The Collapse of the Soviet Union and Its Impact on Eurasia - Essay Example

The Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, that comprised of fifteen s, disintegrated in December 1991. Fifteen new nations came intoexistence, marking the end of the cold war that had lasted for over two decades. Although the decline of the USSR seemed to startle the world at the time, a closer look reveals that the slow decline had begun from the time of Brezhnev, and the trigger provided by Gorbachev’s new thinking precipitated the collapse. The impact of this event was far reaching and the rest of Europe and Asia had to adjust their thinking and foreign policies to the reality of these newly independent states. The states themselves had also to grapple with the realities of being on their own, and stitching new alliances with their neighbors and the rest of the world. Many of them saw internal revolutions, while others were content to let the status quo continue for sometime. Today, many of them have vibrant democracies and thriving economies, but this cannot be said of them all. The Collapse of The Soviet Union and its Impact on Eurasia The Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, or the USSR, was the world’s largest socialist state. When it was created in 1922, it comprised of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, as well as Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan. By 1956, it comprised of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Russia was the most powerful of these, and the one that controlled the union. Before the union was dissolved in 1991, it extended from the Arctic ocean to the Afghan border with a population of roughly 293 million. The Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics or the USSR comprised of fifteen republics that were made up of people of varied ethnicities and divergent nationalities. On the 25th. December 1991, the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics was formally dissolved and the fifteen states that comprised the USSR became independent. This also marked the end of the cold war. Although on the face of it, the downfall of the Soviet Union looked sudden, inexplicable and startling, some long term factors provided a slow and gradual decline in its power, while other short term factors provided the trigger that precipitated its collapse. By the 1980s the communist ideology was on the decline, and the idea of the state being "the leading and guiding force of Soviet life the nucleus of its political system, of all state organs and public organs," (Lewin, 1991) was being questioned. Vladimir Lenin’s revolutionary vision of a system that modernized an agrarian economy in the first part of the 20th century proved to be unsuitable by the end of it. Under Stalin, the predominantly backward, agricultural economy became highly industrialized, with large development projects being completed, and literacy rates rapidly increasing under the centralized system of the communist party. However, towards the later part of the twentieth century, things began to stagnate and the slow decline began under Brezhnev and got worse till Gorbachev tried to reform the system with his ideas of Glasnost and Perestroika. As Moshe Lewin puts it, “The country went through a social revolution as Brezhnev slept” (Lewin, 1991). The widening chasm between the government’s claims of the superiority of the communist way of life, where the state looked after all the needs of its citizens, and the increasing scarcity of consumer goods, as well as the poor quality of social services, all contributed to a growing sense of discontent among the people. The economy was weakening due to decreased productivity rates that were in turn a result of increased worker absenteeism. Growing discontent led to a problem of increasing alcoholism among the people, resulting in worker absenteeism and a lower life span. Problems in the global economy such as declining prices of oil, further added to the economic woes that the Soviet Union faced. The corruption of the bureaucracy that led to the growth of the black market only added fuel to the fire. The constant competition between the Soviet Union and the US with the former trying to prove that it was the mightier power, led to most of its production being diverted towards the army, leaving the common man grappling with a scarcity of essential goods. In the 1970s as the Nixon administration signed the Anti Ballistic Missiles (ABM) treaty and the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT), the tensions to outdo the US in the arms race seemed to ease, and Brezhnev got a breather allowing him to concentrate on economic development. The western nations, primarily West Germany and the US, supplied the USSR with loans and grain. However, despite this the USSR could not remedy its economic stagnation and the standard of living in the USSR remained far below that of western nations. President Reagan’s constant harping on the evils of the Soviets that he labeled the “the focus of evil in the modern world”,(Reagan, 1983) and his increased military spending, forced the USSR to increase spending on ballistic missile systems and nuclear weapons systems, straining an already weak economy. In