The Consequence of IdeasrnThe Future of Radio Liberty and Radio Free Europernby Mihajlo Mihajlovrn• ^^^B ^^^^^I^KiiirnS^’^^^^SH^Hrnlife” .;/’-Wi; ‘-^>=’rn1 ^ “”‘-^”v^j^^^– ^c Jtt^krniHij^iii^Hrn^i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^lrn””^”'”^^^I^S^SIil^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^lrn^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^fcW^^:’^ i ^ ” ^rnl^^l^^l^l^^^HrnUnusual news is arriving from the former Soviet Union:rnleading democrats such as Yuri Afanasvcv, Yelena Bonner,rnand many others are publicly protesting against the managementrnof Radio I .ibcrty. The immediate cause of theirrnprotest is Radio Liberty’s decision to drop one of its mostrnpopular programs, “In the Country and in the World,” whosernvery title was a reference to Andrei Sakharov. The programrnprovided a forum for thought-provoking consideration of importantrnissues, the issues with which Russia’s intelligentsiarnhas occupied itself in its long struggle for the liberation it isrnnow beginning to enjoy. But the show has been replaced by arnmore conventional collection of news reports. This turn ofrnevents is not without importance, symbolic and real. Until arnfew years ago, Radio Liberty’s reputation was secure because itrnwas vilified by the Soiet authorities while loved and praised byrnthe creative intelligentsia, the most important segment of itsrnaudience. Today the situation is different.rnRadio Liberty has recently opened an office in Moscow.rnThere was even an official decree from President Yeltsin, thankingrnit for help during the coup attempt and instructing authoritiesrnto provide it with office space and to facilitate its operationsrnin every way. Last year. Radio Free Europe officesrnwere opened in all the capitals of Eastern Europe. Russianrntelevision and newspapers now quote almost daily from the Radios’rnbroadcasts.rnGorbachev, during a recent visit to Germany, stated thatrnbroadcasting by Radio Liberty is important for continuedrndemocratic development in his country. The same view ofrnRadio Free Europe was earlier expressed b” heads of state Havel,rnWilesa, and Antall of Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Hun-rnMihajlo Mihajlov is a former Yugoslavian dissident whornspent seven years in Tito’s prisons. His major worksrninclude Moscow Summer, Russian Theme, UndergroundrnNotes, and Unscientific Thoughts. Since 1985 he hasrnworked for RL and RFE as researcher, commentator, andrncorrespondent.rngary, respectively. REE and RL were nominated by the ForeignrnMinister of Estonia as candidates for the 1991 NobelrnPeace Prize. Walesa and others supported the nomination.rnTo understand the shift from praise to criticism, it is necessaryrnto examine two recent events. The first was the Report ofrna Presidential Task Force on U. S. Government InternationalrnBroadcasting, which appeared in December 1991. The secondrnwas the publication in Moscow, at about the same time, of arnbook by Anatoly Gladilin, a well-known novelist and dissidentrnand former editor of one of Radio Liberty’s cultural programs.rnThe title of the book—J Was Murdered by Pell, thernBeast—is meaningless to most Americans, but quite easilyrnunderstood by anyone associated with the Radios; “Pell” happensrnto be the name of the man who has been president of thernRadios since 198S.rnGeorge Bush probably established the task force with anrneve to budgetary savings through a merger of the Radios andrnthe official Voice of America. Despite this, the bipartisan taskrnforce argued against merger and in fa’or of continued supportrnfor the Radios. It warmly praised their role in helpingrnto win the Cold War. Indeed, it stated that monies spent onrninternational broadcasting were “among the most useful nationalrnsecuritv dollars well spent during this century. Fhcvrnsent out words not bullets, ideas not bombs—and they brokerndown a wall and helped break up an empire.” It advised continuedrnfinancing of RFE until the end of the century and ofrnRL into the 21st century. At the same time, it repeatedlyrnpointed out a need to redirect and revitalize the Radios byrnchanging their mission from that of a surrogate medium—arnsubstitute for the free media and sources of accurate informationrnthat peoples under totalitarianism lacked—into an alternativernmedium, an alternative to formerly communist mediarnor to new media that have yet to establish traditions ofrndiscipline or integrity.rnIn contrast to the presidential report, Gladilin’s book wasrnhalf-fiction, half-autobiography. It presented the story of arnwriter, famous in the Soviet Union, who was fired from RL’srn22/CHRONICLESrnrnrn