Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
192125725
label
AFL-CIO [American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations] (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
192125725
contentType
document
title
AFL-CIO [American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations] (1)
citationUrl
collections
Records of the White House Office of Public Liaison (Reagan Administration)
Max Green's Subject Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
192125725
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
a67f4881e14cf446
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Green, Max: Files 1985-1988
Folder Title: AFL-CIO (1)
Box: 03
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digitized-textual-material
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/white-house-inventories
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/research-
support/citation-guide
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
FEDERATION OF LABOR
815 Sixteenth Street, N.W.
LANE KIRKLAND PRESIDENT
Washington, D.C. 20006
THOMAS R. DONAHUE SECRETARY-TREASURER
(202) 637-5000
Thomas W. Gleason
Frederick O'Neal
Albert Shanker
Murray M. Finley
Sol C. Charkin
Angelo Fosco
Edward T. Hanley
Charles H Pillard
Kenneth T Blaylock
AFL
Alvin E. Heaps
William W Winpisinger
William H Wynn
CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL
John DeConcinl
Wayne E. Glenn
Joyce D. Miller
John J Sweeney
Frank Drozak
James E. Hatfield
Barbara Hutchinson
Richard I. Kilroy
Vincent R Sombrotto
Gerald W. McEntee
William H. Bywater
Marvin J. Boede
Patrick J. Campbell
Owen Bieber
Lynn R. Williams
John T. Joyce
Morton Bahr
Robert A. Georgine
Larry L. Dugan, Jr.
Milan Stone
Gene Upshaw
April 3, 1986
ARL-C10
Mr. Michael Novak
Ambassador
U.S. Delegation
Bern Human Rights Experts Meeting
Bern, Switzerland
Dear Michael,
I understand that at the forthcoming meeting in Bern to review compliance
with the Helsinki Accord, the Soviet delegation intends to raise the issue of United
States restrictions on visas for Soviets wishing to visit this country as "trade
unionists." Inasmuch as the AFL-CIO has had a long-standing interest in this
matter, I am taking this opportunity to set forth our views.
This issue was last raised in the summer of 1977, when the Congress enacted
and President Carter signed legislation, known as the McGovern Amendment,
removing barriers to the granting of entry visas to foreign communists, including
Soviet "trade unionists." The purpose of the amendment was to dissolve any doubts
as to U.S. compliance with the Final Act of the 1975 Helsinki Agreement.
At that time, the AFL-CIO expressed to the State Department and the White
House our view that there were no trade unions in the Soviet Union and that the
visa applications from those purporting to be Soviet "trade unionists" were
fraudulent. Our position was made clear in an exchange of letters between
AFL-CIO President George Meany and Senator McGovern, which I enclose, and in
Congressional testimony, which I also enclose.
The correspondence and the testimony emphasize that, in the words of the
testimony,
"The AFL-CIO is not seeking to exercise thought control or to close our
borders to people who don't agree with us. The enforcement of ideological
conformity is not the objective of a labor movement which contains within
itself many diverse viewpoints.
"It is, however, our objective to promote free trade unionism
throughout the world--an objective we believe serves the interests of the
-2-
United States--and in the pursuit of this objective we consider it crucial that
a clear distinction be made between genuine unions that represent the
interests of their workers and labor fronts that serve as instruments of
totalitarian states whether they be on the 'left' or the 'right.'
"This distinction is blurred and enfeebled by the issuance of visas to
so-called Soviet trade unionists as trade unionists."
Nothing has happened since the passage and subsequent repeal of the McGovern
Amendment to alter our view of Soviet "trade unions" as instruments of the state
and of Soviet "trade unionists" seeking U.S. entry visas as agents of that state and
not of the workers they purport to represent. We continue to believe that the visa
applications of such agents are inherently fraudulent.
But we also made another argument in opposing the McGovern Amendment,
and it seems even stronger to us today. Even as the Soviets are seeking to lift U.S.
restrictions on entry visas for their "trade unionists," they continue to deny the
AFL-CIO the right to receive visits from Soviet citizens, including real trade
unionists, with whom we would like to meet.
In 1977, George Meany invited Dr. Andrei Sakharov and five other Soviet
citizens, including genuine trade unionists, to attend our twelfth constitutional
convention. The extraordinary steps taken by the Soviet government to prevent
these individuals from receiving their invitations, and finally to deny them
permission to leave, are detailed in my remarks at the convention, which are
enclosed.
If the United States lifts its restrictions on entry visas for Soviet "trade
unionists" while the Soviets continue their policy of denying exit visas for those
whom we invite, the result would not be to advance the free flow of people and
ideas promised at Helsinki. Rather, the practical effect would be to grant a
special advantage to those on the margins of the American labor movement who
are sympathetic to the Soviet system while discriminating against the mainstream
of the labor movement which is hostile to totalitarianism. The pro-Soviet fringes
could invite Soviet "trade unionists" who will sing the praises of Communism, while
the AFL-CIO will not be able to receive Soviet citizens whose democratic views
and activities on behalf of human rights would be more interesting to the vast
majority of our membership and of the American people.
The AFL-CIO will not accept any arrangements with the Soviet Union that
promote the free flow of their ideas while stanching the free flow of ours. Nine
years ago, Congress mistakenly passed the McGovern Amendment in the hope of
demonstrating American sincerity toward the Final Act of the Helsinki Accord and
of encouraging reciprocal Soviet behavior. The Soviet response was to strip
Mstislav Rostropovich and General Pyotr Grigorenko of their citizenship, put
Vladimir Klebanov and his fellow workers in mental institutions for attempting to
-3-
form genuine trade unions, sentence Yuri Orlov, Anatoly Shcharansky and
Aleksandr Ginzburg to cruel prison terms, and persecute countless others for the
"crime" of seeking their government's compliance with the Helsinki Accord.
Today we are asked, this time in the name of "the spirit of Geneva," to make
a unilateral concession to the Soviets by opening up a one-way channel for the flow
of ideas--the flow of their ideas in our direction, while they maintain the
intellectual equivalent of an impenetrable Star Wars defense against ideas they
find distasteful. The hypocrisy of the Soviet position should not go unchallenged.
Unless our government wishes to return to a now discredited version of
"detente" that brought one-sided advantages to the Soviets, it will dismiss Soviet
demands for changes in our visa regulations until such time as the Soviets have
demonstrated, in advance, that the effect of such changes would indeed be to
promote a free two-way flow of people and ideas, in fulfillment of the
commitments embodied in the Helsinki Final Act.
When the Soviet Union is prepared to allow Andrei Sakharov and those who
share his democratic values to come to the United States, speak freely, and return
home, the AFL-CIO would be prepared to consider reviewing its position with
regard to entry visa regulations. But not before.
Please feel free to share these views with your colleagues and to make them
known to the participants in the Bern meetings.
With all good wishes,
Sincerely,
fame Will
President
Enclosures
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION:
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
GEORGE MEANY
LANE KIRKLAND
AMERICA FEDERATION OF
INSURER
815 SIXTEENTH STREET. N.W
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20000
PAUL MALL
IOMM # LYONS
a , CROSPIRON
MATTHEW GUIMAN
PLTER DOMMARITO
THOMAS . CLEASON
FREDERICK O'MEM
HEARY WURF
$ FRAME RAFTERY
GEORGE MAROY
AL # CHESSER
MARTIN I WARD
WILLIAM SIDELL
MURRAY # FINLEY
JOSEPH P TONELLI
ALBERT SHANKER
CL DELLUMS
SOL C CHAIRIN
(DWARD 1 MARKEY
ANGELO FOSCO
CONGRAS AFL INDUSTRIAL
(202) 637.5000
GLENN [ WATTS
CHARLES M PILLARD
WILLIAM # McCLENNAN
- C TURNER
LLOYD McBRIDE
DAVID , FITZMAURICE
KENNETH 1 BLAYLOL
EMMET ANDREWS
ALVIN E. HEAPS
MARRY R POOLE
wm W WINDISINGER
WILLIAM M WYNN
FRED I KROLL
September 14, 1978
The Honorable George S. McGovern
United States Senate
Washington, D.C.
Dear Senator McGovern:
I have your letter of August 10, with whose opening
paragraph I am in complete agreement: we do indeed "have a
basic difference of opinion regarding the merits of the so-
called McGovern Amendment."
But then you go on to say that I have gone "to great
lengths to imply that this difference arises out of my inability
to understand the deficiencies of the Soviet system in general
and of Soviet 'trade unions' in particular. This is not the
case
"
It is precisely the case, Senator, and virtually every
word in your letter demonstrates that you still do not under-
stand either the Soviet system or Soviet "trade unions."
Let us put aside for now "the deficiencies of the Soviet
system in general" and turn our attention to the Soviet "trade
unions," which you concede bear "no resemblance to the American
trade unions."
The point, however, is not merely that Soviet labor
fronts are different from our unions in their ideological cast
or in their organizational structures. There are differences
of ideology and structure between the American labor movement
and many trade unions around the world.
In Great Britain, the trade unions are tied to a
political party; the AFL-CIO is not. In West Germany, the
trade unions believe in co-determination; we do not. In
Israel, Histadrut owns enterprises employing large numbers
- 2 -
of people; we do not. In other countries, trade union
federations are divided along religious lines; we have one
all-embracing trade union federation. I could go on at
great length. Within the non-Communist world there is great
varięty in the way unions are organized and in their political
orientations. In international labor forums and in our bi-
lateral relations with unions, the AFL-CIO frequently expresses
its disagreements with them on this or that policy. But we do
not question their legitimacy, nor do we demand that these
unions conform to the American model. It is up to the workers
of each country to determine for themselves the character of
their own unions.
That, Senator, is the point. The structure and character
of the Soviet "trade unions" is not determined by Soviet workers
but by the totalitarian Soviet state, which has designated these
organizations for the purpose of enforcing labor discipline--that
is, for oppressing and exploiting the workers they pretend to
represent. These structures, therefore, and in the profoundest
sense, are not unions.
This is not a matter of "homenclature". From the worker's
viewpoint, the difference between American (and other democratic)
unions and Soviet labor fronts is not nomenclatural but rather
visceral. It's the difference between your shop steward repre-
senting you in a grievance procedure and your shop steward re-
porting you to the KGB. To the Soviet worker the distinction is
not subtle.
I made these points, at some length, in my earlier letter.
However, nowhere in your letter do you forthrightly accept our
view that Soviet labor fronts are not unions. Your language on
this matter is evasive. You speak of nomenclatural disagreements,
of approval or disapproval of these organizations, and of their
deficiencies. Why is it so difficult for you to come right out
and say that Soviet labor fronts are not unions? Is it possible
that the negative political judgements you have from time to
time expressed toward aspects of the American labor movement--as
is your right--have blinded you to the crucial distinction between
a union you may disagree with and an instrument of the State?
Nowhere are the consequences of your failure to grasp
this distinction more obvious than in your assertion that my
position leads to the exclusion of Soviet "scholars," "parlia-
mentarians, "journalists," "athletes," and performing "artists,"
- 3 -
because all of these are instruments of Soviet propaganda and
everybody in the Soviet Union is tied into the State apparatus.
