what is to be done. Clearly, save a suddenrncatastrophe, a traditional MarshallrnPlan-type foreign aid package is unacceptable.rnRebuilding the old Soviet systemrnwould require trillions in governmentrnaid at a time when demands forrndomestic investment cannot be ignored.rnEven a worldwide effort involving Japanrnand Germany would be insufficient andrnrisky for the respective governments. Privaternsector help ultimately may be thernsolution, but presently this is a drop inrnthe proverbial bucket. In short, the currentrnsituation resembles a picture of horrifiedrnbystanders helplessly watching arnsinking ship loaded with toxic chemicals.rnThe situation is not, however, asrnhopeless as it may initially appear. Thernproblem is that we have conceptualizedrnthe U.S.-former Soviet Union relationshiprnin terms of either outright gifts orrntrade involving tangible commodities.rnPast experience leads us to think instinctivelyrnof handouts or trading, say,rnfood or trucks for metals or oil. We havernalready mentioned the futility of cashrnadvances. And, given that exports eitherrnare scarce within Russia or wouldrntake years to become commercially available,rntrade is not a quick solution. Therernis also the problem of introducing capitalistrneconomics into a bureaucratic staternstill populated by those who believe freernmarkets to be exploitation.rnThe secret is to think in terms of services,rnnot the typical tangible items ofrntrade. We must ask, “What exportablern^ ii!rrrn0,««1.1«: A M.i«i„= =! «=«!=« C^LL-r.rn«.,..,rn’l>l’H-hl’ 1 11-oa-wrn„,…rn». ».u,« i«.«…, ,…, »» «,..,, .!.„>„., »,«.,., m….. .,.„,,„,rnn. U.U.., iâ„¢,.,.,., „. .. „i. .„..,, ^ . i , „ . „„…. „•».,»,rn””^o’^^’^ZL^.,. .„.„…, « ., „. „,..,. ,„.,„.. ,n…,. .„.,.,.„rniiâ„¢.. :. r i _ , . . , » . „ „ , „ , i . . , i , . , . , , . . , . „ , . s , „ . , . . . . U M . .111…. .11..-â„¢..rn„….,. ,.„.., ». „.„„, ,..,.,.„, „. ,. „.. s,,..,. „,.,.„, …….. ,„o,-„..rn• ‘.rsifwS?’:,:^^^::.,”‘ f.-*'”-.-â„¢-.—”-â„¢.”â„¢’*””*”-‘—••-^ •”^-^ – ° -rn’ • 5 1 * ^ ^rn= ;:;r?5S::;i^;=.s^’Krc’S:rn>. CM. F4« Dl««.,«rnO . T O I . ^ O – . ^ I . f , – J – — ^ , „ . – – « . , ,rn””‘i^iz^’is.;â„¢'””rn13 !0Brn4 , ,rn11 JIOrnI ! l lhrn406rn6S6rn’.’T^i.r::’.^â„¢rnH ,00rn„ j .rn12 052rn12 477rn” Lr^rj.ro.’rr.”::;:?^’^ “”l^^”‘”SXr”^”iZ^.rn” ‘ ” ‘ ” • • ” ^ ^ – , – ,rnservice does the former Soviet Unionrnpossess that is of value to the UnitedrnStates?” Once we take this approach,rnand expend some modest thought, thernanswer is plain—the Soviet Union rightfullyrnenjoys the reputation of the worid’srnforemost expert in the arts of oppressionrnand citizen control. What Saudi Arabiarnis to oil, what Japan is to consumer electronics,rnthe Kremlin is to ruthless citizenrncontrol, especially of citizens at the bottomrnof the economic heap. A programrnof brutal repression stamped “Made inrnthe U.S.S.R.” is the equivalent of “Madernin France” on a bottle of perfume orrn”Ten-Day Tour of Fabulous Bangkok”rnfor sex-starved Japanese businessmen.rnAmong connoisseurs of such matters,rnthe Soviet label proclaims the genuinernarticle, a commitment to effectivenessrnnot to be confused with cheap imitationsrnfrom, say. Red China or somernJohnny-come-lately Islamic fundamentalistrnstate. Indeed, a passion forrnexcellence in the arts of citizen controlrnlong predates the communist regime.rnAs the Shah unfortunately discovered,rnquality in such matters cannot bernachieved in a mere decade.rnAt this point the reader may ask,rn”Why would anybody want to buy repression,rneven if of the highest grade?rnAfter all, the end of repression was