Soviet Treatment of Jews Is Test of Helsinki Pact

Can Soviet Jews be delivered from bondage?

As members of minority groups who have experienced deprivation and oppression in many lands and in all ages, we sympathize with Soviet Jews striving for the freedom to emigrate. As part of the labor movement, we recognize the value of enduring struggle to achieve a human rights purpose. And, as organizations on the firing line of events, we have a sense of the possible.

Some significant, if token, human rights concessions in high visibility cases have occurred in the Soviet Union. While these developments do not touch the fundamental totalitarian character of the Soviet Union (as The Times editorial of Jan. 29 implies, only the right to criticize Mikahail Gorbachev and the Politburo publicly would signal an opening to basic change), they do reveal a heightened sensitivity to foreign opinion at a time when external relations seriously impact internal economic problems.

To begin with, the Soviet oligarchy observes the growing realization in the West that arms negotiations and human rights are inextricably intertwined. Progress toward nuclear disarmament agreements is dependent on evidence of good faith in implementing the existing Helsinki accords.

Furthermore, other contacts sought with the West--scientific, economic, cultural--essential to Soviet development, are blighted by the stifling atmosphere of Soviet human rights violations.

In all of this, a particular source of acute Soviet embarrassment is their treatment of Soviet Jews and the courageous and steadfast Jewish resistance.

Their attitude toward Jews is an exception to their general policy of a self-governing “homeland” for cultural development for each “nationality” within the Soviet Union. Most Jews must carry internal passports identifying them as Jews, but unlike other groups they have no Soviet homeland. (The Soviets have for all practical purposes abandoned the pretense that Birobidjan is the “Jewish homeland.”)

In general, Jews are deprived of the opportunity to learn Hebrew; to absorb Jewish culture; to study Jewish history and tradition; and, with few exceptions and the narrowest restrictions, to practice Judaism.

Anti-Semitic prejudice, both subtle and blatant, is common in the media, in literature, in politics. Discrimination is growing--in educational institutions and in areas of high status social, economic and professional activity.

In the face of this, and at great risk, 400,000 Jews have expressed their desire to emigrate. Hundreds of thousands more would try if the obstacle course were less hazardous and hope of success greater. And, many have pursued to the end the course of applying. But last year fewer than 1,000 Jews made it.

For those who have been refused, the “refuseniks,” the consequences have been automatic dismissal from their jobs, ostracism, harassment. Persistence has led to arrest, imprisonment on a variety of trumped-up charges and frequently exile.

The Soviet regime is confronted by a dilemma. It is dangerous for them to let loose the notion that people can escape Soviet society by emigrating. Yet, the spotlight of world attention is being increasingly focused on their treatment of Jews as a test of the Helsinki accords and the right to emigrate.

And, they cannot resolve their problem by intensified repression. No matter how severe the persecution, the hunger to remain Jewish and identify as a Jewish community will prevail.

It only remains for people of conscience to continue to express support and urge their governments to exert pressure on the Soviet Union. In the total situation, the regime may well find it loses least by opening the doors to Jewish emigration.

MAXINE HOBDY

Acting President

Los Angeles Branch

A. Philip Randolph Institute

ALBERT GRIBBELL VELASCO

Chairperson

Los Angeles County Chapter

Labor Council for Latin American

Advancement

MAX MONT

Regional Director

Jewish Labor Committee

Los Angeles