This democratisation helped with the increase of nationalism in the republics. Each one, some even the support of the local communist party, “began to support local independence movements, and insist on the autonomy of the republican governments”. By mid-1990, even the two most influential Republics, the Russian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR had “proclaimed their sovereignty”. The age-old bans on the national flags was lifted, and people “took advantage of the freedom to demonstrate by assembling crowds to listen to speeches and wave the […] national flags” in the Baltic republics. Even in the Soviet strongholds of Leningrad and Moscow, the referendum presented to stabilise the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics passed by a slim majority, and the question concerning a the creation solely Russian president for the Russian SSR passed. However, Gorbachev remained in power, and the push for a “New Union Treaty”, as proposed by him to give more sovereignty to individual republics, could have stemmed the tide.
(656 words)
C Evaluation of Sources
1. Merridale, Catherine and Ward, Chris. Perestroika: The Historical Perspective, 1991, Hodder & Stoughton, Great Britain.
The origin of Perestroika: The Historical Perspective edited by Catherine Merridale and Chris Ward is 1991, when the book was first published. The purpose of the source is to give the conclusions stemming from a three-year project studying the effects of Perestroika on Russia, the USSR and the international scene. The book’s value comes from the fact that the collaborators and editors, as the book described, “were directly involved in the Soviet political process”. As well, since the book is a series of different essays from many individuals, it shows the different viewpoints and other plans that were had at the time, while, since it is by single editors, it remains focused on the issues at hand. However, its publishing date, during the actual time of the restructuring, is a limitation, as post-1991 events are ignored, plus benefit of hindsight removed.
Walker, Martin. The Cold War, 1994, Vintage, London, UK.
The origin of The Cold War by Martin Walker is 1994, published by Vintage in London, UK. The purpose of this source is to tell “the story of the author’s life”, who, after the end of the Cold War, set upon to write a compendium of the last half-century in International Relations. The value of the book is author’s closeness to the events, as the US bureau chief for the Guardian and a commentator for CNN. While this involvement into the events as a journalist will prove valuable, the fact that he was a foreigner looking into the Russia of the time will prove as a limitation as he would be limited in access to many Soviet documents, and personal accounts of the time, which would prove valuable to determine the conditions in a time when many Soviet information was limited.
(282 words)
D Analysis
The Soviet Union did not just disappear in one day. Through a series of slow reforms, the most powerful socialist country in the world slowly broke up. Not all of the reforms were irreversible, however, there was a point where the natural path to take was that of break-up, not centralisation or strengthening. While this was confirmed with the signing of the Belavezha Accords by the leaders of Belarus, Russia and the Ukraine in December 8, 1991, which effectively disbanded the Soviet Union, this was only a document which made events and reforms in past years official.
After releasing some of the most stringent controls in the economy, and allowing for private involvement in the economy, the Party was slowly walking away from socialist central planning. This, supposedly, “would have strengthened the hand of the Soviet government”, as it would release some of the pent up pressure and help the economy. However, this, in some cases, “did not go far enough, while in others, they went too far.” Moscow was unable to control industry, and individual republics signed barter agreements and formed trade barriers inside the Union to “prevent other scarce products being exported across their borders”. While not complete, the breakdown in the economic relations inside the USSR had inevitably broken down, to an extent, relations between each of the Republics, due to the badly made regulatory decisions.
Local communist parties severed ties with Moscow, and insisted on their republican governments on autonomy. By the start of 1990, all of the republics, but the Russian and Ukrainian SSR, had “proclaimed their sovereignty”. These two, the most important, would proclaim it by mid-1990. The Party was losing grassroots support, with many party members failing to pay their subscriptions, which showed its diminishing power to control things on the ground, removing the institution which had the most to lose with an eventual breakup. In Russia, by the 1990, the creation of an American-style president all but removed the power that the CPUSSR held over Russian institutions, which meant that the USSR did not have the power to control the internal affairs in the separate republics, removing its ability to work as a single entity.
Despite the seemingly inevitable downfall of the Union, not all had changed by 1991. The newly liberalised enterprises only accounted for 3% of the GDP, and employed just 2.4% of the workforce, and the countryside was still managed by a new “super-ministry”, Gosagroprom. The Communist Party still held many of the seats of the Congress of People’s Deputies, its creation meaning that many of the nationalist pressures could be controlled in a reformist, rather than revolutionary manner. Furthermore, “[w]ithout Gorbachev, however, the Soviet Union might have survived for many more years, for the system […] was nowhere near collapse.”
