The Pakistani army undertook to crush the autonomy movement in East Pakistan on March 25. Soon after, as word of the army's appalling and indiscriminate slaughter began to seep out, the question was asked in Washington whether arms sold or given by the United States were being used and further, whether the supply of these arms was continuing. Here is the record of the answers given in Washington.

April 2: The State Department said it would neither confirm nor deny reports from the scene that American equipment was being used.

On April 20, the fact no longer deniable, he Department informed Senator Kennedy chat it had "expressed our concern over the use of American arms in East Pakistan"- it added that "arms acquired from a number of countries, including China, the U.S.S.R. and the U.K., also have been used."

Three days later: The Department specifically acknowledged to Senator Fulbright that "some M-24 tanks and F 86 aircraft have been observed in use in East Pakistan in recent weeks." it did not acknowledge that these tanks and planes had been employed against ragged desperate men armed with little more than rifles, if that.

April 6: Mr. Fulbright had asked Secretary of State Rogers for information on the "status of any current shipments" of military equipment to Pakistan. The following week a department spokesman, speaking to reporters, denied that the United States has "a large on-going military assistance program with Pakistan" and declared, "There is no-- repeat--no equipment in the pipeline and none has been delivered" under a one-shot October, 1970, arms deal. Referring to a "modest" sales program dating from 1967 for "non-lethal military equipment, spare parts for equipment already in Pakistan hands and some ammunition," he said: "Insofar as shipments under these agreements are concerned, we have this matter under review."

April 14: An unattributed report appeared in The Washington Post saying that arms shipments were continuing but with minimum publicity, The next day, however, a department spokesman concluded a review of the subject this way: "In short, no arms have been provided to the Government of Pakistan since the beginning of this crisis, and the question of deliveries will be kept under review in light of developments."

April 20: The department told Senator Kennedy: ". . . none of these items [on the 1967 'non-lethal' list, including ammunition] has been provided to the Pakistan Government or its agents since the outbreak of fighting in East Pakistan March 25-26, and nothing is presently scheduled for such delivery. "

May 6: Senator Fulbright was told: "In short, no arms have been provided since the beginning of the crisis and the question of deliveries is under review."

May 8: The Sunderbans, a Pakistani ship carrying arms to Pakistan, sailed from New York, without public announcement or public knowledge.

June 17: The State Department told reporters, as reported in this newspaper the next day, that "no deliveries of military equipment has been made to Pakistan since March 25, when the fighting began."

June 22: The department, responding to a story in the New York Times, acknowledged that two shiploads of arms were going to Pakistan and explained that they had been licensed before March 25. The same day the second ship, the Padma, sailed.

Six days later: The administration said it would allow further shipments of military material If licensed before March 25. The first reason cited was to apply "leverage" to induce the Pakistan Government ( 1 ) to bring about a political accommodation in East Pakistan (it has yet to do so) and (2) to take back the six million refugees who had fled to India (the flight continues, according to report, at a 40,000-a-day rate). The second reason cited by the administration-- which had earner downgraded use of American arms in the carnage by saying Soviet, Chinese and British arms also were used-- was to discourage Pakistan from shifting to other arms suppliers.

June 29: it was revealed that four or five more arms ships were scheduled. The Kaptai sailed July 2.

This is, we submit, an astonishing and shameful record, with two meanings. The first is that, for the shabbiest of political reasons, the United States is supplying military equipment to a brutal regime that has killed an estimated 200,000 of its citizens and driven some six million others out of their country. The second meaning must be read in the context of the current controversy of the Pentagon Papers, which turns on the public right to know and the government's right to conceal. Here we have a classic example of how the System really works; hidden from public scrutiny, administration officials have been supplying arms to Pakistan while plainly and persistently telling the public that such supplies were cut off. We assume that this deception is due to a combination of organizational confusion and bureaucratic dissimulation and not to deliberate deceit. The fact is: arms ships still sail. It is up to the President to stop them-- assuming the government is serious about its proclaimed policy.