July 21, 1978
Page 22187
THE TRIALS OF ANATOLY SCHARANSKY AND ALEXANDER GINZBURG
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the next few weeks will be an uncertain time for Soviet-American relations. There has been much discussion about the extent to which we should link our outrage over the trials of Soviet dissidents to other questions of United States-Soviet policy.
It is important for the world community to understand the extent of American concern for the dissidents Anatoly Scharansky and Alexander Ginzburg, and others who seek an end to repression in the Soviet Union.
Standing by themselves, unrelated to any other question but that of human rights, these trials by the Soviet Union are contrary to all the basic tenets to which the free world subscribes.
The Soviet Union and its leaders must know that the great majority of the American people do not relate these trials to the cosmic questions which confront our two societies. They simply view these trials as a signal that the Soviet Union is still a repressive country in which there are no rights — no political rights — no civil rights — no social rights — no economic rights — and no human rights.
The American people hold dear the right to move freely about the world and have protested openly and loudly when any attempt has been made to infringe on that right at home or abroad.
The American people hold dear the right to freely exchange views with any people, anywhere in the world, so much that we permit all voices, no matter how offensive, in any forum, in any place, at any time.
The American people know that the Soviet Union is not an open society. They know that the Soviet Union is not a democracy. They know that in the Soviet Union there is only one party and one ruling structure and one road to opportunity.
The American people know that in the Soviet Union people take risks when they dissent: exile, imprisonment, even death. It is thus bad enough that we know what goes on inside the Soviet Union. It is quite another thing for the Soviet Union, as an element of international policy, to respond to our President's call for human rights by generating this latest mockery of justice.
Mr. President, these are no ordinary trials. There can be no doubt that they were ordered for the purpose of making it abundantly clear to the President of the United States that his call for human rights would be met with an even more vigorous denial of human rights; that his campaign against oppression would be countered with greater oppression.
The real horror of the trials is that the Soviets did not accuse these men as individuals. With bloodless calculation they brought to trial not two men with the courage to speak out, but mere symbols.
The Soviets set out to put American beliefs and sensibilities on trial. And these men were convicted, to convict us; to convict our ideals, hopes and understandings of the basic decency of the individual.
Let the Soviets understand this: We resist their charges. We reject their verdict.
And let the Soviets understand that we seek no special leverage in unrelated areas. In the basic sense, this is not a SALT issue; this is not a trade issue; it is a fundamental moral question. It divides the United States and the Soviet Union more deeply than our economic differences or our political differences.
The Soviet Union has not only elected to reject the international movement to demand protection of human rights. They have chosen to further restrict the rights of people.
I find this offensive and appalling to a degree which I cannot properly express. I would hope that soon the Soviet Union will reexamine its rejection of President Carter's human rights initiative and rejoin the family of nations and the family of man.