 000174868
 Page: 3     of 7
 Document 6 of 7 FBIS Concatenated Daily Reports, 1989            Page   1
 Report Type:        Daily Report            AFS Number:
 Report Number:      FBIS-SOV-89-223         Report Date:
 Classification:     UNCLASSIFIED            Language:
 Source Line:   LD1711235989
 FULL TEXT OF ARTICLE:
 1.  [Editorial Report] Moscow Television Service in Russian at 1903
 GMT on 17 November carries a 37-minute recording of a news conference
 held on 15 November with Leonid Abalkin, deputy chairman of the USSR
 Council of Ministers, on the conclusion of the scientific and
 practical conference held in Moscow to discuss Soviet economic
 reform.  Video shows Abalkin on rostrum.  An unidentified chairman
 opens the news conference:
 2.   "Esteemed ladies and gentlemen, we have invited you to a meeting
 in connection with the conclusion of the all-union scientific and
 practical conference on radical economic reform.  This conference
 opened on Monday and ended today in the Hall of Columns of the House
 of the Unions." "Today Academician Leonid Ivanovich Abalkin, deputy
 chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers, will share his impressions
 on the conference with you."
 3.  Urgent measures, Abalkin says, must be taken to implement
 economic reform, and these measures must be drawn up before the
 Congress.  Taking part in the conference were experts in all fields,
 to discuss as openly as possible, with all possible opinions
 represented, a nationwide program to take into account of all shades
 of opinion.  The program must be realistic, comprehensive, and bold.
 The conference yielded a great deal of material over the 3 days it
 was held.
 4.  The first question is from a TASS correspondent who asks about
 the basis for the theory of the transitional period.
 5.  Abalkin says one main issue is how to move from a nonmarket
 economy to a market economy, how to create the infrastructure.  The
 program is based upon a critical evaluation of past experience, both
 in the USSR and abroad; a scientific and theoretical analysis was
 also made.  All this vent into the proposals advanced.
 6.  A BTA correspondent asks about consensus on the issues discussed
 and on approaches to republican financial autonomy.
 7.  Abalkin says consensus is impossible in such cases: Full
 agreement would mean stagnation in thinking.  All aspects must be
 Approved for Release
 I 3d
 2.
 000174868
 Page: 4     of 7
 Document 6 of 7 FBIS Concatenated Daily Reports, 1989           Page   2
 weighed and conclusions reached.  Agreement on the basic fundamentals
 was, however, attained: Without reform, we have an impasse.
 Consensus in the sense of an understanding of the responsibility of
 the decisions to be made was thus reached.  Financial autonomy must
 be introduced in the republics from 1990, which leaves very little
 time.  Huge price changes are impossible, but we are compelled to
 take interim measures to compensate until full measures are
 implemented.  The source of republican budgets have been precisely
 defined, and further measures and amendments can be made in 1991 when
 other republics move to financial autonomy.
 8.  The FINANCIAL TIMES correspondent, speaking in english with
 superimposed Russian translation, asks: "A question from the
 FINANCIAL TIMES: Could you tell us what specific changes must be made
 in your economic program as a result of the conference?  It seemed to
 us that the reaction to your program was pretty disappointing.  Do
 you agree with that assessment?"
 9.  Abalkin responds: "The conference yielded no fundamental
 changes, no rejections of any directions or stages of reform.
 Conservative moods, however, turned out to be stronger than I had
 assumed before the conference started.  This perhaps reflects the
 general changes in the social situation in the country, which is
 today substantially different from the situation in the summer, the
 summer of this year. This must be taken into account, this complex
 development of events: One cannot simply brush it aside, one must be
 ready for it.
 10.  "1 cannot as yet fully evaluate what was done in the
 sections--work went on in eight sections, four roundtables, and over
 200 people spoke--all this must be looked at attentively, some
 interesting ideas, and amplifications may evidently be found there.
 And only then will it be possible to evaluate fully the quality of
 the discussions."
 11.  A Portuguese correspondent asks whether public opinion might
 oppose the changes needed to emerge from impasse.  The correspondent
 also asks what will be the role of the congress.
 12.  Abalkin responds that public opinion is vital; attempts have
 been made to play with public opinion and manipulate it.  Public
 opinion must be mobilized--it is awaiting constructive measures and
 decisions.  The congress will certainly be very turbulent and
 contradictory.  We must learn to listen and heed one another, we must
 overcome social "deafness."
 13.  An Italian correspondent asks in English about opposition in
 society to private ownership.
 UNCLASSIFIED
 C00174868
 Page: 5     of 7
 Document 6 of 7 FBIS Concatenated Daily Reports, 1989            Page  3
 14.  Abalkin says the law on ownership, like the law on taxation must
 be submitted for nationwide discussion.  As an economist, Abalkin
 says that it is very common for terms to be misunderstood,
 terminology is a source of misunderstanding and therefore of tension.
 Terms such as private ownership and cooperatives have been
 interpreted in different ways, giving rise to unnecessary polemic. We
 must not try to put over new thinking in the old terminology of the
 19th Century.
 15.  An EL PAIS correspondent, in Russian, asks: "The newspaper EL
 PAIS, Spain.  I should like to learn about ruble convertibility--that
 is one point; then also about a system of rationing, and third,
 parallel money-- chervonets.''
 16.  Abalkin replies: "I believe the opinion is general and
 prevalent that there is a need for a Soviet ruble to be convertible.