My position leads to no such thing. I am not concerned
about Soviet propaganda. They have a right to their propaganda,
as we have to ours. If Soviet scholars, parliamentarians,
journalists, athletes, and performing artists propagandize
for the Soviet Union, that's to be expected. Nor am I worried
that significant numbers of American workers would be won over
by such propaganda. But this is a smokescreen. The real issue
is this:
An athlete is an athlete if he performs athletics--
whatever his political ideology or affiliation may be. A
scholar is a scholar if he performs scholarly work-whether he
espouses democracy or not. A parliamentarian is a parliamentar-
ian whether he believes in democracy or not--and whether he is
democratically elected or not. But a trade unionist is not a
trade unionist unless he represents a trade union--i.e., an
organization of workers and for workers. He is not a trade
unionist if he represents an organization that is created by
and serves the interests of the State. Nor is he a trade union-
ist if he represents the employer. If General Motors decided
to call itself a union, that wouldn't make their chairman a
trade unionist.
Your assertion that the logic of my position is that
"our elected President should avoid any summit meeting with a
Soviet leader who purports to be 'democratically' selected" is
absurd. Is it not clear that there is a difference between a
union and a government? We might prefer that all governments be
democràtic--that they govern with the express consent of their
people and in the interests of their people. But the concept of
democracy is not inherent in the definition of "government.' A
government is a government if it governs, with or without popular
consent.
Now, in my view, how a government governs may determine
its moral legitimacy. I do not believe that the Communist Party
of the Soviet Union has a moral right to rule, because my con-
cept of political morality has to do with democracy. But as a
matter of international law and practice, a government is a
government if it governs. In this sense, the American government
has a counterpart in the Soviet government. But our trade union
movement has no counterpart in the Soviet Union.
4
You ask, perhaps facetiously: "Are you asking for one
visa criteria for so-called trade unionists, misnamed or
otherwise"--again, you can't quite bring yourself to accept
that they are misnamed "and another visa criteria for other
applicants?"
My answer is yes. More precisely, we are not advocating
a different set of visa criteria, but we are saying that there
is something unique about the circumstances surrounding labor
exchanges such that if a single test of authenticity is applied
across the board, the result of that test would be to exclude
Soviet trade unionists--as trade unionists. The result would
not be to exclude callet dancers if they can dance, athletes if
they can run and jump, and journalists. if they can write.
The trade union issue is indeed a special and unique
issue. For twenty years our government recognized it as such by
excluding labor exchanges from our cultural agreements with the
Soviet Union, as I pointed out in my last letter. At least part
of the reason for our government's past position was its reçogni-
tion of the enormously important and unique role assigned to the
international labor scene by the Soviet government- spends
many times more than we do in an effort to influence the labor
field worldwide. Although our government has generally failed
to recognize the potential importance of trade unionism on the
international scene, the Soviets have moved to exploit it with
massive resources. And one of their chief objectives is to win
legitimacy for Soviet labor fronts. If they understand the
importance of this goal, and if the American labor movement under-
stands it, why don't our political leaders understand it? The
Soviets understand the difference between an athlete and a trade
unionist. Why doesn't the Senator from South Dakota?
Let me now turn to some of the other points in your
letter.
As to whether the McGovern Amendment is required by the
Helsinki Final Act, you say that "What is 'required' by the Final
Act is, of course, not subject to precise definition"--a con-
venient interpretation from the Soviet point of view, inasmuch as
if we don't precisely know what's required by the Final Act, we
can't precisely tell when it is being violated. But in the
absence of precise definition, you say
"I would agree with the Commission on Security
and Cooperation in Europe that past U.S. visa
practices can scarcely be reconeiled with the
overall thrust of the Helsinki accord."
- 5 -
As I pointed out to you in my last letter, the basis of the
Commission's reasoning is expressed in this crucial paragraph
from its August 1, 1977 report, which you inserted in the
Congressional Record:
"U.S. practice, in short, is discriminatory. The
grounds for the discrimination--that Communist
unionists are government agents and neither free
nor true representatives of workers--reflect a
mind-set the Final Act does not condone."
This is, quite simply, an outrageous statement by the
Commission. I cannot believe it represents the thinking of
Mr. Fascell. It must be the work of a thoughtless and sloppy
Commission staffer. Does it represent your views? Do you
believe that the characterization of Soviet trade unionists as
"government agents and neither free nor true representatives of
workers" is a violation of the Final Act? How is it that an
agreement whose requirements lack "precise definition" can be
so precise on this point? In any case, this statement by the
Commission was in effect repudiated by the Conference Committee
when Congressman Wolff asked the record to show that nothing in
the Committee's discussion of the McGovern Amendment could be
construed as conferring legitimacy on Soviet trade unions. The
Committee is apparently in violation of the Final Act, according
to the Commission. Let me suggest that the Commission's inter-
pretation of the "thrust" of the Final Act with regard to visas
for Soviet trade unionists is totally vitiated by its "mind-set"
statement.
In your final paragraph you charge that:
"The effect of your position as advanced by
Senator Baker is to deny visas except by a formal
waiver request from the Secretary of State to
members from Western European countries such as
Italy, France and Spain, who in some instances
have been independent if not outspokenly critical
of Soviet policies."
Senator, it is hard for me! to believe that you could write these
words.
You were a member of the House-Senate Conference Committee
which defeated the Baker Amendment. You were present when Senator
Javits introduced a "compromise" version of the Baker Amendment
which would have kept the McGovern Amendment in force for the
"citizens of a country whose procedures for the control of
nonimmigrant entry and exit provide an equivalent degree of
freedom of movement as do those in the United States." This
language obviously would have applied a presumption of admis-
sability to the very Communist party members you are talking
about--those from Italy, France, and Spain, and from many
other countries as well. Not only did you refuse to support
this compromise, but you denounced it in the committee. You
said you would rather have "straight repeal" of the McGovern
Amendment "instead of all this obscurantism."
We supported the compromise--despite the fact that we
have irreconcilable disagreements with Communist trade unionists
of Western Europe. We do not want to have anything to do with
them; but they are not in the same category as Soviet labor
fronts. The Communist-dominated unions of Western Europe are
unions. This has more to do with the structure of political
democracy in these countries than with the philosophy of the
Communist trade union leaders, but in any case these are unions;
they engage in collective bargaining, their leaders are elected
by workers, they are independent of the State, and they go out
on strike.
Our willingness to support the Javits Amendment is
proof that the issue for us is not "ideological affiliation,"
as you put it, but of false credentials. You, on the other
hand, were more anxious to pave the way for Soviet agents to
enter the United States as trade unionists than you were to
lift the obstacles to West European Communists. This is your
prerogative of course, but it hardly entitles you to criticize
me for allegedly opposing something you voted against!
I should like to raise another issue not touched on in
your letter but the subject nonetheless of great controversy and
confusion. I refer to the use of the McGovern Amendment to admit
members of the PLO to the United States.
On July 26, in the course of the Senate debate on the
Baker Amendment, Senator Stone declared that
"members of the Palestine Liberation Organization
have been admitted to the United States specifically
because of the McGovern Amendment. The head of the
PLO's Washington office was admitted to this country
even though he is a member of a proscribed organiza-
tion specifically because the McGovern Amendment
- 7 -
allowed a presumption of admissability to every
person affiliated with any proscribed organization,
including the PLO."
Senator Stone proceeded to insert into the Congressional Record
a press briefing paper of the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs of
the State Department which, as he said, "specifically confirms
this fact." And indeed it did. The fact is further confirmed
by a letter to Senator Stone from Mr. Leonel J. Castillo, Com-
missioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. I
enclose a copy, in case you do not have it.
The record does not indicate any response by you to
Senator Stone's charge. You did not respond on the day it was
made. Nor did you respond on August 10, when you rose on the
Senate floor to insert additional material on the McGovern
Amendment controversy into the Congressional Record. Nor did
you respond during the Conference Committee discussion of the
Baker Amendment several days later, although you and the other
Conference Committee members had been circularized with material
on this matter and many of the conferees had received phone
calls about it from representatives of Jewish and trade union
organizations.
I enclose an article from The Jewish Week of New York,
in which Congressman Stephen Solarz complains that he had "been
deliberately and fundamentally misled" by the State Department
with regard to the PLO. He states:
"I was unequivocally assured by the State Department
that the McGovern Amendment had nothing at all to do
with keeping PLO members out of the U.S It now turns
out that the PLO is one of the proscribed organiza-
tions. This is what I find so outrageous."
Mr. Solarz supported the McGovern Amendment in the
conference committee on the basis of State Department assurances
that it was not being used to admit PLO members. Having learned
the truth, Mr. Solarz expressed interest in reopening the con-
ference committee discussion of the McGovern Amendment.
At about the same time, you wrote to Secretary of State
Vance complaining that
"It has come to my attention that the Department
of State and the Department of Justice have both
been describing the McGovern Amendment to last
year's Foreign Relations Authorization Act (Section
112 of Public Law 95-105) as requiring that non-
immigrant visas be granted to members cf the
Palestinian Liberation Organization."
- 8 -
This letter, dated August 25, a solid month after Senator Stone
inserted the State Department press briefing papers into the
Congressional Record, urges the State Department to
"Clarify its briefing papers in this matter,
stating that whereas the amendment does mandate
a change in the process of dealing with visa
applicants who belong to proscribed organizations,
it in no sense requires that visas be granted to
members of the Palestinian Liberation Organization."
The timing of your letter suggests that you decided to
address yourself to the PLO question after it appeared that
there was a possibility of the conference being reopened. The
fact is, Senator, that you knew, no later than July 26, not only
that the McGovern Amendment was used to admit individuals con-
nected with the PLO, but who these individuals were. In the
July 26 debate, you said:
"Mr. President, I asked the State Department
to prepare a list of the persons who have come
to the United States over the past year who
might be said to have come in under the terms
of the McGovern Amendment
it can be said that
in the past year approximately 40 persons have
come to the United States who, in past years,
according to past policies, would not have been
allowed to come to the United States."
I have a copy of that list of 40 that you got from the State
Department. It contains the names of four people connected with
the PLO. I assume you read that list before you called your
colleagues' attention to it. Why did you not speak out on this
matter then? Why did you not respond to Senator Stone? Why did
you not discuss this in the conference committee, when there was
an opportunity to clarify the language of the McGovern Amendment
so as to eliminate any ambiguity about the PLO?
Your final, fall-back position on PLO question is
that your amendment in "no sense requires that visas be granted
to members of the Palestinian Liberation Organization," for the
same reason, presumably, that it doesn't require that visas be
issued to anybody: "my amendment does not affect the overall
discretion of the Executive Branch on any applicant since it
applies only to the recommendation of a waiver by the Secretary
of State and not to the final decision of the Attorney General."
- 9 -
This, Senator, is simply a cop-out. You cannot escape
responsibility for a policy you have promoted by arguing that
the Executive Branch doesn't have to carry it out. Strictly
speaking, the Secretary of State doesn't have tc recommend
the admission of excludable aliens, and the Attorney General
doesn't have to accept the Secretary's recommendation. But
to argue for your amendment on the grounds that it has no
effect anyway strikes me as peculiar.
"If one takes the McGovern Amendment at all seriously--
and the Executive Branch clearly does--one must recognize that
the PLO question and the Soviet trade union question are the
same. I am not so worried about individual PLO members coming
into the U.S. under the McGovern Amendment and engaging in acts
of violence. We have the means to prevent that, nothwithstanding
your amendment. Similarly, I am not so worried about KGB agents
coming here as "trade unionists" and engaging in espionage and
subversion. I think we have the means to deal with that problem,
too.
What I am concerned about is conferring legitimacy and
respectability on either the PLO or Soviet "trade unions." You
say the issue between us "is not the nature of our adversary but
rather how we respond to that adversary." Again, I say you are
wrong. We differ on how to respond to our adversary precisely
because we differ on the nature of our adversary.
him President Sincerely, 11/mmy
-Enclosure
GEORGE MCGOVERN
SOUTH DAKOTA
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
August 10, 1978
Dear Mr. Meany:
I think it now fair to conclude that you and I have a basic
difference of opinion regarding the merits of the so-called
McGovern Amendment.
