In Search Of Vision

"The world is awaiting your signal. It is watching you. Do not let the world and us wait any longer."

-- Lech Walesa in Washington

The Polish Solidarity leader, and the world, may have to wait considerably longer for any clear signal about what kind of post-cold war Europe the U.S. envisions, and what it may do to help create one. The progressive dissolution of the onetime Soviet Empire in Eastern Europe, symbolized by the opening of the Berlin Wall, raises the possibility of a historic turn toward peace and cooperation -- but also the danger of churning instability. So the questions are piling up: What can the West do to strengthen the democratic movements in Poland, Hungary and East Germany? What sort of relationship can be forged between the former Soviet satellites and the capitalist states of Western Europe? How can the pressure for German reunification be kept in constructive channels? Long range, what is the future of NATO in a Europe no longer frightened by the threat of Communist invasion?

These questions, of course, press on European capitals too. Yet the U.S., as leader of the Western alliance, has both the chance and the obligation to try to frame a coordinated policy. Alas, that calls for a vision of a new European order -- and "the vision thing" has never been George Bush's forte. So far, his Administration has shown no inclination to do anything except stand on the sidelines and cheer. Some Bush officials argue that it is all Washington needs to do.

It is always possible, especially with George Bush, that appearances are deceiving. Diplomats now talk openly of numerous private exchanges between the + U.S. and its allies about the developments in Eastern Europe. They note that Bush has a history of nurturing plans in secrecy and suddenly springing them, to the consternation of critics who had reproached him for indecision and timidity. The President did just that in presenting arms-reduction proposals to a NATO meeting last May and again in arranging his Malta summit with Mikhail Gorbachev, to be held Dec. 2-3. Says Kim Holmes, foreign policy and defense analyst at the Heritage Foundation, which Bush has asked for summit- planning recommendations: "When George Bush gets put up against the ropes politically, he usually pulls off something bold and successful."

Nonetheless, Administration officials confide that so far as they are aware, Bush is doing only tactical planning, concentrating on getting through the summit without a major substantive mistake or public relations flop. The President and his briefers seem to have invested far more time in considering how to counter a surprise Gorbachev proposal than in pondering what Europe -- and the U.S. role in it -- will be like ten years from now. Says one foreign policy official: "We've got plenty of philosophy and vision for 'a Europe whole and free' ((one of Bush's standard phrases)). What we don't have is practical ideas for building this new Europe. Do we use wood or cinder blocks? Where do we lay out the walls?" White House chief of staff John Sununu could think of no better way to counter criticism of the Administration's lack of a blueprint than to circulate anew to reporters a bound set of Bush speeches dating back to last spring -- "as if nothing had happened in Eastern Europe since then," snorts a Sununu critic in the Administration.