CARBUCKLE@UMKCVAX1.BITNET (Valentine M. Smith) (02/08/90)
Sorry I missed you all yesterday, have been ill, syill am, but am tottering about today. USSR- The media is now calling the changes in the Soviet Union "The Second Russian Revolution", especially after the Central Committee adopted the Gorbachev changes to the party by a vote of 249-1, with one abstention. Interestingly, the one vote cast against the program was that of Boris Yeltsin, the former CP chief in Moscow, on the grounds that the changes don't go far enough! This morning at 0930, Yacolev(?) was supposed to hold a press conference to explain what actually got decided; as I was at school when this happened, I'll have to report on this later today. One thing that has apparently come out of this immediately is that the Party Congress originally scheduled for October now may happen as early as June, maybe July. Another is that apparently the post of General Secretary of the party is to be changed to a chairman and two deputies, and their role diminished in the future. A third change will be a "democratically elected" President, instead of the Supreme Soviet ratifying the choice of the party for President. One of the ideologists of the Central Committee, Shislan, suggested yesterday that a multi-party system already exists in the USSR, what this CC plenum is doing is accepting reality. A US Soviet expert, Olcutt, suggested this morning that in the Baltics, such a system already legally exists. Gerasimov said yesterday that "if you can't beat them, join them," in reference to the demands for a multi-party system. Shislin also said yesterday that the "speed of the changes has been overwhelming." In Volgograd, Smolensk, and Sverdlov, the party officials have quit en masse, or been removed by Moscow. One other change coming from the CC meeting is the formal removal of Article 6 of the Soviet constitution, which was what empowered the CP as the sole legal party in the USSR. Another apparently obvious matter will be massive changes in who is on the Central Committee. 61% of the members are past retirement age, and several were put on the CC by Stalin, who's been dead 37 years. Several people said that the party leadership needs "new young blood." I suspect they'll get such real soon. The Baltics- A Latvian leader of the Popular Front there, Janis Jurken, said yesterday that "Communism has polluted the economy of the nation, and totaliarianism has polluted the political identity of the nation." He also pointed out that the CP was losing members at a ferocious rate in Latvia. He is talking about a federation of the Balts, somewhat similar to Havel's idea about the Poles, Hungarians and Czechs. Earlier in these posts, i suggested that the whole of the Soviet Union needed to be in such a federation, with no "first among equals" like the system has operated in the past, actually the USSR has been first without equals. Albania- In answer to Theodore Manos question about Albania. 6 weeks ago, there were some demonstrations in the capital, quickly squelched by the military. No word since about their activities, nor any reaction to the Albanian disturbances in Yugoslavia. Nor has the Albanian gov't reacted to the Kosovo demands that those people be reunited with Albania. Yugoslavia- A riot in a small Kosovo town yesterday because a drunken Serbian policeman accosted a pregnant woman, killed a cow, and shot two teenagers in the legs. East Germany- The ruling council expanded its membership the day before yesterday by 8 members, now 17 of 36 members are CP people. They banned the right wing party of West Germany from participation in East German politics. Romania- A bitterly sad residue of the Ceausescu days is the report that 1 of three sick babies in Romania has AIDS, from using unchecked blood, and mutiple syringe use. Czechoslavkia- Elections are to occur in June. The US lifted yesterday some trade restrictions to the Czechs, who in turn agreed to cut back weapons making and exporting to places like Libya and Nicaragua. Talks are to begin today about removing Soviet troops as soon as possible, especially after a huge demonstration in Prague yesterday where the demonstrators kept saying, "Ivan must go!" Does this sound vaguely familiar? Apparently, earlier today, the Soviets "illegally" blew up a huge ammunition dump somewhere in Czech territory, started a bunch of forest fires. Why, or any other info, not yet available. Bulgaria- Yesterday, the Bulgarians abolished the secret police. Lastly, Secretary of State Baker of the US warned today that the Soviets could not go backward and expect US aid. "Legitimacy, not force, is the only way to ensure tranquility," he said. He also assured European nations that American troops would stay as long as the european powers wished. He is to meet with Gorbachev the day after tomorrow, Schverdnadze tomorrow. The Revolution hurtles onward, the changes have just begun, the next year promises to be highly intriguing vis-a-vis Soviet affairs.