Your letter of August second goes to great lengths to imply
that this difference arises out of my inability to understand
the deficiencies of the Soviet system in general and of Soviet
"trade unions" in particular. This is not the case, for the
issue is not the nature of our adversary but rather how we
respond to that adversary. You are obviously offended by
the use of "trade unionist" to describe a Communist repre-
senting an organization which bears no resemblance to the
American trade unions you lead. This is understandable.
But I disagree entirely with your conclusion that because
this nomenclature is offensive - because such a person is
not really a trade unionist but rather part of the Soviet
governmental structure - he should be barred from a visit
to the United States.
The logical consequences of such reasoning are fairly obvious:
Since most Soviet institutions are, in some sense, a part of
that structure, then other persons I not just "trade unionists"
- should also be barred from our country if your logic is to
be applied consistently. Soviet "scholars" would have to be
kept out because their scholarship is often used to buttress
Marxist dogma. Under your logic, the Soviet "parliamentarians"
(from the Supreme Soviet) who visited Congress earlier this year
should have been rejected. Soviet "journalists" here should be
expelled. We should cease contacts with state-supported Soviet
"athletes" and performing "artists, " who are instruments of
propaganda. And most surely, our elected President should
avoid any summit meeting with a Soviet leader who purports
to be "democratically" selected.
RECEIVED
AUG 14 1978
PRESIDENT'S OFFICE
- 2 .
I cannot-see how our national interests would be served if
American scholars, parliamentarians, journalists, athletes,
artists, and Presidents adopted your reasoning and insisted
on shunning any U. S. contact with their "illegitimate"
counterparts. Are you asking for one visa criteria for so-
called trade unionists, misnamed or otherwise, and another
visa criteria for other applicants?
Your letter raises four points you feel require clarification:
(1) The first concerns the discrepancy between my figures
and yours on persons who have come to the U. S. under the
McGovern Amendment. The figures I used were supplied by
the State Department and I presented them without distortion.
As I stated in my remarks on the Senate floor, however, this
is an inherently imprecise matter, because the McGovern
Amendment did no more than mandate the Secretary of State
to use, in certain circumstances, a waiver-recommending
authority he already possessed. Since this Administration
was intent upon exercising that authority quite frequently
even in the absence of the McGovern Amendment, its effect
was to encourage and formalize a trend already in effect.
(2) You argue that the McGovern Amendment is not required
under the terms of the Helsinki Act because the Act makes no
mention of trade unionists and because the United States
indicated at Helsinki its long-standing policy of excluding
Communist trade unionists. What is "required" by the Final
Act is, of course, not subject to precise definition, but I would
agree with the Commission on Security and Cooperation in
Europe that past U. S. visa practices "can scarcely be recon-
ciled with the overall thrust of the Helsinki accord.' Moreover,
the McGovern Amendment is not directed at trade unionists in
particular, but at affirming an important general principle
- that United States visa policy should not discriminate solely
on grounds of organizational or ideological affiliation. You
charge that, by causing us to "recognize as legitimate trade
union institutions that repress workers" and by encouraging
- 3 .
"relations and contacts with the representatives of these
institutions, the McGovern Amendment represents an
Orwellian interpretation of the Helsinki Act. I would say
that yours is an Orwellian interpretation of the McGovern
Amendment. It has nothing to do with recognizing an
organization as legitimate. Nor does it encourage relations
between legitimate and illegitimate trade unions. It is neutral
on both points.
(3) Regarding the value of exchanges that do occur, you
speak disparagingly, citing Soviet "trade unionists" who,
after visits to the United States, have not returned to the
Soviet Union openly praising the merits of the American
system. I wonder why you would expect otherwise in a
society as repressive as you know the Soviet Union to be.
The absence of immediate and obvious gains is hardly an
adequate basis for repudiating the value of expanding human
contacts. The whole premise for exchange-of-persons
activities is that they work over the long-term, steadily
increasing the number of people with firsthand knowledge
and thereby slowly eroding ignorance and misperception.
(4) You object to my saying that I did not realistically expect
the Soviet Union to comply with all of its obligations under the
Helsinki Final Act. I stand by that and reiterate that only a
dreamer would have. What the Final Act did was set a
standard to which we and others can be held accountable.
We sacrifice nothing by abiding by the spirit of Helsinki. On
the contrary, we greatly strengthen our ability to win admirers
around the world and also, by our example over the long term,
to foster change in the Communist systems of which neither
you nor I approve.
I am sorry that the Senate's passage of the repeal amendment,
which you so actively supported, has provided grist for
propaganda against the United States by Communist countries
which, embarrassed by their own deficiencies in meeting the
4
Helsinki standard, were pleased by the opportunity to
excoriate the United States for hypocrisy. In that this
embarrassment for the Administration's human rights
effort was quite predictable, I regret that your determina-
tion to express disapproval of Soviet "trade unions" took
priority over your concern for our country's international
standing.
There is one final point: The effect of your position as
advanced by Senator Baker is to deny visas except by a
formal waiver request from the Secretary of State to
members of all Communist parties around the world
- including party members from western European
countries such as Italy, France and Spain, who in some
instances have been independent if not outspokenly critical
of Soviet policies. I have enough confidence in American
democracy to believe that our people can withstand contact
with visitors whose ideology differs from ours. I even
believe that our way of life is appealing enough so that we
might modestly influence the thinking of some of our
Communist visitors. I see no reason to make a "federal
case" out of every visa application from those whose views
and party affiliation differ from yours and mine.
Sincerely yours,
Deogr Domem
George McGovern
George Meany, President
AFL-CIO
815 - 16th Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C. 20006
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
GEORGE MEANY
LANE KIRKLAND
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABORI
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY-TREASURER
815 SIXTEENTH STREET. N.W.
PAUL HALL
JOHN M. LYONS
A. F. GROSPIRON
AFL
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20006
MATTHEW GUINAN
PETER BOMMARITO
THOMAS W. GLEASON
FREDERICK O'NEAL
JERRY WURF
S. FRANK RAFTERY
GEORGE HARDY
AL H. CHESSER
MARTIN J. WARD
WILLIAM SIDELL
JOSEPH P. TONELLI
CONGRESS
(202) 637.5000
MURRAY H. FINLEY
ALBERT SHANKER
C.L. DELLUMS
GLENN E. WATTS
SOL C. CHAIKIN
EDWARD T. HANLEY
ANGELO FOSCO
OF
CHARLES H. PILLARD
WILLIAM M. McCLENNAN
1. C. TURNER
LLOYD McBRIDE
DAVID J. FITZMAURICE
KENNETH T. BLAYLOCK
INDUSTRIAL
EMMET ANDREWS
ALVIN E. HEAPS
HARRY R. POOLE
WM. W. WINPISINGER
WILLIAM H. WYNN
FRED J. KROLL
July 25, 1978
TO: The United States Senate
Dear Senator:
I am writing to urge your support for a bipartisan amendment to the Foreign
Assistance Bill which would repeal the so-called McGovern Amendment passed last
year.
The McGovern Amendment, you will recall, lifted virtually all restrictions on
the issuance of entry visas to Communists in the name of encouraging the U.S. and
other signatories to the Helsinki Final Act to comply with its provisions. For
example, this amendment permits Soviet agents to come to this country in the
guise of "trade union" representatives, despite the fact that Soviet "unions" are not
genuine workers organizations but instrumentalities of the Soviet state designed to
enforce labor discipline.
The McGovern Amendment has clearly failed in its purpose of encouraging
Soviet compliance with the human-rights provisions of the Final Act. No sooner
was the Amendment passed then Soviet authorities denied exit visas to Dr. Andrei
Sakharov and five other Soviet citizens invited to the AFL-CIO convention in
December.
Since then the Soviet Union has stripped Mstislav Rostropovich and General
Pyotr Grigorenko of their citizenship, put Vladimir Klebanov and his fellow workers
in mental institutions for attempting to form genuine trade unions, sentenced Yuri
Orlov, Anatoly Shcharansky and Aleksandr Ginzburg to cruel prison terms, and
persecuted countless others for the "crime" of seeking their government's
compliance with the Helsinki Accord.
For the United States to go far beyond the requirements of Helsinki, as the
McGovern Amendment does, while the Soviet Union not only fails to live up to the
accord but jails those of its citizens who think that it should, is to accept and
perpetuate an imbalance in U.S.-Soviet relations that the American people should
not tolerate. How much longer should we acquiesce in an arrangement by which
KGB agents disguised as "trade unionists" can visit the United States, at the
invitation of Americans sympathetic to the Soviet system, but men like Andrei
Sakharov and other voices for human freedom in the Soviet Union, invited by
mainstream American organizations like the AFL-CIO, are not permitted to come
here?
- 2 -
Repeal of the McGovern Amendment would be a specific, reasonable and
moderate response by our government to the accelerating Soviet violations of the
Final Act. It would reassure the American people that their government intends to
deal with the Soviet Union on the basis of reciprocity. It would serve notice on the
Soviet Union that we do intend to hold them to the provisions of the Final Act.
And it may give fresh hope to the Orlovs, Sakharovs, Shcharanskys, and Ginzburgs
that the United States will not passively observe their persecution without exacting
any penalty from their persecutors.
Sincerely,
President
STATEMENT OF KENNETH YOUNG, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATION,
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS,
BEFORE THE
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE, WASHINGTON, D.C.
April 5, 1979
My name is Kenneth Young. I am the Legislative Director of the
AFL-CIO, and I welcome the opportunity to appear before this distin-
guished commission as it reviews our government's compliance with the
1975 Helsinki Accords.
For the last two days, Mr. Chairman, your sessions have been
devoted to "reviewing the U.S. performance in the areas of civil and
polítical and economic, social and cultural human rights." I do not
believe that I need to review for this body the range of activities
through which the American labor movement has sought to extend and
perfect our Government's performance in all of these areas.
Surely, no group has given more vigorous support to the Presi-
dent's human rights campaign. No group has been more conscious of
the profound interconnections among the social, economic and political
dimensions of the human rights struggle. No group has insisted more
forcefully on a single standard of compliance with the provisions of
the Helsinki Accord, regardless of whether the violators of human
rights line up on the left or the right side of the aisle.
Having said this by way of introduction, Mr. Chairman, I should
like to turn to the specific issue on which you have invited our views:
Helsinki-related criticism of U.S. visa laws and procedures.
- 2 -
Two years ago, as you know, the Congress adopted the McGovern
Amendment, which lifted virtually all restrictions on the issuance
of entry visas to Communists in the name of encouraging the U.S. and
other signatories to the Helsinki Final Act to comply with its pro-
visions. Last year, the Senate voted to repeal the McGovern Amend-
ment, but this action was overturned in conference. The AFL-CIO
supported the Senate action, and we shall again seek a change in the
law from this Congress.
Mr. Chairman, I shall not rehearse the arguments that persuaded
the Senate that the McGovern Amendment had failed to achieve its
purpose of encouraging the Soviet-bloc signatories to comply with
the Helsinki Accord. In the wake of the Scharansky, Ginsburg and
Orlov trials, no one was prepared to defend the McGovern Amendment on
that ground. Rather, the supporters of the Amendment agrued that this
change in our visa laws was required to bring the United States into
compliance with the Helsinki Accords.
The AFL-CIO is not seeking to exercise thought control or to
close our borders to people who don't agree with us. The enforcement of
ideological conformity is not the objective of a labor movement which
contains within itself many diverse viewpoints.
