GERMANY paid. This is why the GDR's political class has chosen rapid adhesion (Beitritt)
to the FRG.
However West German capital present in the East. Almost all the West
German "majors" have found their "partners" in the East, which will soon become part of their respective enterprises and trusts in the West. For example, Siemens boasts that it wants to create 30,000 new jobs in a year, in the communication sector alone. And this is with a structure adapted to this great monopolistic trust and with an output and production methods up to West German technological standards. But this must imply the swift destruction of
East Germany's existing productive potential in this domain. Thus Siemens' offer amounts to sacking
60,000 people before employing 30,000. Others, such as General Motors/
Opel and Volkswagen are pursuing similar plans.
The economic and social consequences for the population of monetary union are drastic. It is true that there have been social conflicts, with strikes and demonstrations of support. There have been wage rises in chemicals, engineering and printing, and others will follow. There are now demonstrations and warning strikes in the public sector, and the negotiations will very probably have more or less the same results. The engineering workers demanded DM 400 a month. They got DM 250 with DM 300 from October. After the adoption of the West German taxation system and social security payments, there will be some DM 60 left. That might appear as a lot. Even so, as a result of these negotiations, salaries in the GDR are about half of those in the West.
This has not however prevented Tyll Necker, the head of the BDI (employers' association) from speaking of the "absolutely unjustifiable" , the West German SPD's economics expert Wolfgang Roth of the "exaggerated" or the East German SPD ex-Minister Regime Hildebrandt of the "excessive" results of these negotiations. The wage-earners do not seem to share this opinion. In engineering, 300,000 took part in actions in support of their demands. The enterprise managements raised time and again the threat that these were "illegal actions" and those who took part would have to face penalization through cutting their bonuses. The often militant character of these demonstrations and other 18 forms of action should not lead to any • illusions as to the relation of forces. People are in the grip of a great fear and a feeling of powerlessness. For example, in an important number of enterprises the first payment in DMs was arbitrarily reduced by 10%, without anyone knowing when this money would be paid, but there was hardly any protest about this.
Workers in the GDR have few means of putting pressure as long as every action in defence of their basic interests is confronted with the blackmail of closure of the enterprise for being non-competitive or of massive sackings, and insofar as they do not see any overall alternative to submission to West German capital.
The GDR's workers have to pay the same or even higher prices as those in the West with only half the income. There has been a considerable decline in purchasing power, although rents will remain the same for a further six months. It is easy to imagine the consequences when rents are also "freed". At the same time the social services are disintegrating.
There are almost no GDR produced goods in the shops. The West German monopolies are dictating what is sold and at what price. Wholesalers are no longer accepting domestic agricultural goods. The Agricultural Production Associations (LPGs) can no longer sell anything unless they distribute it to the towns themselves by lorry. The peasants in the LPGs have shown their anger by demonstrating, sometimes violently. But, again, there is no credible perspective; the demands — to raise the prices paid to the producers and so on — do not amount to a systematic programme for changing the way things are going.
The engineering workers won the introduction of partial unemployment instead of sackings "for reasons inherent in the
International Viewpoint #190 • September 17, 1990 situation in the enterprise". This involves payment of 85% of the wage plus the financing of relocation and professional retraining (for which however there are no means available). One effect of this is to facilitate the distortion of the unemployment figures. In fact the 860,000
"partially unemployed" have no jobs but they are not counted together with the thousands of "real" unemployed.
At the time of signing of the State Treaty for Economic Monetary and Social
Union, the official prediction was that there would be 440,000 unemployed by the end of 1990. But this figure has already been left far behind and even the most optimistic experts speak of the inevitability of massive unemployment, up to three or four million in the united Germany in a few months — without taking into account the hidden unemployment created by redeployments to nowhere, the redefinition of women losing their jobs as mothers and housekeepers rediscovering their natural vocation, and by the elimination from the statistics of everyone who is too intimidated or resigned to sign on at the unemployment offices as looking for work. Chancellor Kohl told the people of West Germany EGUEi 90. that the costs of unification could be paid by drawing on the "petty cash". In fact all the calculations - if they were indeed made - have been confounded.
