THE unravelling of the Soviet Union should not haw taken Western policymakers by surprise. Thal it did la both icatimony to their woefully Inadequate understanding of perestroika* impact on the Soviet ayatem and a lesson with far reaching Implication* for the future of the west

At least since 1988, the signs ol dissolution were vial-blc to all who cared lo look. The emergence of powerful popular front*. the declaration of sovereignty by all the republics, the absence of six republics from the now moribund 9-plus ! accord, and the Ukraine's refusal lo accept unconditionally Mikhail Gorbachevs version of a union treaty Were persuasive evidence of the seriousness of republican aspirations.

Why were all the republics abandoning Moscow? Quite simply, because perestroika produced chaos in the polity, economy, and society. Republics sought to break ties with the centre, not because of Irrational nationalist passions or a Juvenile desire for limitless freedom, but because of a supremely rational, almost cold blooded, calculation. In the terrifyingly dangerous Hobbcsian stale of nature created by Gorbachev, survival be-came paramount — and survival meant relying first and foremost on oneself, and nol on an impotent leviathan stale.

The Impotence of the leviathan became manifestly clear, even to Western policy makers, on Aug 21. when ihc Yanaycv coup collapsed. The days that followed witnessed the emergence of a neo-Bolshcvlk Russian president. Borts Yeltsin, and of a Russia proud of its national heritage

and imperial past No less Important. the coup and Ils aftermath represented whul Armenian President Ter Petrosyan termed the suicide" of the centre.

The collapse of all central Soviet institutions and the relegation of Gorbachev lo what Soviet propaganda used lo call the dustbin of history meant that the republics were effectively on their won. As soon as the centre Imploded, whatever remained of its "social con tract" with the periphery was annulled and the republics cf feclively became independent In recognition of the new re allty, most have proceeded lo declare Independence as well

Can Gorbachev make a comeback? Is a union that rep resents more than a very lc economic partnership still possible? The answer lo both questions is "no". With the party s dissolution, the death of communism as an ideology and the self-assertion of Russia and the other republics. Gorbachev represents no one but himself. He can bluster as much as he likes, he can threaten to resign, he can hold Innumerable telephone ion versations with George Hush and John Major — nothing will change the fact that he has become the Alexander Kerensky of 1991. with about as much of a political future as the former

Russian prime minister had in 1971.

Neither can the union be revived. Declarations of independence are, as both Ihc United Stales and Britain should appreciate, serious matters initiated by serious people They arc never mere bargaining ploys that arc casually abandoned once a sweeter deal Is offered. To make matters worse, there Is no one to offer such a deal. Gorbachev has no sticks and no carrots. Yeltsin represents Russia and. thus, an "older brother" whose hegemony no non Russian will accept. The West will never induce the republics to give up their independence to discredited central Institutions — for the sake of possible aid to these very same Institutions.

The reality Is that the Sovle i Union is quite dead, and that reviving a cadaver makes no sense If the West Is truly Interested in stability and. dare I suggest, even some Justice in the former Soviet Imperium. It would do well lo understand that dissolving the Soviet Union as quickly as possible Is the necessary starting point ol radical economic reform and genuine democratl-sation. The longer it takes to begin anew, the more time, energy, and resources will be

wasted on power struggles among Gorbachev, Yeitoin. and ihc republics, and the less likely will come reform — any reform. For, contrary lo the opinion of Gorbachev, who has been proven so terribly wrong on virtually everything, dissolution would not mean 'catastrophe." Rather, denying reality, by attempting to force republics lo abandon their independence and hoping to redraw republican boundaries on the order of Milosevic s bloody attempt to create a greater Serbia, are a recipe for disaster.

What, then, should the West do? Unfortunately, Washington cannot be expected to see past Gorbachev. Decades of Moscow-centred policy have created a blind spot to suicidal Imperialism. It will bp up to Western Europe, and especially Germany, to take the Initiative. After all. It is Western Europe that will bear the brunt of the instability and economic dislocation that will follow If the former Soviet Union descends into conOicL it Is Western Europe, therefore, that has an Immediate and vital interest in the USSR's managed conversion Into a stable system of stale*.

Moreover, It is Western Europe that has the vision and experience required for deal Ing with these realities. The

European Communitys recent insistence on two principle* regarding the independence of the republics — that borders not be changed unilaterally and forcibly and that minority right* be respected — is encouraging. since most republics. especially the important Ukraine, subscribe lo the same principles. The EC s dis astrous policy vis-a-vls Yugoslavia, which encouraged the military lo launch a war against Slovenia and Croatia, I* also a useful reminder of what not lo do In Ihc Soviet case.

Moreover, Germany's historical appreciation of the non Russian people* may also, finally, be put lo good use.

A new "oslpolilik" is Ihc order of the day. Just as Willy Brandts initiative stabilised Europe by accepting realities, so too, a new oslpolilik can lalp refashion Europe by proceeding from three propositions; J) that the soviet internal empire, like the Soviet external empire in Poland. Hungary, and Czechoslovakia, cannot be held together, 2) that the republics In general, and as their recent agreement •hows, the Ukraine and Russia in particular, are perfectly capable of developing rational solutions lo their problems, 3) that the economic condition of Ihc republic* Is no less scrlouk

and no less destabilising than that of Poland, Hungary, and Co- hostovakia

In a word, the future of the West depends on abandoning a dead empire and it* useless in." । Hut Jons and leaders and on assisting the post-Soviet stales rebuild ihcir political, economic, and cultural tnfttitu lions within a framework dominated by European values — democracy. human rights, and a market economy.

Specifically. the West should consider the following

— Immediately recognise all republics declaring independence, especially the Ukraine and Russia, and do business only with them,

— Incorporate the post-Soviet stales into European and international institutions.

— Offer lo mediate between Russia and the republics. Including the Deities, with respect lo such contentious issues as property, borders and the military

— Link economic and technical assistance to the republics lo their abiding by inter nationally accepted human rights norms.

Revolutionary times demand revolutionary thinking. While Washington is still wondering whether Gorbachev has been weakened. Western Europe should seize the Inltia live and boldly forge a new Europe. Now. more than ever. Is the time for the West to manage the USSR's collapse. Doing nothing by courting the meddlesome Gorbachev and ignoring the real reasons for republican drives lo independence can only serve lo help the hapless Soviet president bring about the catastrophe nobody wants