[net.politics] Gorbachev the reactionary?

rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (02/12/86)

Much has been made in the media about Gorbachev being perhaps a
change for the better.  But repression in the USSR has been steadily
growing since the early 70s.  Jan Wasilewsky tells me that one
statistical estimate of the number of political prisoners gives
ten times as many now as ten years ago.  Below is a summary of
recent repression, the worsening status of dissent, and how
Gorbachev fits into the Soviet  scheme of things.

					Regards,
					Ron Rizzo


[ Reproduced without permission from the 2/9/86 Boston Sunday Globe,
  pages A17 & A22. ]


Joshua Rubenstein is the author of "Soviet Dissidents, Their Struggle
for Human Rights."


SOVIETS SOFTENING LINE ON DISSENT?  A Shcharansky Gesture May Be Nothing
More

by Joshua Rubenstein, Special to the Globe


	Last week's reports that Soviet dissident Anatoly Shcharansky
would be released were widely welcomed.  Shcharansky originally tried
to leave the Soviet Union in 1974, but the regime turned down his
request for a visa, claiming he knew "state secrets."  Shcharansky
did not submit in silence.  He became active in the Jewish emigration
movement and then in the broader human-rights struggle, assuming a
leading role in the Moscow Helsinki Watch group in 1976.

	The Kremlin has always been especially wary of activists who
bring together diverse elements of dissent.  So it was not surprising
when Shcharansky was arrested in March 1977.  But the world was asto-
nished when the Kremlin accused him of espionage, a capital offense,
and sentenced him to 13 years of confinement.  He was not due for
release until 1990.

	Should he indeed be let go, it will mark the close of a brutal
episode for him and his family, and for his wife, Avital, who has not
seen her husband since the day after their wedding in 1974 when she
left Moscow for Israel.  But like Elena Bonner's coming to Boston for
medical treatment, the release of Shcharansky is a concession to
international public opinion and does not reflect a change in the
fundamental status of human rights in the Soviet Union.

Sustained Crackdown on Dissidents

	It is a fateful coincidence that Mikhail Gorbachev's rise to
power coincides with the Kremlin's most sustained crackdown on dissent.
Ever since the human-rights movement emerged 20 years ago, the Kremlin
has considered ways to eliminate it.  Several attempts were made, but
each time, in 1968-69, between 1972 and 1974, and again in 1977 and
1978, the authorities backed off because of pressure and publicity in
the West.  The Politburo, however, made up its mind to act decisively
in the fall of 1979, the same year Gorbachev became a candidate member.

	The Kremlin has acted with greater assertiveness, increasing
brutality and with less concern for public opinion over the last six
years.  The administrative kidnapping of Andrei Sakharov and his
continuing exile in Gorki is the most widely publicized act of 
repression.  But other worrisome episodes have also occurred.

	* Hundreds of prominent activists have been arrested in the
last six years, including Lithuanian Catholics, Ukrainian nationalists,
feminists in Leningrad, Crimean Tatars and religious believers affili-
ated with several fundamentalist Christian sects.

	* All five Helsinki Watch Groups have disbanded because of
pressure from the KGB.  Yuri Orlov, who organized the Moscow group,
survived a harsh seven-year term in a labor camp and is now serving
five years of internal exile.  Scores of other members are in prison,
labor camps or psychiatric hospitals.

	* The Jewish emigration movement has collapsed:  51,000 Jews
emigrated in 1979; fewer than 900 left in 1985.  For the first time,
Jewish refuseniks have been placed in psychiatric hospitals for
"observation."  The regime is also trying to prevent the unofficial
study of Hebrew and has confiscated ritual objects, like mezuzas
and phylacteries, claiming that refuseniks use them to hide narcotics
because the Jewish religion requires the use of drugs for ritual
purposes.

