A prep course for the month-long World Cup soccer tournament, a worldwide pheno

ainstakingly forging and cementing ties with former Soviet Bloc military leaders

 , helping achieve an accord with Russia and Ukraine to dismantle their nuclear 

weapons , and pressing the administration 's new Partnership for Peace program i

n NATO . He has begun work on his second objective by creating half a dozen new 

task forces within the Pentagon to study proposals for altering the way the Unit

ed States uses military power . On the third , he has begun efforts to streamlin

e the way the Pentagon buys equipment and weapons systems . He has also sought t

o ease the impact of military downsizing on the nation 's defense industries bas

e by eliminating excess regulations and preserving some programs in order to kee

p production lines open .

 WASHINGTON The final tally is in for the golf outing last Tuesday by a White Ho

use aide who took a presidential helicopter to play a course near Camp David : $

 13,129.66 The White House Saturday night released that figure and said senior s

taffers but not President Clinton will contribute the full amount to reimburse t

he Treasury within the week . Thirteen staffers , nearly the entire White House 

senior hierarchy , have agreed to chip in . The bill , calculated by the Marine 

Corps , is based on a total of 5 hours and 31 minutes of flying for two helicopt

ers . The first carried David Watkins , who resigned Thursday as White House dir

ector of administration , to Camp David and then to the nearby Holly Hills Count

ry Club ; the second was a training flight paired with the Watkins helicopter . 

The White House said it would reimburse taxpayers for both helicopter flights . 

Clinton pledged Thursday that the taxpayers would not be out `` one red cent '' 

for the cost of the golf outing by Watkins and the head of the White House milit

ary office , Alfonso Maldon Jr. , who is being reassigned . But officials were i

n a bind when Watkins , a longtime Arkansas friend of Clinton 's whose financial

 disclosure statement pegs his worth at more than $ 1 million , balked at paying

 for the flight . White House staffers were furious with what they viewed as Wat

kins 's poor judgment in deciding to take the trip , which he defended even in h

is resignation letter as a perfectly appropriate effort to see that the presiden

t enjoyed Camp David to the maximum . Watkins reasoned that golfing in nearby Ne

w Market , Md. , could facilitate that . Presidential aides were even more incen

sed when Watkins refused to reimburse taxpayers . On Friday , the White House ch

ose to bill the staff willingness to chip in as what Communications Director Mar

k Gearan called a `` gesture of friendship '' to Watkins and Maldon . Maldon was

 not asked to repay the money on the grounds that he was following Watkins 's or

ders . Saturday , the White House line changed . Asked whether the repayment eff

ort should continue to be viewed as a gesture of friendship to Watkins , one sen

ior official answered with an emphatic `` no , '' adding : `` Since Mr. Watkins 

declined to make full payment , White House staff members volunteered to pay the

 cost of both flights , rather than forcing the issue , to ensure that the presi

dent 's pledge was fulfilled . '' A Marine Corps statement , released by the Whi

te House , said White House officials had not requested and were not aware of th

e second helicopter , which was described as a `` routine training flight relate

d to potential landing sites with respect to medical or other contingency concer

ning movement around Camp David . '' The Marine Corps said scheduling training f

lights in conjunction with other White House flights was `` routine procedure ''

 in order to make certain that crews receive their mandatory flight time and to 

have them on hand in case there are mechanical difficulties . The statement said

 the pilot of the first helicopter had only 9.4 hours of his 24 monthly minimum 

and the pilot of the second helicopter had 11.3 hours toward his minimum . When 

Clinton went out for a round Saturday at the Robert Trent Jones course at Lake M

anassas , Va. , he traveled by motorcade , his usual mode of transportation for 

local golfing .

