International Viewpoint # 240 • December 7, 1992
USA / BALTIC STATES proving it, especially in a chaos-ridden world. As a result, foreign policy will take up more of the new president's time than he had expected.
The biggest danger Clinton must face is the widespread hankering among the American people for a return to an idyllic past; they have voted for a return to the days of uninterrupted economic growth.
In response to these expectations, Clinton has given himself 100 days to inaugurate the "new era": the end of racial and sexuality-based discrimination in the army; for the strengthening of women's rights, notably in the area of abortion rights; the implementation of an ethics code, to bring an end to the corruption which has undermined federal institutions, including Congress; and public investment of $20bn to boost the economy.
This "Roosevelt" model of an "activist president", in a period characterized by a world recession and the weakening of American world domination, could very well propel the American people to confront head-on the new president's Bonapartist cynicism.
Clinton has opened the Pandora's box and will be unable to close it. *
The New York Times attributed Sajudis' defeat to "factionalism" and political divisions within it. But Sajudis' fundamental problem is that its programme - privatization - is clearly benefitting the old bureaucracy, not its mass base.
In the September 20 vote in Estonia, on the other hand, a coalition of rightwing anti-Communist parties emerged as the winners.
The Isamaa (Fatherland) won 30 out of the 100 seats in the Estonian parliament. The Popular Front (Rahvarine), which had been the principal political force in the struggle against the ruling CP, got only 12% of the vote and 15 seats. The party of the big factory managers "Safe Home" (Kindel Kodu) got 18 seats, the
Elections reflect crisis of perspectives second largest bloc.
The winning coalition essentially consisted of small groups of intellectuals with hard "free enterprise" ideas, who display more consistency than realism.
Despite the different results, both the Estonian and Lithuanian elections reflect
THE elections in Lithuania ended in a decisive victory for the main opposition party, the Democratic Labour Party (LDLP) and a defeat for the nationalist Sajudis movement of Vytautas Landsbergis. The winning party is the successor to the majority of the former ruling Communist Party which, under the leadership of Algirdas Brazauskas, aligned itself with proindependence sentiment in Lithuania in the final years of the Soviet Union.
Brazauskas has promised to slow down economic reforms and improve relations with Russia, while pursuing a conciliatory line towards his defeated opponents and maintaining commitments to institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Coming after Iliescu's victory in Romania in September/October, the LDLP's success provides further evidence of the decline in enthusiasm for radical change in many countries of the former Soviet bloc. This decline reflects the crumbling of the prevailing illusion that support from the West and the adoption of Western-inspired free market programmes would provide a route to prosperity and freedom.
The following article is a shortened version of the first installment of an account by Gerry Foley of a six-week trip to the Soviet Union that first appeared in full in the November 1992 issue of the American Trotskyist monthly, Socialist Action. GERRY FOLEY
T HE first elections in the Baltic
States since the break up of the Soviet Union had seemingly opposite results. On October 25, in Lithuania, the Democratic Party of Labour, the successor of the "national" wing of the Lithuanian Communist Party (and the model for CP successor parties 18 in the other Baltic countries) won a smashing victory over Sajudis, the national democratic front that led Lithuania to independence.
The DPL got over 44% of the votes and will form a new government in which they will be the dominant partner. Sajudis leader Vytautas Lansbergis reportedly announced that his organization will go into opposition.
the same process; the erosion and breakup of the national fronts that led mass movements against Stalinist rule in a number of former Soviet republics.
In the non-Russian republics, these groups existed for years as mass political movements, defeated the local Communist parties on a national or at least regional scale and took over national or regional governments.
They were based on the national intelligentsias of the respective republics and it was this support that enabled them to become mass movements overnight. They were able to address a mass audience immediately through the organs of the writers' and other creative workers' unions.
The national intelligentsias were a privileged layer, and in a general sense part of the bureaucracy. But they represented a contradiction within it, inasmuch as they had a vested interest in opposing "Russification", which was the policy of the bureaucracy as a whole.
Heritage of the revolution
The national intelligentsias represented a heritage of the national policy of the revolutionary Soviet state that Stalinism had been unable to liquidate; that is the right of every nationality to have a national culture and therefore the essential apparatus of a national culture, a press and a literature in the local language.
Once Gorbachev's reform policy and the divisions in the bureaucracy over it weakened Moscow's grip, the national intelligentsias launched a battle for the national rights of the nations on which they depended.
In a number of republics, totalitarian rule was shattered and a relatively free political debate became possible. In the process the national intelligentsias themselves split, owing to fear of radicalism and their programmatic emptiness.
Two years ago, before independence, a wide spectrum of political views could be found in the press and there was a dynamic political life. Now democratization has lost its momentum.
It is notable that none of the fronts have been able to develop a press of their own that could deepen and consolidate their political influence over society. In Lithuania, two editorial teams, one after the other, ran away with papers started by Sajudis. In Estonia, the front was never able to develop a newspaper of its own. From the outset the development of a free press has been obstructed and distorted by an inflow of emigré money.
