"Three in a Boat Called Estonia"

"Three in a boat

called Estonia"

The following article appeared in Sobesednik No S, January 1989, weekly supplement of Komsomol' skaya pravda. If it did nothing else, it would be valuable for bringing out the complexity of the national question in the USSR, for showing that one cannot simply proceed from abstract principles and established formulae in seeking to apply a genuinely internationalist policy to concrete situations. Lenin and Trotsky warned that the most vulgar chauvinism could sometimes hide behind professions of abstract internationalist principles. But the article does much more than that. It shows the socioeconomic and anti-bureacratic origins of the popular movement in Estonia that has become increasingly national in colouring, largely because of the slowness and partial nature of the changes at the centre. It also shows the complex interweaving of nationality and class in these popular mobilizations. The vast majority of the workers in the large industrial enterprises are Russian-speaking. They support most of the basic goals of the Estonian Popular Front— democracy, protection of the environment, greater republican economic and political autonomy — but not its linguistic policy. The Estonian Communist Party also seems split on ethnic lines. Nevertheless, the Estonian bureaucracy, at least at present, appears in solidarity with Estonian national movement, while there is evidence of conservative bureaucratic

118 International Marxist Review manipulation of the Russian-speaking movement in the republic. Finally, the article documents graphically the emergence of genuine political debate and struggle in the Soviet Union. This is a spontaneous movement that the central leadership obviously did not want, but which it is prepared, at least for the present, to tolerate. Without necessarily agreeing with the point of view of the author, who is Russian, we feel the article provides ample food for thought for revolutionary Marxists on one of the central issues of contemporary Soviet politics and, indeed, that of many other multi-national states, capitalist and non-capitalist. (D.S.) LAST SPRING, it was as if the lid blew off a seething cauldron. People began to speak up. And it probably is no accident that the Estonians called what was happening a "singing revolution" Chronicle of a hot year

The mass movement that was born here and which acquired within a few months broad support, the Popular Front of Estonia (PFE), has its origins in those problems upon which the fate of the republic hangs: the Estonian people should not become a national minority in its own territory; it is necessary to halt migration from others, protect Estonian and raise it to the status of a state language; restore the national symbolism; introduce republican citizenship, establish a regional "self-financing" economic regime, restore sovereignty within the USSR, and conduct a consistent democratization.

But the Popular Front proved incapable of becoming truly popular, of uniting the majority of the population regardless of nationality. The Front turned out to be 90% Estonian. The infantile diseases of "national enthusiasm" of a some of its leaders, the haste and thoughtlessness of certain declarations, aroused suspicions among the Russian-speaking population of the ESSR (about 40%) about future discrimination. Intermovement (IM) made its appearance on the political scene. While it declared its dedication to the idea of perestroika, its real aim was the defence of the interests of the Russianspeaking minority. The United Council of Labour Collectives (UCLC) that was formed later in the large enterprises that are subordinated to Moscow took similar positions. Too late came the sober words of Viktor Palm, member of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, addressed to the activists of the PFE:

The national movement can give rise to tremendous enthusiasm. But there is no basis to expect an analogous level of sentiment among the representatives of other nationalities living alongside... As politicians, Popular Front activists should show more concer for the

The outcome of the Eleventh Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Estonia (CPE) did not calm the passions. Many Communists did not accept its line. And here it became clear: the question in many respects is not so much one of inter-ethnic relations as one of politics: a strug-

The initial version of the draft law on language aroused heated debate:

some felt that it only defined the sphere of use of the Estonian language, while others considered that it infringed upon the rights of the Russian

A significant part of public opinion saw in the draft amendements to the

USSR Constitution and Electoral Law [proposed by the central authorities] an infringement on Estonian statehood, the sovereignty of the republic. (85% of the Estonian surveyed were against the drafts in that form, and 49% of the

Russians.) The Popular Front proposed to remove them from discussion. The idea of defending the sovereignty of Estonia by creating a constitutional conflict arose — to jump one step ahead and adopt amendments to the Constitution of the ESSR. This was the position of the council of delegates of the

PFE. The circumstances in which the Supreme Soviet of the republic convened on November 16 was a complex one. After the mass protest meetings organized by the PFE, the warning of one of its activists, H. Valk, was very

We can surround the fortress of Toompe with a crowd of even 100,000, and the deputies will

To be sure, the counterdemonstrations called by the UCLC in 197 enter-

The session of the Supreme Soviet of the republic adopted the well-known decisions, which were annulled by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Mikhail Gorbachov offered an evaluation of what had taken place. It was recognized as necessary to work out in the next stage of the political reform a system of measures and constitutional mechanisms for safeguarding the political and socio-economic rights of the union republics.