 LOS ANGELES Khallid Abdul Muhammad , condemned nationally by most black and whi

te leaders as a racist hate-monger , was greeted with fervent applause Saturday 

night by an audience of more than 1,000 African Americans in a theater here . Mu

hammad , the 43-year-old former senior aide to Louis Farrakhan , head of the Nat

ion of Islam , displayed once again his strident brand of black nationalism that

 is routinely laced with condemnation of Jews . Contending that blacks have suff

ered more than Jews at the hands of oppressors ( `` the black holocaust is one h

undred times worse than any other holcaust , '' he said at one point ) , Muhamma

d quickly launched into the kind of name-calling and racial mockery that has ear

ned him national enmity . `` Don't let those bagel-eating , hooked-nosed .. . wa

nna-be Jews make you think otherwise , '' he said of his statistical claim . Wea

ring long royal-blue robes over a crisp white shirt , Muhammad theatrically list

ed some of the most tragic episodes in the history of black people in America , 

starting with the horrors of the slave ship crossings . As his voice rose in ind

ignation , insisting that recognition of black suffering had been repressed , th

e crowd applauded and shouted words of agreement . By the time he came to one of

 his most emotional statements `` the worst crime that can be committed is to be

 robbed of self knowledge '' the audience errupted in frenzied applause and scre

ams of agreement that nearly drowned out Muhammad 's voice . There were also mom

ents of dark humor . Arguing that Jesus was black , Muhammad said , `` The Bible

 said Jesus would have hair like lamb 's wool , that nappy hair. .. . I 'm talki

ng about a black lord , a black Jesus , a black savior . Take that cracker down 

off your wall and throw him in the garbage . '' The audience screamed in delight

 . The crowd that came to see Muhammad did so out of a mixture of curiosity and 

almost-religious support . The believers said Muhammad had touched a strong chor

d among American blacks and that his strength was his appeal to black self-suffi

ciency , not racism and that some of his outrageousness should be taken figurati

vely . `` He 's telling black people to rise and take care of ourselves , '' sai

d UCLA student Susan Leach , 21 . `` I believe in everything he says . I think i

t 's white people who make the controversy . '' `` He 's not anti-Semitic or rac

ist , '' said Patrick Pritchett , 41 . `` How could he be ? How can the first pe

ople on earth be racist or anti-Semitic ? '' ( Optional add end ) Outside the th

eater , the neighborhood took on the air of a street festival , intensified by a

 rally held in an adjacent park by a group called the All-African People 's Revo

lutionary Party . Inside the hall , all members of the crowd and the press were 

frisked for weapons . Women 's handbags were searched , and all objects includin

g pens and makeup containers were scrutinized . When the speeches began , the cr

owd was treated to what seemed like a cross between the impassioned spirit of a 

rally and the fervor of a church meeting . Before Muhammad came onstage , the au

dience was treated to an African dance troupe , a history lesson from a speaker 

who decried numerous incidents of racism and oppression against blacks , and a r

oll call of visiting celebrities . Actor Wesley Snipes , sitting in the front ro

w , came onstage briefly when he was introduced . Rapper Ice T , who had earlier

 embraced Muhammad backstage , gave a rousing speech . Also onstage were such gu

ests as Georgiana Williams , the mother of Damian Williams , the most celebrated

 defendant convicted in the Reginald O . Denny beating trial that grew out of th

e 1992 Los Angeles riots , and Celes King , a well-known bail bondsman and forme

r president of the Los Angeles Human Relations Commission and the Los Angeles ch

apter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People .

