ABOUT THE MESSAGE BEHIND THE PROTESTS?

I was very disappointed by The Post's coverage {Dec. 7} of a series of demonstrations and protests by Americans of Ukrainian, Afghan and Ethiopian descent against Soviet aggression and human rights violations. Two articles lumped these demonstrations together with a number of spurious protests of individuals. While focusing on the human-interest angle of these diverse protests, the reporters failed to convey the important purpose and message behind them.

The demonstrators did not come to Lafayette Park to spoil the ambience of summit good will. They had a number of very serious messages to convey to the people of the United States and our politicians, who will ultimately be responsible for approving the agreements that the president signed and consenting to cultural and scientific exchanges. Without responsible press coverage, their message will be muted and skewed.

What were these messages that the reporters so diligently avoided concerning themselves with? First, we're not against the INF or any nuclear arms limitation treaty that makes sense and is verifiable. We were simply reminding President Reagan and Congress that they should be firm and demanding in their dealings with Mikhail Gorbachev. Our skepticism is based on experiences with the Soviet Union. Our belief is that "glasnost" and "perestroika" are not intended to be agents of democratization of the Soviet Union, but rather merely catalysts for greater economic productivity. Gorbachev has clearly separated the two purposes in his writings and in his interview with Tom Brokaw.

Second, we see no substantive movement on the basic human rights of non-Russian Soviet nationals. Natan Shcharansky has attested to this, as has every freed Soviet dissident. Thus, the most basic human rights of religious freedom, of freedom for pursuing the multicultural, multilingual and ethnic diversity of the numerous peoples in the Soviet Union, continues to be a dominant goal of our U.S.-based political action groups. Total political freedom for the peoples within the Soviet Union (the Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, etc.) is still our primary objective.

Ukrainians, Latvians, Afghans and Ethiopians don't simply want to emigrate to escape oppression. They are not refuseniks; rather, they are political prisoners in gulags and psychiatric wards, prisoners of war in Afghanistan and countless victims of a man-made famine in Ethiopia. They do not want to leave their native lands. Rather, they want the Russians and their puppet Marxist regimes to leave their occupied homelands.

We share the deep concern of Soviet Jews for their aspirations to religious and political freedom and their desire to emigrate. Their cause is also our cause. But it should be noted that it is Ukrainian political prisoners and Helsinki monitors who have died in Soviet prisons and who constitute the majority of political prisoners being held and tortured in the Soviet Union. Despite repeated entreaties, these prisoners of conscience are still treated as anonymous by the American press. It is the Afghan civilians and starving Ethiopians who suffer the daily casualties that belie Gorbachev's message of glasnost.

Considering these ongoing atrocities, it is shameful and insulting that the press dwells more on the personality conflicts between Nancy Reagan and Raisa Gorbachev than on reflecting on the paradox of glasnost rhetoric amid Soviet-inspired genocide.

Eugene Z. Stakhiv

Articles appear as they were originally printed in The Washington Post and may not include subsequent corrections.