World

~~

MOSCOW — Earlier this month came
the announcement from the USSR Supreme
Court, no less electrifying for having been
expected, that Nikolai Bukharin, Alexei
Rykov and 18 other defendants in the
notorious Moscow trial of 1938, have been
cleared of all guilt and posthumously
“rehabilitated.” Many in the west are apt to
view this as a baffling piece of Soviet arca-

_ nia, or a strange case of delayed justice, but
in this country where history is politics and
vice versa, it has been greeted as one of the
- surest signs that perestroika, the course of

_ social renewal, is firmly on track.

The court announcement noted tersely
that illegal means had been employed to

extract confessions from the accused, that

various other travesties of justice had been
perpetrated in the case, and it therefore
declared the convictions overturned. That
something seemingly so simple could take
so long to arrive at is a measure of how
deeply Soviet history became coloured by
Stalinist distortion. In the 1930s, Stalin con-
solidated his personal power over the bodies
of much of the original Bolshevik party, and
subsequent Soviet history — including
crimes and indisputably immense achieve-
ments — became intimately, perhaps inex-
tricably, linked to his own leadership.

The most prominent Bolshevik leaders
— literally the companions of Lenin —

Court brings a new verdict
to an old travesty of justice

From Moscow

Fred Weir

the alternatives for the USSR during the
1920s were represented by the battle
between Stalin and Trotsky. Actually,
Soviet scholars of today appear supremely
disinterested in Trotsky. “His economic
and social programs, for the militarization
of labour and so on, resemble nothing so
much as that which Stalin eventually
implemented,” one historian told me. “And
his ideas of permanent revolution are less
appealing than ever.”

It was Bukharin who, as-a Politburo
member until 1929, attempted a deep and
extended defence of Lenin’s new economic
policy, arguing for the gradual establish-
ment of co-operatives and a careful mix of
state and market relations in economic
planning. He opposed what he saw as creep-
ing authoritarianism and bureaucratic style
of leadership, pointing constantly to the

’ need to return to the example set by Lenin.

He spoke startlingly in the langauge of

‘today, arguing for “Soviet law not Soviet

Among the Bolshevik leaders who struggled over socialism’s
future in those difficult and uncertain years following Lenin's
death — in some ways so similar to the present period — there
is one who rockets into contemporary relevance: Bukharin.

were put on trial, forced to confess to fan-
tastic plots and demonic deeds, were for the
most part executed and their contributions
written out of history.

The Soviet state, party, press, legal sys-
tem, security forces, and to a certain extent
the international communist movement as
well, all became identified with this crime,
and much history and many careers were
built upon it. It has therefore been a very
tough knot indeed to unravel. Even
Khrushchev, who freed and exonerated
huge numbers of Stalin’s innocent victims,
was never able to secure the rehabilitation
of the principal defendants of the Moscow
trials.

In the present climate, the establishment
of historical justice is held at a very high
premium by those who are working to
change the future, for as long as past crimes

‘remain unchallenged, what guarantees are

there against repetition? Social scientists too
need all historical data to do their jobs
properly, while the relatives and friends of
those wrongly victimized rightfully seek
personal vindication.

But there is another dimension to this
struggle. Rehabilitation of the old Bolshev-
iks who fell victim to Stalin not only clears
the record, it also paves the way for them to
return to political life — though they are
half a century dead — and speak once
again in their own authentic voices. Among
Soviet scholars and political thinkers today
there is intense interest in the decade of the
1920s, before things had hardened into the
Stalinist pattern, when many options were
on the table and debate was far-ranging.
And among the Bolshevik leaders who
struggled over socialism’s future in those
difficult and uncertain years following Len-
in’s death — in some ways so similar to the
present period — there is one who rockets
into contemporary relevance: Bukharin.

This name may not ring a bell with many
people, since in the hackneyed version that
passes for an understanding of Soviet his-
tory in the west it is generally supposed that

arbitrariness.” In cultural affairs he was for
“the principle of free competition” of ideas
rates than “squeezing everybody into one
ISty

In his 70th anniversary speech last
November, Gorbachev noted that in his last
great political battle — against the rapid
collectivization of agriculture — Bukharin
misjudged the danger building on the inter-
national scene and therefore “underrated
the practical significance of the time factor
in building socialism in the 1930s.” How-
ever, Gorbachev otherwise spoke well of
Bukharin’s qualities and contributions and
certainly imputed no criminal guilt to him.

Even before Bukharin’s rehabilitation
this month, the theoretical journal of the
CPSU, Kommunist, took the extraordinary
step of reprinting an important speech of
Bukharin’s, given on the fifth anniversary of
Lenin’s death in 1929. These developments
indicate a strong feeling that it is high time
for the original Bolsheviks to re-enter the
debate around the future of Soviet social-
ism.

By coincidence this year, 1988, is the
100th anniversary of Bukharin’s birth and
the 50th anniversary of his execution. In his
short life he became one of the top Bol-
shevik leaders, first in exile with Lenin, and
afterwards, as leader of the communist
international, editor of Pravda, editor of
Izvestia, and one of the authors of the 1936
Soviet constitution. He wrote several books
on economics and political theory.

In an oft-quoted sketch from Lenin’s last
testament, Bukharin is described as “‘a most
valuable and major theorist of the party ...
He is also rightly considered the favourite of
the whole party but his theoretical views can
be classified as fully Marxist only with the
greatest reserve.” :

Bukharin, however, fought all of his bat-
tles openly and it was not his theoretical
errors that led to his destruction. In 1936,
during the trial of two other major bol-
shevik leader, Zinoviev and Kamenev (who
have yet to be rehabilitated), he was falsely

implicated in the plot to assassinate Sergei
Kirov, head of the Leningrad party until his
murder in 1934. Later Bukharin was
branded an “enemy of the people,” an agent
of German naziism and a “wrecker” who
wanted to restore capitalism in the USSR.

