The growing belief that there will be a Reagan-Gorbachev summit this year is a good reason to take a critical look at the Soviets, their purposes, and their tactics. Many Americans approach the summit concept with two basic illusions. Perhaps we should say delusions.
1. Many Americans seem to think that the United States and the Soviet Union have the same goal, namely, an “end to the arms race” and “coexisting in a dangerous world.” Unfortunately, while that is the U.S. goal, the Soviets do not share it.
The Soviets approach arms control negotiations as a strategic military and intelligence operation. Their objectives are: to stop U.S. advances on whatever strategic system the Soviets are most afraid of (at the present time, this is our defensive space system called SDI), to verify intelligence on U.S. weapons and capabilities, to stir up mischief among Western allies, to mislead the West about Soviet goals, and to promote economic and technological assistance to the Soviet bloc.
2. Many Americans seem to think that the Soviets are changing their tactics and that Soviet ideology (that is, Marxism-Leninism) is dead, discredited, and without current vitality in the era of smiling Gorbachev and his stylish wife. Unfortunately, such changes exist only in the minds of the deluded Americans. There is no evidence that any ideological change has taken place.
The possibility that the two superpowers can coexist in harmony in the same world is consistently denied in all Soviet official pronouncements. The unwavering party line is that the differences are irreconcilable, and that the old conflict will continue until one or the other side triumphs.
The Soviet goal is to make sure that the Soviet system is the side that wins. While Americans have their eyes on the 1988 election, the Soviets are long-range planners for what they see as their inevitable triumph, even if it takes 50 years.
In our efforts to be realistic rather than starry-eyed about the Soviets, let’s examine the words of a man who had first-hand experience with them, a former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union, a career foreign service diplomat who has always been known to be rational and moderate in dealing with the Soviets. Malcolm Toon fits that description; he was even Jimmy Carter’s Ambassador to the U.S.S.R. Publicly, Toon is partisanly critical of Ronald Reagan’s rhetoric; but among his old classmates he sings a different tune.
In the fall of 1985, Malcolm Toon made a remarkable speech to the 50th class reunion of Hotchkiss School, a prestigious eastern prep school. Fortunately, Toon’s candid remarks were reported in the Hotchkiss Alumni Magazine.
“We must recognize the Soviet Union for what it is,” Ambassador Toon told the Hotchkiss Alumni, “a ruthless and brutal power.” Its leadership is “conspiratorial in nature,” and its foreign policy is “inherently aggressive.” The Soviets will extend and consolidate their power wherever they think they can do so with impunity, he added.
Toon obviously doesn’t believe in the popular academic myth of “moral equivalence” between the two superpowers. Our share of the blame for Soviet relations is “infinitesimal,” Toon said, listing incidents of Soviet “misbehavior” as a massive arms buildup, the invasion of Afghanistan, the treatment of Poland and Solidarity, the use of biological warfare, and shooting down the Korean airliner. When Toon fielded questions after his speech, a student asked whether Toon had anything positive to say about the Soviet Union.
Toon paused and then answered, “About the Soviet Union? They have good ballet.” Toon does not share the typical liberal euphoria about Gorbachev. He is probably bad news, Toon said. Toon identified Gorbachev as the protege of Andropov, who was head of the KGB and “spent most of his career arresting and killing people.”
Toon warned that Gorbachev, as an heir of the Stalin legacy, believes in controlling the masses and crushing dissent. Ambassador Toon said that simply trying to reason with the Soviets won’t work because, as ideologues, they are not reasonable.
Then Toon gave us some good advice. The United States must avoid agreements with broad principles and vague wording such as the Code of Conduct (signed by President Richard Nixon) and the Helsinki Final Act, since the Soviets are bound to violate them.
“They violated the Code of Conduct almost before the ink was dry,” Toon said. “The Helsinki Final Act was signed in complete cynicism.”
Now that we know the Soviets are cynics about summits, let’s not let them put anything over on us. On guard!