The so-called "impetus financing" by the federal government (Anschubfinanzierung) for unemployment payments is already exhausted — there is talk of a deficit of DM 1 billion per month. Sickness insurance is in the same state. There is a lot less than anticipated in the bank, while the price of medicines and medical services have risen considerably. The same goes for retirement benefits and services for the elderly. Taxes on wages are coming in, but tax revenue from enterprises - estimated at DM 10 billion - must be largely discounted. The shortfall by the end of the year will probably be around DM 30 billion. That means the "costs of unity" are now estimated at DM 100 billion per year. In June Kohl was speaking of such a sum being required over three years!
Kohl's government wants to give huge presents, such as a reduction of taxes by more than 30%, backdated to July, to employers prepared to invest in the East. To this should be added investment incentives for the "small businesspeople" so dear to the heart of conservative ideology, to the tune of DM 5 billion, billions in compensation for property owners expro-
priated by "communism" and for state guarantees of compensation in cases where property rights are uncertain, further billions for communal infrastructure and so on.
Increased taxes bad for investors morale
For the third time the government has had to present a changed budget, with more than twice the originally estimated expenditure. Some CDU (Christian Democrat) politicians are asking for an increase in the state debt of DM 100 billion for 5 or 10 years. It is clear that increases in taxes for the capitalists would be bad for morale. On the other hand conservatives do not like debt, which could undermine stability. Already some politicians are calling for an increase in Value Added Tax (which puts up the price of goods) and other taxes on current consumption.
The authorities plan to pass on the "national sacrifice" — the "costs of unity" are going to be borne by the wage-earners and the disadvantaged. To get away with this, it is necessary to deepen division in the population, thus racism, anti-feminism and even anti-semitism are being stimulated and manipulated by the respectable bourgeois political forces. Even the social democrats have been joining in the hysteria about asylum hunters" or "Gypsies" as they call the Sinti and Roms.
Kohl and co. are insisting that everything that is going wrong in East Germany is the fault of the old regime, of Honecker, the SED and socialism. But now that it is the West's rulers who are taking all the decisions, this theme is likely to lose much of its power. It is quite possible that catastrophic developments will be increasingly interpreted as a result of the economic incompetence of the coalition government in Bonn — above all if they start to affect working class living standards in the West. And "economic competence" is about the only - but decisive — area where opinion polls reveal popular confidence in this government. Despite the miserable role played by the SPD in the present public debate, the pan-German elections in December are not without risks for the conservatives and liberals. *
GERMANY / BULGARIA Bulgaria - elections open period of crisis WITH 211 of the 400 seats in the National Assembly after the June elections, the Bulgarian Socialist Party (previously the Communist Party) seemed to have a comfortable working majority, with the main opposition grouping, the Union of Democratic Forces (UDF), having only 144 seats. However the new government has plunged straight into crisis; there have been demonstrations and occupations by students in Sofia, claiming election irregularities and demanding the resignation of Petar Mladenov, a BSP member, from the presidency. Mladenov, it was alleged, had said, when he was booed by a crowd last December, "the best thing is to let the tanks come."
On July 6, Mladenov resigned to be replaced on August 1 by Zhelyu Zhelev, the leader of the UDF. Zhelev, in his inaugural speech to parliament set his goals as a democratic society...with parliamentary democracy, a multiparty system with a guarantee of political pluralism, a free press, Independent book publishing and a market economy". . However his appointment has not calmed the situation, as was underlined by the sacking of the BSP's "Party House" in Sofia by thousands of demonstrators on August 27.
At the end of June, IV spoke to Ivan Kalchev, editor of the daily paper of the Alternative Socialist Alliance (ASA), a faction in the BSP, and Tikhomira Trifonova, a member of the occupation committee of Sofia University. Ivan Kalchev - leader of
La Communist Party Taction WHAT is your balance sheet of the legislative elections?
The Alternative Socialist Alliance (ASA) draws a positive balance sheet, because they reflected the will of the majority of population. But the ASA regrets the extreme polarization in the campaign. Personally, I would go as far as to say that this polarization - desired as much by the BSP as the opposition UDF (Union of Democratic Forces) -distorted the election from the beginning. Out of this completely artificial line of divide came the victory of a party that has not been transformed and that has no perspective to offer the population. • But you are still a part of the BSP.
