Archives|Is Mr. Gorbachev Turning Tail?
Just who is Mikhail Gorbachev? The reformer whose unconventional thinking encourages the Soviet Union to transform itself, or a pushover for reac tionaries who want him to arrogate authority and save the Union at all costs? Americans have reason to wonder, and cause for concern. But they'd be wrong to ignore the continuing revolution in Soviet society amid the moment's political machinations.
Soviet reformers are themselves uncertain of what to make of Mr. Gorbachev's increasingly conservative behavior. Sensing a mood swing in Moscow, some actually applaud his efforts to restore order. Their hope is that he will thus tame the tiger of reaction and consolidate reform before renewing it. Others, like the most reform-minded of his inner circle, Eduard Shevardnadze and Aleksandr Yakovlev, warn of impending dictatorship. Yet even they have warm words for him.
Mr. Gorbachev's reformist critics fall into two camps. One is composed of radicals who favor the breakup of the Soviet Union. They, along with those who cheer them on from outside, call for Mr. Gorbachev's overthrow. But they've always underestimated his radicalism and his perseverance, while overestimating their own support.
The other camp consists of reformers who have grown disenchanted with the pace of change. They fear that he has been co-opted by apparatchiks who identify freer speech and markets with chaos.
But these critics do not include Mr. Shevardnadze or Mr. Yakovlev. The real enemy, they still say, is not Mr. Gorbachev but the forces of reaction deeply entrenched in Moscow's ministries, the security forces, Communist Party apparatus and regional military commands.
"We are witnessing the rise of a vengeful and merciless conservative wave," Mr. Yakovlev said last week. "I'm extremely worried by the indifference and fatigue of the democratic forces."
Now both he and Mr. Shevardnadze are on the outside looking in. And both may have lost power on what is now the central issue confronting Mr. Gorbachev -- how to reconstitute the Union.
Both men favor decentralization to allow reformers in the Russian Republic to plunge ahead, while republics in Central Asia proceed more slowly. And they want to cede more power to the republics as a way for leaders who favor the Union to head off independence movements. The exceptions are the Baltic republics; Mr. Yakovlev admits that they were forcibly incorporated into the Soviet Union, implying they eventually deserve independence.
Such fine distinctions seem to be lost on Mr. Gorbachev just now. The immediate task, as he sees it, is to restore order. And to do so he has turned to the bureaucracy, the military and the K.G.B.
The great fear -- not only in Moscow but also in Washington -- is that Mr. Gorbachev's alliance of convenience will restore the reactionaries and torpedo reform. That could happen.
But the social revolution has moved too far for any lasting return to the days of Stalin, or even Brezhnev. No longer a peasant society, the Soviet Union is increasingly urban, educated and cosmopolitan. Mr. Gorbachev knows all that, and more: he knows that technological accomplishment cannot proceed without freer discussion and that social renewal cannot come without relaxing central command. For now, and as long as the transformation of the Soviet Union continues, it still warrants America's watchful encouragement.