Needing new disguise: Soviet bureaucrats haul down red flag

Scan page 1

Sifting through a garbage dump in Moscow. In its drive to restore capitalism Soviet bureaucracy impoverishes the people.

Both the capitalist rulers and the chiefs of the Stalinist bureaucracy had their reasons to sound the death knell for the Soviet Union. For the former, it was a splendid occasion for proclaiming the "end of Communism." For the latter, it was a most resounding way of declaring that they do not really exist— "There's nobody here but us democrats and free enterprisers.

Pravda, which apparently remains the central organ of the old political bureaucracy (now surviving in various disguises and concealments), has been trying to stake out a position, not only as the defender of now "persecuted" Communists, but as a moderate opposition to the "radicalism" of Boris Yeltsin. That is, it argues for a slower approach to restoring capitalism.

From this stance, Pravda apparently considered it safe to say openly, in its Dec. 17 issue, that the new Commonwealth of Independent States was an attempt by Yeltsin to gain some political credibility to "cushion" the impact of the "social explosion" that might be touched off by the end of price controls at the beginning of the year.

From the standpoint of the old-line Stalinists and Gorbachev, this operation was an extremely risky one-too risky for them. This was so precisely because it meant a formal break with the constitutional and administrative continuity of the state, and would therefore entail at least a temporary disorganization of the bureaucracy and, most importantly, the armed bodies.

The difference on this point was a continuation of the fundamental difference between Gorbachev and Yeltsin from the start. Gorbachev had tried to maintain the formal continuity of the Stalinist institutions, the party and the Union. Yeltsin has tried to get some political credibility by breaking the continuity of these hated institutions.

From the standpoint of the bureaucracy as a whole, both are right. Yeltsin is correct that the bureaucracy can only hold on by maneuvers aimed at appeasing at least the more conservative or fearful sections of the population. But at the same time, Gorbachev is correct that such operations risk fundamentally undermining the bureaucracy's means of control.

In fact, the bureaucracy is in a hopeless situation. It faces blowups whichever way it turns, but following Yeltsin's policy, it can at least hope to delay and scatter the explosions. It is clear that the bureaucracy is heading toward a new stage in the break (continued on page 14)

----- pull-quotes -----

The bureaucracy is in hopeless sítuation. It faces blowups whichever way it turns.