home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
090991
/
0909003.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
2KB
|
49 lines
<text id=91TT1976>
<title>
Sep. 09, 1991: U.S.S.R. or B.U.S.T.
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1991
Sep. 09, 1991 Power Vacuum
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
WORLD, Page 34
SOVIET UNION
U.S.S.R. or B.U.S.T.
</hdr><body>
<p> The name Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has about it the
deep sonority of history. Unfortunately, it is history--or
virtually so. Last week members of the Soviet parliament batted
around suggested titles for the disintegrating union. Among the
candidate monikers are the Union of Sovereign Soviet States (a
Gorbachev favorite), the Euroasian Economic Community and the
Commonwealth of Sovereign States of Europe and Asia. One cynic
even suggested the Club of Crippled Nations.
</p>
<p> The problem with the Soviet Union is that each of its many
incompatible parts may be slighted by a name that failed to take
specific national identities into account. The solution reached
by Pakistan (an initial from each of its eight component regions)
would be ideal--except for the fact that there are 12 republics
to deal with. The acronyms are hardly euphonious or politic.
Turgutmakbak, for example, simply turns the new confederation
into gobbledygook. Using syllables from some of the republics
would be just as untenable. For example, the Belokazakirghuzbek
Russukra Union (B.R.U.) would leave out the easily offended
states of Tadzhikistan, Turkmenistan, Moldavia, Georgia, Armenia
and Azerbaijan. And what would the country's inhabitants be
called? Bruskis?
</p>
<p> The demise of the initials U.S.S.R. will mean that one
classic Beatles tune will become archaic. But initials are tricky
things. The Soviets (or ex-Soviets, as the case may be) should be
careful not to name their country the Basically United Sovereign
Territories.
</p>
</body></article>
</text>