Western Aid to Soviet Union

Grigory Yavlinsky and Graham Allison (“Would the West’s Billions Pay Off?” Commentary, June 3) inexplicably tie Western aid and Soviet free-market reforms together. It is peculiar, to say the least, that adopting the only sensible solution available to Mikhail Gorbachev should be conditioned upon the West pouring billions into the Soviet economy. If Gorbachev had not vacillated so long that he lost all credibility with his public, Western investment dollars would already be flowing into his country. The truth is Gorbachev wants to revive his command-and-control economy, not adopt free-market reforms. Given his unpopular leadership, he knows he cannot ask his people to bear the sacrifices entailed in the transition. Yet any money the West gives Gorbachev will almost certainly be used by the central government to hang onto power a little longer.

Some Soviet republics, such as the Baltic states, Armenia and Georgia, are anxious and ready to adopt free-market reforms if the central government would only give them the freedom to do so. The best course that Gorbachev can follow is to allow willing republics to adopt privatization of small and medium-size businesses, to legalize land ownership and private property and to implement many of the reforms recommended by the joint IMF, World Bank and OECD task force last December. None would require financial assistance to the central government in Moscow, but only leadership and decisiveness on Gorbachev’s part.

If President Bush wants to provide assistance to the Soviet Union, he should condition such aid on individual republics being allowed to negotiate with, and receive assistance directly from, the West. When he goes to Moscow for his summit with Gorbachev, President Bush can take the initiative by visiting and meeting with the leaders of some of the republics. The important symbolism of the visits will not be lost on the Soviets.

VARTKES BROUSSALIAN, Granada Hills