	* There has been a marked deterioration in the treatment of
prisoners of conscience.  Many well-known prisoners, like Anatoly
Koryagin, a psychiatrist who protested psychiatric abuse for poli-
tical purposes, and Anatoly Marchenko, who was arrested for the
fifth time in 1981, have been beaten.  Three other prisoners died
because of mistreatment and medical neglect in 1984 -- Yuri Litvin,
Valery Marchenko and Oleg Tykhy.  They were veteran Ukrainian
dissidents who had recently been sentenced to 15-year terms.   It
was not the first arrest for any of them, and, as recidivists,
they were kept in a "special regime" camp, the most severe confine-
ment in the labor camp system.  The food is poor and inadequate,
while the working conditions physically break prisoners.

	* The Soviet government likes to proclaim its desire for
peace, but it has yet to allow its citizens the right to have an
opinion about peace.  In June 1982, a dozen Soviet citizens
announced the founding of the Group of Establishing Trust Between
the Soviet Union and the United States.  This "peace group" wanted
to encourage direct contacts between ordinary citizens and exchange
peace education projects.  Hundreds of people signed the group's
petitions.  Small demonstrations were organized, and group members
received visits from foreign activists.  For this work, several
members were arrested, and others have been placed in mental
hospitals.

Departure from Brezhnev Period

	This pattern of increased repression marks a departure from
the relative restraint of the Brezhnev period, when the novelty of
open dissent and the need for detente with the West inhibited the
Kremlin from dealing decisively with the human-rights movement.
But once Brezhnev became infirm at the end of the 1970s, Yuri
Andropov, the longtime head of the KGB, began to exercise greater
influence and power.  Andropov succeeded Brezhnev in November 1982
as general secretary of the Communist Party, and it ws he who made
the campaign against dissent part of a general crackdown on corrup-
tion and lack of discipline in Soviet life.

	These were Andropov's favorite themes, and Mikhail Gorbachev
has made them his own.  He came into office with the attention of the
world focused on his relative youth, his intelligence and his apparent
charm.  While these qualities may make him a more charismatic leader
than his immediate predecessors, they do not ensure the humane
instincts needed to move the Soviet government in a more tolerant
direction.

	Gorbachev inherited many problems from Brezhnev, Andropov
and Chernenko.  He has emphasized economic modernization and arms
control as the overriding concerns of his domestic and foreign
policies.  But Gorbachev also inherited many prisoners, and he has
no easier way to gain favor in the West than to release prisoners
of conscience and thereby put some distance between himself and his
predecessors.

Upcoming Party Congress

	But even if Gorbachev is making a humanitarian gesture by
releasing Shcharansky as part of an East-West exchange of spies,
the international community must keep the substance of his policies
in mind.  His connection to Yuri Andropov, who championed his rise
to power, makes it likely that he shares Andropov's vision of Soviet
society.  This has already resulted in campaigns for greater disci-
pline, not only within the party and at the workplace, but in
society at large.  There are new laws regulating consumption of
alcohol.  Scores of government ministers and regional party leaders
have been sacked or forced to retire, many of them under suspicion
of practicing or at least tolerating corruption.  Respect for human
rrights has little place in this scheme.  These changes need to be
seen as part of Gorbachev's efforts to exact more efficient produc-
tion from the Soviet economy.  They do not signify a willingness to
propose genuine economic reform, say, greater initiative for factory
managers, dismantling the collective farm system, or allowing small-
scal enterprise to flourish as the Chinese have done.

	Gorbachev is now preparing for the next party congress, where
he is expected to disclose more of his intentions for the country.
It is interesting to note that the congress is scheduled to begin on
Feb. 25, thirty years to the day since Khrushchev denounced Stalin
in a speech to a closed session of the 20th party congress in 1956.
Khrushchev's revelations marked a major shift in Soviet political
history, and one cannot but wonder why Gorbachev chose to open the
first party congress under his leadership on such a momentous anni-
versary.  With his speech and the release of millions of political
prisoners, Khrushchev renounced terror as a means to conrol the
Soviet population.  It remains to be seen if Gorbachev will renounce
intimidation.

	For Soviet leaders regard dissent as a symptom of social
anarchy and not as a natural response to repression.  As the exper-
ience of the last six years demonstrates, and as Mikhail Gorbachev
knows from his duties in the Politburo, enforcing social discipline
and greter economic efficiency is not inconsistent with repression.
In his mind, it may even be a prerequisite.