Memory's Account: Notes by a Member of the Government

18 Pages·1983·31.72 MB·English

by  Lev Volodarsky, Jane Sayer (trans.)

ARSKY
Lev VOLO
——
>
'
4
{

Notes by a Member
of the Government ’’ e{y f i vweis

= ee FY whe del
a
a
et
e

e
e

“ eoeee yee ~e%

(<]n} Progress Publ isners - Moscow
Translated from the Russian by Jane Sayer
Designed by Ivan Karpikov
Jles BononapcKkni
CYUET MAMSITH.
SANMHCKH YWIEHA TIPABHTEJIbCTBA
Ha aH2auuckom a3bike
© Us3ynatenpctso «IIporpecc», 1983
English translation © Progress Publishers 1983
Printed in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
4702010200—454
B 014(01)—83 6e3 OObABA.
CONTENTS
A Note from the Author 9
Bread Comes Before Anything Else 9
“Whose Name Is Not a Word but a Banner” 25
The Hotel on Nevsky Prospekt 48
“YCL Squadron” 66
Code Number—‘‘OS 6” 74
A Feat of Labour and Spirit 91
At “Voznesensky’s School” 103
Fate’s Crossroads 118
The Reliable Figure 134
The Statistically Average Person? 145
My “Keys to Life” 171
We Need a Common Language 183
Our Point of View 202
Afterword 215
AT “VOZNESENSKY’S SCHOOL”
All my life I have been surrounded by good people,
people for whom a striving for knowledge, the
need to advance and improve themselves were the
rule. Among these people who exerted a major in-
fluence on me, and to a certain extent became exam-
ples for me, I would like to pick out, in particular,
Nikolai Voznesensky. I consider myself very lucky
that I encountered him several times in my life, both
directly and indirectly.
Infinitely devoted to his country, people and the
Communist Party, a man of tremendous knowledge
and fantastic ability to work, he was an _ excellent
leader and organiser, both demanding and attentive,
always ready to give assistance.
His direct influence on me began when I was
working as a Gosplan commissioner, and continued
when I was transferred from Leningrad to Moscow.
Counting the time when I read the first works by this
famous economist and considering that the skills I
acquired from working with him I find useful to this
day, the period of his influence covers virtually all
my working life.
At fifteen a YCL leader; at sixteen already a Com-
munist; at 32 a recognised research economist; at 34
the head of the country’s economic headquarters—
103
USSR Gosplan; at 37 First Deputy Chairman of the
Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR; at 39
a member of the USSR Academy of Sciences; at
43 a member of the Politbureau of the Party Central
Committee: such were the landmarks in Voznesens-
ky’s biography.
To me it seems worthwhile to judge a person from
the contribution he has made to the life of the coun-
try than to look at his personal characteristics. It 1s
my conviction many times proved in practice, that
the true role of a foresighted statesman may be as-
sessed according to qualities that go beyond the perso-
nal frame.
For me, the measure of a person has always been
the extent of his interest in his society, I am sure
that anyone who compares his everyday actions with
the interests of society and the people deserves deep
respect. Voznesensky was just such a person.
I recall that, right at the beginning of 1941, there
was a conference in Moscow. A group of comrades,
including myself, were given the task of preparing
its draft decision, precisely formulating in it the chief
guidelines for the future work of the USSR Gosplan
commissioners.
We drew up the draft carefully and considered the
final version to be complete. But a day later Vozne-
sensky proved to us all that the document was far
from perfect. Our definition of the commissioners’
functions and tasks did not include variants taking
into account the specifics of the various regions of the
country. Voznesensky was disappointed that we had
not considered the organisational aspects of transport
links between regions in sufficient detail. A few
months later we saw how right he had been: the war
104
p) raoskse eOvWa!c uawtiit:oh n naozf i ciGe teie zremnas nya nd ande quitphem e immedi at e,
|
iI |
uired. h
di
tur“WnHheoed wn to cwomeue l d waenyrdoe u , asCkeoddmi:sr causdsien g Votlheo dadrrsakfty,, Va oCzann deisednastkey
of Economics, have failed to take this into congiq.
eration?”
“Actually, ’m not a Candidate of Economics, but
that in no way excuses me,” I replied, since I had
not yet defended my thesis.
Voznesensky reacted instantly:
“Not a Candidate yet, but you will be. And a
D. Sc., too, if you understand correctly the extent of
your responsibility before the people. Examine your-
self in everything you do according to the highest
standards.”
I had known and heard a lot about Voznesensky in
Leningrad. In early 1935 Zhdanov asked for Voz-
nesensky to be sent to Leningrad to head the city
planning commission. His request was granted, and
among Leningrad economists the news was met with
approval.
Once Voznesensky arrived, the members of the
planning commission could hardly ever be found at
their desks—they were always in workshops, at public
amenities enterprises, on building sites, at tram ga-
rages, at factories, or in shops—each according to
his own field. Many of them really began to pene-
trate the economic life of the city for the first time,
feeling it not only through columns of figures, direc-
tives and documents, but in allits nuances and con-
tradictions. ‘This is what the new head wanted from
his subordinates,
105
As head of the USSR State Planning Committee.
Voznesensky began with the same delicate and com-
plicated matter—the selection and training of staff;
he sought experts with initiative, with a flexible and
efficient way of thinking. He made these demands on
any worker, whatever his post.
In order to turn the socialist planning bodies into
militant headquarters for checking on the fulfilment