The problem of harmonizing relations has ripened. I will point out an important fact: following November 16, the index of confidence toward their deputies in the Estonian part of the population rose from 67 to 97%, and in the

Russian-speaking part - from 42 to 59%. That is food for thought.

We must analyze our decisions from two points of view: the political and the legal, said the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Estonian SSR,

I. Toome. From a legal point of view, they were obviously incorrect. But they interests of others.

gle is taking placed between the new and old approaches.

language...

real:

surely not vote against the will of the people.

prises gathered over 100,000 people.

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 119

were correct politically. Many of our amendments to the union Constitution

I will not attempt to judge to what degree such a "demonstration" is justified. But it happened, and we should understand its reasons: people here are fed up with the dictates of the central organs, their wastefulness of resources

... What did I see in Estonia? Against the background of poorly stocked store shelves, unprecedented politial activism. Interest in the regular plenum of the Supreme Soviet of the Estonian SSR was tremendous; it proceeded, as a people's parliament should, analyzing and discussing each step in depth.

The status of Estonian as a state language is secured in the Consitution of the

ESSR. This was the subject of heated debate. Important decisions were also taken on ecological issues. In those days, I felt that much in the fate of the

Estonian perestroika depends on what positions the mass social movements adopted, what path they choose: confrontation or consolidation.

"Our little Estonia..." — these words, full of pride in their land, were repeated in conversations with each of my three interlocutors, who by will of fate have become important political leaders in the country. They sometimes hold diametrically opposed views. But all consider Estonia their homeland, and I therefore think that, despite all their differences, they can be united by authentic concern for the fate of the perestroika in their republic and by a sin-

...The notice about the meeting was printed in tiny letters on the advertising page of Evening Tallin. If you were not looking for it, you would not see it.

Intermovement (IM) is not in the good graces of the local press. Its leaders complain about press lack of objectivity. They begin to feel uneasy just from a caricature of Pravda, where turnips replace the usual medals at the top of the front page... I think that the supporters of the Popular Front who happened to be at the meeting of the IM felt uneasy when they saw in the frosty sky under the red banners and state flags of the ESSR (not one national

Estonian banner) such slogans as "PF is a Brake on the Perestroika", "Down

120 International Marxist Review and to the Law on Elections were accepted. and nature.

Let us try to listen carefully to their arguments. Measuring the mood cere desire to improve the life of all ethnic groups. On the interfront — no change With the PF Monopoly of Radio and Television". Vanes' in the Central Committee of the CPE"

, "Down with the Weather-

". Hopping from one foot to the

other in the bitter cold, the people applauded the speeches that one cannot call conciliatory, at first in a rather restrained manner, but then with enthusiasm. They seem to have drawn together preparing to beat back the offensive. Even the healthy, sensible words spoken from the tribune could not

We spoke afterwards with a member of the co-ordinating council of the IM,

- Oleg, how large is your movement and what is its composition?

- According to disinterested Estonian sociologists, in the fall, over 100,000 people openly supported the IM. About one tenth are Estonians. The majority

- Democracy - for everyone. No privileges according to national criteria.

Our differences with the PF are often exaggerated. But our general democratic demands are similar. Our differences are about the national question.

- If you accept a large part of the programme of the PF, why do you not par-

- We supported the idea of the Popular Front. But we do not accept of the politics of certain of its leaders. They began to openly voice nationalist ideas and, under the pretext of defending the rights of the indigenous population, they propose to infringe upon the rights of others. They blame the Russians for all problems, for the deterioration of the economic situation... It is natural that people who have set down roots here, who have come to love this land, will feel insulted by such agitation. Intermovement arose in response to this

- What is your position on the question of a state language?