Nevertheless, the battle was all but lost with the people. The “singing revolution” was already under way in the Baltic republics, where people gathered in the streets, waved their national flags and demanded independence, leading to a unilateral declaration of independence by Lithuania on March 11, 1990. In the referendum proposed by Gorbachev, people agreed with the creation of a Russian president, and in the two most important Russian cities, Moscow and Leningrad, the referendum passed barely. In a largely symbolic vote, 55% went for the reversal of Leningrad to its old name; St. Petersburg. Optimism was so low that, when the government of New Zealand praised Soviet authorities over its actions concerning the sinking of a Soviet cruise, few people believed it, showing a complete lack of trust in the central Soviet state.
(755 words)
E Conclusion
We find that, by the start of 1991, the USSR was no longer the same entity as had been before Gorbachev. Nationalism flourished in each of the SSRs, and while officially there were no divisions, each was already acting as a single entity, especially in matters of domestic policy. The Party was not the sole political structure over the USSR anymore, with open elections becoming more popular with time. Economically, the Party, and with it the state, had lost its strong grip over the economy, with private initiatives growing, as well as trade deals between individual republics acting as sovereign states. However, the political lines were still standing, and the Communist Party still held power over a lot of the institutions, with Gorbachev holding considerable power. Furthermore, over half of the population had voted for the continuance of the union, though in a biased referendum. In conclusion, while the breakup was not inevitable by 1991, it was in progress, and only serious effort could have prevented the eventual fall. (169 words)
F List of Sources
-
Christian, David. Imperial and Soviet Russia: Power, Privilege and the challenge of Modernity, 1997, Addison Wesley Longman L, Edinburgh.
-
Fitzgerald, Frances. Way Out There in the Blue: Reagan, Star Wars, and the End of the Cold War, 2000, Simon and Schuster, New York.
-
Fitzgerald, James. The Cold War and Beyond – Us Relations with Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia [Second Edition], 1995, Nelson ITP, South Melbourne, Australia.
-
Gaddis, John Lewis. The Cold War, 2005, Allen Lane, London, England.
-
Gaddis, John Lewis. We Now Know – Rethinking Cold War History, 1997, Oxford University Place, New York, USA.
-
Gorbachev, Mikhail Sergeevich. Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1987, Harper & Row, New York, USA.
-
McGwire, Michael. Perestroika and Soviet National Security, 1991, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
-
Merridale, Catherine and Ward, Chris. Perestroika: The Historical Perspective, 1991, Hodder & Stoughton, Great Britain.
-
Walker, Edward W. Dissolution: Sovereignty and the Breakup of the Soviet Union, 2003, Rowman & Littlefield, Maryland, USA.
-
Walker, Martin. The Cold War, 1994, Vintage, London, England.
-
Westwood, J. N. Endurance and Endeavour: Russian History, 1812-1992, 1993, Oxford University Press, New York.
Walker, Martin. The Cold War, 1994, Vintage, London, UK. Pg. 284.
Walker, Martin. The Cold War, 1994, Vintage, London, England. Pg. 279
McGwire, Michael. Perestroika and Soviet National Security, 1991, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC, USA.
Gorbachev, Mikhail Sergeevich. Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, 1987, Harper & Row, New York, USA. Pg. 88
Christian, David. Imperial and Soviet Russia: Power, Privilege and the challenge of Modernity, 1997, Addison Wesley Longman L, Edinburgh. Pg. 408
Furthermore, the wording was made so that it was very hard to vote yes, as it asked "Do you think that it is necessary to preserve the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as a renewed federation of equal sovereign republics, in which the rights and freedoms of people of any nationality will be fully guaranteed?"
Walker, Edward W. Dissolution: Sovereignty and the Breakup of the Soviet Union, 2003, Rowman & Littlefield, Maryland, USA. Pg. 104.
Walker, Martin. The Cold War, 1994, Vintage, London, England. Pg. 304
Christian, David. Imperial and Soviet Russia: Power, Privilege and the challenge of Modernity, 1997, Addison Wesley Longman L, Edinburgh. Pg .418
Westwood, J. N. Endurance and Endeavour: Russian History, 1812-1992, 1993, Oxford University Press, New York. Pg. 498.
Christian, David. Imperial and Soviet Russia: Power, Privilege and the challenge of Modernity, 1997, Addison Wesley Longman L, Edinburgh. Pg. 418
Westwood, J. N. Endurance and Endeavour: Russian History, 1812-1992, 1993, Oxford University Press, New York. Pg. 522.
Christian, David. Imperial and Soviet Russia: Power, Privilege and the challenge of Modernity, 1997, Addison Wesley Longman L, Edinburgh. Pg. 309
Westwood, J. N. Endurance and Endeavour: Russian History, 1812-1992, 1993, Oxford University Press, New York. Pg. 498.
Fitzgerald, Frances. Way Out There in the Blue: Reagan, Star Wars, and the End of the Cold War, 2000, Simon and Schuster, New York. Pg. 476.