The Estonians are a tiny nationality, about a million people, with a relatively large diaspora. (About 100,000 people fled the country during World War II.) Estonia's most prestigious daily, Postimees, is firmly controlled by the rightwing and most of the financing for the election campaign came from abroad
The Latvian Front (Latvias Tautas Frontas - LTF) had the most substantial and lively paper of any of the national democratic organizations, the weekly Atmoda. This was stolen by its editor and turned into a commercial paper. A new series of Atmoda was started by the Front on a much more modest scale.
### Widening social gulf
One issue of this consisted mainly of a long article by the LTF's president Romualdas Razukas. It lamented the growing abyss between a small section of the population that was enriching itself as a result of privatization and the great majority that was becoming impoverished.
Razukas wrote that the incumbent government, supposedly made up of supporters of the Front, actually represented the "liberal nomenklatura" and that the Front considered itself in opposition to the government.
Deputies elected to the Latvian Supreme Soviet under the Front's auspices had happily gone their own way once in the legislature. Half of the delegation of the harder-line nationalist group, the Latvian Independence Movement (LNKK) did the same. The LTF and LNKK are in an alliance for the upcoming elections.
It is the LNKK —which has called for the restoration of the 1940 Latvian republic and wishes to recognize as citizens only those who lived in that republic and their descendants - that seems to be the dominant partner. Its programme would involve denying citizenship rights to most of Latvia's Russian-speakers, who make up almost half of the population.
Razukas believes that the front form of organization is outdated and hopes to turn the LTF into a party. He thinks that this party should be politically "centrist", by which he seems to mean that it should not have a definite programme, but should reflect the prevailing political
It is possible that the LTF-LNKK bloc will succeed electorally for a time, so long as the Russian-speaking population is disenfranchised.
However, the LTF is losing its political role. At the same time, it is abandoning important political territory to the new Social Democratic Party, which is in the process of defining its programme.
The opposition trade union movement that developed in the orbit of the LTF, the Workers Union, now looks to the Social Democratic Party. It is composed equally of Russian and Latvian workers and is opposed to discrimination against Russians.
Evolution of women's movement
The women's movement that grew up in the shadow of the LTF is also going its own way.
This organization, the League of Women, began as an anti-militarist movement of mothers of soldiers protesting against the treatment of their sons in the Soviet army. It then appealed to mothers in other parts of the USSR to protest against their sons being sent to repress the Latvians. As the movement developed its leaders became interested in the economic problems of women.
The leader of the League of Women, Anita Stankevica, told me that women had been hardest hit by the economic changes, in particular the closing of daycare centres and higher prices. She wanted to build a united, independent women's movement to fight to defend women's interests. The SDP is said to support this idea.
However, the programme of the SDP is very like that of the successor to the Latvian Communist Party, the Latvian Democratic Party of Labour. According to the chair of the Latvian Workers Union, the difference between the two was purely one of personnel. The DPL was made up of former or present bureaucrats, while the SDP were "new people".
In the case of most of the fronts, people talk about radicalization. The
BALTIC STATES intellectual layer that formed their original backbone is withdrawing — generally into new parties that, to one degree or another, favour compromise with the bureaucracy.
In the confusion and decay that exist in all the countries of the ex-USSR and Eastern Europe, intellectuals in particular are seeking ideas. An appearance of consistency can be important to the masses as well, until they see that certain politically consistent policies have consistently bad results.
At the moment, the "consistent" advocates of a market economy — as in Estonia — can have an advantage in some circumstances. However, despite Isamaa's impressive election victory, politicians in Estonia do not expect its government to last long. Its promise to return confiscated property to its original owners and its inclination to exclude Russian-speakers from political life and even drive them out will lead to massive crises.
But given Estonia's small size and the fact that the West's fundamental interest is in Russia, the Estonians can only maintain their independence with the support of democratic forces in their giant neighbour.
The Estonian front leaders understand these realities and their opposition to an ultra-nationalist rightwing offensive has pushed them into opposition to the government.
The Fronts originally called for a thorough-going democratization of the society and economy alongside the national demands. Although some of their demands have been achieved. at least for the moment, the national liberation and development of the peoples they represent is still far from being accomplished.
### Troop withdrawals suspended
In fact, the gains of these nations are being more and more put at risk by the gradual return of the government of Boris Yeltsin in Russia to openly Russian chauvinist positions, exemplified by the recent decision to suspend troop withdrawals from the Baltic States and to use the presence of Russian troops to put pressure on the local governments.
Further steps towards national liberation require a programme that integrates national liberation and a programme for the fundamental democratization of social relations — workers' democracy.
Such a programme also has to be a national one - able to appeal to the majority in the oppressor nations as well. This would be the next stage of the political process set in motion by the rise of 1 9 the mass national movements. *
"We are going ahead with our eyes open"
International Viewpoint # 240 • December 7, 1992
RUSSIA
220-230 hours. We had hardly any days off. They paid us up to time and a half, but this was calculated only on the basis of our basic wage.
People were afraid to complain because it was easy to get rid of them. They'd start calling you in for some minor infraction of