|
|
|
| Current Issue |
|
|
| Resources |
|
|
|
The Soviet Crisis
| Article
# : |
15858 |
|
|
Section : |
EDITORIAL
|
| Issue
Date : |
1 / 1989 |
1,427 Words |
| Author
: |
Morton A. Kaplan
Editor and Publisher |
Developments in the Soviet world continue to fuel speculation about the degree of change inside Russia and the Soviet bloc that is likely to be produced by recent reforms. Will we see mostly cosmetic increases in efficiency, or will a more profound transformation take place? In an effort to explore these questions, this issue of THE WORLD & I presents portions of the introduction to volume 2 of The Soviet Union and the Challenge of the Future, edited by Alexander Shtromas and this writer, and a translation of major portions of a declaration by Vadim A. Medvedev, the member of the Politburo in charge of ideological matters.
The volumes Shtromas and I edited are based on an international Professors World Peace Academy conference held in Geneva in 1985, the planning for which commenced in 1983. The title of the conference was "The Fall of the Soviet Empire." At that time, most scholars in the Soviet field viewed the Soviet system as stable. Even though the participants in the conference were aware of the economic crisis in the Soviet Union, most of them also thought that the political system would not be transformed.
Shtromas and I did not believe that the system would necessarily undergo transformation within a few years, but we did suggest that it was entering a period of political as well as economic crisis. We anticipated the great difficulty that Gorbachev would have with perestroika. So far, the economic reforms have been minimal. Shortages still abound and may even be greater than before reform. Inflation is now apparent and, for the first time, the Soviets are considering a price index. Nonetheless, glasnost has produced developments in the Soviet Union that in the long run--short of the Finlandization of Europe--are most likely irreversible, even if in the near term the Soviet government reintroduces harsh rule and reverses some aspects of reform.
Even though the Soviet Union is confronted with the alternatives of reforming or becoming a Third World country--and all members of the Politburo are aware that these are the choices--there are strong institutional forces that are prepared to reverse direction under circumstances that are not remote. Perestroika is popular with the intelligentsia, but not with the average Russian. His life is bitter and poor and, unlike the members of the intelligentsia, who--in any event--have privileges, he cannot see the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow of market reform. Moreover, he is acculturated to an existence in which the state makes decisions for him. The threat of unemployment and of having to find work by himself is
...
Read Full Article
Look for this article in Ask.com
|
|