It is, however, our objective to promote free trade unionism
throughout the world -- an objective we believe serves the interests
of the United States -- and in the pursuit of this objective we
consider it crucial that a clear distinction be made between genuine
unions that represent the interests of their workers and labor fronts
that serve as instruments of totalitarian states whether they be on
the "left or the "right." This distinction is blurred and enfeebled
by the issuance of visas to so-called Soviet trade unionists as
trade unionists.
- 3 -
We believe, Mr. Chairman, that totalitarian labor fronts have
absolutely no interest in the human rights of workers. Certainly,
they have no interest in recruiting these workers to organize inde-
pendent unions representing worker interests as contrasted to
government interests.
Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, this Commission has contributed
to the problem. We were greatly disturbed to read in your August 1,
1977, report the following:
"U.S. practice, in short, is discriminatory.
The grounds for the discrimination -- that
Communist unionists are government agents and
neither free nor true representatives of
workers -- reflect a mind-set the Final Act
does not condone."
If it is the judgment of this Commission, Mr. Chairman,
that the long-held view of American labor -- that so-called Soviet
"trade unionists" are not true representatives of workers -- is a
state of mind rendered impermissible by the Helsinki Accords, then
we stand guilty of violating the Accords.
We believe, however, that the contrary is true, and that the
statement quoted above subverts the overall thrust of the Commission's
work, which we have applauded repeatedly in the past. The promotion
of human rights compliance -- the implicit purpose of this Commission
-- flounders once the distinction between free and unfree institu-
tions is lost.
The AFL-CIO position is clear and uncomplicated. If a leader
of a legitimate trade union -- a union which engages in collective
bargaining on behalf of its members -- happens to be a Communist,
- 4 -
we do not on that ground demand that he be denied a visa. We, as
democratic trade unionists, may decline to have anything to do with
him -- as is our right -- but we are not a priori demanding that the
Government bar him. What we do seek simply, is the restoration of
the ban on representatives of totalitarian labor fronts. It is not
the ideology of the individual but the character of the institution
that concerns us.
We are adamantly opposed to the U.S. Government conferring
trade union legitimacy on organizations which serve as instruments
of the state for the purpose of enforcing labor discipline and nega-
ting the rights of workers.
Whatever this Congress may decide about the future of the
:
McGovern Amendment, the AFL-CIO will not betray the workers of
the Soviet Union by breaking bread with their oppressors.
With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I also append to my
testimony letters to President Meany from Anatoly Marchenko and
Vladimir Borisov -- Soviet workers who were prevented by Soviet
authorities from accepting our invitation to attend our convention.
I request that these letters be made a part of the record. Mr.
Borisov has recently been arrested for trying to form an indepen-
dent workers organization. I also attach information from our
monthly international affairs publication, The Free Trade Union News,
on the efforts of Vladimir Klebanov to form a workers organization --
efforts repaid by incarceration in a mental institution. The efforts
of these workers to form independent workers organizations speak more
eloquently and directly than our own statements to the real character
of the official Soviet "trade unions."
- 5 -
We are astounded that the Soviet crackdown on these heroic
workers should be rewarded by an American governmental policy that
would confer an increasing recognition and respectability on the
fraudulent institutions that oppress them.
For the AFL-CIO, a crucial issue before this Commission must
be the distinction between genuine -- even if imperfect -- trade
unions and totalitarian labor fronts. Maybe businessmen, academicians
churchmen, government officials, military men and others have counter-
parts in the Soviet Union or China. We do not.
There simply are no free trade unions in totalitarian states.
It is important for this Commission to recognize this fact and to deny
legitimacy to those who would masquerade as genuine trade unionists.
This is all we ask.
Dear Mr. Meany,
I would like to express to you my helated gratitude for the
honor you have bestowed upon me by inviting me to the AFL-CIO convention.
The Soviet authorities refused to give me permission to visit
the United States, stating that the millions-strong working class
of the United States does not have the right to invite me as a
private person, and if it did have this right then it could
only do so through the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions
( VTsSPS) of which I am not a representative,
Indeed, not only am I not a representative of the VTsSPS,
I am not even a member of this appendage of the state-party apparatus,
which the VTsSPS constitutes in our country. This is because I withdrew
from this organization many years ago, when I became convinced that
official trade unions in my homeland not only do not defend the
rights of workers, but objectively facilitate the enslavement of
the working class as well as
the entire population.
Under such circumstances I can place my sole hope on
the new independent trade-union and workers' movement which is
undergoing its birth pangs.
Today this movement finds itself in a stage of formation,
but the objective necessity for such a movement, its timeliness
(which is expressed if only in the fact that its ideas are
arising independently in the minds of many people scattered
throughout the vast resches of our homeland, and which
are finding resonance in the hearts of many, despite our very
low level of legal consciousness), strengthens the certainty
that this movement will grow and shall become one of the decisive
forces for bringing about significant change in our country. It
is a movement that is capable of compelling the authorities
to respect the rights of workers, as well as human rights in
general.
But today, I repeat, our independent trade-union and workers'
movement is undergoing a very difficult period of formation, a period
when the movement, without having yet grown strong, without having been
able to stand firmly on its own two feet, is attacked by the full
punishing force of the totalitarian state-employer, a state which is
the exploiter and abcolute monopolist in the realm of prices as well
as wages. We are in a period when, one after another, the activists
of our workers' movement are arrested and thrown behind prison
bars or special psychiatric prison hospitals.
Recently, on October 13; 1978, one of the most
energetic activists of our independent trade-union movement and
a fighter for the revival of the workers' movement, Vladimir
Skvirsky, was arrested on charges fabricated 'by the authorities.
Having been humiliated by the trials of last summer (those
of Aleksandr Ginzburg and Anatoly Shcharansky -- trans.), the
authorities decided not to confronthim with political charges, but
fabricated a trumped-up criminal case, inaccordance with a
well-honed technique, as was done in the cases involving Malva
Landa, Kirill Podrabinek, Felix Serebrov, Vladimir Slepak, Valeria
Makaycva, and many others. A week before his arrest, Skvirsky was
-2-
dismissed from his job, after members of the KGB visited his
supervisors. Since the late 1950s Vladimir Skvirsky linked
his personal fate with the struggle for human rights; he took
part in the democratic movement and helped facilitate the birth
of the workers' movement. Consequently, by arresting him>the author-
ities have dealt a severe blow to the independent trade-union movement.
This is a time of great difficulty for us, and I, as
a person who bears a direct connection to the workers' and
independent trade-union movement, turn to you and through you,
to the working class and the trade unions of the United States
with a request that you give us active help. I turn to you
with a call for international solidarity among workers.
Basing my observation on those scanty sources of information
which we are able to glean at no small effort, on the develop-
ments in world affairs, and the ideological and political
conflicts which are taking place, I have become increasingly
convinced that in our struggle it is impossible to hope for the
support of those political leaders and governments whose viewpoints
and actions depend almost totally on the political, economic,
and tactical gains
of the moment, and whose blindness
was so accurately noted by Lenin in 1921 ( I have in mind the
passage from Lenin's writings which you quoted during your
testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
a quote which eloquently reveals the entire essence of the USSR's
foreign policy and, in some measure, its internal policies
in the decades ahead).
At the same time, I am convinced that the working class
and the trade unions of the entire world are much more capable of
soberly understanding the essence of events which are occurring
throughout the world. The aspirations of trade-union and workers'
movements toward a solidarity between workers of all countries, toward
a solidarity among peoples, which flows out of the very idea of the
trade union, along with the struggle for the unfettering of the
oppressed and the struggle for human rights in general, assure
us that we will not stand alone.
Once again, I turn to you, as the representative of the
largest trade-union association in the United States, and through
you to the workers of the entire world, with a call to solidarity,
with a call to demonstrate your active help and support for the
fledgling trade-union movement in the USSR. I turn to you in
the name of our freedom and yours, in the name of the
implementation of workers' rights and of rights throughout the
world.
Mr. Meany! Since I do not have the means for disseminating
information, I ask you, in our name, to forward our appeal to the
workers of all countries:
Workers of the World!
The governments of your countries, as your representatives,
-3-
have concluded international agreements with the Soviet Union
in the sphere of human rights, as well as in the area of
workers' rights. Yet, they have shown themselves to be
powerless in forcing the Soviet Union to honor its own
obligations. They are much more interested in momentary
political expediency, and for this sake they allow the
precisely delineated international obligations assumed by
Soviet party and state leaders to be turned into amorphous,
and in no way binding , declarations!
Compel the Soviet Union to respect your own rights,
the rights given you by the obligations which the Soviet Union has assumed
We believe that you have greater strength, possibilities,
and determination than your governments!
Give your active support to the independent trade-union
movement in the USSR and win the freedom of Vladimir Skvirsky
and all arrested members of the workers' movement in my
homeland!
Dear Mr. Meany!
For quite some time now, I have wanted to send you a
simple, personal letter, but each time I sat down to do so the
immediate problems of our eventful life tore me nway from my writing
paper. These same circumstances have now compelled me to address
an open, public letter to you, rather than a letter of a personal
nature. Please try to understand and forgive mel
With profound respect for you and your long-lasting :
struggle for human rights throughout the world,
Sincerely yours,
Vladimir Borisov
October 1978
Dear Convention participants:
By listening to a foreign radio, I learned that I. was invited by
you as a guest. I thank you for the invitation. I was not able to accept
it, since I did not even receive it. One of those invited along with me -
Vladimir Borisov -- did receive his invitation but could not get an exit
visa. He was told that "he did not represent anybody."
Recently some of our citizens visited the U.S. as invitees of the
American National Committee of Labor Union Action for Democracy. At first
they had certain problems with their U.S. entry visas, but they received
Soviet exit visas with no difficulty. Whom do they represent? Metailurgists,
school-teachers, the trade union masses in general? Not at all. They are
the eyes, ears, and mouthpiece of our regime.
They told us about the desperate situation of one black woman worker;
that American teachers beat their pupils and that some American highschool
graduates don't know how to read; that there is inadequate industrial
safety technology in American mines; and that American workers have a
friendly attitude toward the USSR. That was all they derived from a two-
week trip through the U.S.
How much does that poor black woman make, and what can she buy for her
pay? Are her five children in school, and how does she pay for their medical
care? Where, how, and in what schools did America train its scientists,
who year after year have come away with most of the Nobel prizes? Perhaps
they are semi-literate? What is the accident rate at an American mine?
There was nothing concrete -- only a general and grim picture.
If Semyonova had not visited you as a representative, she might have
possibly shared with your teachers the fact that in our schools there is
also a low level of education -- I know more than a few semi-literate
-2-
people who have recently graduated from our schools. And the miner Gatsenko,
perhaps, might have told about the systematic practice we have of not
registering on-the-job injuries so as not to spoil the statistics and not
to deprive a shop or a team of its bonuses. But our representatives,
judging by the newspaper account, did not see a single positive feature
in the life of working America, and enriched you with the information that
we walk around in shoes and our women use cosmetics.
The reporting of their trip is published in the column "Chronicle
of Detente." Apparently this means that now you and we, American and
Soviet working people, know each other better. But we used to read the
same sort of stuff about America thirty years ago in the worst years of the
Cold War.
If I could visit America, I would not only demonstrate my shoes, but:
I would tell you that I paid a fifth of my monthly wage for them. I would
tell you what the concept of "general employment" means to us, and what,
other than cosmetics, the workers are concerned with. In all this I would
base myself on my own recent experience of work at a timber-processing
enterprise in the Siberian settlement of Chuna. This experience is typical
enough of our system of production and does not contradict official statistics.