 The following editorial appeared in Sunday 's Washington Post : The sexual-hara

ssment lawsuit filed by Paula Jones against President Clinton is a case of first

 impression no one has ever brought a civil suit against a sitting president for

 alleged conduct that occurred before he took office . The court is sure to hear

 a variety of arguments on why the lawsuit should be thrown out . Unfortunately 

for the president , every angle that has been suggested so far has flaws . The p

resident 's advisers have put forward a theory that the chief executive is simpl

y immune from civil suits , or at the very least entitled to have litigation pos

tponed until he leaves office . They cite a 1982 Supreme Court ruling that accor

ded President Richard Nixon this protection . But that case is easily distinguis

hed , because it was limited to suits arising out of a president 's official act

s , specifically in that case Nixon 's firing of whistle-blower Ernest Fitzgeral

d . Such an immunity is similar to the kind enjoyed by legislators and judges wh

o cannot be sued for actions taken in their official capacity . The allegations 

against Clinton , of course , arose out of conduct that occurred long before he 

became president and certainly involved no actions that were part of his officia

l duties . The president 's lawyers may well ask a judge to make the leap from p

rotecting official acts to shielding private ones , but such a finding would be 

a substantial extension of the Nixon v . Fitzgerald doctrine . Harvard professor

 Laurence Tribe has another theory that is even more imaginative . He cites a fe

deral statute that protects military personnel on active duty from civil suits a

nd argues that since the president is commander in chief of the armed forces , h

e is included in the protected group . The statute mentions no civilians and was

 clearly intended to cover men and women whose ability to defend lawsuits is sev

erely hampered by the nature of military service . In addition to the immunity d

efense , the president 's attorneys may also move to dismiss on other grounds , 

questioning , for example , Paula Jones 's use of an old civil-rights statute to

 support a legal action that should have been brought under the equal-employment

 laws but on these laws the statute of limitations had run out . Others will que

stion the plaintiff 's motives , point to her partisan supporters and complain t

hat she waited until the last minute to file this suit . But probably none of th

ese objections will carry weight in court . It is likely that motions to dismiss

 will fail . But extended appeals may perhaps postpone an actual trial for years

 . The prospect of a public airing of these charges true or not is surely troubl

ing for the president and for a lot of people who have an interest in the well-b

eing of his presidency , irrespective of anything else . But the alternative of 

granting a single individual special immunity from civil suit in these circumsta

nces is not a good idea no matter how powerful he is or how important it is that

 he be able to conduct the business of his office . Even those who believe Clint

on has been wronged in this case need to consider the precedent that would be se

t by such a waiver . Divorce actions could be delayed , child-custody disputes p

ostponed for years , damage claims ranging from auto accidents to industrial pol

lution could be shelved , leaving victims in each case without remedies for year

s . Like every citizen who finds himself in a legal dispute , the president must

 defend himself in court . Frivolous cases and claims arising out of his office 

can be dismissed . His schedule can be accommodated , and demands on his time ca

n be minimized . But individuals with private claims have a right to proceed , a

nd he has the obligation to respond .

 In his 18 years as a reclusive writer in Cavendish , Vt. , Alexander Solzhenits

yn created an ideal Russia . It existed in his mind , within the walls of his ho

usehold and in the forests of birch trees , which had the same sun and blue sky 

that on good days can be seen in Russia . He saw few visitors besides his family

 , had virtually no contact with the outside world . Instead , he applied the gr

ueling self-discipline he adopted during his years in Stalin 's gulags . He got 

up at 6 every morning and spent the rest of the day writing , completing `` The 

Red Wheel , '' his four-volume history of events leading to the 1917 Russian Rev

olution . No one knows whether that exhaustive and long-winded history will ever

 be published in full . Few people in the West are that interested in the subjec

t . As for Russians , they no longer have endless time to read about past histor

y that has little relevance to matters at hand . Like millions of Westerners , t

hey are hustling to make a living . We wish Solzhenitsyn well as he returns to h

is native Russia . But we fear he is in for a tremendous disappointment . Crime 

and corruption are rampant , Western pop music , pulp literature and pornography

 prevalent . He will have a tough time trying to reconcile his idealized view of

 Russia with the rudeness and greed he will encounter or with the country 's dis

regard for thoughtful writing and high culture . As a painstaking chronicler of 

the gulags , Solzhenitsyn made his contribution not only to history but to a pub

lic realization at home and abroad of the true nature of communism . The country

 which oppressed and exiled him no longer exists , however . It was replaced by 

another that is still taking its first steps on a long road to economic prosperi

ty , cultural fulfillment and rule of law . Anticipating the collapse of communi

sm , Solzhenitsyn wrote in 1991 that `` we must take care not to be crushed bene

ath its rubble instead of gaining liberty . '' As he moves to Moscow , he may re

alize that life in Vermont offered more inner peace . Russia may be eternal , bu

t it , too , changes .

 For most of the last half-century , the relationship between the United States 

and India was colored by Cold War distrust . Differences between the world 's tw

o most populous democracies were frequent , with Washington voicing concern over

 India 's ties to the Soviet Union , its nonaligned status , its state-dominated

 economy and its nuclear weapons program . From a U.S. perspective , there was c

ause for suspicion , and that suspicion was the basis for a longstanding U.S. po

licy in South Asia that favored Pakistan , India 's neighbor and bitter rival . 

Now , however , the Soviet Union is gone and India is making a revolutionary tra

nsformation from socialist protectionism to a market-oriented economy . In light

 of this and the fact that Pakistan now has nuclear weapons , the United States 

is being forced to reassess the Indo-American relationship . Economic cooperatio

n between the two nations is important . The United States already is India 's l

argest export market , and U.S. corporations like AT&T , Ford , General Electric

 , Coca-Cola and IBM have operations in India . An enduring economic relationshi

p appears certain . In a speech this month before a joint session of the U.S. Co

ngress , Indian Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao emphasized the new economic ti

es between Washington and New Delhi . For that matter , so has Ambassador-design

ate Frank Wisner , who will fill a 16-month vacancy and is expected to be confir

med when the Senate reconvenes after the Memorial Day holiday recess . Such opti

mistic assessments are certainly welcome . But as the United States becomes more

 economically linked to India , it will be forced to face up to some uncomfortab

le differences that persist . These include India 's continuing attempt to devel

op nuclear weapons and its efforts , much criticized by human rights groups , to

 crush a separatist insurrection in Kashmir . The violence in Kashmir reportedly

 has claimed as many as 20,000 lives . Although the United States and India can 

easily agree on the benefits of a stronger economic relationship , they aren't l

ikely to find the going smooth as they confront the political challenges .

