Andropov is being frustrated by Brezhnev has-beens

Press, 10 February 1983, Page 17

Andropov is being frustrated by Brezhnev has-beens

From

MARK FRANKLAND

in Moscow

The appearance of a new Soviet Leader inevitably touches off expectations of change inside Russia as well as out.

Comparisons are sometimes made with the hopes that a new President raises in the United States. A new American President, however. is nothing very unusual. A new Soviet leader is. Ronald Reagan is the eighth President since the end of the war. Yuri Andropov is only the fourth man to have led" the Soviet Communist Party since Lenin's death 59 years ago. For this reason some Russians will say that much more is expected of a new leader in their country. They may then make the point that, unlike an American President, he nevertheless takes office with few of the tools necessary to bring about change.

A new President carries with him hundreds of political appointees to place in all the key jobs of the federal government. When Adropov moved into the offices of the general secretary last November, he moved virtually alone. His election did not give him the right to change a single Minister in the Government or a single high official of the party apparatus. The Central Committee, whose 470 full'and candidate members occupy the major positions of power in the country, were elected by the last party congress in 1981 and cannot be removed until the next congress. (Congresses must be held not less than once in five years.) Probably the only changes that Andropov was able to make at once were among the staff of advisers personally attached to the general

secretary. He is believed to have sacked all of Brezhnev staff except one (Aleksandrov. who remains chief diplomatic adviser), although only one new’ adviser (Sharapov, for relations with the Communist bloc) has been announced so far. In the three months since Andropov took office two elderly Ministers (Trade and Rural Construction) have been retired and two others (Railways and internal Affairs) have been removed. The latter were clearly dismissed for failing in their jobs, though this has not been said openly. Andropov has also appointed a new head of the important propaganda department of the Central Committee (Boris Stukalin), the previous one (Yevgeni Tyazhelnikov) being despatched as Ambassador to Rumania, a clear demotion.

But the nub of the problem remains in the Central Committee. Under Brezhnev, membership of the committee was almost automatic for any party or government official of a certain rank, such as Ministers, regional party bosses, and senior military and security commanders. And because Brezhnev followed a policy of so-called “stability of cadres,” many of these have grown old in the job.

If one excludes the few worker and peasant members of the Central Committee, the average age of its members is around 63. This compares with an average age of only 53 in 1966 when the first party congress of

the Brezhnev period was held. Elderliness is even more pronounced among full committee members with the right to vote. Over half are 61 or over and almost a quarter are over 70. although the official retirment age for men in the Soviet Union is 60. Three are over 80. and two of these hold extremely important positions — Arvid Pelshe. Politburo member and head of the Party Control Committee, and Y. P. Slavsky. head of the Ministry of Machine Building that runs military-related nuclear programmes.

Fewer than 10 per cent of the committee’s full members are aged 50 or less.

The situation in the Government is. similar. Of some hundred Ministers or their equivalents who sit in the Council of Ministers, well over a third are 70 or above. There seems little doubt that if Andropov is to reshape the Administration to make it more energetic and up to date, he must address the problem of the Central Committee quite apart from any political need to have men of his own choosing there. But how does he do it? The Soviet Union has nothing like the British House of Lords to which politicians may be honourably retired and where they may still play some public role.

A hint that the problem is being thought over has just come in the shape of a long editorial in the newspaper “Soviet Russia.” It took the form of reflections on

Lenin's last writings and is a companion piece to an earlier editorial also entitled "Reading Lenin Anew."

The first editorial stressed Lenin's believe in experimentation and his fears of an ossified bureaucracy. The new one considers his last thoughts about the Central Committee. Lenin, already on his sickbed, is described as inquiring about the age and health of the committee's veteran members. He then "developed the thought" that the committee should include "members of different generations." In that way youth would be drawn into the Central Committee, would learn its ways, and the committee would become perpetual "in the sense that the passing of one generation would not mean having to build it up again from scratch." He is also described as proposing the same method for staffing ministries, and that new appointees should not just come from those with a long record of service who were liable to be influenced by "well-known traditions and well-known prejudices” but from among ordinary workers and peasants.

It is unlikely that either of these editorials was written merely as history. Lenin's words’ are frequently quoted to justify present or new policies. The problem, though, is that there can be no reshaping of the Central Committee until the next party congress. This is why some people wonder whether Andropov will not try to call a party congress sooner than the next one scheduled in 1986. Copyright — London Observer Service.