It was not your fault or mine that I was unable to visit you. Still,
I would like my short statement to be heard at your convention. And so let
me tell you about the workers' life in a Siberian settlement, Chuna. Of course,
I will not try to describe all aspects of this life; I will touch on three
questions only.
The average pay of our workers is approximately at the level of the
official average pay in the whole country, that is about 160 rubles per
month. How does the worker earn this salary? In the drying section, the
-3-
sorting and stacking of boards is done only by hand. Mostly women are
used for this work. The damp boards coming in from the lumber mill measure
five meters in length, and 19-60 mm. in thickness. The production quota
for each worker, be it a man or a woman, is from 10-17 cubic meters per
shift, paid for at the rate of 23-40 kopeks per cubic meter. Thus a worker
can make no more than four rubles per shift, or not more than 120 rubles
a month. Added to this is a "distance coefficient" of twenty percent. If
the plan is overfulfilled (more than 400 cubic meters per person per month)
a bonus is added. All this barely reacher 160 rubles per month. But this
salary is not guaranteed. In the first place, because of bad organization
of labor the fulfillment of the plan does not at all depend on the worker
himself. Secondly, the bonus is awarded only when the monthly plan is met
by the whole section or shop, but not by the individual worker. And there
are a thousand reasons why the section might not meet its plan, and these
also do not depend on the worker. In order to fulfill the plan and receive
the bonus, at the end of the month people have to work not the one shift of
seven to eight hours, as established by law, but two shifts in a row, even
including days off. These extra hours are not registered and no overtime
is paid for them. The management of the trade union, together with the
plant administration, organizes these illegal extra shifts. This happens
because the trade union does not defend the interests of the workers but
the interests of the state, while the fulfillment of the plan is the chief
indicator of its work.
I chose not to work additional shifts, and I was fired from the plant
for "breaking labor discipline" on the decision of the union and plant
committees.
The workers of the drying section work in any weather under an open
sky, that is, in winter in temperatures lower than minus 40 degrees Celcius.
The law states that extra pay, the so-called "below-freezing coefficient,"
must be paid under such conditions. But this is not paid to us, with the
knowledge and approval of the trade union.
Often the weight of the boards exceeds the maximum weight limit set
for women or adolescents. Adolescents are put to work in pairs with adults,
that is, on an equal basis with them. I refused to work with an adolescent,
and the shop foreman punished me by transferring the to other work.
In the settlement there are a lot of people from elsewhere, for instance,
from the Ukraine; a round trip takes them 12 to 14 days. Most of the workers
at the plant receive 15 days paid vacation. This means that relatives are
separated for years.
The whole plant, except for the drying section, works in two shifts.
:
Working these shifts are also women with small children, of whom there are
very many at the plant. All the kindergardens and nurseries in Chuna are
operated in the daytime only. In order not to leave the children alone,
married people arrange to work different shifts, and they see each other
only on days off. It is even worse for mothers without husbands: they are
forced to leave their small children at night completely alone. An acquaintance
of mine tells me that her children (aged seven and ten) don't go to sleep
until she returns from the second shift, that is until two clock in the
morning.
Women go to work under such conditions because a family cannot live
on one average salary. (Incidentally, our statistics are silent about
the minimum wages necessary to live in the Soviet Union.)
Can a family live on 160 rubles per month? The following things can
be bought for this sum of money: one and a half decent suits; one third of
-5-
a black-and-white television sct; one round-trip ticket from Chuna to
Moscow by air; two wheels for the subcompact car "Moskvich"; or three to
five children's overcoats.
A kilogram of meat in the store costs two rubles; a kilogram of dried
per litre
fruit -- 1.60; milk -- 28 kopeks; eggs -- .90 to 1.30 for ten; butter --
3.60 per kilogram. But most of the time none of this is available in the
stores. If one is able to buy anything privately, one must pay almost
twice as much: a kilogram of pork costs four rubles; milk --- 40 kopeks
per litre.
Judging from all this, you can see for yourself how far our average
monthly pay goes to cover the minimum needs of the family. We may not
have unemployment, but the average pay of a worker here is probably less
than your unemployment compensation.
It is said that our rents are the lowest in the world; rent for an
apartment is only one eighth or one tenth of an average salary. My friend
pays 17 rubles a month for his apartment. He and his wife, two working
daughters, and a highschool senior son live in a two adjoining room apartment
(16 X 12 sq. meters) with a tiny, hardly passable corridor, a same size
kitchen and a combined bathrcom. Their house, which contains many apartments,
has facilities: central heating, an electric stove in the kitchen, hot and
cold running water, and indoor plumbing. That is the naximum of conveniences
known to us.
About a quarter of the Chuna population lives in houses like this.
Half of the two-story, sixteen-apartment buildings have no facilities: common
lavatories -- cold wooden outhouses in the back yard, water at a street pump,
heating by stoves. The rest of the settlement's people live in their own or
-6-
government owned huts, also without, of course, any facilities whatever;
often there is not even a water pump, but a manually operated well, several
hundred mcters from the house. We have no standards by which a dwelling
may be declared a hovel unfit for habitation. If people live there, it
means it must be usable. Such living is guaranteed for us in the 21st
Century also: "In the Tenth Five Year Plan it is planned to create for the
use of more than ... 60% of the population well-equipped housing with
heating, water, and plumbing." This is the report of the chairman of the
Chuna regional executive committee, G. M. Krivenko, at the eighth session
of the regional soviet. (Kommunisticheskiy Put' (Communist Way) 28 August 1977).
This means that the remaining 40% of the people will go on using board
outhouses at 40° below zero.
What part of our people is provided with even housing such as this is
unknown. In Chuna families wait for years to get an apartment, and meanwhile
rent what they can get privately: a summer outside kitchen, a bath, a
room or a corner in the owners' room. And the rent here is not just symbolic:
for a tiny room of six square meters they pay 10 rubles; while in Moscow rent
for a one-room apartment reaches 50-60 rubles per month.
All. our citizens have equal rights, including rights to the amenities
of life. But recently I learned from an article written by the First Secretary
of the Minsk City Committee of the CPSU, Bartoshevich, that among the
equals there are those who are "most equal," to whom these amenities are given
at top priority. I know this myself in practice. Everyday I pass by Shchors
Street. On one side of the street there are modern private houses with large
windows, naturally with all facilities, and with a telephone. They are
inhabited by the regional and factory bosses, and they don't have five square
-7-
meters living space per person, such as is available to my friend, a driver.
The people who live on the opposite side of the street drag sleds with
containers to the nearest pump, and each backyard there is decorated by a
collective outhouse. Obviously, there were not enough water and sewer
pipes to go around.
If anybody from the "most equal" set gets sick, he also gets special
medical attention. He will have a place in a separate ward, and he will
receive scarce medicine and food, and not half a ruble a day's worth, as
in the case of any ordinary patient.
The "most equals" will know only by hearsay whether there is meat or
milk in the stores. Everything they need is delivered to their homes, and
there is always enough for them of everything, from food to books.
In this way the principle of pay according to work performed has been
transformed into amenities given for service to the state and one's place
in the state hierarchy. Our whole society is riddled with hierarchy. With
permanent shortages of the most necessary goods, this principle reaches
ludicrous heights. In our settlement there exist several distribution systems
in addition to the one for the bosses. Lumberjacks can buy fur jackets,
and the other residents of this Siberian settlement get them only if any
remain. Today they brought eggs to the store for the workers of the Baikal-
Amur Mainline; the workers at the plant get only canned pressed meat; it is
handed out right at the plant, so that outsiders cannot somehow get at it.
People living on pensions will get neither one nor the other.
You can replace a fur jacket with a padded jacket, but you cannot replace
a child's eggs with potatoes.
In the women's dormitory on the Baikal-Amur Mainline project, "the
most essential things are lacking: a kitchen table, rugs on the walls to
-8-
prevent the cold from secping through, a dresser. The girls sleep in blankets
without top sheets. It seems that they don't exist in any of the other dormitories
either, with a few exceptions.
'We issue them only to exemplary individuals. Those who behave themselves,'
is the explanation of A. Ya. Ostrolutsky, chief of the Housing department." "
The preceding quote was taken by me from the regional newspaper, Com-
munist Way, dated 7 May 1977.
And thus the principle of hierarchical distributionof goods extends to
everything: from sheets to cottages equipped with toilet paper.
Such conditions for the working people of our huge country are possible
only because we are totally without rights in our own home. In the USSR
the administration, the labor union, the organs of power and those of
repression are all links in one chain, which has totally fettered our whole
people. All organizations, including the church, are under the control of
a small group of rulers and are subordinate to them. Let our sixty years
experience serve as a warning to other peoples!
I can understand those Americans who may be dissatisfied with the
political, social, or even economic conditions in their country. I sympathize
with their striving for a better life. But when I read the ecstatic reports
of your compatriots about my country, I would like to address them with the
words of our contemporary song: "If you envy this, you can come and sit
next to me." Yes, next to my stove, next to me on a bed without sheets,
next to me in a communal outhouse (preferably in the winter time).
I invite as my guests to Chuna Messrs. Mike Davidoff, Gus Hall, and
anybody else, together with their families. If they agree, I will file
official invitations for them. I also invite any delegate of your convention
who is willing to visit me, and I ask you to communicate his name to me so
-9-
that I may put together an official invitation.
Please accept my greetings to the convention and my best wishes for
your successful activities for the well-being of American workers, in the
name of further successes for the United States of America.
Chuna settlement, Irkutsk Oblast', 18 Chapayev Street,
A. MARCHENKO
1 December 1977
SEE ESPECIALLY PAGES
320 to 328.
PROCEEDINGS
OF THE
TWELFTH
CONSTITUTIONAL
CONVENTION
OF THE
AFL-CIO
DAILY
PROCEEDINGS
AND
EXECUTIVE
COUNCIL
REPORTS
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 8-13, 1977
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND
CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Seychelles
VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY
Margaret Baptiste, Treasurer, Seychelles Workers Education
USSR
Committee
Togo
President Meany, Mr. Kirkland, Delegates and guests at this
Awute Folikpo, State Secretary for the Public Sector, Togo
great Convention of free workers:
Workers National Confederation (CNTT)
Recently, during the celebration of the 60th anniversary of
Tanzania
Soviet power in Moscow, somebody made a very shaky compli-
ment to Mr. Brezhnev, "Comrade Brezhnev," he said, "In your
Leopold U.C. Pallahani, Assistant General Secretary Civil Ser-
seventy years, you look much younger than your country at six-
vants Union (NUTA)
ly."
Liberia
Frank G. Walker, Secretary General, United Workers Congress
And, really, sixty years of Communist power has brought the
country to a desperate situation-backward technology, devastat-
Mali
ed agriculture, the lowest living standard in Europe, and the
Seydou Diallo, Secretary General, National Workers Union of
absence of human rights. Crime and alcoholism have reached
Mali
unbelievable heights.
Mauritania
Given this record of failure, how can we explain why the Soviet
Malik Fall, Honorary President, Confederation of Workers of
regime not only remains in power but holds half of the world
Mauritania (UTM)
in fear and forces you to spend billions of dollars in armaments?
