We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 July 2011
The trend toward economic rationality in the USSR has not beenconfined to domestic issues alone. It is also manifest in the search for more advantageous and efficient procedures in foreign economic relations, specifically aid and trade with the third world. In this search for ways to secure tangible gains, Soviet relations with the developing countries are entering a new phase, in which economic considerations of profit are challenging the hitherto dominant political motivations.
1 Pravda, October 22, 1961, p. 8.
2 V. Sergeev, “K voprosu kategorii vsemirnyi rynok” [On the problem of the world market], Vneshniaya torgovlia, No. 4 (April 1963), 17-24. S. Stepanov, “Sotsialisticheskoe vosproizvodstvo i vneshniaya torgovlia” [Socialist production and foreign trade], ibid., 1 (January 1962), 3-10.
3 L. Zevin, “Vzaimnaya vygoda ekonomicheskogo sotrudnichestva sotsialisticheskikh i razvivayushchikhsia stran” [Mutual benefits in the cooperation between the socialist and the developing countries], Voprosy ekonomiki, 11 (February 1965), 72-83.
4 Baranov, B. S., ed., Vneshniaya torgovlia sotsialisticheskifyi stran [Foreign trade of the socialist countries] (Moscow 1966)Google Scholar.
5 Prokhorov, G. M., Problemy sotrudnichestva sotsialisticheskikh i razvivayushchikhsia stran [Problems of cooperation between the socialist and the developing countries] (Moscow 1966)Google Scholar.
6 Pravda, April 6, 1966, p. 6.
7 Interview. New Times, xv (April 17, 1968), 9.
8 The East European, not the Soviet, economists have been the persistent advocates of the need to coordinate and integrate the Bloc's economic relations with the third world. Cf. L. Dvorzhak, “Glavnye tendentsii v ekonomicheskom sotrudnichestve sotsialisticheskikh i slaborazvitykh stran” [Main tendencies in economic cooperation between the socialist and the underdeveloped countries], Novye yavleniya v ekonomike sovremennogo imperializma [New phenomena in the economy of present-day imperialism] (Moscow 1963), 90-104. Even though the USSR and the East European states have been participating in the construction of a number of large aid projects, collaboration seems to be limited to subcontracting, and there has been no mention of any office within CEMA that might work on or administer a multilateral approach. However, the East European states are beginning to innovate on their own. Poland, Hungary, and Rumania have committed themselves in their 1969 trade plans with India to trilateral import arrangements and have agreed to consider transferability of funds. Weekly India News, No. 36 (November 22, 1968), 3. At present the Soviets are only discussing the desirability of departing from bilateralism in trade widi the developing countries and of setting up multilateral clearing accounts within the Savelev, Bloc. V., “Obmen mezhdu razvivayushchimisia i sotsialisticheskimi stranami” [Exchanges between the developing and the socialist countries], Ekonomicheskie nauki, 1 (January 1968), 58–64Google Scholar.
9 Temirskii, I., “Moscow and Delhi,” New Times, v (Feb. 5, 1969), 10–11Google Scholar.
10 Results of an Algerian-Soviet commission's meeting are reported in Pravda, October 27, 1969, p. 5.
11 Kommunist (Erevan), September 8, 1968, p. 3.
12 The Times of India, October 5, 1968, p. 1.
13 Zevin, L., Ushakova, N., Strepetova, M., “Ekonomicheskoe sotrudnichestvo sotsialisticheskikh gosudarstv s razvivayushchimisia stranami” [Economic cooperation of the socialist states with the developing countries], Nova i noveishaya istoriya, 11 (February. 1966), 12Google Scholar.
14 Shamrai, Yu., “Problemy sovershenstvovaniya ekonomicheskogo sotrudnichestva sotsialisticheskikh i razvivayushchikhsia stran” [Problems of perfecting economic cooperation of the socialist and developing countries], Narody Azii i Afriki, iv (August 1968), 10–13Google Scholar.
15 In the case of the trading company in Ethiopia, the USSR supplied 51% of capital and the local entrepreneurs the rest. Za Rubezhom, xxiii (June 2-8, 1967), 27Google Scholar.
18 Degtiar, D., “Ekonomicheskoe i tekhnicheskoe sotrudnichestvo SSSR so stranami Afriki” [Economic and technical cooperation of the USSR with African countries], Vneshniaya torgovlia, IX (September 1968), 2–5Google Scholar. For the story of how additional Soviet technicians revived the milk processing plant in Somalia see Bulimov, V., “Pervyi v Somali” [The first in Somalia], Ekonomicheskaya gazeta, xxxii (August 1968), 46Google Scholar.
17 Andreev, I. F., “SSSR—krupneishii eksporter mashin i oborudovaniya” [USSR—the biggest exporter of machinery and equipment], Vneshniaya torgovlia, vi (June 1966), 3–9Google Scholar. Andreev, I. F., “Sovetskie mashiny na mirovom rynke” [Soviet machinery in the world market], Mashinostroitel', iv (April 1968), 4–6Google Scholar. Shamrai, Yu., “Nekotorye voprosy rynochnykh otnoshenii mezhdu sotsialisticheskimi i razvivayushchimisia stranami” [Some problems in market relations between the socialist and the developing countries], Narody Azii i Afriki, 11 (April 1969), 22Google Scholar.
18 “Soviet Planning Production of its Cars in Australia,” The New York Times, July 4, 1965.
19 Pravda, February 2.0, 1966, p. 5 and April 6, 1966, p. 6. In 1960, the share of the developing countries in the total value of Soviet machinery exports was 11%; by 1966, it had doubled to 22.4%. Capital goods constitute a very high proportion of Soviet exports to many countries: in 1966, they accounted for 52% of exports to India, 60% to Pakistan, 39% to Iran, and 67% to the UAR. I. F. Andreev, 5.
