The Fall of Soviet Russia, Research Paper Example

The Fall of Soviet Russia and Challenges for the New Russia in the 21^st Century

The Soviet Union officially dissolved in December of 1991. While one final meeting between members of the Soviet republics finally weakened the power of the union, the fall of the Soviet Union was due to an increasing amount of discontent among the governed. Ultimately, the lack of the freedoms held by the people under the communist government led to a series of uprisings that destabilized the reign of Mikhail Gorbachev (Bialer et al., 1988). Since the infrastructure of Russia was heavily dependent on the government during the Soviet era, it had a difficult time adjusting to the new federal semi-presidential constitutional republic under new Prime Minister Boris Yeltsin. However, the Russian people helped to stabilize the government that they so radically wanted to change. As a consequence, modern Russia is a vision that more closely reflects the ideas of its people.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union began as early as 1985 when Mikhail Gorbachev was elected General Secretary. In order to address the faltering economy of the state, he enacted political and social reforms (World Bank and OECD, 1991). Because he changed many leading politicians in the majority political party, the people responded with national movements and ethnic disputes. These events culminated in 1989 which allowed for the mainly peaceful overthrow of communist regimes that had been imposed by the Soviet Union by the Warsaw Pact. Ultimately, these events placed pressure on Gorbachev to increase the democracy and independence of the Soviet Union’s satellite nations, demonstrating that the action of the people is an effective way to enact social change.

In most senses, Gorbachev acted to limit the freedoms of his people once he was elected. This included preventing their access to even the most basic of pleasures, such as alcohol. As a consequence, he placed significant taxes on vodka, wine, and beer in addition to restriction their overall sales. The vast majority of the public did not agree with these restrictions, which facilitated the sale of these products on the black market. Even though acquiring alcohol was now a dangerous activity, many people continued to acquire it in protest. As they did so, their discontent with the new administration continued to rise.

While many changes occurring in the main government of the Soviet Union ushered in the want for social reform, it is important to consider that at the point in which Gorbachev was elected, many satellite nations were severely discontent with the government and were working to find ways to restore their autonomy. As a consequence, many of these nations began enacting policy changes in 1986 that were in direct contrast to the commands provided to them by the Soviet government. For example, in 1988 the Estonia local government passed laws that contrasted the rule of the central government system. In addition, Lithuania declared itself to be completely dependent as of 1990. The potential for social and political change to occur in these states was a direct consequence of the growing dissatisfaction that its people had towards the communist Soviet government. As a consequence of its weakening reigns under Gorbachev, the people used this opportunity to promote a new government in their homelands, which further weakened the reign that the Soviet government had over countries that were not initially resisting.

As of 1987, it started to become clear that Gorbachev himself was not fully committed to the ideals of communism when he demonstrated that it would be better for government officials to be elected through secret ballot and be provided with the option of several candidates. However, other sectors of the government disagreed with these policies and worked to silence his beliefs. Gorbachev attempted to enact other reforms as well, such as allowing any content to be discussed on the media. While these plans did in fact come to fruition, members of the media were cautious about this because they feared arrest, and a truly democratic media was not established immediately. This want for policy reform demonstrates that the word of the people successfully reached Gorbachev and that he wished to implement their beliefs into the government system. This was only possible because such as large number of citizens demonstrated that they were discontent with the current political system and provided their leaders a mean by which change can be ensured.

A major blow to the Soviet communist government occurred when Boris Yeltsin resigned from his political position in the Soviet government. Unlike Gorbachev, he was more actively discontent with the communist government and detailed a list of issues to Gorbachev that should be addressed to fix the system. This action encouraged nationalist protests, as Yeltsin was the first politician to resign from the government, demonstrating that it was fallible and flawed. The government criticized Yeltsin’s actions and in doing so, the people found a leader that would be able to support their beliefs in their wants to change the politics of Russia.

After Yeltsin’s resignation, the Baltic States initiated protests and demonstrations to promote change in the government. While these demonstrations were not provided press, they were not broken up and allowed a nationalistic sentiment to grow in the participating states of Latvia, Estonia, and Armenia. Starting in 1988, these protests caused Gorbachev to lose complete control over the Baltic States and the Caucasus. The Baltic States were able to establish and implement their own government systems and the Caucasus fell to violence and civil war. In an emergency response to maintain support from his retainers, Gorbachev implemented plans to separate party and state, which culminated in amendments to the 1977 Soviet Constitution. Gorbachev would not have taken this action unless he felt pressured to do so by the people. This was a last stitch effort for him to remain in control, thereby protecting himself. At this point, he also enacted a law focusing on electoral reform, and set the next election to be held approximately six months later. After completing this action, Gorbachev unjammed radio stations for the first time in order to ensure that his people would be able to access content from foreign nations. This new exchange of ideas further enhanced the power of the people to ensure that the changes in the government they wanted would be accomplished.

1989 marked a shift in political policies for the Soviet Union when the Congress of Peoples Deputies was democratically elected (Gvosdev, 2008). This allowed for the complete freedom of the media in addition to providing foreign news companies with the ability to enter the country for journalistic purposes. At this point, many satellite nations were no longer a part of the Soviet Union and this trend towards dissolution was completed between 1990 and 1991. Gorbachev’s leadership was ineffective during this time, as no other leaders would listen to him. As a consequence, he finally resigned, allowing the will of the people to guide the government.

