KREMLIN'S GUARDIAN LAST week the Guardian published a very remarkable
document. Purportedly the sarnizdat manifesto of a 'Movement for Socialist Renewal', originating in Lenin- grad, this contained a deeply realistic assessment of the Soviet Union, such as one rarely, if ever, reads in the pages of the Guardian. For example, on the position of women: 'Since it is impossible to live on a man's salary, women in the USSR are forced to abandon family and children and find work. . . . But work does not liberate a woman from housework and the care of her husband and children. The reason for the appearance of so many problem chil- dren and young criminals is that many Children are not cared for at home, in the family. . . .' Again: 'Soviet foreign policy Is based on mistaken assumptions about the causes of tension in the world (the arms race), and pursues false goals (universal and complete disarmament). The arms race is a consequence, not a cause, of international tension . . . .' Guardian leader-writers, please note. Yet even more remarkable than the document itself was the gloss put upon it by its deliverer, the paper's Moscow correspondent, Martin Walker. He insisted it came from 'the very heart of the Soviet ruling elite'. The evidence? 'From internal evidence, it [the document] was written by a group Of powerful officials with unusual access to Western sources and to privileged Soviet statistics.' But there is nothing in the text which a moderately well-placed academic could not have found out. For example, the author or authors cite Watergate, the Spiegel affair, the Lockheed scandal and the Rainbow Warrior case as examples of the value of a free press. 'This', says Walker, 'means that they have privileged access to the Western press.' Or perhaps they just listen to Radio Liberty? (This might explain the haziness of their refer- ence to 'Foreign Minister Strauss', when the whole point of the Spiegel affair was Strauss's conduct as Defence Minister.) But no matter, for Walker claims to have external evidence too: 'I can vouch for the eminence of some at least of the authors.' In which case, if he actually knows some of the authors, his front-page caveat — remains possible that the leak of this document is a deliberate provocation, con- cocted by anti-reform groups . . — is inexplicable. But it is in his comment on possible KGB involvement that the real Walker touch can be felt: 'Under Yuri Andropov, the KGB became one of the main institutional forces for reform in the Soviet Union, and I suspect that among the authors of the Manifesto are KGB offi- cials. And anyone who knows the Soviet Union can only applaud the plain human decency that makes them condemn the way the existing apparatus of repression leads to hypocrisy and servility . . . ' So three cheers for the KGB, leaders in the fight for human decency against 'the existing appar- atus of repression' (the KGB). This pas- sage may be puzzling if you imagine that it is written for you. But all becomes clear once you realise that it is addressed to the KGB. What it really says is: 'Please, I know I've been naughty in splashing this document. (But perhaps you wanted me to?) Anyway, please, please, don't expel me. And please don't stop giving me the privileged access I've enjoyed up to now — those juicy little tit-bits whispered in my ear, the dacha trips which make such colourful centre-page features. Boys, I really love you.' It is the authentic sound of tongue licking boot.
Previous page
