78
PART ISAN REVI EW
their a udi ence than develo pments in the United Sta tes a nd th a t cha nge
in Eastern Europe wo uld come from a bove-from communi st pa rti es
th a t inched towards refo rm, like the Communi st Pa rty o f Hunga ry
under Janos Kadar. " Euro- ist " staffers tho ught the way to enlighten
Eas t Euro pea n Party officia ls, wh o they knew li stened to th e Radi os,
wo uld be to tell them a bout developments in those Wes t Europea n
countri es that were run by soc ia l democra tic pa rti es. Acco rding to the
New York Times,
an edito r in th e Hunga ri a n Service sa id th a t " we a re
not as king the Communi sts to give up Communism . .. . We wo uld like
a beautiful Communi sm . . . a goul as h Communi sm. "
Thi s view of how to promote cha nge in the Soviet bl oc was th e " rea l–
ist " view held by many academi cs as well as by most people in the Sta te
Depa rtment. H enry Ki ss inge r, the prima r y expo nent o f th is pos iti o n ,
sa id in th e mid -1970S tha t th e best the U.S. could ho pe fo r was " mutu a l
restra int, coexistence, a nd , ultima tely, coo perati o n " between the two
superpowers. Ameri ca ns must no t " mesmeri ze th emse lves with simple
so luti o ns." To the " rea lists" the idea o f even di scuss ing the questi o n o f
ridding Eastern Euro pe of communi st regimes was foo lish, counterpro–
ducti ve, a nd poss ibl y da nge ro us, fo r th e Sov iet Uni o n wo uld ruthl ess ly
suppress a ny po litica l movement th a t went too fast a nd too fa r, as it had
done in Prague in 1968. T he Reaga n Admini stra ti o n a ttacked thi s view.
" Reaga n 's victo ry," Ro bert Kaga n has sa id, "came a t th e expense of the
rea li st esta blishment. "
I had my doubts a bo ut th e rea li st a pproac h. I knew a lot a bo ut da il y
life in Hunga ry-my wife was fr om Hunga ry and o ften went back to
visit her relati ves (I had been th ere twice myse lf)- a nd I didn 't think
"goul as h communi sm" was a good thing o r tha t it was the bes t the
Hunga ri a ns could ho pe fo r. Mo re impo rta nt, I tho ught the rea li st posi–
ti o n was not rea li sti c, beca use it was based on the ass umpti o n th a t
re fo rmi st communi st regimes were sta ble, whereas I tho ught a ll com–
muni st regimes were unsta bl e beca use they were undemoc ra ti c. Fina ll y,
I did not think th a t communi st regimes wo uld eve r institute ser io us
refo rms; the Pa rty would a lways squelch refo rms th a t threa tened its
power.
Nevertheless, I didn't argue with RFE/RL sta ffers a bo ut th e bes t way
to promote ch ange in Eas tern Euro pe. Instead , I sa id , "Even if the rea l–
ists are ri ght, the views of the Reaga nites sho uld be hea rd o n the
Radi os ." I didn 't buy the a rgument th a t RFE/RL's a udi ence prefe rred to
hea r mo re a bo ut po liti ca l a nd soc ia l deve lo pments in , say, Sweden th a n
a bo ut th ose in the United Sta tes. I to ld sta ffers tha t li steners sho uld have
mo re info rmati o n a bo ut the U. S. a nd a bo ut the Reaga n admini stra ti o n.