For the moment, yes. But in our opinion the BSP has betrayed its promise of November 1989 of profound change in the party and society. Their aim became that of victory of the election at any price. In my view, in fact the renewal of the party was the most important thing, worth even the loss of the elections. • What should the party do?
During its last congress, in January
1990, it should have shed the Stalinists and conservatives. They make up about 100,000 of the party's million members. But the party leadership preferred to continue to base itself on the most conservative forces in the country.
Currently, we are proposing a refounding congress of the party and the readmission of each member into the new organization. In the meantime, to denounce the candidacies of the most corrupt members of the old apparatus, we stood against them under the ASA label in 8 constituencies. We did not get elected, largely due to the slander campaign against us by the party, who tore down our posters and attacked us personally. I was a candidate in the village where I grew up. Although people there know me and have a good opinion of me, this was not enough, because the party has been whipping up fear of anything new, of anything that is not the BSP. • The BSP seems to be as diverse as the opposition.
Both are going to explode; it is only a question of time — perhaps after the municipal elections in the autumn. The Stalinist current is getting ready to form a new party, and it is possible that we will leave the party soon. • What will you do If you leave the 19
BULGARIA
We are in favour of an alliance of all the social democratic forces which are presently dispersed' and hope that in the municipal elections, the Green Party and Ecoglasnost (see box) will also join us. • What are your basic economic ideas?
We are in favour of a moderate privatization programme and for careful control of foreign investments. We propose a monetary reform that will allow the recuperation with an indemnity of 10% of the funds confiscated from the old apparatus, which are currently frozen. We are against "shock therapy" on the Polish model. We want to avoid unemployment through a policy of careful reforms. *
Tikhomira Trifonova -Member of student occupation committee
The Turkish minority
THE Turkish Muslim community In Bulgarla, living principally in the
South East and the North East of the country, was about a million strong and formed about a tenth of the population before 300,000 left
Bulgaria for Turkey in the summer of 1989.
In 1984/85, the Zhivkov leadership launched a radical bulgarization campaign almed at the Turkish commurity. All Muslim names had to be changed, while speaking Turkish and practising the Muslim religion were forbidden. The campaign was accompanied by numerous acts of violence, leading finally to the massive exodus of Turks.
After the ousting of Zhivkov, the new communist leadership has, since January 1990, had the project of passing a law allowing Bulgarlans of Turkish origin to rediscover their identity. This decision has led to big demonstrations by Bulgarian nationalists against any backing down on this question. Finally, in March 1990, after demonstrations and counter-demonstrations, the National Assembly adopted a law allowing
Turks to re-adopt their original names.
In the June 1990 elections, the Turkish minorily formed a party, the
Movement for Rights and Liberties, which won 23 seats in parliament,
YOU have been occupying the university for 15 days now. What are your demands?
We do not want the first hours of democracy in this country to be stained by lies and trickery. For this reason, after the first round of the elections, we sent a list of demands to the different authorities, including the electoral Commission. We asked them to explain publicly on the television the number of contested results and of complaints of electoral fraud. We also asked the Interior Minister to explain the role of the security forces during the electoral campaign and vote.
We think that the National Assembly elected after the second round must meet as soon as possible to begin the look into cal and are within the framework of the opposition Union of Democratic Forces (UDF). Are you working in its favour?
We are not directly involved in the election campaign, but it is true that the UDF supports us at all levels. • What is your balance-sheet of the elections, a few days after the second round?
The BSP got its absolute majority because people are afraid. Above all in the villages, people continue to vote as the mayor tells them to. People's pensions and allocations depend on it. • What kind of economic reforms
Movement for Rights and Liberties, which stood in the first round of the elections to defend the Turkish minority?
