Soviet Union-Eastern Europe
SOVIET UNIONEASTERN EUROPE
This publication it prepared Ic regional specialists in Ihe Washingtonby the USSREastern Europe Division. Office ol Current inlet-licence, wilh occasional contribution! from other offices within the Directorate of intelligence. Comments and queries are welcome. They ihould be directed to the authors of Ihe individual articles.
CONTENTS October6
est
Party Prods Economic
PUBLICATION OF
est Germany
The Soviets have reacted with predictableto the narrow victory of the West German ruling coalition. No authoritative commentary has yet appeared, but the general media line is that the outcome is notocialree Democratic victory,ictory for the policy of European detente.
The Soviets, however, have reason to be unhappy with the narrowness of the coalition's victory. Soviet diplomats expressed concern before the electionhift to the rightazor-thin majority for the coalition would increase the leverage of the Free Democrats and their leader. Foreign Minister Genscher, whom Moscow does not like. Another concern is the durability of the coalition. Although Genscher's pledge to remain in coalition with the Social Democrats received extensive publicity both before and after the elections, the Soviets are aware of the Free Democrats' long history of cooperation with the Christian Democrats before they entered into their present partnership. To appeal to the business interests that traditionally back the Free Democrats, the Soviets, in one of their first commentaries,stressed the "mutually beneficial" businessthat has marked the coalition's tenure and held out the prospect of the "capacious" Soviet market absorbing new, large consignments of West German manufactures in exchange for fuel and raw materials.
Looking beyond the immediate outcome of the election, the Soviets have returned to their theme that they wiLl do "everything" to deepen detente and implement cooperation with the West Germans. One vehicle to achieve this is the Brezhnev visit. the election the West Germans were, without Soviet contradiction, conveying the impression that the visit would take place "as quickly as possible after chend at the latest by early
October 7,6
December. Now, however, both sides areore
relaxed view andisit occurring sometime early
next year. Among the delaying factors are Brezhnev's
crowded schedule, lack of preparation for the visit,
and the gaps still existing between Soviet and West
German positionsumber of agreementsBerlin.
October 7,G
Party Prods Economic Managers
On several recent occasions, party organizations have prodded the government's economic apparatus. This suggests that pressure for some changes inplanning and management is growing, but not necessarily that it will bring results in the near future. Kosygin's illness may have encouraged the relative boldness on the part of some party officials.
Beloruaalan Gosplan Criticized
Onhe Belorussian Central Committee discussed in critical terms the work of the republic's Gosplan. The subject is unusuallenum, and the sensitivity of the Central Committee's action is betrayed by press reporting on the meeting. Oh Septemberovetskaya Beloruasiya publishedimple communique on the plenum's actions and speakers. The next day, Pravda carried areport on the discussion of Gosplan at the plenum. Sovetekaya Bcloruntiya did notescription of the discussion until Septembernd then in the form of an editorial leader. Speakers at the meeting included Petr Masherov, candidateof the Politburo and Belorussian first secretary; A. A. Smirnov, Belorussian party secretary; and M. G. Pervukhin, chief of Gosplan's department forplanning and the location of production forces.
According to the articles, Belo russian Gosplan was criticized for its slow progress inost of economic problems including the quality of production and output, fulfillment oi plans andaccording to assortment, capital construction, and the introduction of new technology in production. The articles stressed tho need toomplex approach to planning, combine sectoral and territorial principles of planning, and rectify imbalances within and between sectors. Gosplan workers were criticized for their statistical approach and for failing to
Octobers
-4
employ scientific methods, including mathematical-economic techniques. ajor accomplishment attributed to Belorussianthe basicof the republic's economic development up toa task that USSR Gosplan has not accomplishedational scale.
Hasherov's hostility toward Gosplan was revealed at the Party Congress last February, when he said that the problems of intersectoral relations "exceed the potential of USSR Gosplan and USSR Cossnab." He proposed that subdivisions be created under the USSR Council of Ministers to administer intersectoral processes.
The articles on the Belorussian plenum did not reveal any significant proposals, such as Masherov made at the Congress. This is undoubtedly because Moscow has not passed on any new measures. The plenum called for improved use of economic indices and levers. Attention was called to the experiment in the Belorussian construction industry. It was also decided toepublic commission on the quality of production. This will apparentlyarty commission since such commissions are to be attached to party committees at the oblast, city, and rayon level.
Change in Planning Pressed
A more specific proposal for changing thesystem was put forward in Pravda on Septembery N. F. Lobachev, deputy chief of the Central Cojrjnitteelanning and finance organs department. Lobachev declares that "the economic mechanismplanning" is causing an "alienation of interests" among economic units and "undoubtedly needs to be changed." lie writes that "the time has come to abandon planning according to the value of output sold" and to make the fulfillment of deliveriesto contracts and orders the basic criterion for evaluating enterprises and associations. funds would be made dependent on this indicator. Ministries and Gosplan, however, would continue to use value and physical terms in planning and.
October 7, 6
Under this system, economic contracts ond direct, long-term economic ties between enterprises wouldthe basis for planning. Lobachev cites the draft five-year plan on enhancing "the role of consumer enterprises in shaping production plans."
According to Lobachev, this system was proposed two years ago, but "to this day some industrialfor various reasons take exception to thise notes that some think it "would weaken centralized planning" and calls this idea unfounded".
Lobachev, who has some career ties to Brezhnev, put forward tho same proposals in /Communist That article was footnoted, however, with the notation thatumber of matters raised in this article are in the nature of statements of questions." The present article carries no caveats, and its publication in Pravda gives an added sense of immediacy to the issue.
Maftherov
Lobachev also recommends the experiment in the Belorussian Ministry of Industrial Construction. Here finished projects (analogous to fulfillment of deliveries) has become the main criterion for Tho ministry has been shifted to full cost accounting so that its activities and evenare financed by ita own profits and by credits. The cost accounting aspect follows the celebrated experiment of the Ministry of Instrument Making. Despite plans by Gosplan to extend the Ministry of Instrument Making's experiment to other ministries, no progress has occurred, except for the example in Belorussia. Masherov displayed his backing for the experimentpeech to the Belorussian Central Committeeisit to the republic ministry in the summer
Mashcrov's sallies against Gosplan and thein the construction industry ore givingistinctive record concerning economic policy.
October 7, 6
This recalls how Leningrad party chief Romanova political reputation by pushing various economic schemes. Criticism of Gosplan must beas anti-Kosygin. uestion remains about the position of First Deputy Premier Ma2urov, who rose in the Belorussian party organization just ahead of Hashercv. His past supportystem approach to economic management indicates that he might agree with some of Masherov's ideas. On the other hand, Mazurov has been Kosygin's deputy for overears and cannot entirely disassociate himself from the present economic regime. (UNCLASSIFIED)
October6
PUBLICATION OF INTEREST
Appearances of Soviet Loaders,NCLASSIFIED. This publicationecord of the known public appearances of selected Soviet leaders, coverage includes members of the CPSU Politburo anddeputy chairmen of the USSR Council ofand leading officials of the Ministry of Appearances of Soviet Leadersssued semi annually and is cumulative within each calendar year
October6
-8-
Original document.
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: