Thu, 16 Dec Fri, 16 Dec Daniels, professor emeritus of history at the University of Vermont, is the author of The End of the Communist Revolution Routledge and Russia's Transformation Rowman and Littlefieldamong numerous other works on Russia.
The s for the Soviet Union: They embraced 3 different, but connected with each other, eras: No wonder, there is a huge literature on the subject, both researching Yu.
Let me draw your attention to only two problems which, I seem, can improve our understanding of the Russian s and give a possible perspective on their studying. The first problem is that of a space of power.
This space is a specific interactive sphere where government proper is exercized. But first let me remind you in brief the Soviet history of s. I n the first half of the decade, the political life in the Soviet Union was quaked with frequent changes of leaders.
In January Mikhail Suslov, the chief ideologist of the party, died. Later that year, in November, Leonid Brezhnev, the long-time head of the party and state died, too. He was replaced by Yuri Was the soviet union reformable who died in less than 15 months, in February Konstantin Chernenko acquired the highest authority, but in March there was another funeral and another changing of power.
But this policy appeared to result in growing number of accidents in different sectors of economy. The Chernobyl nuclear power station accident of April became a gloomy symbol of catastrophe.
At the same time, the Baltic republics appeared to fully intend to withdraw from the Soviet Union. In the the Communist Party ceased to be a nucleus of the Soviet political system, and this fact was reflected in the Constitution.
The multiparty system started to revive. Let me also remind you about foreign factors. W hat were the early 80s internationally? There are only a few, most important developments: Soviet-American summits were restored. An agreement was reached about the elimination of a whole class of nuclear weapons.
Soviet troops began withdrawing from Afghanistan. Communist parties there were deposed from power. Even a brief enumeration of these significant events demonstrates how difficult for historical analysis were the s.
Why did the question was put just this way? Steel, cement, tractor productions were increasing rapidly. But traditional, out-of-date branches consumed a lot of natural resourses which often were not used efficiently.
Modern high technology productions formed only a small sector of economy. Moreover, they worked mostly for military orders. Afterwhen in West Sibiria huge resourses of oil and gas were discovered, Soviet assets grew significantly and made economic reform unnecessary, at least for some time.
As economist later put it, oil became a drug for the Soviet economy. The country was turning into an oil and gas addict. Huge pipe-lines transferred oil and gas to the West in exchange of hard currency.
Framed against the background of national agricultural crises, Soviet dependency on food imports became more clear and dangerous.
In the late 70s, another attempt to initiative economic reforms was made, but it was blocked by the political leadership. As it was the case in the late 60s, they saw in economic transformation a threat to their political authority.
It is not the coincidence that many scholars tend to see the reason of Soviet economic stagnation, deepening crises and, consequently, growing opposition attitudes exactly in the sphere of power. The Requirements of mobilization development created extremely concentrated power. In the centre there is the Supreme power-holder The Ruler.
This is an important feature of the ideocratic regime.The second problem’s connected with a question of whether the Soviet system was reformable. This question has been a matter of a big and promising discussion going on both in Russian and in the West. The Demise of the Soviet Communist Party.
This book, based on extensive original research in previously unexplored sources, including the party archives, provides a great deal of new information on the disintegration of the Soviet communist party, in and the preceding years. the Soviet Union was reformable, noting that even President Ronald Reagan recog-nized and applauded Gorbachev’s reforms.
But reform was not enough. The Soviet Union needed to be t r a n s f o r m e d, and that was a process it would not have survived. T he Soviet system under Gorbachev did take remarkable strides toward political transformation.
Cohen's ramifying arguments include that Stalinism was not the predetermined outcome of the Communist Revolution; that the Soviet Union was reformable and its breakup avoidable; and that the opportunity for a real post-Cold War relationship with Russia was squandered in .
The Soviet forces present at that time engaged in plunder of the former eastern territories of Germany which were being transferred to Poland, stripping it of valuable industrial equipment, infrastructure and factories and sending them to the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union needed to be transformed, and that was a process it would not have survived.
T he Soviet system under Gorbachev did take remarkable strides toward political transformation. In March , for example, the Communist Party gave up its constitutionally guaranteed monopoly on .