20 Vneshniaya torgovlia, VII (July 1967), 12.
21 Ibid., 1 (January 1966), 6.
22 The Times of India, October 5, 1968, p. 1.
23 Kapranov, I., “The U.S.S.R. and the Industrial Development of the Newly Free States,” International Affairs, vi (June 1966), 33–36Google Scholar.
24 Gertsovich, G., Shamrai, Yu., “Vneshneekonomicheskii aspekt khoziaistvennoi reformy v stranakh SEV” [The external economic aspects of economic reforms in the CEMA countries], Voprosy ekonomiki, iv (April 1968), 58–70Google Scholar.
25 Speech in commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Soviet trade. Vneshniaya torgovlia, vi (June 1968), 8Google Scholar. Similarly, the Rector of the Foreign Trade Academy, B. Vaganov, favors continuing state monopoly of foreign trade in its traditional form to avoid competition between Soviet organizations and to save money on maintaining trade agencies abroad. Ekonomicheskaya gazeta, xxiii (June 1968), 42Google Scholar.
26 Valkenier, Elizabeth K., “Recent Trends in Soviet Research on the Developing Countries,” World Politics, xx (July 1968), 644–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
27 Kollontai, V. M., Puti preodoleniya ekonomicheskoi otstalosti [Ways of overcoming economic backwardness] (Moscow 1967), 206Google Scholar.
28 The Soviets have had a hand in the plans of India, the UAR, Uganda, Afghanistan, Iran, and Algeria.
29 Shmelev, N., “Stoimostnye kriterii i ikh rol” v ekonomike razvivayushchikhsia stran” [Cost criteria and their role in the economy of the developing countries], Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya (hereafter cited as MEMO), vi (June 1968), 51Google Scholar.
30 Arabadzhian, A. Z., Medovoi, A. I., eds., Plany-programmy ekonomicheskogo razvitiya stran Azii [Plans-programs of economic development in Asian countries] (Moscow 1966)Google Scholar.
31 Andreasyan, R., “New Aspects of Middle East Countries' Oil Policies,” International Affairs, ix (September 1968), 30Google Scholar.
32 Stroitel'stvo natsional'noi ekonomiki v stranakh Afriki [The building of a national economy in the countries of Africa] (Moscow 1968), 36–59Google Scholar.
33 “Finansirovanie ekonomiki razvivayushchikhsia stran” [Financing the economy of the developing countries], Narody Azii i Afriki, 1 (January 1968), 3–20Google Scholar.
34 Shmelev, N., “Razvivayushchiesia strany: formirovanie khoziaistvennogo mekhanizma” [The developing countries: formation of economic mechanism], MEMO, viii (August 1968), 52–62Google Scholar.
35 Quoted in Mizan, ix, 5 (September-October 1967), 199.
36 Vneshniaya torgovlia, ix (September 1968), 20.
37 Hendrick Smith, “Russians Suggest Reform in the UAR,” The New York Times, October 24, 1966. E. Primakov, “Segodnia v Kaire,” [Today in Cairo], Pravda, April 26, 1968, p. 4.
38 The Hindu Weekly Review, March 25, 1968, p. 10.
39 I. Temirskii, 10.
40 V. M. Kollontai, 184-95.
41 Drew Middleton, “East Meets West in Afghanistan,” The New York Times, May 28, 1967.
42 See, for example, the program of the Sudanese party, Pravda, December 16, 1967, p. 4, and a statement of the Iraqi party, The World Marxist Review Information Bulletin, xix (November 7, 1968), 16–19Google Scholar.
43 “Nauchnyi sotsializm i osvobodivshiesia strany” [Scientific socialism and the liberated countries], Kommunist, iv (March 1968), 104Google Scholar.
44 Solodovnikov, V. G., “Some problems of economic and social development of independent African nations,” Il International Congress of Africanists. Papers presented by the USSR delegation (Moscow 1967), 5Google Scholar, 8-9.
45 Bochkarev, Y., “Letter to the Editor,” New Times, xxix (July 19, 1967), 13–14Google Scholar. There was a similar defense of the July 1965 Algerian-French agreement on the Sahara oil. N. Prozhogin, “Neft Sakhary” [Sahara oil], Pravda, November 14, 1967, p. 4.
46 Andreasyan, R., Elianov, A., “Razvivayushchiesia strany: diversifikatsiya ekonomiki i strategiya promyshlennogo razvitiya” [The developing countries: diversification of the economy and the strategy of industrial development], MEMO, 1 (January 1968), 32Google Scholar.
47 Rastiannikov, V. G., “Prodovol'stvennaya problema v razvivayushchikhsia stranakh” [The food problem in the developing countries], Narody Azii i Afriki, 1 (January 1967), 41–42Google Scholar.
48 Henry Tanner, “Algeria under Boumedienne Struggles for Stability,” The New York Times, January 16, 1967.
49 Prokhorov, G. M., “Druzhba, vzaimoponimanie” [Friendship, mutual understanding], Ekonomicheskaya gazeta, xviii (April 1968), 46Google Scholar.
50 Révolution Africaine, civ (January 9-15), 1967, p. 18Google Scholar.
51 R. Andreasyan, E. Elianov, 30-31.
52 Pravda, June 3, 1968, p. 4.
53 Although the degree of dependence of most developing countries on trade with the USSR and its allies has not reached a high level, it should be noted that some, i.e., Afghanistan, India, Syria, and the UAR, conduct over 20% of their trade with the Soviet Bloc and have obtained even larger percentages of foreign aid component of their development plans from the Communist states.