of the national economic plans, Voznesensky put such
highly-qualified experts at the head of Gosplan that
they could converse a level with the heads of minis-
tries (people’s commissariats, as they were then
called). The Gosplan directives were distinguished
by a thrifty approach to the possibilities of both
each individual region and the state as a whole.
Economists began to talk about “Voznesensky’s
School’.
The “school” confirmed its vitality by rapidly trans-
ferring the economy of the huge country on to
military lines when nazi Germany attacked the
USSR.
In December 1942, it was suggested that I go to
Moscow. It did not take me long to get ready—my
possessions consisted of a small suitcase with essentials
and a couple of books. My departure was delayed by
the weather—for ten nights in a row I went to the
airport only to return in the morning.
Phone calls on behalf of Voznesensky came every
day, and sometimes he even rang personally to ask
why I had not yet left.
I explained.
On New Year’s Eve I left for Moscow. By mid-day
I was in Moscow and two hours later Voznesensky
received me. His first question was whether I had had
106
[ sa sat there until about 3 a.m., reading papers
plan. . aking of my family. At about four o’clock in
ing 1 went to my hotel then called “Asto-
at now “Berlin”, and spent the rest of the
ie Vveat’s night there. I ate a sandwhich and went
e
. ‘n April 1943 was I allowed to go to Sverd-
Ory the Urals, where my wife and family had
lovsk in th . ted. i d br; h
been since being evacuated, in order to bring them
back to Moscow.
When I arrived in Sverdlovsk I found out that,
the day before, they had already left for Moscow,
so we had passed each other on the way. The same
evening I had to take the train back. I could imagine
how my family would feel when nobody met them
at the station. But, as it turned out, I need not have
worried. Colleagues from Gosplan received the tele-
gram giving my family’s arrival time and met them,
helping them to get to Third Meshchanskaya Street,
where we had been given a flat. They had brought
in some food and a few essentials, and made some-
thing to eat.
When I arrived in the capital a couple of days
later, I came back to a virtually “lived-in” home.
There was a lot of work to do and I saw little of
on cmilly, Now, almost forty years since that spring
mena a lot has, of course, been erased from my
with "Ys a lot has been forgotten. But my meeting
My dear ones after the long, difficult period
of “€Paration
¢| b h
One of my m len brought me new strength h and and 11 S
Ost treasured memories.
107
Working in direct contact with Voznesensky, we
all passed through his same strict “‘school’’, where
the main subject was exactingness. From his subordi-
nates he demanded thoroughness and everything they
could give. He had a perfect knowledge of economic
proportions, the correlations between industries and
types of output, and believed that we should look
at all things broadly and, when solving partial prob-
lems, should always co-ordinate them with the gen-
eral tasks involved in developing the country’s econ-
omy, taking both inter-regional and_inter-industry
interests into account.
He would not accept a project unless the author
could prove convincingly, with specific calculations
and computations, not only the partial, but also the
overall benefit to be derived from it. Initially I was
concerned with fuel-supply problems. Whenever I
reported to Voznesensky on a possible Gosplan deci-
sion, I always took with me a sheet of calculations
going beyond the particular issue.
Voznesensky never brought pressure to bear with
his authority, never imposed his own view. He set
tasks in the form of the conditions of a precise prob-
lem; the solution and choice of methods he left to
his subordinates. He gave calm but not indifferent
approval of successful work, making it clear that
a good piece of work carried out by subordinates is
an honour for their head.
Once asked whether figures did not tire him, he
replied that, while words make it possible to com-
municate with one another, figures allow one to
communicate with time. To foresee and embody an
108
idea in calculations, and then make it reality: this
was the attraction of figures for Voznesensky.
In 1943, still long before the victorious end of
the war, Gosplan elaborated a plan for restoring the
national economy in regions liberated from nazi
occupation.
Some of our comrades thought that efforts and
means should be concentrated on restoring industry,
while housing could wait till the end of the war.
When Voznesensky heard such views, he would make
a dry and firm objection: “The war has caused the
Soviet people inexpressible difficulties. Yes, they could
survive even worse. But what they have survived is
enough. We must think about the peaceful future.
And tomorrow the Soviet man must both work and
live under normal conditions.”
He insisted that the maximum possible funds be
allocated for restoring housing and that a special day-
to-day accountability be instituted—the Gosplan com-
missioners had to report every five days on how
many people had been moved to new or repaired
houses.
During the restoration of the national economies
of the liberated regions, the Government set the task
of not simply recreating what had existed before, but
also of considering this as a reconstruction process
making it possible, in addition to attaining the prewar
level of production, to iron out the defects that had
existed before the war in the location of productive
forces. We were to locate large enterprises close to
raw material sources and, where possible, duplicate
these sources. When restoring towns and _ villages,
their old lay-out was to be reviewed, taking into
account the prospects for development, and the geo-
109