laura@utcsstat.UUCP () (11/29/83)
O.K. now. Let's stop talking about the U.S., and let's talk about what I've been thinking about in the last week: what the Soviets are thinking of The Day After (TDA) and other funny things happening around the Western World. A local ex-U.S.Rep said: "I think the Soviets are smiling" to the fact that the movie was made at all. I tend to agree. If you know how frequently pictures of nuclear protests appear on the Pravda and other Soviet papers, you will be tempted to conclude that somehow, knowingly or dupe-ly, those protestors are playing into the hands of the Soviets (in fact, my mom does). It is true that the Pravda will advocate for something only if the Party sees that that something is good for its interests. When the UN lines up against Israel, it is called "world-wide people's will to stop the imper- ialist Israel" (yes, Israel is called imperialist too). And when the UN points an accusing finger to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, it is called "an action by the corrupted capitalist countries in the UN in order to destroy the revolution of the Afghan people". I doubt if the Soviets will give an article about TDA, because the Soviets don't look good in TDA either. But I am pretty sure that if they have to talk about TDA at all, they will try to put words in ABC-TV's mouth and say something like: "The American TV network ABC recently releases a movie called 'The Day After' depicting the horrors of nuclear war and accusing the US government of its belligerent, dangerous policy in pursuing the arms race" In my opinion, which is not necessarily any one else's, TDA helps Andropov a lot in diverting tension when he orders Soviet delegation in Geneva to walk out and prepares to deploy new missiles in Eastern Europe. In the emotional crisis following the showing of TDA, Andropov and the Politburo must be hoping the American public will push their government into doing something crazy like unilaterally freezing or temporary shut off or whatever, all of which are suicidal. It is sad to think that Americans talk so much about the Vietnam experience, and fail to notice anything beyond "we lost". One lesson that Americans should have learned is that we can never trust Communists, and on the other hand, Communists almost always trust us. Remember the Paris Cease-fire Treaty that won Kissinger a Nobel Peace Prize ? Hanoi literally ignored Paris Treaty and invades South Vietnam, despite rumors later confirmed that Nixon has made a commitment to send troops back to Vietnam if such an invasion occurs. American troops never came back, and Hanoi scored an easy win after the deroute of South Vietnamese troops. Let's not talk about how and why the deroute occurs. The real lesson to learn is that we cannot trust Communists to keep their words ( Do you suppose Hanoi would stage the invasion without consent from the Kremlin ? ), but the Communists always trust that we are all too noble to violate the treaty we signed. So if you suppose the Soviets will be pleased that we unilaterally freeze our weapons and they will start negotiating in good faith, then you are seeing them in US standard. I assert that if we freeze our weapons first, they won't follow. I assert further that if they think they're big enough, then they will freeze their weapons in an attempt to make us follow. The whole point why the apparently controdiction works is that "we can't trust 'em, but they'll trust us". It is a mistake to think that "Since we don't trust 'em, they won't trust us either". You can't trust a crook, but it is very likely that a crook will trust you. I always remember Krutchev's words before the Cuban Crisis. He said "Americans are too liberal to fight". I feel that TDA and the protests and demonstrations that follow it only serve to strengthen the Kremlin's belief in American weakness. A unilateral whatever will further strengthens such belief, and encourages the Soviets to go on with their own arms build-up. I wished this article was more organized, but some Louis said that the first thoughts are always better. So let it be that way. Hao-Nhien Vu (pur-ee!Pucc-H:dlk, or pur-ee!vu)
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (11/29/83)
Due to a mistake ( i typed USR not USER ) that last article which I posted but was supposed to appear to come from Hao-Nhien Vu appeared to come from me. I blew it, sorry, send all flames and other sundry to pur-ee!vu or pur-ee!Pucc-H:dlk Sorry, laura creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura