• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Gorbachev(TM)s reforms and policies, which were intended originally to strengthen the Soviet system, eventually killed it. How far do you agree with this statement?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

When Mikhail Gorbachev became General Secretary of the Communist Party in March 1985, his efforts to streamline the Communist system offered promise, but ultimately proved uncontrollable and resulted in a cascade of events that eventually concluded with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Initially intended as tools to bolster the Soviet economy and solve the Soviet Union's long term problems, Gorbachev's policies and reforms soon led to unintended negative consequences. This was a result of the long term economic, social and political weaknesses of the Soviet Union which simply could not sustain the impact of Gorbachev's reforms, hence I agree only with the statement to a small extent as the Soviet system was already "dead" when Gorbachev assumed office, and his policies merely "hit the last nails on the coffin of communism", in the words of Lech Walesa. Firstly, among the most consequential and bitter disappointments of the Gorbachev reforms was its almost total economic failure. That failure was rooted in the long term imbalances and irrationalities of the Soviet economy and Perestroika, the attempted cure, turned mere stagnation into outright decline. Gorbachev's policy of Perestroika (economic restructuring) intended at improving efficiency through the introduction of competition, dismissing unproductive workers and giving the local regions more authority to plan local economies according to their needs. This would be achieved by ending the command economy which had existed since Stalin's time and replace it with a demand economy. He had hoped that this would encourage enterprise and boost Soviet economy. Although Gorbachev's economic reforms were bold in Soviet historical context, they were not sufficiently radical enough to restart the country's sluggish economy in the late 1980s. Under Perestroika, the economy would no longer be controlled by the government but by the market. Perestroika also aimed at improving efficiency through the introduction of competition, dismissing unproductive workers and giving the local regions more authority to plan local economies according to their needs. ...read more.

Middle

Even if their opposition did not derive from selfish motives, others (such as Ligachev) opposed too much reform on grounds of principle and ideology since it would destroy the Soviet system in which they believed. For example, Gorbachev's democratization, in particular the striking out of Article 6 in the Soviet Constitution, resulted in the formation of a multiparty system where all the newly emerged opposition groups posed a huge challenge to the CPSU leadership. Gorbachev had in many senses diminished the authority of the CPSU and thus, the party had been separated from the government and stripped of its leading role in society and its function in overseeing the national economy. For seventy years, the CPSU had been the cohesive force that kept the Soviet Union together, without the authority of the party in the Soviet center, the nationalities of the constituent republics pulled harder than ever to break away from the union. Furthermore, Gorbachev's 'new thinking' de-ideologised Soviet foreign policy. Unlike previous political leaders like Andropov and Chernenko before him, he was determined achieve his goal of peaceful coexistence and d�tente with the west and was willing to give up what had previously been considered as vital foreign policy interest. He ended the arms race with the West and restored diplomatic relations with the West. Gorbachev also set out to adopt a new relationship between the USSR and Eastern Europe. By 1989, he repudiated the Brezhnev doctrine and adopted the "Sinatra Doctrine", in favour of non-intervention in the internal affairs of its Warsaw Pact Allies. Gorbachev also made it clear to the communist leaders in Eastern Europe that they would no longer have the support form the Red Army to put down protests and demonstrations and that they would have to listen to their own people. In the past these governments had relied on Soviet support. Without this help they had to deal with the protests on their own. ...read more.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the August coup was the short term factor which led to the fall of communism in the USSR as the failed coup merely sped up the collapse of the USSR. The coup was a result of Gorbachev's policies which worsened the economic conditions which he had inherited initially. The Soviet economy was not on the point of collapse when Gorbachev came into power. The catastrophic economic collapse of the late 1980s was a direct result of failure of Gorbachev's policies of Perestroika and Glasnost, but obviously, the collapse would not have taken place had not the serious economic weaknesses already existed. Even without Gorbachev's policies, communism would have bound to fail eventually due to the poor economy and corrupt communist system which had already existed since Stalin's time. Gorbachev's policies merely acted as a catalyst which speeded up the collapse of communism in the USSR. Furthermore, Gorbachev's unprecedented move to adopt the Sinatra Doctrine stemmed from the economic realities of the USSR - the Eastern European states were more of economic liabilities than assets and its bankrupt economy could no longer finance the Red Army to maintain tight control over the republics. Essentially, the inheritance of a troubled Soviet Union was the main reason for the collapse of communism in USSR. The prolonged economy and the rigid and corrupt communist system which Gorbachev inherited was simply unable to support his polices and also unable to cope with the internal as well as external pressures threatening the USSR. Not only did Perestroika and Glasnost fail in objectives, communism in USSR came to an end due to this long term pre-existing inherent economic weakness which rendered the USSR an incomplete superpower to begin with and thus contributing to its eventual demise. "Gorbachev's reforms and policies, which were intended originally to strengthen the Soviet system, eventually killed it." How far do you agree with this statement? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Free essay

