Vision of a Soviet Apocalypse

...By Andrei AmalnL Haipei & Row 93 pp $4 95 Reviewed by Ludmilla Thorne Will the Soviet Union survive until 1984' Andrei Amalnk's answer is a resounding "No " Plagued by incurable internal ailments and tormented by external irritations, the USSR will decompose and die Amalnk's diagnosis gives Soviet Russia no more than 15 years of survival, death is predicted sometime between 1980-85 The crucial blow is to be dealt by Red China, which will entangle the Soviet Union in protracted guerrilla warfare along the two countries' 4,000-mile frontier Once Soviet forces are transferred to the East (Amalnk does not believe the USSR will unleash its nuclear might), Russia will no longer be able to look after its interests in Europe Germany will be reunited, and a process of de-Sovietization in Eastern Europe will follow, accompanied by a succession of long-dormant temtonal squabbles "As the regime's difficulties mount and as it appears ever more incapable of coping with its tasks, the 'middle class' will grow increasingly hostile, writes Amalnk "The defection of allies and the temtonal claims advanced in both West and East will increase the feeling of isolation and hopelessness There will ensue sporadic eruptions of popular dissatisfaction, or local riots The bureaucracy, unable to cope with external and internal disruption, will be seized by irresolution Consequently, "a major defeat at the front, or a serious eruption of popular discontent in the capital, such as stakes or an armed clash, will be enough to topple the regime Power will pass into the hands of extremist elements and groups, and the country will begin to disintegrate into anarchy, violence and intense national hatred These are the shattering predictions found in Amalnk's essay, first published in the original Russian by the Alexander Herzen Foundation in Amsterdam It has since raised a mild furor among Russian readers and is bound to stimulate lively discussion in the United States and Canada (The work has been published m Great Bntain, as well, m the Autumn 1969 issue of Survey ) Amalnk's apocalyptic vision of Soviet Russia is not without weaknesses He eliminates, for example, the possibility of rapprochement between the U S and the USSR in the event ot a Sino-Soviet war because it "would make sense only after serious steps toward democracy were taken in the USSR " He continues this line of thinking with "A genuine rapprochement must be based on a similarity of interests, culture and traditions, and on mutual understanding Nothing like this exists [between the U S and the USSR] " Then he offers a rather cunous alternative "Undoubtedly, m the course of time China will raise the standard of living of her people considerably and will move into a period of liberalization This, together with her traditional faith in spiritual values, will make her a remarkable partner for democratic America " It is difficult to foresee any ensuing "similarity of mterests, culture and traditions" between the United States and China, just as it is doubtful that China will take more "serious steps toward democracy" than Russia The author's vision of China's future also contains at least two contradictions First, he draws a parallel between the development of Communist China and that of Soviet Russia, and suggests a "period of liberalization" for China while denying the possibility of a similar liberalization in Russia, already less militant m its adherence to Communist dogma than China Second, should a "period of liberalization" take root in China, is it not probable that the newly enlightened, liberal Chinese leadership would embark on a course of reconciliation with the Soviet Union on the border question rather than wage all-out war7 Amalnk, a 31-year-old Russian rebel living in Moscow, is no less controversial than his essay Bent on proving that "a Soviet citizen, like the citizens of any other country, has the right to publish books not issued in his own country," he has authorized Western publication of his works under his own name, and has asked that remittances be sent to him through the Soviet State Bank When the Bank refused his plan, Amalnk sent a letter to several Western newspapers m protest "Stalin would have executed me for the fact that my books have been published abroad His wretched successors dare only embezzle a part of my money It only reaffirms my opinion of the degradation and decrepitude of this regime " Unlike most Soviet dissident writers, who usually transmit their works to the West secretly, Amalnk prefers direct confrontation with the authorities, to remind them that there is m fact no law forbidding a Soviet writer to publish abroad So far, bis approach has met with a measure of success—but it also has given rise to suspicions that he is an agent of the kgb How else, the reasoning goes, can an author predicting such a cataclysmic end for Soviet Russia remain at liberty7 Those who question his integnty note, too, that the manuscript of his essay was not confiscated by kgb agents who conducted a search of his one-room apartment m May 1969 "Andrei's freedom amid unfree-dom baffles those of small mind, both in Moscow and in the West Because he lives resolutely within Soviet law, the authorities have not found a way of silencing him," Henry Kamm writes in his Preface Kamm became closely acquainted with Amalrik while serving as head of the New York Times Moscow bureau "It is difficult to see how they can believe this [Amalrik being a kgb agent] in the face of his public statements and writings—for instance, this book—which radically reject all that the Soviet Union professes to believe," Kamm continues It is difficult not to agree, the book is indeed a scathing indictment of the present Soviet leadership I must take exception, however, to the statement that because Amalrik "lives resolutely within Soviet law, the authorities have not found a way of silencing him " The authorities can always find a way of silencing anybody Witness the case of Anatoly Marchenko He too hved strictly within the law, but after Western publication of his devastating account of today's Soviet labor camps, and other "anti-Soviet" acts, he was seized on the street, beaten, and sentenced to a prison camp This incident suggests that Andrei Amalnk's safety may also be in the balance In his most recent letter to the West, Amalrik expresses his own conjectures as to why he has not yet been arrested "I think that the kgb are reasonably sensible from the police point of view and that they will arrest me when the fuss abroad has died down and interest m me and my books has fallen away " Amalnk's life has not always passed without official obstruction In 1963, he was expelled from Moscow University for writing a paper about the influence of Norman culture on early Russian civilization, and for passing it to a Western scholar who shared his views In 1965, he was imprisoned on the charge that his five plays (never printed or performed in the USSR) were "anti-Soviet and pornographic " The prison sentence was eventually