[bit.listserv.history] USSR, and...

CARBUCKLE@UMKCVAX1 (Valentine M. Smith) (02/09/90)

This is mostly a response post, to too many questions I've let accumulate.

First, let me expand on comments made yesterday. I recall suggesting a range of
ways the reunification could go. I personally believe that the Allies will
attempt to have a say despite the FACT that the World War has been over 45
years, if only because Germany's neighbors are already expressing fears about a
reunified Germany. I think the idea of a reunited Germany within NATO is
intriguing, but how realistic...? (No disparaging of you, Prof. Ryle!) The
federation of the Germanies, or the Soviets, seems more likely, though form
seems still rather nebulous. I think the world, or Europe, voting on this issue
would be an unworkable proposition. In the end result, though hassles still are
going on, monetary union appears to what will happen first. Then the issue of
the Allies, et al will be resolved somehow. Then the two Germanies will hold a
plebecite(may be a bad word, maybe a referendum?) and formally vote on whether
to unite. I believe the vote will be a resounding yes. What name? Does it
matter? They'll work it out, though I bet Deutsch is in the nation title
somewhere.

As to Randy Appleton's assertion that the Warsaw Pact will last 17 years more
by treaty- I would only point out that many treaties have been broken in Europe
in just this century. If the Germanies chose the neutrality scenario(which
Kohl opposes), the issue of NATO/Warsaw Pact could ducked somewhat. Again, I
agree with Randy that a relationship with western Europe and the US is
long-term, I would say that could possible with a United European Federation
too. Whether NATO and/or Warsaw Pact will survive, less sure on the form of
that. I think both are dying before our very eyes, and only the members refuse
to accept that.

To comment on John Harlan's comments on the march on the 4th- I believe this to
be close to an unprecedented manifestation in Russian history-a peaceful,
"sanctioned" march of such magnitude and diversity of beliefs is staggering to
behold and contemplate upon. I don't believe the Soviets have cut any arms per
se, but I believe their rate of expansion in this area has slowed way down.

Jerry Anderson's comments on nationalist movements in the USSR leave out two
more feeble areas of protest and restlessness-the Ukraine, which has always had
a simmering nationalist movement under the surface, and Siberia, where miners
struck several times last year. All of the five "Central Asian" republics are
restive, but none with the organization the Azeri have.

To answer John Landry's query on do I think the "mainline media" is covering
these momentous changes inadequately. Primarily yes. Two reasons come
immediately to mind. The half hour format of the three networks just doesn't
have the time to do the situation justice at all. In that respect, CNN has them
cold. But even CNN could do better, like a reporter in every republic and daily
reports from each run several times. The mainline media needs to go to a one
hour format, as of five years ago. They cannot begin to adequately tell this
Info era audience enough under current program restrictions. I say this in the
face of cutbacks by all three networks in the news area, because there's no
money in news. Too bad, I think that's why the slightly odious Ted Turner's
network is knocking 'em dead.

Obn Romanian AIDS cases, and the new news that such a problem was also hitting
the USSR- the children referred to in the Romanian story, on both CNN and ABC,
were not defined by age, I got the impression they were under teenager in age.
Sick is defined in this context as unwell enough to be hospitalized.

I agree with Jim Zuelow's assertion that CSPU is in a good position from a
dominant party position, though I disagree that they're as strong as he thinks.
I heard from one of the Pushkin Square radicals earlier today thatr there might
be a couple dozen major parties, and a couple hundred minor ones throughout the
USSR. Talk about fragmentation!  But a lady on the street in Moscow said it
best today-"We have no tradition, we don't know how to deal with new parties."
I sense that accurately sums up a lot of Russians feelings on this.

However, that sly fox, Gerasimov of the Foreign Office, was interviewed todauy
on this subject. He indicated that the CPSU had every intention of staying in
power, and "The party is going to be one of the others-but the Communist party
will want to be more equal than the others."

A thing I didn't know before reading my Christian Science Monitors for the
last few days. Until 1940, Moldavia was part of Romania, which the Soviets
seized, though I don't know what rationale was given. The leader of the
National Peasent's party, who spent 15 years in Ceausescu's prisons, a fellow
named Ion Puiu, asserts that he was born there and sees as a long-term goal of
Romania's is to get that territory back. This would back up my assertion in a
couple of these posts that the map will change several times before all this is
over. Already there are a dozen nebulous parties in that country, including the
Greens, reported to have 50 members meeting at one's apartment in Bucharest.

Are we talking instability for years, as several on both POLITICS and USSR-L
have suggested? Probably so, though I would see the next six months as
critical, not unlike the period between the March and October Revolutions of
1917. A lot has yet to take place, and probably will. While I agree that the
CPSU is the most organized and financially fixed of the Soviet parties, they
are bitterly despised similtaneously. Gorbachev is seen as separate from the
party and to use a quote I heard a reporter use earlier today, he IS the
"scrambling quarterback" of the team. But the team is losing their ass, and the
game is now in the last quarter. So a lot has to happen damned fast. One rival
group, the Inter-Regional Group, had a spokesman, Mezentev, offer that their
group was disorganized and broke, but he sounded pretty optimistic about their
future at the same time.

One thing that intrigues me(this came on a walk this afternoon in our
unbelievably balmy weather-60 in February in Missouri?) is the lack of mention
by any commentator on this whole USSR scene about the KGB and GRU and their
role in this "new democracy." It would be good if the Soviets denounced the use
of secret police, but don't look for this to happen soon!

Lastly, as my emphysema has been terrible this week and I need more rest than
I'm getting, to comment on Paul Mason's humorous comment on Gorby being a "deep
plant" of the CIA. Somehow, I don't think it possible. The guy hasn't been out
of the country enough to be glommed onto, I don't think. ( I truly could be
wrong on this, no data.)

One more comment. Lois, moderator of POLITICS, has USSR-1.file at
Listserv@ucf1vm, which can be gotten by a GET USSR-1 File to that listserv
address as I understand it. USSR-2.file is a "work in progress" which you have
to ask me for until it reaches about the same length as USSR-1.File, 168
blocks.               Thanks for your patience, indulgence, and praise. VMS