 The only difference is in the professional and the nonprofessional
 views of how to make the switch.  The difference lies in the fact
 that the professional assessment--as held by all the great experts,
 not just in the Soviet Union but in the west, too--is that
 convertibility cannot be introduced by decree.  We cannot just
 convene a session of the Supreme Soviet and vote to introduce ruble
 convertibility as of 1 January.  In order for this to come about, we
 must have within the country a developed market economy, a price
 structure akin to the price structure on the world market.- We must
 have a developed infrastructure with the circulation of domestic
 securities and at least what we call internal ruble convertiblility.
 We must have well-trained professionals.  We must have a whole host
 of other conditions which cannot be created just by decree or
 administrative decisions made purely at will.  This is the road we
 must go down.  But we must go down it aware of all its complexities.
 This must be the case at subsequent stages in this movement, as well.
 17.  "A system of rationing is, in my opinion, an unacceptable path.
 We asked the country's leading academics and economists for an
 analysis of this problem and of the possible economic and social
 consequences.  We had virtually total unanimity from them in their
 assessment of the inexpediency and of the socioeconomic
 unjustifiability of such a move.  It does not feature in the program
 of our actions.  If we succeed in implementing the steps that have
 been mapped out in the course of this year and next year, then this
 issue will have been removed from discussion by the start of the
 1990's.  If this program is not implemented--if something prevents it
 from being carried through--and if by the end of 1990... by the start
 of the 1990's we are unable to stabilize the situation in the
 country, then a system of rationing will be inevitable, but that will
 be the end of the reform.
 18.  "The question of a parallel currency is a question that is open
 C00174868
 Page: 6     of 7
 Document 6 of 7 FBIS Concatenated Daily Reports, 1989            Page   4
 to discussion.  It is open to discussion.  There are many plans and
 proposals on this score, but there has been no decision on this
 matter.  There are pros and cons.  It is not celar which outweigh
 which, or by how much.  We need some more time to form a definite
 opinion, but there is less than a month for this."
 19.  An APN correspondent asks about the difficulty of the present
 state of affairs and whether the population expected to wait.
 20.  Abalkin says everyone is waiting for an instant miracle.  In the
 past, he says, it is at times like this that reports of UFO's start
 circulating.  We must convince public opinion, by means of the truth
 and nothing but the truth.  Huge disappointments are inevitable after
 huge illusions.  The unfortunate must be made aware of the state's
 concern for their well-being.  We must not give way to emotions.  The
 individual must be made to feel his own responsibility and the
 importance of this work.  The republics must be given their chance:
 In 1990 they must be zones of change; they must show that things are
 changing for the better.
 21.  An ABC correspondent, speaking in English with superimposed
 Russian translation, asks: "President Bush has said that he wants
 perestroyka to succeed.  What steps would you like the United States
 to take in the economic sphere to help perestroyka succeed?"
 22.  Abalkin responds: "We must do most of the work ourselves.  I
 remember what Bush said about Poland and Hungary.  He was quite
 right, I think, when he said, as a wise and realistic politician,
 that the Poles and Hungarians themselves must bring their country out
 of economic crisis, just like the Soviet people must do.  We must do
 this ourselves.  I am concerned most by what must be done in our
 country in these matters.  As for what can be expected of the United
 States of America, which might be of assistance, I do not wish to
 develop this topic, because apart from the most general concepts with
 which you have all long been familiar--decide the issue of the
 most-favoured nation system, remove some other restrictions--I shall
 not be enriching our knowledge with anything."
 23.  A (?HARLEMS DAGLAD) correspondent, speaking in Russian, asks:
 "We did not all manage to follow the debates conducted at the
 conference.  Could you perhaps tell us more specifically which points
 gave rise to the most negative reaction from the conservatives, and
 how do you reckon to break this opposition?"
 24.  Abalkin answers: " We have a great deal of historical experience
 on how to break the opposition. [laughter in hall] Therefore, the
 main task is how to learn to hold a dialogue with the opposition. The
 best way is to compel the conservatives to do battle with the
 radicals, while we get on calmly with the job at hand. [laughter]
 000174868
 Page: 7     of 7
 Document 6 of 7 FBIS Concatenated Daily Reports, 1989            Page   5
 That would be the wisest solution, we have both radicals and
 conservatives.  At the same time, we must take all the valuable and
 useful and sensible things offered by both of these, and include
 these in our programme and get on along our own way.  As for the
 aspects which came in for criticism, I would limit myself to just two
 approaches.  Emotions carried over from meetings were present at the
 conference; and there were also scientific discussions.
 25.  "Everything starts at the very beginning: Should state property
 be left unaltered, or should we start to modernize and renew, make it
 more flexible and start the process of de-etatization, given labor
 collectives on this basis the freedom to decide matters independently
 and to elect their manager.  Or should we maintain the system of
 administration by injunction.  Should we move to a market with new
 laws of regulating it, with flexible and mobile prices.  Or should we
 as before keep prices unambiguously under harsh state control.  A
 quite normal process is under way, not a very pleasant one, but a
 normal process of counterposing and weighing up and so forth.   At the
 same time--and this is also a very well known thing--the existence of
 any opposition compels one to sharpen one's instruments of argument,
 compels one to weigh up more attentively the possible consequences,
 which might be overlooked were there no such criticism.  Altogether,
 in the final analysis, if there is no destructive action and no
 struggle, one can derive useful things from this, if one regards
 taking account of diverse points of view as a factor making it
 possible to ensure a more realistic program of action.
 26.  "Thank you for the interest you have shown in the work of our
 conference and in our commission's work.  Thank you."