VAM9360@WOOSTER.BITNET (Milos van Leeuwen) (02/08/90)
>Did anyone notice the colors of the tsarists flags people were carrying in Mosc >ow? They were red, whit and blue. >Christine (UCI481@URIACC) I did not see the flags and was wondering what they looked like. Also, does anybody know where the colors red, white and blue in flags come from and what they mean/symbolize? I'm wondering because there are more flags with these colors such as the Dutch, French, British and American flag. v Milos van Leeuwen +----------------v----------------------------------------------------------+ | M I L O S V A N L E E U W E N -- VAM9360@WOOSTER (Bitnet) | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | College of Wooster, box C-2936, Wooster, Ohio, 44691, USA, # 216-287-3212 | | OR: Copernicusstraat 64, 1098 JJ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 020-944272 | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ (\/)ilos says: Quit reading these messages, and get back to work. :-)
alewis@HUB.CS.JMU.EDU (02/08/90)
McDs in Moscow.... Gorbachev advocating getting rid of the guarenteed role of the communist party.... ok valentine.... tell us what's going on
CARBUCKLE@UMKCVAX1.BITNET (Valentine M. Smith) (02/08/90)
I have to hope these posts are not too boring to the HISTORY list, but as I see it, I'm commenting on history being made, which may be a poor approach for a historian, but usual for us journalist types. Fortunately, I do have a slight historical grounding in the area of Soviet affairs(see #12 in this series). This afternoon, I'd like to partially report on the CP press conference that finished about 1415 our time, I only got in on about 35 minutes. There were 6 ranking members of the party allowing themselves to be queried by the Western press about their actions! In my life(42 years), I cannot recall ever seeing more than a selected member of the Politburo face the press, and usually only with a prepared statement. There were 6 on this platform, of whom I saw four speak. Only two of the four were identified. Anatoly Lubyanov and Aleksandr Yakovlev, the latter alleged to be Gorbachev's strongest supporter on both the Central Committee and the politburo. One of the two unidentified is apparently an agricultural expert. Another on the platform was G. Gerasimov, who did no more than gesture to which reporter would be next. The main points decided by the Central Committee that i gleaned from the press conference- 1) A strong Presidency elected nationally. 2) All forms of land ownership permitted(though this was not spelled out clearly) 3) Accepted Lithuanian CP breakaway from USSR CP, but called for a cooling off period, "reconsideration", and one referred to the Lithuanian move as "dangerous" 4)Moved the Party Congress up to "the end of June, the beginning of July" 5)Strengened the judicial system 6)(most importantly) recommended that Article 6 of the Soviet Constitution guaranteeing CP dominancy be abolished. In addition, some intersting comments were made. Yacovlev-"Not the function of our party to permit or not permit other parties" in response to a question about permitting conservative parties when the CC plenum called for parties of "socialist choice." He also called the adopted program as "program of action," "a big step towards democracy." He said the German issue, whether a person could hold two posts at once, and specifics of other reforms not discussed at the plenum. He acknowledged that the USSR is in terrible shape economically and socially, these changes are moves to address those admitted difficulties. He admitted also that these changes were primarily caused by events in eastern Europe, not by any long-held plan. He said,"Let the people decide on an alternative to socialism." Both he and Lubyanov said all of these changes will have to be ratified by the Party Congress. Look for BIG debate there on all of these and a multitude of other changes. Yacolev said in regards to the Germanies- "We need to make sure our borders are safe, that there is no threat from Germany. We are for Germany in Europe, not a European Germany." The Germanies- Yesterday, it was announced the Federal Bank of West Germany and the State Bank of East Germany were negotiating on a joint currency. Ha! I suspect that all this will take awhile. Earlier today, I posted a comment to the 9Nov89-L list speculating on the Schvernadze proposal that the world vote(Huh?) on the reunification. I think this a European question, at the most the nations of Europe should decide, at the least-the US, the USSR, France, Great Britain, and the two Germanies. Somewhere in between might be a partial European referendum. I've not thought this out yet. The trade minister for West Germany warned that East Germans should abey coming to West Germany, as currently thee over 130,000 unemployed East Germans there. Lastly, I watched Marshall Shulman, Professor Emeritus at Columbia University's Harriman Institute interviewed this afternoon.(God, if Averill were alive! He'd delight in all this Soviet activity!) Some of his comments follow. "There will be a long period of continued struggle." "Two other questions that need dealing with are the nationalities question, and the state of the economy." "The Soviets have excluded the idea of the use of military force, such as in the case of Lithuania."(actually a paraphrase) "There will probably be an intermediate step(on land ownership), "some kind of leasing arrangement." On the multi-party idea-"The battle isn't over on this. some may drop out(of the CP) and form new party, others will form factions." He also felt that the Baker visit would be primarily to deal with the summit in June's details. On did he expect these changes?-"I did not expect this, did not think that changes we've seen would occur in my lifetime. After 44 years of watching the Soviet Union, I thought this would take much longer." He concluded, as do I until this evening, with, "Sometimes change comes like a glacier, sometimes like an avalanche.
