RUSSIAN ELECTIONS: THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY

By now you have probably heard of the political earthquake that shook Russia this week: communists and nationalists, some who properly could be called fascists, scored unexpectedly big in the vote to establish a new parliament. Meanwhile, the reformers aligned closest with Russian President Boris Yeltsin received a disappointing number of general election votes. Not all is as dire as first reported, however. And, there are lessons Americans can learn from the results.

The Good

Taking the glass is half-full approach to looking at the elections, which is also the latest line out of Washington, it is important to note that while the reformers did not do as well as expected, they are in a slightly stronger position -- if the differing reform groups agree to work together -- than they were in the previous parliament. Of course, Yeltsin, the nearest there is to a true democrat in Russia today, was forced to disband and eventually bombard the previous, communist-dominated parliament two months ago, so "slightly" stronger does not soothe many fears.

The reformers are at least in this position, and not a worse one, due to the organization of the Russian vote. The 450 seats in the lower parliament are evenly split between those elected through "party-preference voting" and those elected to represent specific districts. It was the return of the party-preference vote which smacked the world between the eyes on Monday. The party gaining the most votes, 24 percent of the electorate, was the Liberal Democratic Party led by the charismatic Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, who has become a recent celebrity on American television -- as he did on Russian TV before the election -- because of his racist, anti-semitic and ultra-nationalist soundbites. Russia's Choice, the party most identified with Boris Yeltsin, came in second with just less than 14 percent of the vote. The Communist Party followed with 12 percent.

These numbers tell less than half of the story, however, because they do not take into account groups that are likely to work together. For example, the Agrarian Party, which came in fourth with ten percent of the party vote, is basically a communist, peasant-based group, which is likely to vote alongside the Communist Party on most issues. Likewise, there were two other pro-reform groups, which totaled seven and six percent of the vote, who are likely to work alongside Yeltsin when push comes to shove. No group has yet indicated that they want to work alongside Zhirinovsky and the Liberal Democrats.

But even these numbers do not paint the full picture, because the single seat voting heavily favored the reformers, followed by the communists. The end result is that nobody has a majority, and political alliances will dictate the course of events in the lower parliament. Importantly, it appears that the reformers will have at least a third of the seats: a significant level as this is enough to block overturning of vetoes from the upper house, which is dominated by pro-Yeltsin forces.

The most immediately important aspect of the Russian elections is not the troubling parliamentary voting, however, but the passage of a new Russian constitution. It is the constitution's passage that will allow Yeltsin to continue necessary economic and political reforms.

The Bad

While the final Russian election results are not as bad as they appeared they would be early in the week, they have had some immediately disconcerting effects. The first is that President Yeltsin has proclaimed that he would serve out his term, which lasts until 1996, instead of going to an early election this spring. While there is no constitutional obligation for Yeltsin to conduct an early vote on the presidency, he had promised it two months ago when disbanding the previous parliament. What results from not having an election is that Yeltsin no longer can call himself the most democratically elected figure in the country, a status which had carried him through strife this fall.

While it is understandable that Yeltsin would not want to risk an election in the current atmosphere, public cynicism about his democratic credentials will only rise. It is this very type of cynicism that added to the poor showing of those reformers closely tied to his government.

The ugly

The worst part of the Russian election is that it has given a platform to a truly scary man, Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Here's just a short listing of the type of belligerence Zhirinovsky used to rally his vote: the seal of his party displays an eagle hovering over the old Russian empire -- including Finland and Alaska; he says he dreams of a day "when Russian soldiers can wash their boots in the warm waters of the Indian Ocean," when former Soviet republics beg Moscow to take them back; he has spoken of reannexing the Baltic nations; using the threat of nuclear warfare; ridding the television of "Jews and other non-Slavic people;" shipping the "dark skinned out of Moscow."

While we believe that much of Mr. Zhirinovsky's success was the result of a protest against the poor economic conditions and escalating crime in Russia, it was also a sounding of how deep resentment is about the decline of Russia in world power. Anti-Westernism was also a strong component.

The lesson

There is not much the United States can do at this juncture outside of what it is already doing. And, indeed, the passage of the new Russian constitution is a most positive event for Russia and for relations between East and West. Still, the obvious reverberation of Mr. Zhirinovsky's message among some of the Russian people is a reminder that we should always remain vigilant.