Niger
For one thing, the psychological situation created by Soviet
Boureima Mainassara, Secretary General, Trade Union Con-
propaganda has not changed much since Stalin's time; as before
federation of Workers of Niger (USTN)
all Soviet citizens from childhood on are saturated with the idea
Lesotho
that the Soviet Union finds itself in a capitalist encirclement,
Simon Molestane Jonathan, Lesotho Council of Workers
hostile and aggressive. It is enough to point out that any person
who tries to flee abroad or refuses to return to the USSR is
Zambia
considered by Soviet law to be a traitor, a deserter who has
Silvester Munda, Amalgamated Railway Workers Union
gone over to the enemy. The Soviet Union, loudly demanding
a cessation of the so-called "cold war," when talking about West-
Botswana
ern Countries, fully preserves the climate of the cold war within
Pelotelele Thaodi, Deputy General Secretary, Botswana Federa-
its own borders. For decades the idea has been suggested to
tion of Trade Unions
Soviet man that he has no right to demand improvements in
Ghana
the conditions of his life, no right to demand the observance
Adelaide Asihence, Branch Secretary, Veterinary Services
of human rights, since this is "grist for the enemy's will" and
Branch, General Agricultural Workers Union
is used by the enemy to weaken the country. Such an artificially
created atmosphere is vitally essential to uphold the Communist
PRESIDENT MEANY: At this time I want to present a speak-
dictatorship and is inseparable from it.
er who I'm sure you will listen to with a great deal of interest,
Vladimir Bukovsky. He is 35 years old, and he has spent 11
In 1962 in Novocherkassk the workers went on strike because
years of that 35 years in prison for his human rights activity,
their pay was cut and prices were raised on food at the same
for speaking the things that he wanted to speak about, even
time. The workers and their families went to the City Soviet
for thinking the thoughts that did not square with the philosophy
building with a petition. This was a totally peaceful procession,
of the communist dictators. He was freed a year ago in exchange
but it was met with machine gun fire. Dozens of people were
for a Chilean communist leader, Corvalan, who was in prison
killed and wounded. The organizers, including the women among
in Chile, and he was released to the Soviet Union and Bukovsky
them, were later condemned to be shot or to 15 years of imprison-
ment.
was set free. He has been in America for some months now.
He has talked to a number of our organizations throughout the
In 1976 in the city of Riga, four workers were sentenced to
country. I'm sure he has a human interest story that will keep you
up to three years after a strike called forth by the lack of
at attention for a few minutes, Vladimir Bukovsky. (Applause.)
meat in the stores.
312
313
The Soviet Union has signed various international conventions
we won't need so many workers," he said, "Half of you will
recognizing the right of workers to strike, but it has not bothered
be discharged. Who is in favor?"
to formulate this right in its own legislation. Moreover, a strike
Everybody was in favor. At this point the trade unionist lost
is regarded as a "gross group violation of public order," for
patience completely. "But we will not be able to feed those who
which one can be imprisoned for up to three years. This is for
a completely peaceful strike, merely for refusal to work. But
don't work, and thus everybody who is discharged will have to
be hanged. Who is in favor?"
methods of struggle such as sit-downs, picketing, etc., are pun-
ished according to the article entitled "mass disorders," with
Again everybody voted in favor. Suddenly one of the workers
sentences up to fifteen years or the death penalty.
raised his hand and requested permission to ask a question.
The fictitious Soviet labor unions exist to prevent a real work-
"Only one thing isn't clear to me," he said. "Will the rope
ers' movement from springing up. They do not protect the work-
for the hangings be provided by the government or must we
ers from hunger, arbitrary rules, and exploitation. The labor
bring our own (Applause.)
unions in the USSR are part of the party and governmental
apparatus and they are not concerned with the protection of
This is a very sad joke, but what do people have to console
working people but with the carrying out of party governmental
themselves with other than bitter jokes about their own situa-
plans.
tion?
More than anything else the Soviet press writes about strikes
Accustomed to lack of rights, Soviet workers prefer to steal
and unemployment in the West, creating a strange impression
from their place of work anything that can be sold on the
among Soviet workers. Many of them seriously believe that you
black market, in order somehow to feed their families, but they
are dying of hunger, because in the Soviet Union only a person
do not dare make open demands. This is very useful to the
facing death from starvation could decide on such a desperate
authorities, because in this way everybody is guilty and every-
measure as a strike. And to be paid for not working-that is
body can be tried, not for his political convictions, but for theft.
unbelievable. The authorities consider that a person is himself
In general, crime in the country is very widespread, and alcohol-
at fault if he cannot find work. Such people are declared to
ism, drug addiction, and prostitution flourish.
be "parasites" and are sent to Siberia to work at low-paid labor.
In all there are 3,000,000 prisoners in the country, a little
During its sixty years of existence, the Soviet regime has
more than one percent of the population. Such a high percentage
destroyed more than sixty million people-an average of one
of convicts is artificially supported by the government, mainly
million people a year. Because of this, as you might well imagine,
out of economic considerations.
the spirit of Soviet workers has been to some extent broken.
A prisoner is cheap labor, which can easily be shifted by the
The following ancedote is very popular in the Soviet Union:
authorities from one branch of the economy to another, sent
to do the most difficult and unprofitable work in underdeveloped
One Western trade unionist, visiting the USSR as a guest,
parts of the country with a difficult climate, to which free labor
could not understand why Soviet workers don't strike.
could be attracted only by offering very high pay.
"They don't want to," Soviet officials explained to him. "If
But what makes possible the long existence of this huge con-
you don't believe us, go and talk to them yourself. Try to provoke
centration camp called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics?
them into striking."
Is it only terror and the denial of rights?
The workers at one factory were called together, and the for-
I doubt that the creators of the theory of convergence supposed
eign guest addressed them as follows:
how literally their theory would realize itself!
"Beginning tomorrow you will work twice as hard and will
Soviet prisoners, forced into slave labor, cut down trees and
be paid half as little. Who votes in favor of this
make lumber. The Shah of Iran buys this lumber and uses it
Everybody voted in favor.
in mines where Iranian prisoners work. The British government
gets a loan from the Shah of Iran and lends the greater part
"Who is opposed?"
of it to the Soviet government. For us, however, such paradoxes
are no longer news. Beginning with almost the first years of
Nobody was opposed.
the Soviet regime, over fifty years ago, Western businessmen
The Western trade unionist was surprised, but continued the
have been helping the Communist leadership strengthen its
experiment. "In view of the fact that under this new system
power.
314
315
You know better than I, that the greatest building projects
of the first Five Year Plan were created exclusively with the
Some people here in the West try to prove that for people
help of western technology. Every time that the Soviet Union's
in backward countries the problem of human rights is not as
inellicient economy experiences need-in re-equipment, in support
essential as the struggle with poverty. I do not think that these
-western countries readily come to its aid. On the one hand—
two problems can be separated, because lack of rights gives
millions of slaves behind barbed wire eating crusts of bread
rise to poverty, and poverty strengthens the lack of rights.
and in fear of death. On the other hand, well fed businessmen
Precisely for this reason the movement for human rights in
are completely voluntarily building, strengthening, and enriching
the Soviet Union, along with purely intellectual rights, defends
this monstrous system of oppression, impossible to compare with
the rights of workers. More and more workers are joining our
anything in history. Why? For what?
movement. They understand that only thus can the vicious circle
My companions in prison refused to work for the Communist
of lack of rights and poverty be broken.
system. We, a handful of defenseless people without rights, un-
Last week, half a dozen workers gathered in a small apart-
derstood that we could not look people in the eye if we did
ment in Moscow to tell their experiences when they tried to
not refuse to participate in the building of this sytem. We were
exercise their "right of complaint."
deprived of food, we rotted in solitary, we were killed, but we
did not back away from our decision. We knew that each ruble
They were ordinary workers-among them a waitress, a coal
they squeezed out of us would turn into bullets-against you
miner, a locksmith and a housing maintenance man. They turned,
in the West-would turn into jails and concentration camps in
as a last resort, to the western press to expose the wrongdoings
Russia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and, it may be, in France, in
they had experienced.
Germany, in Switzerland. Forgive me my directness and frank-
"Our unions don't defend our rights," said the miner.
ness, but I think that I have earned the right to it. I speak
for millions of prisoners dying from hunger or scurvy or just
"Our unions aren't like western unions," said the locksmith.
killed, and I want to know: What for?
"Our unions have no power," said the waitress.
After decades of unheard of terror, after several generations
We are witnessing the beginning of a process which will lead
of people in the USSR have grown up in fear and conviction
that they are surrounded by fierce enemies who thirst for their
us to freedom, a process of working people recognizing their
destruction, and that every demand for natural human rights is
rights and their human dignity. Now the fate of our peoples
treason. Now in the USSR and in the countries of the Communist
will depend on your positions, on your solidarity and support.
world there have appeared people who by their actions and their
this. In the last analysis the fate of the whole world depends on
lives are dissipating this fear. With every year, with every pass-
ing day there are more and more of them. These are no longer
Approximately a year ago, I was released from prison. Since
just separate people but a whole movement which the authorities
then I have been traveling and making appeals to Western trade
have to reckon with.
unions, to their sense of solidarity with oppressed workers ev-
erywhere. Unfortunately, only infrequently have I seen a readi-
The Communist tyranny has built a unique machine of repres-
ness on their part to express this solidarity with Soviet workers.
sion, capable of destroying any plot, any invasion or revolt. But
Some English laborites explained to me that they did not want
this machine can do nothing with people who simply refuse to
to destroy their workers' illusions about the happy life in the
obey it. We are not trying to change the system by force or
Soviet Union.
create some sort of pre-conceived model of society. We merely
want to insure for the people the opportunity of making their
Earlier this year a prominent leader of the British Trades Union
will known, of freely expressing their likes and dislikes. We
Congress made a trip to East Germany and reported that he
know full well how easy it is to lose freedom and how agonizing-
felt "quite at home" there. I wonder whether he would feel
ly hard it is to get it back. We know that initially democracy
himself "quite at home" in my prison cell.
is born in the minds of men and only later becomes a fact
of life in society. It is a slow-appearing and brittle growth, requir-
Another British Laborite, Alex Keatson, went to the Soviet
ing tender, attentive cultivation and care. So please help it. Trade
Union for the 60th Anniversary celebration and said: "How pleas-
and economic relations are a powerful weapon of interference
ant it is to be in this country, where the situation is quite
in the life of a country. So interfere, but interfere on the side
different than in my country. Long live the October Revolution
of the people and not on the side of the tyrants! This, after
and unions in the USSR."
all, is in our common interest!
I would like to know what is the solidarity of these people
316
317
who still regard themselves as the defenders of workers and their
interests.
Most of the western representatives at Belgrade appear bent
on pursuing a policy of detente which necessarily leads to limited
Such irresponsible behavior cannot help our workers. It only
sovereignty for some countries. For what else can one say of
makes men bitter.
a policy which secs war or slavery as the only alternatives?
It is completely evident that Western capital investments in
forms of slavery.