CARBUCKLE@UMKCVAX1.BITNET (Valentine M. Smith) (02/08/90)
First, I must apologize to the lists. I have been misspelling Schevardnadze's name all week, saw it tonight, and realized I had been spelling it wrong. Sorry. Speaking of Schevardnadze, he said tonight that he had "broken party discipline" for the first time in his life when he left the Central Committee plenum to greet Sec. of State Baker. Beijing had a reaction to the CC actions today-"A similar path in China would cause civil war." Today ABC had a story about three generations of Soviets having come to see Lenin in his tomb, but today the line was longer at McDonalds. Meat consumption has fallen, Jennings said, in the USSR by 20% in the past two decades. The average Russian is lucky to get 2-5 pounds of meat a month, or 8 to 20 quarter- pounders in a one month span. Ghastly, we take our meat availability far too casually. Earlier, CNN showed folks occupying high CP official's dachas, most of them without a place to live. Baker said in Moscow this evening,"If 1989 was the year of sweeping away, 1990 is the year of rebuilding." The only building I see from the US is a continued committment to a very fat military budget. I say that there's so much going on inside the USSR, who's got time for superpower war? A great quote from a man on the street in Moscow(could have been a CC member, not sure)-"There is no such thing as a conservative in the Communist Party, there are only slow thinkers." A quote yesterday from one of several academicians interviewed-"If Gorbachev thought the CC meeting would weaken him, he wouldn't have let the meeting happen." No one got canned from a party post today, though Ligachev provoked Gorbachev greatly by attacking privitization and the multi-party proposal. I bet some are let go before the Party Congress happens at the end of June. The party secretary for internal affairs is a fellow named Falin- he said yesterday that the "CP no longer holds a vanguard role" in the USSR. "The party must know its days are numbered," he said. Latvia and Lithuania have another minor problem. Due to some crafty planning (probably by Stalin), 40% of their populaces are Russians. What are they going to do about thses sizable minorities? A quote from Bush on the changes happening(I believe said to soldiers on war games in CA)-"We can't let down our guard. America must always be prepared to fight for freedom and security." For once, an American President sounds more bellicose and paranoic than a Soviet leader, how about that? He also said today that he'd" rather be cautious than reckless." Yet he recklessly submits to Congress the largest US military budget possible. (What does this guy think he's doing?) Marvin Fitzwater has also offered a gem,"The Soviet challenge is very real. This is no time to lay down our arms." As far as I know, no one has advocated such a posture, just a reduction in SDI and Stealth, which is not disarming! Several quotes from Russian citizens over the past two days- "The least we have is fresh bread." "Of course, things are worse." "It's much worse...there's nothing in the stores."(CNN showed a party officials store, and apartment block late this afternoon, no wonder the populace begrudges the party guys their perks!) "...a peaceful revolution, for now." "Tired of all the words!" "The economy is bankrupt, the society is corrupt." "Disband the party!" A poll released yesterday said that 12% of Russians believe even the economic reforms won't make any differencve in their lives.
PH509003@BROWNVM.BITNET (Jon Kjoll) (02/08/90)
Valentine's submissions contine to impress me. Having realized
that Gorbachev probably will have my Utopia in effect in the land
of USSR before I have even convinced *one* Amerikan about it's
superiority I have decided to join the international commentary
again. This time regarding the unification of Germany.
I oppose a European referendum regarding the future of Germany.
It is about time Europe learns to live and respect Germany.
This seems like the absolute best time for this to happen.
Meddling in German internal affears have over and over proven
to very bad for Europe and it is with dismay I read that France
is expanding it's atomic arsenal five-fold. Maybe one day
they'll learn too.
Jon
> a quote just for the heck of it.
