TURMOIL IN THE EAST BLOC : A ‘Fateful Moment’ in Europe Foreseen

The “fateful moment” has yet to occur in the historic drama of Eastern Europe, Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell said Friday--that moment when the leaders of the Kremlin may have to decide whether to reverse the course of change on the Continent and try to hold the Warsaw Pact alliance together with the lash of Soviet tanks.

Such a choice “increasingly appears likely” to confront Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev, Mitchell said.

And because the response remains in doubt, the Maine Democrat said that the U.S. government must proceed cautiously--both in defense cuts and in other diplomatic actions that may send the wrong signals abroad.

“Despite all the talk that has occurred, there remain 605,000 Soviet troops in Eastern Europe--375,000 in East Germany,” Mitchell said in a speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. “The fateful moment has yet to occur with respect to Soviet policy in Eastern Europe.”

Mitchell said that the West has come to regard Gorbachev “as a mythical figure,” and the senator credited him with policies that “are historic in nature.”

“But like all of us, he is human and subject to error and contradiction,” Mitchell continued.

“He has publicly said on many occasions that the people of Eastern Europe, including the East Germans, should have the right to determine for themselves their future. He has also publicly said that the people of Eastern Europe, and especially East Germany, cannot leave the Warsaw Pact.

“What will happen if, as increasingly appears likely, the East German people decide for themselves that their future lies outside the Warsaw Pact?” Mitchell asked. “That will be the moment of fateful decision on the political transformation of Eastern Europe.”

Mitchell’s speech concluded a two-day visit to Los Angeles in which the two-term senator emphasized his hopes that 1990 will produce epic environmental legislation in Congress. His remarks on Eastern Europe came in response to a question from his audience about defense spending.

He answered that it is “premature” to try to determine how much to scale back militarily until the Administration and Congress undertake a “careful review” of security needs. “Once we define those needs, then we can develop the type and level of force necessary to defend them.”

As for unwarranted diplomatic signals, Mitchell renewed his stinging criticism of last weekend’s surprise mission to China by the President’s National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence S. Eagleburger. The timing of the trip could not have been worse symbolism given the tumult of Eastern Europe, Mitchell said.

“Just last weekend, the men in the Kremlin watched as the national security adviser to the President of the United States stood in Beijing and toasted the leaders of the Chinese government, which just six months before sent their tanks into Tian An Men Square to murder their own citizens. . . .

“Lest we be overwhelmed by the events in Eastern Europe, let none of us forget that the largest demonstration peacefully urging freedom in all of human history occurred in China in June.”

Mitchell said that the Bush Administration should have considered how the Scowcroft mission could be perceived in the Soviet Union.