    The development of the international economy in the period 1945-2000 favoured rich countries at ...

    4 star(s)

    Tariff lowering and increasing prices of 3rd world imports by the USA served to reduce the comparative advantage that the LDCs had in manufacturing of certain products. This practise of discrimination, though violating the rules of GATT, was allowed only due to the dominance of the USA, who were responsible for most of the international economic policies.

  2. This graduation paper is about U.S. - Soviet relations in Cold War period. Our ...

    Hurrying back from Moscow, Averell Harriman sought the president's ear, lobbying intensively with White House and State Department officials for his position that "irreconcilable differences" separated the Soviet Union and the United States, with the Russians seeking "the extension of the Soviet system with secret police, [and] extinction of freedom of speech" everywhere they could.

  1. How far should Gorbachev be blamed for the collapse of the Soviet Union?

    "Information, slew the totalitarian giant" (Scott Shane) In essence, glasnost gave the people more freedom to be discontented with the system and the way the Government controlled their lives in general. Gorbachev implemented glasnost to enhance efficiency but in return the people merely voiced their discontent for the current government,

  2. What were Gorbachev's intentions when he launched Glasnost and Perestroika, and how far did ...

    prepared first," through tighter discipline (hence his early anti-alcohol campaign), and restructuring (perestroika).7 At first Gorbachev introduced policies designed to begin establishing a market economy by encouraging limited private ownership in Soviet agriculture and industry.8 He intended to tighten central planning but at the same time increase the rights of

  1. Post-Cold War Realities

    an Azeri company, away from the Alov structure.[41] In a bid to destabilize Azerbaijan and the pipeline, both have backed Armenia in the dispute over Nagorno-Karabagh?Iran by providing arms and gas, Russia by selling arms and maintaining its military bases.[42] A former Azeri ambassador to Tehran has even claimed to

  2. Neither Stalin, Khrushchev or Brezhnev successfully addressed fundamental economic problems which increasingly dogged the ...

    Overall the USSR managed to produce a 75% increase on the production of 1940 which shows its extensive success and therefore disagrees with the statement that as a leader he failed to address the economic problems faced. Although it can be suggested that Khrushchev faced less of challenge than Stalin,

  1. Do you agree that the policies of Mikhail Gorbachev were the most important reasons ...

    In 1988, the USSR and the US signed the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty in which both agreed to destroy nuclear weapons. In 1989, the Soviet army withdrew from the wearing war in Afghanistan. In 1990, another treaty was singed to limit non-nuclear weapons as well.

  2. In the context of the period 1905-2005, how far do you agree that Khrushchev ...

    Likewise, Stalin?s Collectivisation process had failed to produce an economic structure of continuity, with state farms operating at a loss, since procurement prices which were set by the state, had hardly been increased since 1928.[19] Stalin was indeed conscious of this, stating to the party that they had become ?dizzy

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work