JonVAM9360@WOOSTER.BITNET (Milos van Leeuwen) (02/09/90)
>> The Germanies- >> >> Earlier today, I posted a comment to the 9Nov89-L list speculating on the >> Schvernadze proposal that the world vote(Huh?) on the reunification. I think >> this a European question, at the most the nations of Europe should decide, at >> the least-the US, the USSR, France, Great Britain, and the two Germanies. >> Somewhere in between might be a partial European referendum. I've not thought >> this out yet. >> >It seems to me that this is a German question, and that only. No one >in Europe or anywhere else has the right to tell the German people >whether they can become one nation again. A popular vote, taken in >both East and West Germany, should decide it, and no one else should >have anything to say about it. Admittedly, at the end of WWII, there >were reasons for the splitting, but I don't think they have any place >in today's world. We have no evidence that the Germans are ripe for >another Hitler, or that any such person exists. In the absence of >threat, prudence is silent. In this case, it is their decision, not >ours, not the USSR's, and not Europe's. > >I think this should be the stance of the US government, which at least >pays lip service to self-determination. What do you think? > >Steve L Vissage II Although I don't share this viewpoint, I do see that there are good reasons for arguing that the FRG and GDR should decide their future themselves. I was wondering if this is legally possible. Doesn't the treaty signed by the allies (if any exist, maybe I mean the peace treaty?) make it legally impossible (at least for the FRG) to make such decisions without the former allies approval? Does anybody have details on this? Milos van Leeuwen +----------------v----------------------------------------------------------+ | M I L O S V A N L E E U W E N -- VAM9360@WOOSTER (Bitnet) | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | College of Wooster, box C-2936, Wooster, Ohio, 44691, USA, # 216-287-3212 | | OR: Copernicusstraat 64, 1098 JJ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 020-944272 | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ (\/)ilos says: The probability of a piece of bread falling with the buttered side down is directly proportional to the cost of the carpet. :-)
CARBUCKLE@UMKCVAX1.BITNET (Valentine M. Smith) (02/13/90)
Within the hour, disturbances in Tajikistan(Tadzikhistan?)caused a state of emergency to be declared from the capital of this SSR deep in the center of Asian USSR, Dushambe. I think that the six "Asian" republics-Kazakh, Turkestan, Azerbaijan, Tadzhik(?), Uzbekistan, and a sixth I'll look up, are the true "great hotbeds" of future USSR dissent. They and Georgia haven't been heard from a lot, and Siberia and the Ukraine not all. But in all nine cases, there are significant restive minorities just itching for confrontation with the central government. Apparently, one of the more unknown ones(to Western eyes) has decided to react negatively to the Soviet state. Another interesting group of comments on the Germanies- Schevardnadze-"The process(to reunification) can be manageable." Baker-"...haven't gotten there yet." There appears to be some hope, by whom all I'm not sure, that the unification issue will be resolved by the June Gorbachev-Bush summit in the US. There appears to be more and more riding on this summit-German reunification and under what umbrella defensively, if at all, arms control and Open Skies agreement, and now announced this afternoon is the hope that a US/USSR trade agreement can be reached in time for signing at this summit. On the troop cuts, Bush stands by his 195,000(40,000)excluded formula, the Soviet President just offered his 235,000 on both sides through all of Europe over the weekend, more to come on this. East Germany today has requested $6-9 billion in aid from the West Germans, while opposition members in the East German parliment remain opposeed to a West/East German monetary union, spoken of over the weekend as "on the verge of happening" and "within a few days." Today there are predictions of monetary union, a single capital city and single Parliment within weeks. Hurd from the British Foreign Office was asked about this today, he replied that they had "had little time to consider that." Czechoslavakia, Poland and Hungary are beginning to press the Soviets for "immediate" troop withdrawals, my wife quipped when she heard that, "When are the western powers going to ask the US to take their troops out?" I think the latter will happen more slowly than the Soviet withdrawal. George Bush said today,(I paraphrase) "If the momentum of the bilateral relationship( between the US and Soviet Union) continues, the June summit will be a sucess." Lastly, Walesa on South Africa, though his remarks are really more wide ranging- "...no room for regimes that hold human rights in contempt." He could have as easily been talking about his own government, or the Soviets, or even to a lesser degree, the United States, though our disregard seems to revolve around CIA Operations Division than all of our political institutions. Congress tends to be ignorant, the administration obtuse about the not-so-moral things WE do in the world.