Commentary : At U.S.-Soviet Get-Together, One Theme Stood Out: War Is Obsolete

Recently I had a rare opportunity for a community college teacher: I was part of a group of 25 representative Americans who met with a high-level group of 25 Soviet leaders. For nearly three days we ate together, walked together, swam together, sang together, and--most of all--talked together.

The Soviets definitely had an agenda and were putting their best foot forward. Still, they had to deal with some tough questions about the treatment of Jews in their country, immigration restrictions, Communist Party domination of Soviet politics, and assuring individual freedoms of conscience and expression. This unprecedented event took place in Newport Beach in early May and was made possible by the Kettering Foundation in conjunction with the Dartmouth Conference program in Soviet-American relations. (The Citizen Summit will be televised nationally Tuesday at 9 p.m. on Channel 28.)

On a late afternoon walk with Andrey Kortunov, a boyish-looking, 30-year-old Soviet official with the Institute for U.S.A. and Canada Studies, I had an opportunity to ask a number of questions that have been on my mind. “What’s really going on in your country?” I wanted to know. “A revolution, a bloodless revolution,” he said matter-of-factly. I asked if there was strong resistance to perestroika and democratization (their word). He said there was strong resistance from some quarters. “Have you passed the point of no return,” I asked. “Yes,” he responded. I wanted to know where all of this would come out; he said no one knew for sure, only that there was no turning back now.

Andrey (we got to a first-name basis quickly) talked about the incredible opening that now exists to improve relations between our two countries. As evidence of the new developments, he talked about a book, “Breakthrough: Emerging New Thinking,” he recently helped write along with several dozen other Soviet and American scientists and scholars. This book, in his opinion, outlined the new realities, both economic and military, and provided a needed sense of direction for the superpowers.

At a roundtable discussion the next day, I asked two Soviet officials how they first heard about the Chernobyl disaster. They both said that they had heard from Western radio sources that are no longer being jammed by their government. “How did that make you feel?” I asked pointedly. They both said they were furious that they had not been informed first by their own media. Their press is opening up now, one of them said in a voice that sounded hopeful.

At one of the evening dinners I sat next to Georgy Arbatov, institute director. We discussed briefly the recent wars in Central America, disagreeing sharply on some points, agreeing on others. I said that I had a very hard time seeing the Sandinistas as champions of democracy, as he suggested. However, we both agreed that the use of military force throughout the region has not worked and that the Arias peace plan offered the best hope for a lasting settlement. Then I asked him what message would he like for me to take back to my students? After pausing for what seemed like several minutes, he replied: “Tell them, tell them not to let their thinking be governed by stereotypes. Tell them to think for themselves.”

After dinner, Sergey Plekchanov, the institute’s deputy director, went to the piano and began playing jazz, followed by American spirituals. A dozen or so people, Soviets and Americans alike, left their tables to gather around the piano to sing “Amazing Grace.” Next Sergey played and we sang “We Shall Overcome.” The sense of feeling mounted and the old familiar lump in my throat emerged as we all belted out the last line together: “We shall live in peace some day.”

The last evening featured a televised panel discussion among four Soviets and four Americans before an audience that included the other participants from both countries and numerous invited guests. In response to a question from the audience about what the Soviets had learned from the Chernobyl disaster, Sergey Plekchanov replied that, among other things, they learned that “conventional wars are out now” because nuclear-power reactors would most certainly be targets. “In fact,” he said, “because the planet seems to be getting smaller, there isn’t much room to be fighting wars of any kind.”

In the days that have gone by since our Newport conference ended, one thought seems to keep coming back to me. Sergey Plekchanov was saying something profound about war having outlived its usefulness. Maybe his statement should really be regarded as a challenge to the peoples and governments of both our great nations to publicly declare the ending of war by the year 2000 as the supreme goal of the Soviet-American relationship. In the process, both nations would free up their immense intellectual and other resources to address all of the other important issues discussed so candidly during a weekend that would not have seemed possible several years ago.