- We have come out in favour of bilingualism on the Finnish model. There you have two equal state languages (Finnish and Swedish). Why cannot 40% of the population of Estonia have the same rights as the Swedish-speaking population in Finland? Swedes make up only 6% of the population. There was also a compromise proposal — to give Russian the status of a language

- How do you understand the sovereignty of Estonia within the USSR?

- The republic must have greater rights and possibilities to decide its own economic problems. We are for a republican "cost-accounting" regime. But we are opposed to the automatic transfer of power from the Moscow bureaucracy to the local one. "Cost-accounting" must begin from the lowest links, from the full autonomy of the enterprises that will form themselves into muftle the sense of alarm.

the teacher Oleg Morozov:

are Russians.

- What are your goals?

ticipate in its work and try to change its position?

stirring up of national passions.

unions (trusts, syndicates).

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 121 of international communication. This idea was rejected.

122 International Marxist Review - The PF puts forth the slogan of national-cultural autonomy [for nonEstonians]. What is your position? - What do they mean by that? The question has not been worked out. They cite the experience of bourgeois Estonia — here, they say, is a model. All we have to do is restore the old laws. Oh yes, they were good ones: for a simple concert by a Russian choir, you had to have a permit from the police chief! It would be more logical to pose the question of creating an autonomous district in the areas of compact Russian population — in Narva, Prichud'e, Kohtla-Jarve... - How do you feel about the decisions of the Supreme Soviet of the ESSR of November 1? - They convinced the deputies that that was the way to defend the sovereignty of Estonia, to defend themselves against the Moscow bureaucrats. The deputies were worked over thoroughly. Well, the results are well known. In other countries, deputies resign after such a failure [the USSR Supreme Soviet rejected most of the amendments to the Estonian constitution]... - Are not there rather too many accusations coming from both sides? - We are all behave improperly and say inaccurate things at times. Apparently, that is inevitable until we develop the required political culture. But you can understand, for example, the indignation of a war veteran who hears calls for rehabilitation that include among the "victims of Stalinism" even people who collaborated with the Nazis... - Do you see the possibility for a compromise between the PF and IM? - We are for co-operation and dialogue. The best framework would be a congress of democratic movements of Estonia. But we cannot accept extremism. We are for negotiations from internationalist positions. Our proposals allow the Russian-speaking population in the republic to live on an equal footing with the indigenous population. We must fight for the perestroika and democratization of life in the entire country, and not hammer a wedge between peoples. Against the current ... Under the arch into the courtyard, third floor on the right. This is the office of the man whose name his compatriots recently rewarded with abusive epithets after publication in Pravda of his article "From Head to Toe". It is amazing how in our enlightened times the crowd is prepared both to raise up and to throw down. It does not catch the meaning of the words addressed to it. The beating of the heart drowns out the intellect. Maybe we will hear

what Gustav Naan of the Estonian Academy of Sciences wants?

- Gustav Johanovich, in your view, what are the reasons for the deteriora-

- The population felt a sharp decline in its standard of living. The consciousness of a possible ecological catastrophe took hold. And finally, there is a whole complex of questions related to the sovereignty of the republic

At present, myths are acting on the mass consciousness, a strange mixutre of the real and the illusory. For example, a belief in the miraculous power of regional "cost-accounting" has arisen. But they do not explain to people that reforms will not bring quick results. Thus, it will take 7-8 billion roubles worth of foreign currency to modernize the Estonian economy. And they

- How do you explain that the article "From Head to Toe" aroused such a

- Many held the illusion that by some miracle the decisions of the republic's

Supreme Soviet of November 16 would be left in force. I do not believe in political miracles. The illogical nature of the decisions adopted was obvious to me. If the republic's Supreme Soviet decides it has the right to ratify or reject union laws, then district soviets could demand the same right in relation to decisions of higher bodies.... And we have fifteen sovereign union republics... I called not to wave the flag of maximalism, but to be realistic. To