fact, President Reagan pointed to the fact that the USSR was increasing its military strength at the cost of its economy. “The constant shrinkage of economic growth combined with the growth of military production is putting a heavy strain on the Soviet people. What we see here is a political structure that no longer corresponds to its economic base, a society where productive forces are hampered by political ones”. (Reagan, 1982) The American support to Afghan guerrillas in the Soviet war against Afghanistan proved costly, and was another factor in weakening the economy of the Soviet Union, and the Soviets ultimately suffered a humiliating defeat in Afghanistan. It was under these circumstances and in order to solve the numerous problems that he faced when he took over as General Secretary in 1985, that Gorbachev introduced his policy of Glasnost and Perestroika that are loosely defined as openness and reconstruction. This policy uncovered for the public the problems that the nation faced. The openness translated into freedom of speech and that of the written word. By the time these changes were effected, there was a large educated class among the people who were ready to take advantage of this change. Gorbachev’s reforms in the USSR encouraged nations in Eastern Europe under communist rule to demand similar concessions. Gorbachev’s policy on Eastern Europe was not the same as Brezhnev’s. He made it clear in a speech in the United Nations, that he would withdraw Soviet troops and tanks, as well as other military paraphernalia from Eastern Europe, giving the Polish Solidarity Union a shot in the arm. Poland overwhelmingly voted Solidarity into power, and this seemed to have a domino effect on other Eastern European nations. In a matter of months, the Berlin wall fell and this gave rise to uprisings in Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Romania. The fall of the wall was not the outcome of President Reagan’s “tear down this wall” (Reagan, 1987) message to Gorbachev to goad him into fulfilling his promise of greater openness; it was the result of the popular uprising of the people against the dictatorial rule of the communists. The same was true of other countries of Eastern Europe. The communist regimes in these countries fell as Gorbachev staunchly refused to use military force to quell the uprisings. Another cause that eventually led to the downfall of the Soviet Union was the restiveness of the various ethnic communities that had never really merged with the social ethos of the Soviet Union. The anger of these ethnic groups was fuelled by their perception of the government’s reserving the best jobs for Russians. The Lithuanians, Latvians and the Estonians who had never been reconciled to the annexation of the Baltics, began to demonstrate against the language policy in Lithuania and Georgia. Bomb blasts and uprisings against the government were masterminded by the Armenians. Recognizing the fact that the root cause of the economic problems of the Soviet Union, were to be found in the corruption and apathetic attitude of party officials, Gorbachev decided to reduce the power of the officials and increase accountability. He got the party legislature to agree to elections for a new legislature. Those that were critics of communism won in these elections, among them Boris Yeltsin who had long criticized the system, and for whom this system of elections was a godsend, enabling him to win elections on his own terms. Gorbachev’s ideas of the interdependence of all countries of the world, and his thinking that all nations had the right to choose what kind of political system they wanted, was the final end of the cold war that had prevailed for nearly two decades before Gorbachev. This prompted the Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians to also set their sights on the goal of independence. The final straw, however, was the Russian leader Boris Yeltsin, demanding independence for Russia. The military and the KGB mounted a coup and Gorbachev was put under house arrest at his holiday home in the Crimea. The coup however failed because of divisions within the military and the KGB, and a considerably weakened Gorbachev had to bow to the pressure of the Yeltsin camp; that lost no time in getting together the leaders of Belarus and Ukraine and finally dissolving what was the USSR into fifteen independent states. As professor Archie Brown very succinctly puts it “Fifteen new states stood where one mighty superpower had recently held sway”.