 WASHINGTON Next year , for the first time , the United States will produce more

 combat planes for foreign air forces than for the Pentagon , highlighting Ameri

ca 's replacement of the Soviet Union as the world 's main arms supplier . Encou

raged by the Clinton administration , the defense industry last year had its bes

t export year ever , having sold $ 32 billion worth of weapons overseas , more t

han twice the 1992 total of $ 15 billion . As the administration and the industr

y look abroad for new markets to offset military spending cutbacks at home , the

y are raising concern in Congress and a chorus of criticism from arms control ad

vocates . `` Things have moved toward the ` merchants of death ' view of arms pr

oduction , '' said Randall Forsberg , executive director of the Institute for De

fense and Disarmament Studies in Cambridge , Mass. . `` It 's becoming a commerc

ial business involved in profits and jobs rather than security . '' This will be

 the last year this century that the U.S. defense industry will produce more com

bat planes for domestic than overseas use , according to a study by Forsberg . N

ext year , 92 combat planes will be delivered to U.S. forces ; 97 will go abroad

 . In 1996 , the Pentagon will get just 24 , compared with 153 for overseas . Pl

anes are , except for ships , the most expensive weapons , and account for more 

than half the value of U.S. arms exports . The increase in arms exports , Forsbe

rg said , creates a long-term paradox for the United States : Foreign sales were

 meant to help keep the U.S. defense industry operating and able to meet future 

threats ; but the main source of new threats is likely to come from the prolifer

ation arms abroad . `` They are going to create the very threats they are insuri

ng against , '' she said . `` Short-term commercial interests are outweighing ou

r long-term security interests . '' Joel Johnson , international vice president 

of the Aerospace Industries Association , countered that as the United States re

duces its overseas military presence and demands that allies accept more of the 

defense burden , it is inevitable that the allies will need more weapons . `` Yo

u can't have it both ways , '' he said . ( Begin optional trim ) The export of o

lder-model combat planes is overtaking their production for domestic use , he sa

id , as the Pentagon develops such new programs as the F-22 fighter , improved F

-18 attack jets and the Commanche helicopter . Once those new planes go into pro

duction for the Pentagon around the turn of the century , the gap between higher

 exports and lower domestic sales will be corrected , he said . `` The only thin

g now keeping the ( production ) lines open is exports , '' Johnson said . Notin

g that 450,000 U.S. defense workers have lost their jobs since 1991 , Johnson sa

id : `` Why do you want to fire people in St. Louis and hire them in Paris ? '' 

( End optional trim ) Mindful of the controversy , the Clinton administration is

 forging a new arms sales policy . A senior White House official involved in dra

fting the policy said it would seek to establish an `` international regime '' o

f nations with `` a common set of standards '' for arms exports . The intent wou

ld be to restrict arms exports to particular regions or countries and bar the sa

le of certain weapons systems altogether . The official declined to be more spec

ific . Testifying to the Senate Budget Committee earlier this year , Defense Sec

retary William J. Perry said : `` The dominant criterion for determining whether

 any weapons systems .. . are sold to a foreign government still is a national s

ecurity decision , not an economic decision . '' But critics question that asser

tion . `` The ( Clinton ) policy and practice , as far as we can see , is a cont

inuation of what the policy under Bush and Reagan was , which was sell , sell , 

sell , '' said Sima Osdoby , director of policy for Women 's Action for New Dire

ctions , a Washington group seeking to divert defense spending to social program

s . Natalie J. Goldring , of the the British American Security Information Counc

il , a Washington-based advocacy and research group , said : `` The United State

s has a special responsibility to lead efforts toward arms-transfer control . In

stead , U.S. policy is moving in the direction of less-restricted arms sales . '

' In a paper titled `` In Search of Arms Control , '' she pointed to Clinton 's 

support of major arms-sales contracts during the 1992 election campaign and whil

e in office ; his loosening of controls on high-technology exports ; the taxpaye

r subsidy of U.S. company displays at foreign air shows ; and an Air Force plan 

to sell up to 360 used F-16s abroad to enable it to buy up to 88 more sophistica

ted planes . ( Begin optional trim ) Until 1990 , the Soviet Union led in milita

ry sales to an arms-hungry world as it sought to export and defend global Commun

ist revolution . Between 1989 and 1991 , as the Soviets retreated from the marke

t , world arms sales fell by 53 percent . U.S. arms sales declined less steeply 

, by 34 percent , leaving the United States with a bigger share of a smaller pie

 . In 1991 , the United States took the lead in international arms sales and has

 widened it since . In 1981 , the United States supplied 19.3 percent of world a

rms exports , compared with the Soviet Union 's 39.9 percent . In 1991 , accordi

ng to the latest statistics from the U.S. . Arms Control and Disarmament Agency 

, the U.S. share had nearly doubled , to 37.8 percent ; the Soviet share was dow

n to 26 percent . The Arms Control Association , a Washington research and lobby

ing group , says that the export trend has continued . Last year , the United St