Spontaneous protest arises on the basis of everyday life. Goods are scarce. It seems that foreigners are to blame. Islands of well-being really are attractive. Both in Moscow and in Estonia there are those who want to blame, in the first case, the "limitchiki" ['immigrant" workers from the provinces with temporary residence permits] and in the second the "immigrants". There are also people, perfectly conscious of what they are really doing, who present objective or crisis processes as conscious machinations of Moscow bureaucrats, who allegedly only dream of destroying the Estonian people, its language and culture. This is not a new trick. For example, you can present the objective process of a declining birth rate, something occuring in the majority of developed countries, as the result of someone's treachery. The search for "enemies" allows one to manipulate mass consciousness. In the meanwhile, objective data are not published. For example, take this same birth rate. I have written about this. Not one newspaper in Estonia, except for

Molodezh' Estonii (Estonian Youth), would publish this article...

- Several republican publications have accused the central press of onetion of ethnic relations in Estonia?

within the USSR.

have to be earned.

storm of anger against you?

many this seemed a betrayal of the interests of the nation.

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 123

124 International Marxist Review sided depiction of the perestroika in Estonia... - This is apparently a reference to the fact that it does not repeat the smug claim that Estonia is the vanguard of the perestroika. For myself, I would not try to judge who is ahead and who behind. Criticism calls forth denials and accuations of an informational blocade. But here they forget that the republican press itself lacks sufficient pluralism. It often exists only for those who uncritically repeat the slogans of the Popular Front. - Do you believe in the possibility of consolidation? - It will not come soon. It is first necessary to improve the economic situation. People must feel the changes. After that, the mutual anger will begin to subside. But the tragedy is that we have reached the kind of situation that exists in some families: people engage in a knockdown fight, they reach the point of divorce and then on the threshold of the court decide on a reconciliation. The passions have put rationality on its knees. As a result, the process of reaching a dialogue between the two linguistic communities will be harder and take longer than a single generation. I do not have hope for any rosy immediate perspectives. That would just be another myth. The sociology of alarm

...The republic was waiting for this event. The founding congress of the PFE opened. The programmatic documents of the movement are being disucssed; there is an open discussion of the paths of the perestroika.

Yes, many orators lack sufficient political culture. Yes, many statements are debatable. But there is that which has been missing for many long years - sincerity.

They were waiting for this speech. On the tribune is a sociologist, head of the Department of Journalism of Tartu University, Marju Layristin:

The basis of the party's monopoly of power was not article 6 of the USSR Constitution, but the firm pressure of the apparatus and the mechanisms of control. For Communists, this meant voluntarily ceding one's own conscience and one's ability to critically evaluate events. All this became the cause of a most cruel drama — Stalinist terror. So great is the burden of guilt for this, that it even today hinders the development of the perestroika, the spiritual liberation of our society from demagoguery and dual morality... As a Communist, I can say — the Communist Party of Estonia will be able to free itself from the burden of guilt for the past. But it will be able to do that only when it ceases to lower its eyes shamefacedly before the past, forcing Communists in the name of party discipline to make the anti-human and immoral choice: your party card or your honour, your party card or your humanity; your party card or the freedom of your people. We, the Communists of the PFE, are prepared even for such a choice. We choose honour, humanity and Estonia. I am convinced that there will be a perestroika and we will not be faced with such a choice!

When I think about that speech, I recall the words of the first secretary of

We all — both the CPE and the PFE — must realize that we will have to anwer for our words and promises, not only a year from now but ten years from now..."

M. Layristin, my interlocuter, was ready for an open conversation.

- What in your opinion is the most urgent problem facing the Popular Front

- The problem of the collaboration in the PFE between people of different nationalities is very serious. We took this question up from the very start but we came up against big problems. A significant part of the Russian-speaking population did not understand the development of openness [glasnost']. This public received less information than the Estonian-speaking population.

Rumours began to spread. The republican Russian press did not react effec-

- The programmatic documents of the PFE and IM have a lot in common. Is

- There are a lot of intelligent elements in the conceptions of the IM, but when I read them it occurs to me that in the time of Stalinism many beautiful slogans were uttered about freedom and democracy, but the practice was totally different. We have to judge the IM by its practice, by how much the words correspond to deeds. There is a lot to make one cautious: a lot of ideological schemas and stereotypes are current. An offensive is being conducted against the new leaders of the republic who have won popular confidence.

