U.S. Softening Its Stance on Economic Aid

The Bush Administration, trying to keep up with the American mood of euphoria over the courage of the Soviet people, offered the first hint Sunday that it might ease its tough stand on economic assistance to the Soviet Union.

Secretary of State James A. Baker III said the United States and its Western allies would require no more than a firm commitment toward reform before considering an aid package. In the past, many U.S. officials have insisted that they needed to see the reforms before going ahead.

On another emotional issue, however, President Bush made it clear that he does not intend to join the international bandwagon rushing to recognize the independence of the Baltic republics even before the government of Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev sets them free.

With the White House expecting the Supreme Soviet to take up the question of the Baltics momentarily, President Bush said his Administration is just “biding our time” in hopes that the Soviet government will swiftly grant independence to Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

“Everyone knows our policy, which is that we want to see them free,” the President told reporters as he welcomed Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and his family to the Bush vacation home in Kennebunkport, Me. “But let’s wait and see what happens tomorrow. It’s going to be an interesting day.”

On the issue of assistance, Baker expressed approval of the latest appointments of economic reformers to top posts in the Soviet Union. Speaking from his Wyoming ranch on the ABC news show “This Week With David Brinkley,” Baker said: “This will, I think, give us an opportunity perhaps to do more once we see clear determination on the part of the Soviet people to move toward reform.”

Obviously trying to underscore the significance of his statement, Baker added a few minutes later: “I didn’t say they had to act on reform first. I said they had to demonstrate a determination that economic reform move forward.”

Baker, however, was clearly not talking about any massive U.S. aid program. “We should not make the very same mistake that we made in the ‘70s with Poland, where we poured a lot of money down a rat hole,” he said.

Nevertheless, Baker’s remarks are an encouraging sign for the Soviet Union on the eve of a special meeting in London of the world’s seven leading industrial democracies--known as the Group of Seven--to take up the matter of Soviet aid. White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater underscored the importance of the meeting by describing it as “a time for assessment” of Soviet economic reforms.

Despite a plea from Gorbachev, who flew to London in July to meet with the G-7 leaders at their annual summit, Bush blocked proposals then from German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and others for immediate and large economic assistance.

The G-7 consists of the United States, Japan, Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Canada.

Baker said he now believes that the Soviet and Russian leaders are committed to economic reform. “But what is needed is a concrete, specific program and plan that everyone signs on to,” he went on. “. . . I think it’s likely to come and to come very soon.”

In fact, Baker said, if Gorbachev had endorsed a reform plan drawn up by Soviet free-market economist Grigory A. Yavlinsky and others before the summit in London, “I think that the actions taken by the G-7 countries might well have been different.”

Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney, however, did not sound as forthcoming as Baker did on aid. While “the events of the last week have cleared away a lot of the political underbrush . . . they are still well short of the set of circumstances economically where we can do more than we already have,” Cheney said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

But, he added, “I think if there are major humanitarian needs this winter in the Soviet Union, that we probably would be prepared to help.”

Both Baker and Cheney maintained that there is no need to rush on the issue of the Baltics, since the United States had never recognized the Soviet Union’s seizure of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia in 1940. And they predicted that the Soviets would accept the independence of the Baltic republics soon. This prediction carried the implication that there is no point in embarrassing the Soviet government by refusing to wait.

“So there are still a number of mechanical questions that need to be sorted out,” Cheney said. “But I think it’s just a matter of time until the Baltic republics will--as they should be--be independent states.”

White House spokesman Fitzwater declined to elaborate on the reasons for the Administration’s confidence that a new Soviet policy on the Baltics will emerge from today’s session of the Supreme Soviet, or national legislature, in Moscow.

“We’ve had discussions about this with various people,” he said, “and we’ve made our views known. Let’s just leave it at that.”

National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft told reporters in Kennebunkport: “We have indications that such a measure will be introduced by some of the deputies in the Supreme Soviet, but what will happen I don’t know.”

Meisler reported from Washington and Jehl from Kennebunkport, Me.