(Brown, 2011) He goes on to add: “Seldom, if ever, has a highly authoritarian political system, deploying military means sufficient to destroy life on earth, been dismantled so peacefully. Never has an empire disintegrated with so little bloodshed. Although huge difficulties remained for the successor states, the way Soviet communism came to an end was one of the great success stories of 20th century politics”. (Brown, 2011) The downfall of the communist government was, probably, in part due to the miscalculations of Gorbachev, who wanted to reform the system. The collapse of the USSR has often been hailed as the triumph of democracy and capitalism by western nations. “The Soviet Union may have been doomed, but the world has Gorbachev to thank for the fact that the empire he oversaw ended without a bloody conflagration”, writes Joseph Nye, a Distinguished Service Professor of Harvard University. (Nye, 2006) As these fifteen republics stood on the threshold of a new era of freedom from their communist masters, they faced awesome challenges, in the areas of nation building, and setting up administrative institutions, rebuilding their economies and creating for themselves a place in the international order. The aspirations, hopes and fears of the peoples of these new nations, would shape their futures. Starved for political freedom, during decades of autocratic rule as part of the USSR, these newly independent states, eagerly embraced democratic freedom. Their futures would also depend on their relations with their geographical neighbors, who would significantly influence their domestic and foreign policy. Russia, the largest state inherited both the seat of the Soviet Union in the United Nations, as well as the nuclear weapons systems of the former USSR. Persuading Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus, to allow all nuclear weapons on their territory to be withdrawn to Russia, required a great deal of diplomacy on the part of the western nations. The promise of economic aid and diplomatic relations with the western nations, were the incentives that finally decided the issue. The western powers had a major role to play in assisting these new nations in the process of transition from a centralized Soviet state, to independent entities. Having once held sway over large swathes of the continents of Europe and Asia, when the USSR disintegrated, it impacted Eurasia through its former republics. Their political statuses, economies and progress would therefore define Eurasia. Some economies did extremely well in the decade after they became independent. With the prices of energy rising, exporters like Russia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan had growing economies. The economies of the Baltic republics of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia grew many times over. Lithuania was hit hard by the world economic crisis of 2008, but is now well on the road to recovery. Estonia’s is a story of great economic success. In Latvia too, economic reforms led to an economic boom soon after it gained independence, but like the rest of the world suffered in the economic downturn of 2008. However, this story was not repeated in all of the former republics of the Soviet Union. The Caucasian republics of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia, have done well on the economic front due to their oil, but in the central Asian republics, it is a mixture of a vibrant economy in Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan with their hydrocarbon reserves helping them to grow exponentially; while Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan have reported a more modest growth story. Although the Russian economy slumped in the aftermath of the split, today it is thriving. The record of their democratization is also a mixed bag. While the democratic records of the Baltic states are exemplary, Belarus is under autocratic rule and the Central Asian Republics have elections in name only. They have yet to have a free and fair election and most are still under the autocratic rulers who led them out of the Soviet Union. Among the Caucasian republics only Georgia has had free and fair elections. In a non violent uprising known as the Rose Revolution in 2003, western educated Mikheil Saakashvili became president. His free market economic reforms have received international praise. However in 2008 when Georgia tried to assert its control over Abkhazia and South Ossetia, it lost when Russia launched a military offensive against its efforts. In the states bordering the European Union, Moldova has the best record of free and fair elections and has returned a communist to power. Russia, however, seems to have reverted to the power structure of its Soviet Union days and the results of elections are foregone conclusions. In the aftermath of the decline of the USSR, a new concern emerged about whether the six predominantly Muslim republics of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan Turkmenistan and Tajikistan could fall under the influence of the Middle Eastern nations. These Middle Eastern nations saw a window of opportunity to increase their sphere of influence over the newly formed nations. The competition among Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan had political, economic cultural and strategic dimensions. Turkey especially portrayed itself as a link for these newly formed nations to the west. However, Turkish efforts to help Azerbaijan to set up a stable democracy ended badly with Turkey unwilling to take sides in Azerbaijan’s war with Armenia. These republics still have strong ties to Russia and Russia reciprocates this. Today Mr. Putin is talking about a Eurasian Union. He seems to suggest adding more of the former Soviet republics to the Customs Union that was formed with Belarus and Kazakhstan in 2009. This will become a unified economic zone next year and will facilitate movement of labor and capital. Putin explains, "We received a big legacy from the Soviet