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

How Far Was Gorbachev Responsible For The End Of Soviet Union?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How Far Was Gorbachev Responsible For The End Of Soviet Union? Many factors influenced the end of the USSR and it is far too simplistic to say that a certain factor was wholly Gorbachev's fault or was wholly free of Gorbachev's ideas. For example, the ideas of perestroika, glasnost, and his actions were generally caused by Gorbachev. However, elements of nationalism, the economy and unpopularity only contain a few examples of Gorbachev not being directly responsible. Some factors to do with the end of the Soviet Union had nothing to do with Gorbachev. There are also cases where Gorbachev is shown to be trying to keep the USSR intact. Another element to consider is that various factors affected the stability of the Soviet Union to varying degrees. It is only by debating these topics can we come to a judgement on how far he was or was not responsible for the end of the Soviet Union. There are examples of Gorbachev weakening the Soviet Union. Zubok in particular argues that Gorbachev's personality helped to destabilize the USSR. This is a valid argument because the strength of a nation to prosper is dependent on the strength of character of its leader, for example Stalin was a leader of strong personality (for all his flaws) and his country did prosper for a short time. There is the belief that Gorbachev was of "weak character" (ZA P62). This quote is particularly useful because it is a quote of Chernyaev, a strong supporter of Gorbachev who is now arguing the opposite of what someone with his ideals of Gorbachev would be. The piece is corroborated to some extent by Yeltsin who says Gorbachev was the lover of "half measures and half steps" (AtG P262), which infers that Gorbachev would not commit fully. Zubok also gives the prevailing view that Gorbachev suffered "naivety" (ZA P73) and that he had "overreached himself" (ZA P73). ...read more.

Middle

This would stress an already weakened system due to perestroika to the point of breaking. Following the fall of the Berlin wall, the "self confidence of people power [was] immeasurably enhanced" (R+FotSE P131) and this would encourage more demonstrations, as people knew they had a chance to succeed. Because of glasnost, the Afghan war became televised and this galvanized the government's unpopularity, just as the televised Vietnam War had a detrimental effect on the US administration. Historical research permitted by glasnost had a negative impact on the Soviet Union, strengthening hostility to the regime. The massacres of poles at Katyn, and the discovery of mass graves in the Ukraine and Belorussia all alienated people from the regime, which weakened the USSR because the government no longer had a strong power base. The Nazi-Soviet Pact "galvanized Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania into nationalist protest" (R+FotSE P119). Other examples of the "excesses of the Stalin era" had the effect of reviving the "nationalist campaigns of the non-Russian bloc" (R+FotSE P119). The rise of nationalist movements in a country is not a sign of strength but of weakness. Following the broadcasting of the Supreme Soviet on television, an "entire population awakened" (AtG P246) politically. This population had access to western thought because of openness, such as human rights and democracy. The principle of democracy undermined the Soviet position because it advocates the creation of more than one party, which goes against the basis of Soviet power. These examples show glasnost having a negative impact on the USSR. It can be debated that glasnost had decisive advantages, such as politicians actions would now be open to the public to view, making leaders accountable to the people. This is a vital element to democracy and in this respect glasnost would strengthen the new democracy in the USSR, making the country more stable. Also openness is beneficial in exposing corruption, as in the Tehelka case in India. ...read more.

Conclusion

These demonstrate that Gorbachev was deeply concerned with keeping the USSR intact. This can be further demonstrated by the Union Treaty in which he tries to preserve the USSR. Another example would be the economic blockade of Lithuania following its calls for independence, a measure designed to force it to stay in the Union. These measures do demonstrate that Gorbachev tried to keep the USSR intact, but for all this, it still broke up. His policies weakened the Union but did not cause the USSR to break-up directly. Gorbachev certainly caused the weakening of the USSR, in the form of his actions, perestroika and glasnost. Other factors such as nationalism, economic factors and unpopularity also contributed to the weakening of the Soviet state. However these factors did not cause the immediate end of the USSR. Rather the end of the Soviet Union can be attributed to the failure of the August coup and the subsequent of Yeltsin. Gorbachev did not cause the coup directly, so the end of the USSR cannot be attributed to him. In this respect, the opinion of Zubok: "without Gorbachev, the dismantling of the cold war could not have happened as quickly as it did" (ZA P93) is not valid. The quote can be inferred to say that Gorbachev created the conditions for the coup, but the actual act in itself Gorbachev was not associated with. It is interesting to note that had the August coup not occurred, the Union Treaty would have come into effect and the USSR would have strengthened, perhaps enough to silence separatist voices in the Baltic states, though this would be an extreme case. The failed coup itself lead to the break-up of the Soviet Union as it secured the rise of anti-Soviet forces such as Yeltsin, who subsequently went on to abolish key aspects of the USSR such as the CPSU. Gorbachev was not responsible for the end of the USSR, only responsible for the weakening of the Soviet Union, it was the coup that gave the "final blow" to break-up the USSR. 15th January 2004 1 of 7 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE International relations 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 GCSE International relations 1945-1991 essays

  1. Why did the relationship between the USA and USSR change between 1975 and 1990

    This meet broke down as the USA refused to give up their Star Wars programme. However Gorbachev confirmed to Regan that the USSR would withdraw from Afghanistan and that no more Russian nuclear tests would take place if the US did not test any either.

  2. Explain why the USA and the Soviet Union did not trust eachother after the ...

    They both seemed a little to close for comfort. The soviets were concerned that the western allies might start to co-operate with people who had been Nazi sympathisers. The last thing the soviets wanted was another attack from a fascist Germany.

  1. To what extent were Fulgencio Batista's weaknesses the cause for Fidel Castro's rise to ...

    -Batista was seen as an obstacle to restoration of stability. Even the members of his government saw the need to remove him because he failed to maintain socio-political peace (10). - By mid 1958, Batista launched an offensive against the guerrilla: it failed.

  2. Explain the part played by external pressure (for example, economic sanctions and international isolation ...

    cricket, rugby and athletics. Increasingly South Africa was cut off from International sports. After South Africa left commonwealth there were no more participations in the UN, 1964 onwards and because of this South Africa was banned from the Olympics. This increased disruptions of South African teams abroad.

  1. How did the Red scare and McCarthyism become such a dominant force in the ...

    Other high profile people such as some of Hollywood's biggest stars were also beginning to speak up against him. Throughout this 'era' Newspapers such as 'The Washington post', and 'New York times' had been giving fair and balanced reports, obviously not always in favour of McCarthy.

  2. The Cuban Missile Crisis: Was President Kennedy the Saviour of the Cuban Missile Crisis?

    This ruled out future testing of nuclear weapons in the armosphere and underwater. Source A1 shows that this type of testing would be a thing of the past. This represented the most significant improvement in international relations in a decade.

  1. Cold War Summary, quotes and revision notes.

    came to realise America's military might was being frustrated by North Vietnamese * Humiliating back down --> US withdrew from South Vietnam in 1973 * North Vietnamese forces overran the country, became communism in 1975 Impacts * Caused enormous suffering to people of Indochina * Also had major impact on

  2. Cold War Short Essays - Questions and Answers.

    The tanks faced each other for 18 hours and then finally withdrew. This marked a clear divide between the East and the West Briefly explain the key features of the refugee problem in Berlin in the years 1957-61 (6 marks)

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