planned diplomaticmission next week to Europe by United Nations Ambassador Vernon A.Walters, who will seek to win tightened sanctions against Libya.

Against the sudden outpouring of threats and "misunderstandings"that have played back and forth this week between President Reagan'svacation resort in California and Washington, these new pressures areseen as part of a strategy designed to signal to the Libyanopposition that the United States would still welcome a coup.

But the contradictory interviews, public statements andbackground briefings by administration officials have left a confusedpicture of administration policy.

The major confusion has focused on whether the administrationhas proof that Gadhafi was planning new terrorist attacks againstU.S. targets and was preparing to retaliate. An unidentified seniorofficial was quoted in the Wall Street Journal Monday as saying therewas such evidence.

A senior official briefing reporters in Los Angeles saidWednesday, "There is hard evidence that the Libyan government hasbeen planning and seeking to execute terrorist acts . . . since theU.S. bombing."

But officials at the White House and State Department insistedthere was no such hard evidence.

"We don't have evidence, not of any recent attack directed at usthat we can source with confidence to Libya," said a State Departmentofficial. "There is lots of information of targeting, but it's notunequivocal, which is the standard we have set for ourselves."

Similarly, the White House official said, "The honest answer isthat we have bits and pieces, but that it's not strong enough yet topoint to a specific activity. It's not that it is groundless, butit's not the sort of hard evidence that would be necessary to justifyanother strike."