Russian politics crazy

The unruly state of Russian politics was captured aptly the other day on a television talk show when Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the nationalist leader, tossed a glass of orange juice in the face of a reformist governor after he suggested Zhirinovsky had syphilis.

Then there was the member of the Russian parliament who turned up in the Duma chamber toting a toy gun to protest government bargaining with Chechen fighters as a loss of Russian honor. His fellow lawmakers agreed, approving a nonbinding motion of no confidence in the government of President Boris Yeltsin.

Russian politics, never short of intrigue or combat, has rarely been crazier or crankier. If the potential consequences for Russia and the rest of the world were not so serious, the fractious behavior might merely make for entertaining theater. Unhappily, it reflects powerful centrifugal forces that continue to tear at Russia's efforts to create a democracy. There is likely to be more turbulence ahead, not only within Russia but in Russia's relations with the United States and other countries.

No one ever suggested Russia would make an easy transition from tyranny to democracy. In some areas, progress has been considerable. Sixty percent of Russian economic output is generated by privately owned business. A middle class is slowly developing. Free speech and a free press are taking hold. Barriers to foreign investment are diminishing, and travel restrictions for foreigners and Russians have been lifted. Fair and free elections have been conducted, and a new round of parliamentary and presidential balloting is scheduled later this year and in 1996.

But the unstable political climate, while a healthy sign of freedom, threatens to overwhelm the still-tender democratic system. The development of democracy and a market economy requires a sustained period of political stability. So far neither Yeltsin nor the parliament has shown the steady leadership to provide it.

There is a need for responsible behavior in Moscow. Instead of undermining each other, Yeltsin and the Parliament should be working together to create an effective government, a stable ruble and a civil society where public safety is assured without sacrificing civil liberties.

Instead of skirmishing over the war in Chechnya, they should be cooperating to end a misadventure that has cost thousands of Chechen and Russian lives. The political imbroglio produced by the no-confidence vote must be cleared so the president and parliament can concentrate on the country's real problems.

Washington can encourage greater stability by behaving more responsibly itself on relations with Russia. Vice President Al Gore is headed to Moscow this week with four Cabinet members and an agenda packed with important business, including Moscow's pending sale of nuclear reactors to Iran that could help Teheran develop nuclear weapons.

He should be traveling with the support of Congress, not under the weight of a variety of Republican proposals that would undercut American efforts to support democratic institutions and the dismantling of Russian nuclear arms. If Speaker Newt Gingrich is serious about his commitment to work with the administration on Russia, he will quietly bury these destructive measures.

Democracy building is hard work. It requires the dedication of political leaders joined in common cause, working with the support of their countrymen. When change was first stirring in the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev said the immature political culture of his country could not manage the competing interests of a democratic society. Nearly a decade later, little seems to have changed.

-- The New York Times