These are by no means inter-ethnic problems, but political ones. Opposition by the old to the new. I think that consolidation on the level of the organizational centres is impossible as long as the activities of our opponents are a

- Undoubtedly there are those among your opponents who do not find the reforms at all to their liking. But you also have people in your organization who have frightened the Russian-speaking population with extremist declarations. Remember how Heinz Valk declared on Pevcheskii Field that neither the Stalinists, nor the stagnationists [Brezhnev regime] nor the interists [IM] were able to break the Estonian people... What a sharp reaction those words

- If we are moving toward a process of self-regulation of society, do we have to put every word under a microscope and file it? That is not the road to democracy but to absolute control. When you latch on to one imprudent word

- that is the kind of political regulation that was fostered in certain years:

"Look at what he said! He has to be made to answer!" Starting from a presumption of confidence, I cannot accept the desire to "make answer" instead the CC of the CPE, V. Vjaljas:

today?

tively, and we had no way of conducting our agitation.

a compromise possible?

manifestation of neo-Stalinism.

drew!

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 125

126 International Marxist Review of understanding. Estonians know that the secretary of the Union of Artists of the ESSR, Heinz Valk, is an emotional man. He is not a professional politician. And so they make the appropriate correction. But the leaders of Intermovement blow his words out of proportion, pasing off one element for the whole thing. - It seems to me that at present both sides need to approach every word with greater responsibility. - You know, one cannot explain everything. It is a great pity that some people live here for years and still do not know who is who. Why do we talk so much about the need to know Estonian? You cannot translate and comment each sentence, everything that takes place. - Do you not think that the PFE has sometimes not considered seriously enough that the causes of many inter-ethnic conflicts are social? - How did the Popular Front arise? A mass ecological movement against the processing of phosphates united people. They supported the idea of republican "cost-accounting" ". The economic struggle grew into a political one. Thus, on the basis of an innovative economic programme, arose the PFE. But we see that one cannot resolve socio-economic problems without resolving essential political ones. All this is also closely tied up with national problems. Productive forces are not only machines, but people too. They speak their own language, they think and love.

Take the question of the status of the Estonian as a state language. For the indigenous population this has become a problem: can people, whose native language is gradually being squeezed out of the sphere of everyday life, not to speak of production, feel itself at home in its own land? That which traumatizes people must be removed. - But in doing this, we should not infringe upon the interests and legitimate rights of other peoples. - Our position on the language question has two levels. One is the level of the individual rights which, regardless of nationality, colour of skin, education, should not be infringed upon. The other is the level of the nation. Here too there should be no infringement. But many do not understand this. There is no discrimination even in the first draft of the language law, which was simply poorly formulated on a stylistical level. The new variant takes into account much better the interests of the Russian-speaking population of the republic. - The Popular Front is offering national-cultural autonomy to the national minorities on the territory of the republic. Why is this needed? - We have to look at society as an ecosystem. National minorities who can-

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 127 not defend their culture on their own in our territory need a system that will defend their interests. Clubs, schools, publishing houses. In the USSR until 1937, such arrangements existed. In Leningrad there were Estonian and Finnish schools, clubs, theaters. We would be happy if the Byelorussians, Armenians, Lithuanians, Ukrainians and all others had these. National-cultural autonomy also has an internationalist aspect. The "mother" culture will support all its members scattered across the country. Such ties will become regular and not, as today, reserved for festive occasions. There is a good proposal - to create an all-union television channel that would be used by republican studios and a newspaper in which journalists of each republic would have their column.

- But will such a system satisfy the Russian-speaking population of Estonia? There are voices calling for territorial autonomy within the republic for the areas compact Russian population. What should one think of such an idea?

- Where there is a Russian population of ancient origins — in Narva, Prichud'e - such questions can arise. But we do not feel that this is the time for that. Such autonomy is not possible as some sort of society of immigrants. There is a non-Estonian majority in Tallin. So, should it be divided by districts? At present, such a policy would mean quiet colonization. Let me bring a hypothetical parallel: imagine that China with its billions of people joined the USSR. Then probably in the RSFSR and other republics people would start worrying about how to prevent their peoples' assimilation by the natural population movement of the new majority.