In 1937, when Bukharin realized his
arrest was imminent, he dictated his final
letter to his wife, Anna Larina, who memo-
rized it. Larina carried the letter in her mind
through 18 years of subsequent imprison-
ment and, when she emerged and was her-
self exonerated in the 1950s, began a long
and lonely battle to win her husband’s
rehabilitation.

Late last year, Larina, who still lives in
Moscow, was able to recite Bukharin’s letter
for the first time to the Soviet press. The
letter, consciously addressed to “a future
generation” of Soviet people and leaders, is
a powerful document for today. One young
student recently told me that reading it in
Moscow News “burned my mind.”

“I’m leaving life,’ were Bukharin’s
words. “I bow my head before the proletar-
ian sword, which‘ should be merciless and
also chaste. I feel my helplessness before the
infernal machine which, using medieval
methods, possesses a gigantic strength, fab-
ricating organized slander, it acts boldly and
confidently ...

««_. Any member of the central commit-
tee, any party member, can be reduced to
nothing, made a traitor, terrorist, saboteur
or spy. If Stalin were to doubt himself, the
confirmation would come at once.

“Storm clouds loom large over the party.
My single absolutely innocent head will pull
after it thousands of innocents because an
organization — a Bukharinite organization
— must be invented. Such does not exist. I
haven’t had a shadow of difference with the
party for the past seven years. There was no
such organization even when I did, at the
time of the ‘right opposition’... _

“I’ve been a party member since I was 18
and the goal of my life was always the strug-
gle for the interests of the working class, for
the victory of socialism. These days the
newspaper with the holy name Pravda is
printing the most heinous lies — that pur-’
portedly I, Nikolai Bukharin, wanted to
destroy the gains of the October Revolution
and restore capitalism. This is unprece-
dented brazenness, it is a lie...

“If in the methods of socialist construc-
tion I’ve been mistaken many times, let our
descendants not judge me more strictly than
Lenin did. We moved to one goal for the
first time, by an untrodden path. The time
and the mores were different. Pravda used
to carry a ‘discussion’ column — every-
body argued, made up and went on further,
together.

“Addressing you, the future generation
of party leaders, whose historic mission is
the obligation to unravel the terrible mess of
crimes which are becoming, in these night-
marish days, ever greater, gaining strength
and suffocating the party, I am addressing
all party members. In these days, which are
perhaps the last of my life, I am confident
that sooner or later the filter of history will
inevitably wash this dirt from my head ...

“You should know, comrades, that there
is also a tiny drop of my blood on the
banner you will carry in your triumphant
march to communism.

Nikolai Bukharin™

Supreme
Soviet
outlines
Arctic
proposal

NOVOSTI PRESS — Soviet am-
bassadors in Canada and the US.
have brought a message to Washing-
ton and Ottawa from the Soviet parli-
ament addressed to all Arctic nations.

The message calls for a dialogue
toward making the north a zone of
peace and co-operation. It suggests
the immediate start of regular work-
ing meetings, workshops and confer-
ences as well as television link-ups for
foreign affairs commissions and other
parliamentary bodies from northern
Europe, Canada, and the U.S. The
USSR also invites MPs from all inter-
ested countries to visit Moscow this
year to examine ecological problems
in the region.

The Soviet message expresses con-
cern over the continuing dangerous
arms race in the Arctic. It points out
that Arctic seas are being cruised by
submarines and surface vessels carry-
ing large destructive capacities. As
well, the message expresses growing
alarm at mounting NATO and USS.
naval activity in the North Atlantic
which, the USSR believes, runs con-
trary to the steps in Europe toward
nuclear disarmament.

According to the London Institute
for Strategic Studies, the number of
NATO aircraft and helicopter carri-
ers, cruisers and destroyers exceeds
almost twice the numerical strength of
Soviet naval forces. In addition, the
U.S. intends to deploy 4,000 cruise
missiles (800 of them nuclear-armed)
on its warships in the region.

According to NATO leaders, their
alliance requires such forces to coun-
ter Soviet military potential on the
Kola Peninsula which, the USSR
argues, is a component of strategic
stability. This stability, the USSR sug-
gests, can be maintained by mutual
reduction, not build-up of nuclear
capability.

Soviet naval forces, including
nuclear submarines, the message says,
could be cut substantially if Soviet-
American talks which are currently
underway on a 50 percent reduction
in strategic offensive weapons are suc-
cessful.

The latest message repeats a readi-
ness on the part of the Soviet Union to
examine jointly the threat to the

_region with other Arctic states. It has

advanced several initiatives in this
respect, particularly its readiness to
withdraw part of its submarine fleet
from Arctic waters.

Its message stresses that the USSR
opposes arctic rivalries and favours
business-like and mutually-beneficial
co-operation. It invites Canada to
establish joint ventures to develop oil
and gas deposits on the Soviet Arctic
shelf. It also indicates the willingness
of the USSR to work work out jointly
with its Arctic neighbours a compre-
hensive program for environmental
protection.

The message voices the readiness of
Soviet parliamentarians to discuss
any reciprocal proposals aimed at
developing mutual trust and co-
operation and to stem the growing
arms race in the north. =

Pacific Tribune, February 24. 1988 « 9