TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/021191/0211001.000

Text File | 1992-08-28 | 7.9 KB | 165 lines

                                                                                WORLD, Page 58

SOVIET UNION

New World Order? Or Law And Order?


Reformers fear that a crackdown on street crime and business
fraud heralds more repressive moves

By JOHN KOHAN/MOSCOW -- With reporting by J.F.O. McAllister/
Washington


    Even in the best of times, Moscow was a militarized city,
where officers in uniform rode the metro and army vehicles
mingled with city traffic. But as tensions rise and visions of
chaos begin to haunt the nation, jittery Muscovites have been
paying more attention to all the soldiers in their midst.

    As soldiers and sailors teamed up with police last week on
joint patrols in cities across the country, the question of
just what they were there for took on fresh urgency. Defense
Minister Dmitri Yazov and Interior Minister Boris Pugo, who
drafted the order in secret last Dec. 29, say the new patrols
are intended to combat an odious side effect of economic and
political liberalization: a steep rise in violent crime.

    But many Soviets interpret the measure differently. They see
it as one more piece of evidence that Mikhail Gorbachev has
given way to hard-line pressures to curtail the reforms he
ushered in himself. In the past month the Kremlin has sent the
army into the Baltic republics, tightened controls over
television and radio, outlawed 50- and 100-ruble notes and
seems to have shelved plans for introducing a market economy.
Gorbachev has also authorized KGB fraud squads to stamp out
so-called economic crime. A new era of repression seems to be
in the making.

    While there is widespread resentment of these measures, many
Soviets fear the confusion attending wholesale reform and
welcome the reassurance that the central government does not
intend to let liberalization get out of hand. The Soviet people
are accustomed to a system that guarantees order and stability,
whatever the cost in individual liberties. Now that crime and
disorder are up, people are frustrated and afraid. "I get the
impression," says a State Department analyst, "that a lot of
Soviets are saying, `Let's get things calmed down.' And if it
takes a little arbitrary justice to make life more stable, well,
O.K."

    But as democratic forces in the country pointed out, the
dispatch of paratroops to Lithuania last month was first
justified in the same way -- as a limited move against draft
dodgers. Yet it quickly turned into a bloody assault against
pro-independence demonstrators that claimed the lives of 14
people.

    Demands for law and order have become a favorite rallying
cry of the hard-liners. Declared an Interior Ministry colonel:
"People are afraid to walk the streets. Something must be
done." But reformers are skeptical. Russian leader Boris
Yeltsin, who now stands at the head of the democratic
opposition, called the moves "a serious step toward
dictatorship." Reformers argued that bringing troops into the
streets has involved the military in areas beyond its
competence. Said the independent weekly Moscow News: "The army
must not be used as a muzzle on the people!"

    The string of policy reversals cast something of a chill on
U.S.-Soviet relations as well. Last week the superpowers agreed
to postpone the presidential summit that had been scheduled for
Feb. 11-13 in Moscow. The ostensible reason was the gulf war
and the need for more work on a strategic-arms treaty. But the
U.S. was also attempting to indicate its disapproval of the
Kremlin's backsliding on reform.

    Few of the signals from Moscow offered much cause for
optimism. Gorbachev's decree on economic crime gave security
squads the right to raid government enterprises, cooperatives,
private businesses and even joint ventures involving foreign
firms, and to carry out audits of their wares, cash holdings
and accounts. The crackdown is supposed to wipe out the black
market, but it may well trample underfoot the first fragile
growth of free enterprise. Said Deputy of the Russian parliament
Artyom Tarasov, a new Soviet entrepreneur: "This is no longer
the politics of the free market but the politics of
discipline."

    With public confidence in the Kremlin steadily ebbing,
ordinary Soviets doubted that either politics or public safety
explained the security patrols. Citizens suspected that the
troop "deployments" were going to be coupled with an
announcement of steep price hikes: the Kremlin wanted to be
ready in case the people rioted. Government officials assured
the population that no such decision was coming any day soon.

    If the rest of the country was suffering from a bad case of
nerves, the troubled Baltic republics enjoyed a moment of
relative calm. After meeting with Soviet Foreign Minister
Alexander Bessmertnykh in Washington, President Bush said he
had been given assurances that Moscow intended to withdraw some
of its forces from the region and reopen talks with the
republics. Interior Minister Pugo said that all paratroops,
except those permanently stationed in the Baltics, and
two-thirds of the Interior Ministry forces would be withdrawn
by week's end. In another conciliatory gesture, Gorbachev set
up Kremlin delegations to begin talks with the Baltic
republics.

    There were signals too of a slight softening in the stance
of Baltic leaders. "If we see signs of a reduction of the
Soviet military presence in the republic now," admitted
Lithuanian President Vytautas Landsbergis, "the step can become
a good signal for talks." Nationalist governments in the three
republics have rejected Gorbachev's plans for a nationwide
referendum in March on the future of the union. The Lithuanians
and Estonians plan to hold their own polls on independence
before then. That would help defuse Moscow's charges that the
Baltic governments only represent the views of radical
minorities.

    With the Baltics cooling down, Gorbachev's decision to send
troops into the streets everywhere else seemed all the more
bizarre. Even though the Defense and Interior ministries' order
on joint patrols was dated a full month ago, Gorbachev gave his
official authorization for the decree only last week. When he
did publish the directive, it was considerably watered down and
accompanied by provisions for local watchdog committees on "the
activities of law-enforcement organs."

    Reformers had been incensed by the permission for the joint
patrols -- and even armored vehicles -- to control "mass
actions by citizens" and "social-political activities." Their
anger led Pugo to explain that the reference was not to
"rallies" but to "hooliganism and other criminal offenses and
nothing else." Pugo also said that each republic had the right
to decide whether it wanted the army to join forces with local
police. Taking him at his word, the Baltic republics and
Georgia, Armenia and Moldavia promptly turned down the offer,
and the Russian Federation called on Gorbachev to suspend the
entire decree.

    Mistrust of the security forces runs high -- with good
reason. According to Colonel Victor Alksnis, a spokesman for
disenchanted reactionaries, the pro-Communist National
Salvation Committee in Lithuania was prepared to seize power
and expected Gorbachev to pave the way by imposing presidential
rule. But Gorbachev did not act, leading Alksnis to conclude
that "the President betrayed us."

    The colonel put Gorbachev on notice that if he did not
intend to use his powers more decisively he would face a mutiny
within the army. At the same time, Gorbachev's hesitation to
impose presidential rule in the Baltics or give his unequivocal
support to military actions has not won him applause from
reformers either. If the Kremlin has a strategy nowadays, it
seems to be to get tough -- then back down. But with the
growing polarization between radicals and reactionaries, no one
seems prepared to accept uncertainty anymore.