Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, June 21, 1990 TAG: 9006210364
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A14 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Thus is created room for negotiation and maneuver. For his part, Gorbachev has proposed that the Soviet Union - the "unbreakable union" of its national anthem - become a looser confederation of states, each with a degree of autonomy. The way is open for Balts, along with other nationalist groups now part of the U.S.S.R., to have more freedom and more say in their own affairs.
It is not the independence that the Balts sought. But it is an improvement over the past. And for now it stems the Soviets' drift toward chaos - a kind of vacuum that could draw in all kinds of unrest, disruption and violence. The Soviet Union and the Soviet system must change; that is recognized by all but the communist diehards there. Better for the Soviets and the rest of the world if the change is orderly. Chaos would endanger the West as well.
President Bush took a lot of criticism for not espousing Lithuanian independence more strongly. It was said, for instance, that he should not have signed a trade agreement with Gorbachev unless the Soviet president made concessions on Baltic freedom. Bush rejected such tactics as likely to backfire, and more recent developments indicate that events are moving as Washington would prefer.
The type of confederation Gorbachev now seeks seems more true to the idea of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics formed in 1922. Each of the 15 republics would have sovereignty except in diplomacy, national defense and some economic activities. Such an approach would allow for differing roads to perestroika. The Baltics could move more briskly toward economic independence than many of the more backward republics.
Such a new charter will not end the ethnic strife and related problems in such republics as Soviet Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kirghiz and Uzbekistan. It will not dampen nationalist sentiment among Ukranians, Moldavians and others.
Nor will it resolve the role of the largest republic, Russia. It has three-fourths of the Soviet Union's land mass, more than half its population, 80 percent of its natural gas and 90 percent of its oil. Unless there are further political and economic changes, by sheer weight Russia can dominate the rest of the union - an outcome that Boris Yeltsin, Gorbachev's chief critic, would cherish.
Because of challenges posed by such as Yeltsin - because of Gorbachev's great sea of troubles - some argue that the Bush administration should not tie itself too closely to the Soviet president. But if not to him, then to whom? Under his leadership, the U.S.S.R. has moved further and faster toward democracy than anyone - including Gorbachev himself - could have envisioned only five years ago. There is a liveliness of political discourse and debate that most democracies might envy. Only a few days ago, the Supreme Soviet abolished censorship and allowed anyone to publish a newspaper or magazine.
For the West, the most significant change may be the virtual collapse of the Soviet Communist Party as governing authority. It can no longer command uncritical obedience to Marxist-Leninist maxims or obeisance to its orders. The country is moving toward a newer, more diffuse kind of authority, more of which will be exercised by the people themselves.
That movement is gaining a momentum difficult to slow, as Gorbachev's own maneuvers acknowledge. He may not be the one to lead the Soviet Union into the future. But there seems little reason for the West to fear the direction in which he is taking it now, or to distance itself from him.
by CNB