Union – infrastructure, current industrial specialization, and a common linguistic, scientific and cultural space. To use this resource together for our development is in our common interest." (Putin, 2011) Having said this, the central Asian region is a cauldron of ethnic groups like the Tajiks, Afghans, Kyrgyz, Uzbeks and Pashtuns. While the Soviet Union held these people together under the umbrella of communism, today the imbalance in populations, (Afghanistan has more Tajiks than Tajikistan and Iran has more Azeris than Azerbaijan) seems to breed instability. The events and instabilities of one nation have serious consequences in neighboring ones. Settling their disputes amicably and democratically will be the key to peace and stability in this region. Most of the republics of the former Soviet Union have managed to balance their relations with the west, as well as with Russia. Many of them are members of NATO and also of the European Union. The Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia are important transit points for imports of oil to Europe. They have all joined the European Union and have been admitted to the World Trade Organization. Ukraine, which was one of the important economic republics of the former Soviet Union, holds a key position linking Europe with Asia. It is therefore an important trade link between the former republics of the Soviet Union and Europe. Ukraine is one of the largest consumers of oil and gas in the world and is dependent on Russia for its needs. All gas pipelines to Europe run through Ukraine. Therefore this is an important link in the export of gas and oil from Russia to Europe. In 2004, the Orange Revolution ushered in a new era of reforms. Ukraine sought closer ties with Europe and membership of the European Union and NATO but Russia opposed this. In 2010, Viktor Yanukovych became president and has improved ties with Russia. Kazakhstan is one of the wealthiest of the former soviet republics with vast deposits of oil, natural gas and uranium. On the basis of this vast mineral wealth it has naturally seen brisk economic growth. It was one of the first nations to give up its nuclear weapons voluntarily and is a staunch believer in global disarmament. Despite maintaining friendly relations with Russia, it has also tried to take advantage of its proximity to China, by encouraging the Central Asian trade group - The Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Russia saw unprecedented political freedom, rampant corruption and the rise of a new oligarchy in the decade that followed its liberation from the Soviet Union. By the end of the decade Boris Yeltsin appointed Vladimir Putin as his successor, believing that he would follow in his footsteps. However, Putin tried to consolidate power in his own hands at a time when Russia was going through a period of excellent economic growth driven by its oil industry. He also rolled back freedom of the press and although Medvedev followed him as president, Putin still holds the reins of power. He has resisted the expansion of NATO and tried to offset the power of the US by joining hands with China. The world economic crisis has had its effects on Russia with the prices of oil dropping, and the popularity of the Medvedev-Putin leadership also plunging; but without a strong opposition, Putin is expected to again take over power sometime during this year. When people demonstrated against Mikhail Gorbachev, the architect of the downfall of the Soviet Union, he rightly observed, "Remember, I am the one who gave you the right to shout." (Gorbachev, 2006) History teaches us that man must enjoy his freedom of choice if he is to achieve his full potential. The confines of an autocratic system may cater to the physical needs of its subjects, but all living creatures treasure the freedom to choose the way they want to live, and given a window of opportunity, will try to break free of the shackles of confinement. Many of the former republics of the USSR are even today not free, but as the Tulip revolution of Kyrgyzstan or the Twitter Revolutions of the Middle East have revealed, people are waiting for an opportunity to break free. References Brown, A. (2011). Reform, Coup and Collapse: The End of the Soviet State End of the Union. Last updated 2011-02-17 Retrieved from Gorbachev, M. (2006). Gorbachev and the End of the Cold War. New Straits Times. Retrieved from Lewin, M. (1991). The Gorbachev Phenomenon: A Historical Interpretation. Taken from: Domestic and International Influences on the Collapse of the Soviet Union (1991) and Russia’s Initial Transition to Democracy (1993) Section 2: Domestic Causes of Transitional Breakthrough in 1991 Retrieved from Nye, J. S. (2006). Gorbachev and the End of the Cold War. New Straits Times Retrieved from Putin,V. (2011). Putins grand vision: a new Eurasian bloc with old Soviet neighbours Russian prime minister proposes ambitious union across republics based on economic interests. By Miriam Elder. Tuesday 4 October 2011. The Guardian Retrieved from Reagan, R. (1982). Speech in the UK. Retrieved from Reagan, R. (1983). Address to the meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Florida. Retrieved from Reagan, R. (1987). Speech in Berlin. Retrieved from Read More