If we want to avoid war, we are told, we must accept some
the USSR, which are calculated to exploit cheap labor, are direct-
ly harmful to the interests of Western workers. I am certain
An equal exchange of people and information is one of the
that western labor unions at least have the right to investi-
basic principles of the Helsinki Agreements. And we have always
gate all cases of investment of western capital in the USSR
consistently demanded its observance. But we demanded a real
and the conditions of labor and pay in the areas where this
exchange not a fictitious one.
capital is applied, and I hope that they will not allow profit
to be made from the lack of rights of Soviet workers. After
their peoples, travel to the Soviet Union. Labor union leaders
Delegations of western parliamentarians, genuinely elected by
all it is no accident that the Final Act of the Agreement on
Security and Cooperation in Europe, signed in Helsinki, links
genuinely representing the interests of the workers go there.
economic relations with the observance of human rights.
and who are they trying to saddle you with-under the guise
The Helsinki Agreement has created in the USSR and the
of Soviet Parliamentarians and labor leaders? Party officials,
other countries of Eastern Europe a broad movement for its
KGB agents, that is, the executioners of our people, those who
strict observance. In Moscow, in the Ukraine, in Lithuania, in
shot down the workers at Novocherkassk, those who keep the
the Caucasus groups to monitor the observances of the Agree-
members of the human rights movement rotting in jail. Since
ment have been created. Because we knew. that the Communist
when do the hangmen represent the hanged?
countries from the very beginning had no intention to observe
the articles dealing with human rights, the members of the So-
Who needs such an "exchange of people? It merely lends
viet Helsinki groups collected a considerable body of information
a respectable coloring to phony Soviet institutions, but it does
not help our nations better to understand each other.
on the violations of human rights in the USSR and presented
this material to the governments of the 35 countries signing
The AFL-CIO and your President, George Meany, have always
the Agreement. At present more than half of the members of
fought on behalf of human rights. I would like to thank the
these groups have been arrested for their activities-such out-
standing defenders of human rights as Yuri Orlov, Alexander
American workers for their support, of which we have always
Ginzburg, Anatol Shcharanski, Mykola Rudenko, Zviad Gamsak-
been conscious. It was the strength of your solidarity that swung
open the doors of my prison cell.
hurdia, Oleksa Tykhyi, and Merab Kostava. I am happy to tell you
that a group of Norwegian and Belgian members of parliament
It is your solidarity along with our growing movement that
have nominated the members of the Helsinki Movement for the
will eventually lead us to freedom. We are witnessing the be-
Nobel Peace Prize for the next year. (Applause.)
ginning of a process, a process of working people recognizing
But that is the attitude of world public opinion, not govern-
their rights and their human dignity. In the last analysis the
fate of the whole world depends on this.
ment. At present, when the Belgrade conference is in session
to discuss the observance of the Helsinki Agreements, one gets
In the name of my comrades in the struggle for human rights
the impression that the delegations of most of the western nations
-the Soviet workers Vladimir Borisov, Anatoli Marchenko, and
have completely forgotten why they gathered there. Precisely
Valentin Ivanov, the physician Aleksandr Podrabinek, the writ-
at the moment when an account should have been demanded
er Nadezhda Mandelstam, and the scientist Andrei Sakharov-
from the Communist oppressors, the western governments be-
who were not allowed to accept your invitation to attend this
came remarkably bashful in their statements about human rights.
convention, I thank you. (Standing ovation:)
It looks as if the western countries signed the Helsinki Agree-
PRESIDENT MEANY: Thank you very much, Brother Bukov-
ments just for fun, to cover their deals with the Soviet Union
sky.
with those vague formulas!
Brother Bukovsky mentioned in his talk the Helsinki Agree-
Only one voice spoke out in defense of human rights-Chick
ments. These agreements signed about two years ago, by the
Chaikin, President of the International Ladies' Garment Work-
Soviet Union, the United States and a couple of dozen other
ers Union, and your representative at the Belgrade Conference.
nations, made specific guarantees in the field of human rights.
318
319
One of the guarantees was the right of anybody to leave his
The amendment declared as one of its purposes. encouraging
own country whenever he felt so inclined, and to return without
other signatory countries to comply more fully with those pro-
interference from any official source.
visions of the Ilelsinki Agreement.
In keeping with that agreement, the United States Congress
At this time, the AFI-CIO expressed to the State Department
amended one of its laws, which was on the books about twenty-
and to the White House our continuing view as to the fraudulent
odd years, to allow Communist labor leaders to visit this country.
nature of visa applications from agents of Soviet repression dis-
guised as trade unionists.
In keeping with the agreement, the AFL-CIO invited Andrei
Sakharov and five of his well-known compatriots, who have an
We stated our reservations as to the value and effectiveness
international reputation as fighters for human rights, and, of
of such a one-sided, unreciprocated step, and we suggested that
course, are looked upon by the Soviets as dissidents.
this measure be conditioned on compliance by the USSR by end-
I would like Secretary-Treasurer Kirkland to give you a run-
ing its practice of restricting exit visas to a favored few.
down of the attempts that we made to get Andrei Sakharov
Our views and our advice were rejected. Shortly thereafter,
and his companions to come to this Convention in accordance
the State Department granted entry visas to four designees of
with the terms of the Helsinki Agreement.
the All-Soviet Congress of Trade Unions, representing themselves
Brother Kirkland.
as typical, simple, unspoiled, loyal production norm-breaking So-
viet workers, without any background investigation, and with
SECRETARY-TREASURER KIRKLAND: Brothers and sis-
no restrictions or even inquiry as to their itinerary. They were
ters, I would like to give you just a seriatim, blow-by-blow account
received, entertained, and proudly displayed by various groups
of the events of our effort to secure the attendance at this Con-
and individuals whose view of Soviet labor practices might con-
vention of this great man, Andrei Sakharov, and his colleagues.
servatively be described as uncritical, if not admiring.
The Final Act of the 1975 Helsinki Agreement, as President
At this point, your officers decided that we should ascertain
Meany has pointed out, affirms directly and by reference the
whether this new freedom was a privilege confined to those
principles and obligations set forth in the Universal Declaration
Americans who feel some affinity or warmth toward the labor
of Human Rights, and the Charter of the United Nations.
apparatus of the Soviet Politburo. We decided to find out whether
Among those enumerated rights, stated very plainly is the
an organization in the mainstream of American democratic
right of every person, every person, not just some selected or
thought could also successfully invite Russian guests of the kind
that we would like to meet.
privileged person, to leave and to return to their native land.
In signing the Helsinki Agreement, the Soviet Union formally
Accordingly, on October 7th, President Meany addressed a letter
acknowledged this right as an international obligation, not an
to six citizens of the Soviet Union, inviting them to come to
internal affair. Yet the USSR continues to require and to arbi-
Los Angeles to observe this Convention of the AFL-CIO.
trarily withhold official permission for its citizens to leave and
Our six invitees were Nadezhda Mandelstam, the widow of
to return to their country.
a well-known Russian poet; Aleksandr Podrabinek, a psychia-
The Soviet Union is also a signatory to the Universal Postal
trist; Anatoli Marchenko, a. building tradesman and an author;
Vladimir Borisov, an electrician; Valentin Ivanov, also an electri-
Convention, guaranteeing the delivery of mail, and is a member
cian, and Andrei Sakharov, physicist and Nobel Peace Prize lau-
of the Universal Postal Union, which oversees compliance with
reate.
that solemn international obligation.
They share in common a deep and an eloquent concern for
During this past summer, the Congress of the United States
human rights. That is their only crime. They have not been
enacted, and President Carter signed, legislation designed to re-
arrested or charged with any offense, at least at that time, and
move any possible questions as to U. S. compliance with the
they should be entitled to all of the rights technically spelled
Helsinki agreement.
out in the Soviet Constitution, as well as the IIelsinki agree-
ment.
This legislation, the McGovern amendment to an appropriations
bill, removed all barriers to the granting of entry visas, to for-
To improve the chances that one might slip through, we sent
eign communists, including Soviet trade unionists. That is to
each of them seven separate copies of this invitation, in separate
say, agents of the Soviet system of labor control.
envelopes, the last by registered mail.
321
320
!n the letters President Meany said, and I quote, "Since its
delegation, took the floor and recounted the fact of our undeliv-
very inception the modern American labor movement has had a
ered letters of invitation, and in simple, straight-forward terms
broad international outlook expressed repeatedly in a concern
described the multiple violations by the Soviet Union of the Uni-
for workers' rights everywhere. History has taught us that work-
versal Postal Convention as well as the Final Act of the Helsinki
ers' rights are inseparable from human rights generally; that
Agreement. The reply of the Soviet spokesman typically was,
neither can survive outside of the framework of democracy. Be-
"What about the Wilmington 10 and the unemployed in
cause American trade unions constitute one of the most democra-
America?"
tic of our mass institutions, and because they have played a
significant role in the defense of human rights, both at home
The original of Sakharov's group letter to President Meany
and abroad, I believe that you would find our Convention proceed-
has yet to be received except, no doubt, by the KGB. What
ings of great interest.
we have received is a copy which Sakharov personally delivered
to our Embassy in Moscow, and which the State Department
"In keeping with the spirit of the Helsinki Agreement and
has transmitted ta us earlier this month.
its key objective of encouraging a freer flow of people, ideas
and information, the AFL-CIO would like you to have the oppor-
Here is what the letter says, and I would like to read it:
tunity to observe our proceedings firsthand."
"Dear Mr. Meany:
Copies of these letters were sent to President Carter, Secretary
"Thank you very much for your invitation to visit the Conven-
of State Vance, and Ambassador Goldberg representing the U.S.
tion of the American trade unions.
at the Belgrade Conference on the Helsinki Agreement.
"We would like very much to go to Los Angeles, provided
Secretary of State Vance replied for the President, advising
the Soviet authorities would give us exit visas and sufficient
us that our embassy in Moscow had been instructed to support
guarantees that we will be allowed back into the USSR.
our invitations and to make such representations to the Soviet
government.
"Unfortunately, only Vladimir Borisov has so far received an
official invitation to the Convention."
A copy of his letter is contained in the latest issue. of the
Free Trade Union News, which has been distributed to all the
That, incidentally, he got, because we addressed it to his wife
delegates here.
rather than to him.
Weeks passed and the letters were not delivered. The regis-
"He was told at the Visa and Registration Section of the USSR
tered letters produced no receipts.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, however, that invitations from such
organizations to private individuals are not even considered by
In November we filed a protest through the Postal Service
this Section.
to the Universal Postal Union. Our embassy in Moscow sent
a formal diplomatic note to the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Af-
"Instend of an invitation, A. D. Sakharov found in the envelope
fairs, officially urging that our invitees be granted permission
a clipping from some journal. The other invitations have not
to visit this convention. The note was returned without a reply.
arrived, apparently because of the Soviet 'mail.'
Surely the most insulting response.
"Dear Mr. Meany, we greatly appreciate this activity directed,
Late at night, on November 11th, our embassy in Moscow
in particular, to protect human rights. We hope that your own
reached Andrei Sakharov by telephone.
prestige and that of the AFL-CIO will help overcome all the
difficulties and that we will end up, despite everything, among
He advised the Embassy that he had not received the invitation,
your guests.
although he knew about it from western press inquiries. He
"Respectfully, A. D. Sakharov, Aleksandr Podrabinek, Vladimir
had received an envelope from the United States which he was
Borisov, Anatoli T. Marchenko."
personally sure had come from President Meany, but the contents
had been removed and replaced by a crude cartoon of a dinosaur.
There is a footnote to the letter in which they say, "Marchenko
He further stated that he was sending President Meany a reply
could not affix signature because he is exiled in Siberia, but
by group letter signed by each of the invitees whom he had
he asked over the telephone that his name be included:"
been able to reach.
The final chapter of this story opened early on a Sunday morn-
On November 15th Vice President Sol Chaikin, attending the
ing, November 27, when, as here, there are no mail deliveries.
Belgrade Conference as labor's representative on the American
A person who purported to be an employee of the Soviet
322
323
mail service appeared at Sakharov's apartment and gave him.
Saturday morning 20 of the most prominent dissidents in Moscow
George Meany's letter of invitation.
were placed under house arrest.