- There is much debate about the decisions of November 16. How do you see them: as an attempt to consolidate changes or as the expression of disagreement with the policy of the centre, as a parliamentary demonstration?

- We already had some experience: the republic took its proposals to Moscow. They were not considered. Many in Estonia considered until recently that the possibility of change was a myth. Decisive steps were needed. The decisions of November 16 are a manifestation of a new integral approach to relations between the centre and the republic. Without doubt, it was a challenge to the centre. But a challenge to enter a dialogue. And, as we can see the dialogue has begun.

- Have you taken real practical steps to consolidate all the national groups?

- The autonomous structure of the PFE — its Russian section — is growing. stronger, expanding its membership, although it is having trouble breaking through the wall of pre-established conceptions. In a way, it found itself a stranger among its own people. In general, I think that as a result of this con-

128 International Marxist Review frontation, of theaw debates, the Russians here have begun to better understand the Estonian population. This is also occurring with the Estonians. I have the impression that we have discovered each other only now.

- Do you want some kind of exceptional status for Estonia?

- We have to start from the reality that has formed in the USSR. A country that for decades has told itself that it is the most progressive, the bastion of democracy, internationalism, science and technology, turned out not to be any of these things. We are experiencing a serious socio-politicial and economic crisis. And everything we do — as Communists, as members of the Popular Front, and myself, as a sociologist — we do because we see no way to the renewal of the country other than through a mass popular movement in support of the perestroika, through the mobilization of the majority of the population. Every republic, every region must make its contribution to the transformation of society. A big system — as cybernetics has long ago shown - can be effective only if self-regulation and self-correction exist. We are moved not by some mythical nationalism, but by the idea of systemic growth.

We see our movement as a school of politics and we must arrive at the point where its participants themselves come to the idea of democratization, a society based upon law, sovereignty.

There is a sea of words flowing around each of us. It can become so polluted that no life will remain in it. We cannot reconcile ourselves to that. We must be conscious of our goal: to change in society all that deforms natural, humanistic relations. If we forget about the person, we will again lose our way. Stop and look around

We all hope for the best. That passions will subside, that the intense emotional atmosphere will cool off. And we will be able to see clearly what is behind the words and slogans.

Let us remember Lenin. In his work "On the Question of Nationalities and Autonomization", he said:

Internationalism on the part of the oppressor, or so-called "great nation"... must consist not only of respect for the formal equality of nations, but also of such inequality that can compensate for the inequality which has come to exist in practice in favour of the oppressor, the great nation.

It is really about time we established normal relations between the union and republican organs of power, giving the latter the maximum possible of rights to resolve their political, economic, ecological problerms in the frame-

"Three in a boat called Estonia" 129 work of a federal state. The elements are there: a union treaty that establishes mutual obligations and rights, republican "self-financing". What alarms me is something else. Sometimes they suddenly begin to pull Lenin's words by their ears to apply them to relations between the Estonian majority and the Russian minority within the republic. This can cause nothing but consternation. It is clear who is the "great nation" in a sovereign Estonia. At least one would think so. But for some, it is not at all obvious, since, they say, behind the back of the majority stand a people of one hundred million. The conclusion? The Russian-speaking minority must reconcile itself to having its rights infringed upon. I cannot accept that. Does a Russian worker or intellectual in the ESSR suffer less from overcentralization, absence of democracy, bureacratism, than Estonians? In my view, in order to unite the efforts, we should recall, for use within the republic, what came next in Lenin's thought: It is better to oversalt in the direction of concessions and flexibility for the national minorities, then to undersalt...

Obviously, the longer the resolution of urgent social questions drags on, the stronger are forces hindering the reforms that arise out of the indecisiveness of some and the conscious opposition of others, the greater the odds that popular dissatisfaction will find expression in interethnic relations. It is a pity, since national energy could be put to so much better use to solve social problems. The watchword of genuine democrats was always the internationalist slogan: "For our freedom and yours!" So let us struggle for it. For freedom from bureaucratic arbitrariness, for the real equality of people and nations, for an efficient economy and the rights of people.

INTERVIEW