They have an absolute right to stand in the elections, since they represent a part of the population. There are people here who want to chase them out, but the Turks consider themselves Bulgarians, so where are they supposed to go? It is necessary for them to feel welcome here, then perhaps they will integrate. * 1. The ASA is both a faction in the BSP and a party in its own right. There is also an Alternative Socialist Party, a split from the ASA which has left the BSP; the Social Democratic Party which is at present part of the opposition coalition; and the New Social Demo cratic Party, whose leader, Peter Markov, has been these frauds. We want an independent organism to to check the recording of the organism to to check the recording of the phrase used by the President Mladenov, talking of "calling in the tanks". Finally, the mass media did not have a neutral attitude during the election; the television hardly mentioned our movement. We are demanding the resignation of the TV president, Pavel Pissarev. • Did you get any reply?
Not a satisfactory one. The BSP Central Committee sent a representative to talk to us. We received the figures on electoral fraud, but nothing has been done publicly.
We will continue until we get real results. We met the police chief yesterday. We know that the government will not use force, but is looking forward to the summer when they hope the university will be deserted. Our means of pressure lie in the blocking of the university entrance exams and thus of income and above all in the strike's international impact. 20% Your demands are directly poltdo you think the country needs? try needs?
Above all to give people back their initiative. To develop free initiative and the market economy. • You do not fear the negative effects for a section of the population of the development of social inequalities or unemployment?
We educate excellent technicians, but they are not used to taking initiatives. They do what they are told. They should be given the means to go forward. As for the others, they ought to work more than they do at present. • What do you think about the Turkish problem and of the elected to parliament.
A devastated environment
ACCORDING to figures provided by Ecoglasnost, the first opposition movement based on the defence of the environment, which was founded in April 1989:
•The atmosphere is polluted throughout a quarter of the country's territory.
• 71% of the main rivers are heavily polluted. • 44% of the soil is polluted, including 69% of cultivatable land and 96% of land actually under cultivation.
Ecoglasnost is a front that includes associations, parties, such as the Green party and individuals. On November 3, 1990, (that is a week before the fall of Zhivkov) a demonstration called by Ecoglasnost brought together around
4,000 people which called for glasnost and democracy as well as raising ecological demands.
Ecoglasnost did not take part in the elections, but its president, Petar Baron and the Green Party are in the opposition coalition, the Union of Democratic Forces.
International Viewpoint #190 • September 17, 1990
USSR
Last call for the CPSU
CHAT ACTIONS to the lapol HE ELECTIONS to the local, regional and republic soviets in the winter of 1989 and spring of 1990 gave some impetus to the "democratic opposition" — symbolized by the new democratic majorities in the Moscow and Leningrad soviets and the election of Boris Yeltsin as the chairman of the soviet of the Russian Republic on May 29.
Inside the CPSU this trend expressed itself in the appearance — for the first time in 60 years — of public platforms opposed to the policy of the central leadership. The largest of these was the Democratic Platform (published in Pravda, March 3 - see IV 188) which attracted many prominent party intellectuals, but gained no broad support from the workers' sections of the party. The Democratic Platform advocated the democratization of the party and society, but had no unified social and economic project, although most of its leaders support liberal market measures. The Platform was from the outset marked by strong impatience with the internal regime of the CPSU, and already in May some of its "radical" members broke away — among others Nikolai Travkin, who went off to found a "Democratic Party of Russia".
Alongside the Democratic Platform another current, the "Marxist Platform", growing out of the Moscow Party Clubs, was set up (see /V 187). The Marxist Platform supported most of the democratic demands raised by the Democratic Platform, but criticized the option of a liberal market reform and emphasized the idea of self-management in all spheres of social life. The Marxist Platform however, was much smaller, primarily gaining support from intellectuals and functionaries at the lowest levels of the party.
Neither of these platforms managed to get a significant share of the delegates for the 28th Congress. In spite of the popularily of some of its leaders with the general public, the Democratic Platform got little more than a 100 out of the Congress' 4683 delegates, and the Marxist Platform only a handful.
In spite of a cautious democratization of the election procedures for delegates — giving local party branches some influence, but still excluding the election of delegates according to platforms - the majority of the seats were taken, sometimes with less than democratic methods, by "apparatchiks" from the middle and higher layers of the party apparatus.
By January 1, 1990, the CPSU numbered around 19 million members -34.4% of these being state and party employees, 20.2% workers, 15% peasants, 12.5% intellectuals, and the other 17.9% not engaged in active employment (pensioners and so on).' The picture at the con-
THE 28th CONGRESS of the