On Monday, November 28th, Sakharov went to the appropriate
I have here in Russian a copy of the speech that Andrei Sak-
Soviet ministry, presented the letter of invitation and requested
harov planned to read to this Convention, and I will now read
an exit visa. Later that same day he received a telephone call
an English translation of that speech. Please keep in mind
from someone at the ministry who advised him that the form
that while it is my voice you hear, these are the words of Andrei
of the invitation was inappropriate and unacceptable. He was
Sakharov.
told that while an invitation to visit Mr. Meany as his personal
guest would be in order, an invitation to participate in a meeting
President Meany read the following informal translation
of an organization of a "transitory nature" could not be ap-
of Andrei Sakharov's intended remarks:
proved. (Laughter.)
The opportunity to speak here is a great honor for me. I
Sakharov promptly reported these facts to our Embassy rc-
want to express my gratitude to you and to your Chairman.
questing that they be passed on to President Meany.
The following day President Meany dispatched a telegram to
We in the USSR know of the influence on internal and interna-
Sakharov and to our Moscow Embassy inviting Sakharov to
tional affairs which the AFL-CIO has in your country. We have
visit the United States as his personal guest without reference
great respect for your evaluation of such vital matters as the
to the AFL-CIO Convention, that transitory organization. The
proper tasks of foreign policy, of economic, scientific-technologi-
Embassy promptly passed this to Sakharov who applied once
cal and cultural ties, and of aid to developing countries. We
again to the Soviet ministry for an exit visa. Sakharov was
also greatly respect your responsible understanding of the tasks
given a bundle of elaborate questionnaires to complete, and in-
of U.S. economic prosperity and national security-on which de-
structed to secure a letter of consent from his wife and an en-
pends the future of not only the American people-as well as
dorsement of his application from the Soviet Academy of Science.
your approach toward the defense of human rights. This role
So at long last the ultimate Catch 22, the final snare, the Soviet
of your organization, which represents the interests of the broad-
Academy of Sciences, that is to say the KGB, which is to say
est strata of working people, is one of the manifestations of
the Soviet system of engineering and control of the human soul,
the pluralistic nature of American society which is surprising
refused to approve his application.
to us, surprising because these manifestations are in striking
We have been informed today that on Friday night another
contrast to what we see in our own country. In this pluralism,
or, to put it more simply, in democracy, lies the enormous, real
of our invitees, Aleksandr Podrabinek, was arrested by the KGB
power of your society, the profound source of its successes. It
and is now in prison. So Andrei Sakharov and his colleagues
will not be here in person, but they are very much here in
is, of course, true that our single-party, single-ideology, closed
spirit. Andrei Sakharov has sent to us outside the channels of
caste society is in many ways different from your society. And
the Soviet dead letter office a message to all of the delegates
yet, not so different that we cannot understand your problems,
at this AFL-CIO Convention, which he has asked President
and you ours; not so different that we cannot try to work
Meany to deliver in his stead. After you have heard it he intends
out some sort of a common course of conduct.
to release it in Moscow to whoever will pay attention there.
It is said that the character of the American people, its active
I don't propose to editorialize or expound further as to what
and practical goodwill and feeling of its own worth, is expressed
this all means about the value of Soviet agreements, of Soviet
in the question, which has become a national tradition-"how
promises and of Soviet life. The facts and eloquent words of
can I help It seems to me that in inviting me to this
Andrei Sakharov which you will hear speak for themselves.
meeting, you are in effect also asking me this question. I will
try to answer it, for we are dealing here not simply with help
PRESIDENT MEANY: Incidentally, last Saturday was the
to us, but above all with the defense of universal human values,
29th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Human
the universal future of mankind, universal human security-in
Rights at the United Nations, a declaration which the Soviet
other words, we are not dealing with interference in our internal
delegate signed with great fanfare. An observance of this date
affairs.
was planned in Moscow. They planned what they called a silent
demonstration: No speeches, no Nags. They just planned to march
First of all, I want to speak of the question of communications,
around Pushkin Square in order to let the Soviet citizens see
which is decisive for the whole struggle for human rights in
that they still believed in the Declaration of Human Rights.
the USSR and for my public activity. The only weapon in our
324
325
struggle is publicity, the open and free word. Inside our country,
Attainment of unhindered, international television broadcasts
all channels of mass information are in the hands of the party-
from communications satellites.
state apparatus. During this era of detente and a broadening
struggle for human rights, ties with the West, acquisition in
I rely upon the AFL-CIO to continue its active support of
the West of information about violations of human rights, and
the struggle for free choice of country of residence, because
the most effective, exact utilization of this information, have
in my view this is a key problem in the larger struggle for
acquired enormous importance. Authorities in the USSR under-
individual freedom from the arbitrariness of the state. I remem-
take the most shameless measures to cut off channels of com-
ber with gratitude President Meany's decisive speeches in support
munication with the West, and it seems to me that only by
of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment.
actively opposing this can we anticipate successful cooperation
The following eminent participants in the human rights move-
in the struggle for human rights.
ment are now in prison or exile in the USSR: Sergey Kovalev,
Semyon Gluzman. Anatoli Marchenko, Andrey Tverdokhelebov,
Are you aware that hundreds of people wishing to emigrate
Mal'va Landa, Mikola Rudenko, Oleksa Tikhiy, and many others.
do not receive the required invitations from abroad, invitations
Awaiting trial are Gamsakhurdiya, Gayauskas, Ginzberg, Kos-
which the authorities always arbitrarily require, in violation of
tave, Marinovich, Matusevich, Orlov, Pailodze, Pyatkus, and
the right of free choice of country of residence? Because of
Shcharanskiy. The priests Vins and Pomanyuk, many dozens of
this, such people are not even officially included in the number
religious believers, and the leader of the All-Russia Social Chris-
of those wishing to emigrate. Many of those with relatives abroad
tian Association for the liberation of People (VSKHON) Igor'
are deprived of the opportunity to talk with them. Letters, tele-
Ogurtsov, are in prison. Many who tried to leave the country-
grams, books, packages and other international postal materials
participants in the so-called Leningrad Airplane Affair, Zosimov,
do not reach addressees. The authorities temporarily or perma-
Fedorenko and dozens of others-are in detention and in pyschia-
nently shut off the telephone of people who allegedly have unde-
tric prisons, on the illegal charge of treason to their country.
sirable international conversations over the telephone, thereby
making clear that the KGB listens to conversations.
It should be a matter of honor for America to achieve the
release of Ukrainian artist Petr Ruban, convicted for preparing
Even the invitation to today's meeting was marked. by such
a commemorative present-a wooden book with a model of the
violations. Mandelstam, Aleksandr Podrabinek, Anatoli Mar-
statute of Liberty-as a gift to the American people in honor
chenko and I did not receive letters with invitations. Rather,
of the 200th anniversary of their independence.
I received an envelope with a mocking drawing of the extinct
monster Brontosaurus. The KGB evidently had in mind those
Recently the Association of American Scientists and Engineers
they call reactionaries, perhaps you, Mr. Meany, and, of course,
working in the field of computer technology. adopted the decision
me. But in actual fact the Brontosaurus is the repressive system
to end contacts with their colleagues in the USSR if Anatoliy
which spawns such illegalities. The morning of November 27,
Shcharanskiy should be convicted. I expect similar steps in the
after already having discussed the missing invitation aloud with
cases of unjustified rejection of requests by Slepak, Meyman,
my wife in our thoroughly KGB-bugged apartment, I finally
Gol'fand and many others to emigrate. I consider that steps
received your invitation.
such as rejection of contacts are justified in the struggle for
each individual human life and fate.
What actions do we expect from you:
Detente is not only the attempt, through establishing contacts,
Facilitation of a broad campaign in the press and in Congress
trade, technological and cultural ties, to weaken the threat of
against violations of the freedom of exchange of information.
universal destruction. It is also the complex, many-sided antago-
nism of two systems against each other at the basis of which
Facilitation of the solution of this question on the level of
lies the contradiction between totalitarianism and democracy,
intergovernmental negotiations.
between violations of human rights and their observance, between
Measures to increase the effectiveness of radio broadcasts to
the striving to close society and the striving to open it. On
the outcome of this struggle depends the convergence of our
the Soviet Union and the countries of Eastern Europe. In par-
societies-which is the alternative to the collapse of civilization
ticular, it is very important that the Voice of America have
and to general destruction.
its own permanent representative in the USSR, so that this sta-
tion can transmit more often, in full and without annoying distor-
Since the time of the Helsinki Conference, which officially pro-
tions, the documents it receives on human rights violations.
claimed this mutual interdependence, the struggle for human
326
327
rights has been constantly strengthened. America can be proud
which unemployment has been rist
that its President proclaimed the defense of human rights as
we have more than one and a have
the moral basis for U.S. policy. New forms in the struggle for
believe that the statistics are
human rights have arisen in Czechoslovakia, Poland, and other
are officially published because with
countries in Eastern Europe. In Western countries, the ideas
cluded within those statistics.
of this struggle increasingly penetrate public consciousness, unit-
ing the most varied people, from conservatives to Eurocommu-
I refer, for instance, to the sch
nists. A few days ago we heard, with a feeling of profound
school because they have been
joy, of the political amnesty in Yugoslavia, the first, to our
rather than to join the unemploy
large numbers of married women
knowledge, in the history of socialist countries. This daring
and humane step is evidence of an irreversible moral victory
Security benefits and, therefore, and
of the ideology of human rights over the ideology of totalitarian-
statistics of unemployed.
ism. Now it is a matter for the governments of other countries—
In our country we have at the
from the USSR to Indonesia!
of our choosing, a labor government
been involved in many discussions.
I am convinced that the AFL-CIO, with its enormous influence
has put in money in an endeavor
upon the internal and international policy of the USA, can be-
creation schemes, work experience
come one of the centers which coordinates and directs actions
it is merely tipping the top of the
in defense of human rights throughout the world, in defense
way coping with the problem of unen
of our common future. Thank you for your attention. (Applause.)
We had, therefore, the Trades
PRESIDENT MEANY: Now, at this time I'm going to present
proposals to the government that
another delegate from the British Trades Union Congress for
investment, there must be a reflation
an address, Brother Leonard F. Edmondson of the Amalgamated
be an expansion of industry, and
Union of Engineering Workers.
productivity if we are to surmount
Brother Edmondson. (Applause.)
It is rather farcical, though, when
for Economic Cooperation and Develo
tions that an industry such as ship
in capacity whilst at the same tim
LEONARD F. EDMONDSON
OECD countries are providing finan
Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers
edge to create and build shipbuildi
British Trades Union Congress
developing countries to compete a;
Mr. President, fellow trade unionists: It is with extreme pleas-
where the workers will be employed
ure that I convey to you fraternal greetings from the British
than the developed countries and, in
the right of association, the rights of
trade union movement, greetings in the common struggle to sur-
mount many of the common problems which are facing. the trade
In company with some of the unior
unionists of both countries because, sitting here during this Con-
I attended an international shipbuild
vention, I have been greatly impressed with the similarity of
the International Metal Workers Fed
the problems which are facing us in Britain and the problems
sentations to the Organization for
which are facing the trade unionists in America. And also the
Development, and made it perfectly
common solution which we are all seeking to surmount these
to support a reduction in the capa
problems, and how it has become abundantly clear to the trade
developed countries. making shipbu
unionists to both sides that we cannot surmount these problems
whilst the industrialists were provi
merely by the collective bargaining process with employers, but
shipbuilding in undeveloped countrie
must go down the road of seeking to influence governments and
ing against us and at lower rates
having introduced the legislation which will lead to the solution
ployed.
to some of the problems and will bring beneficial results to the
In our country we have introduced
working class whom we represent.
proved a benefit to the workers. I re
In Britain at the present time, the burning problem is similar
of the workers and the Employme
to the one in your country-unemployment and the manner. in
ministered through a service know
328