changed to two-and-a-half years of exile in Siberia as a "parasite," and his experiences there are the subject of a new book, Involuntary Journey to Siberia, to be published this summer in English and Russian by Harcourt, Brace & World Since Amalnk's return to Moscow in 1966, he and his wife Gyusel have been living in the back room of a six-room flat in which six famdies share one kitchen, one toilet and one bathtub The secret police have systematically barred him from finding work befitting his ability and intelligence Kamm tells us that "Andrei has worked as a letter earner, a proofreader, a construction worker (despite a frail body and a congenital heart ailment), a lighting technician in a film studio, a translator of technical literature, a laboratory helper, a cartographer, a private tutor and secretary and timekeeper at sports events " Gyusel, a talented painter, cannot exhibit or sell her paintings because she is not a member of the Union of Artists, the sole agency able under Soviet law to sanction such activities Following the trial of writers Andrei Sinyavsky and Yuli Daniel in February 1966, a flood of protest letters, appeals and trial proceedings began to reach the West In the mmds of most observers, these have fused into an amorphous political opposition in Russia, its actual composition, aims and ideology remaining undefined Amalrik makes a substantial attempt to describe the development in his book Starting with the "revolution at the top" after Stalin's death in 1953, he traces the subsequent evolution of the "Cultural Opposition" of the late 1950s, and the samizdat (self-publishing) phenomenon, finally offering a penetrating analysis of today's "Democratic Movement," as he calls it Although his schematic view should not be regarded as definitive, it is a useful basis for the observation of further developments He sees three major components in the Democratic Movement "genuine Marxism-Lenimsm," "Christian ideology" and "liberal ideology " The first of these contends that the Soviet regime has perverted the true doctrinal concepts, makmg a return to a pure form necessary "Chnstian ideology" maintains that Soviet society must become imbued with Christian moral principles, "liberal ideology" would have Russia move in the direction of a Western kind of democratic society All three of these viewpoints share at least one essential aim "the rule of law, founded on respect for the basic rights of man " Amalrik shows that the Democratic Movement's basic support comes from the intelligentsia, or what he prefers to call the "middle class " But his hopes for its ultimate success are small "The vast majority of this class is so mediocre, its ways of thinking are so much those of the government employee, and its intellectually most independent members are so passive that the success of a Democratic Movement based on it seems to me to be gravely in doubt" His description of the government hierarchy is equally pessimistic "Not only are they incapable of conceiving new ideas, they regard any novel thought as an assault on their own prerogatives Thus we have a passive bureaucratic elite opposed to a passive 'middle class ' " As for the "lower classes," they are potentially dangerous "The proletarianization of the countryside has created an 'alien class'?neither peasant nor workmg class," capable of "damaging, violent and irresponsible action " The Russian psyche, Amalnk believes, has essentially been shaped by a lack of Europe's humanist tradition, by the inability to differentiate between "freedom" and "disorder," and by a fanatic infatuation with "justice " But "this idea of justice is motivated by hatred of everything that is outstanding When the average Russian sees that he is living less well than his neighbor, he will concentrate not on trying to do better for himself but rather on trying to bring his neighbor down to his own level " It is statements like these that have subjected Amalnk's thesis to hostile criticism and given rise to renewed personal suspicions It has been suggested that the exposure of such stinging "anti-Russian" sentiments expressed by a liberal, dissident writer may discredit the entire Democratic Movement Most Soviet citizens, no matter how critical they may be of the USSR, remain loyal to Russia They could easily be repelled by a Democratic Movement that fails to distinguish between the two The passivity of the Democratic Movement as portrayed in Amalnk's book has also been criticized, for it is feared that it can have a demoralizing effect on those actively resisting oppression Amalnk has therefore been accused by some critics of unwittingly playing into the hands of the kgb, rather than being its direct agent Could this be the reason why his manuscript was not seized9 Did the kgb want to encourage circulation of the book7 In principle, the possibility cannot be entirely eliminated It is widely believed that a copy of Svetlana Alliluyeva's man-uscnpt of Twenty Letters to a Ft tend (as well as some personal photographs) was transmitted to the West by the secret police via Victor Louis in order to diminish the impact of the book pnor to publication And there is reason to believe that some of Aleksandr Sol-zhemtsyn's manuscripts reached the West with the help of the kgb, a maneuver aimed at discrediting the author and making it entirely impossible to have his books published in the Soviet Union In the case of Amalnk, it would seem that wide circulation of his book in Soviet and Western circles would be counterproductive to Soviet interests His devastating depiction of the Soviet leadership and his prediction of the regime's ultimate downfall could not possibly please the Kremlin Moreover, the passages which urge the United States to support China agamst the USSR in the event of a Sino-Soviet war are also not in line with Soviet foreign policy At the same time, Amalnk's "anti-Russian" views are not likely to discredit the Democratic Movement as a whole, because most readers will realize he is a dissident among dissidents "Even among his own kind—among outsiders—he is something of an outsider," writes Sidney Monas in his excellent Commentary The majority of readers, East and West, will not agree completely with Andrei Amalnk's view of the Russian character, Soviet society and its future Most of us are more optimistic, and foster the hope that the Democratic Movement will meet with success We are also aware of Russia's great contributions to world culture in spite of her tragic history (I cannot agree with Amalnk's statement that Russia is "a country without beliefs, without traditions, without culture and without the ability to do an honest job ") Ideally, Amalnk's essay, because of its severe indictment of Russia's past and frightening forecast of its future, will arouse Soviet readers to act more vigorously in the direction of change All readers would do well to separate the various rumois and suspicions concerning the author's personality from his work, and value that for what it is—a provocative and fresh approach to a 50-year-old problem...