whatrnthe Cold War was about. We spent billionsrnto rid ourselves of it.” Such a reader,rnclearly, must be unaware of what hasrnbeen transpiring in the American judicialrnsystem. We are, to put it mildly,rnoverwhelmed with criminality—our prisonsrnare overcrowded, our courts are overwhelmed,rnand our police are outmannedrnand outgunned in the war against violentrnhooliganism. What we need is oppression,rnalbeit of a more focused varietyrnthan the traditional product, and thernformer Soviet Union now possesses anrnenormous over-supply of that product.rnTo borrow a slogan from the early 1960’s,rnthe oppression gap must be closed.rnThe easiest way to begin is concretely,rnwith prisons. Though precise figures arernnot available, it must be true that therncollapse of Marxism has resulted in arnsurplus of empty cells and unemployedrnguards, wardens, and psychiatric counselors.rnNot only could our use of underutilizedrnspace and infrastructure relievernovercrowding in American prisons, but arntransfer of inmates to the Soviet Unionrnwould save the American taxpayers hundredsrnof millions while revitalizing a traditionalrnmainstay of the Soviet economy.rnRather than pay $30,000 or more tornhouse a prisoner in Joliet, the FederalrnBureau of Prisons could pay, say, Russianrnjailers maybe $5,000. Given their greatrnand cost-effective skill at housing guestsrnof the state, even $5,000 per year per inmaternwould generate sufficient profit tornheat up hundreds of local economies.rnMoney would also arrive from gifts sentrnabroad by friends and relatives of inmates.rnThe black market in importedrnAmerican cigarettes and jeans wouldrnprovide valuable lessons in trade andrnmarketing. Housing American prisonersrnin Siberia would amount to a multibillion-rndollar aid program undertaken gleefullyrnby the people of America. So profitablernmight this enterprise become thatrnRussian jailers would surely keep theirrnguests for extended stays by insisting onrnfull rehabilitation. No muddleheadedrnbleeding-heart time off for good behaviorrnor early release programs. Delegationsrnof ex-KGB members armed withrncolorful brochures would roam U.S.rncourts drumming up business much likernMidwestern small-town economic developmentrncommittees chase Californiarnhigh-tech industries. The Russiansrnwould quickly become the Motel 6 ofrnthe private prison industry—the fearedrnlow-cost provider.rnOn the other side of the ledger, lowerrntaxes at home would permit additionalrnpurchases of luxury goods, such as importedrnvodka, caviar, and sable coats.rnSome American consumers might buyrnRussian to express their solidarity withrnthis venture in international cooperation.rnEmpty correctional facilities wouldrnbe recycled into theme parks, tourist attractions,rnor budget motels where formerrnemployees could have less stressfulrnpositions. That the incarcerated felonrncommunity was at least 6,000 miles awayrnwould also mean that we would have littlernto fear from weekend release programsrnor an occasional escapee. UnitedrnStates judges, thanks to the Russianrnpostal service, would be spared thernfrivolous appeals endlessly offered up byrnjailhouse lawyers. Meanwhile, criminalrnlawyers would be gone weeks at a time tornsee their clients, not a trivial considerationrnin the needed reform of our legalrnsystem. Some may never return givenrnthe hardships of travel to remote gulagsrnand of dealings with those lacking a respectrnfor fine legal argument.rnThis “Felon Exchange Program” isrnonly the first step in utilizing our formerrnenemy’s special expertise. Thou-rn44/CHRONlCLESrnrnrn