PERSPECTIVE ON RUSSIA : Fear of Failure Rattles Yeltsin : He behaves as if the democratic process is an impediment to getting his constitution passed. This is a grave danger.

Russia is poised on the verge of a precipice far more dangerous than anyone in the West has been willing to publicly recognize. Ostensibly, our unqualified support for Boris Yeltsin was extended in the hope that he would resolve the constitutional crisis gripping the country. What could be shaping up, however, is another new standoff, this time potentially even more dangerous.

With U.S. encouragement, Yeltsin abandoned the existing Russian Constitution in favor of a bigger gamble: that a new constitution granting sweeping presidential powers would pass, thus settling many of the government’s major organizational problems.

The Yeltsin regime has both threatened and cajoled candidates in next Sunday’s parliamentary election, to ensure that the charter will be adopted.

At the heart of the regime’s confusing and inconsistent positions is a significant rift among members of the government and other leading democrats. This rift has weakened the unity of the forces for democracy and deepened Russia’s sense of hopelessness.

The critical split over the conduct of the election and the debate over the constitution has been particularly evident in the past several days. Although Yeltsin has yielded on the issue of whether the proposed constitution is fair game for public criticism by candidates, his waffling indicated a conflict between conducting a free (or semi-free) election and actually getting his constitution passed.

On Nov. 27, Yeltsin warned that any parties critical of the constitution could be denied access to free state television time. Then, on Nov. 30, one of his ministers urged the Central Election Commission to ban two political parties for criticizing the proposed charter and advocating that voters boycott the constitutional question on the Dec. 12 ballot. If more than half don’t vote, the proposal dies.

With resistance to the charter growing, along with complaints about the government’s arm-twisting tactics, Yeltsin’s aides have begun to worry that the constitution will fail.

This fear might explain why Vladimir Zhironovsky, the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party and a neo-fascist, has been given privileged television time in recent days. Unlike his Communist and centrist colleagues, Zhironovsky, who supports the reinstitution of the Russian empire and the restoration of superpower status, has been an ardent supporter of both the constitution and the newly adopted Russian military doctrine.

The frequency of Zhironovsky’s appearance on television is troubling. He represents one of the most radically right of all official and unofficial political blocs. Despite his extremism, however, he has been given increasing visibility and credibility by the authorities, without whom he would not have such special national television access.

While the pro-constitution forces have put the squeeze on democrats and moderate/conservative forces who openly oppose the constitution, Zhironovsky, a menacing and unpredictable man, is now, inexplicably, carrying the Yeltsin banner.

“One can hardly predict further developments in Russia if the referendum is disrupted or the constitution is not adopted,” Gennady Burbulis, Yeltsin’s political confidant, said at a press conference on the last day of November.

What Burbulis didn’t say is that it would be impossible to “predict further developments” if the constitution is passed, given the current political environment. The opposition that the Yeltsin government has created ensures that the new parliament--with or without this constitution--will refuse rubber-stamp status. Serious new conflict could easily arise.

The West must pressure Yeltsin to open up the debate and frame a reasonably stable fallback position if the constitution fails. Such an alternative might include the drafting of a power-sharing charter with the new parliament.

No matter what the outcome is Sunday, confrontation must be avoided. That has already offered--and will continue to offer--too many dangerous and bloody possibilities.