While the trend towards democracy occurred slowly, it is important to consider that the Russian government had to establish infrastructure in order to ensure that it would be successful. Officially, Russia has only been a country for the past 14 years and as a consequence we can consider it to be relatively new. While it has a government in place that seems to be more effective than it had been during the Soviet regime, many Russians and individuals of other nationalities call into question whether the changes that have been made were significant and beneficial. It appeared that Russia under the government of Boris Yeltsin would make progress towards achieving the goals desired by its people, but the current government appears to be undermining these original intentions. In essence, while the threat of a nuclear war seemed to have ended with the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, tensions between the United States and Russia are currently at an all-time high and it is important to consider the nuclear threat as a concern.

When Soviet Russia was first dissolved, the initial concern of the nation was its faltering economy. Gorbachev had been concerned with improving the local economy under the Soviet regime and this need was strengthened by the financial costs of protests and reestablishing the government’s infrastructure. As a consequence, a highly industrialized economy was fostered. In addition, there was a need to reestablish the political ties between Russia and its satellite countries. While none of these nations were interested in being governed by Russia, their proximity contributed to the need to establish a treaty that would support their implementation of democratic rule. Thus, the Commonwealth of Independent States was formed. Furthermore, the country recognized its need to participate in foreign politics and mend ties that had been broken during the Soviet regime. To do so, the country became a member of the United Nations in 1991 under its new name.

Vladimir Putin is the current president of Russia and as a consequence holds a majority of the influence over his people. While the country is still considered a democracy, there is a current understanding that Putin wishes to sensor the information that his people are obtaining to influence their social and political views. One of the main instances of this occurrence was his denial that his government was involved with shooting a plane down over Ukraine, when there was clear evidence stating that this was the case. Rather, he framed the situation to make it appear that the Ukrainian government did this mistakenly, to encourage feelings against the government and thereby making Russian citizens feel more accepting of the fact that the country wishes to claim Ukrainian territory. In addition, Putin left the world in awe when he spent the money of his citizens on the 2014 Winter Olympics in a fashion that left his intended construction incomplete. This emphasized the lack of wealth that is currently held by the nation, which appears to be due in part to erroneous spending. Critics of Putin’s actions believe that this money should have been utilized to create welfare programs for the poor.

As a consequence of Russia’s latest actions, tensions have been increasing with the United States and other Western nations. Political and social disagreements have resulted in government sanctions on both sides and Russia is currently threatening to block off its airspace. The height of this tension is over Russia’s current treatment of Ukraine, and its Western allies are rushing to defend it. However, the outcome of this situation is uncertain providing the close proximity between Russia and Ukraine in addition to the large distance between Ukraine and its Western allies. Currently, the United States can be considered to be engaged in a second Cold War with Russia, as there is a constant struggle for the two nations to outmatch one another without directly engaging in war (Conant, 2014).

While there is not currently a concern that there will be a nuclear war as both sides seem to recognize that utilizing nuclear weapons will be detrimental for all nations involved, it is possible that if Putin’s policies continue to trend towards communism ideals he will decide this action to be appropriate. Unfortunately, it does not appear that Russia and the United States will come to terms any time soon, and it is therefore necessary to consider what further tensions will arise between the two nations. The United States currently believes that its involvement with Russia is a humanitarian concern and wishes to intervene only when lives are in danger. However, this may not remain for long, depending on the next steps that Russia takes. As a consequence, it is in the United States’ best interest to prepare for Russia’s actions.

Russian culture is currently deeply integrated in socialistic ideas, which is reflected by their news broadcasts. Even though the country claims to act as a democracy, the leadership of Putin contrasts this idea. While the citizens of Russia are certainly allowed more freedoms than they were under Soviet rule, their rights are considered to be more limited than that of individuals living in Western nations and their president has more influence that the president of the United States towards his people. Therefore, it is necessary to consider that it is a possibility that Russia will return to communism. Currently, Putin is convincing the people that they are satisfied with the political change that has occurred since the Soviet regime, so there is little nationalistic and revolutionary sentiment among its citizens. If this continues, Putin will be able to implement more and more policies of his choosing as time comes, and his position will be that of a totalitarian leader rather than a president.

In conclusion, it is important to understand the value that people have in implementing political and social change. The opinions of the majority are the driving force of change and if this voice is loud enough, it will force politicians to take action. The Soviet regime was overturned due to the recognition of the people that this government system was unfair. As a result, protests and rallies allowed it to be transformed into a democratic system. Now that people are no longer voicing their opinion, they have allowed Putin to have a complete control over the government. Therefore, it is likely that Russia will return to a communist system. If Russian citizens do not wish for this to occur, it is important that they continue to fight to ensure that they will live in a democracy.

References

Bialer, Seweryn, Mandelbaum. (1988) G.orbachev’s Russia and American Foreign Policy.

Conent E. (2014). Is the Cold War Back? Retrieved from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/09/140912-cold-war-geography-russia-ukraine-sanctions/

Gvosdev N. (2008). The Strange Death of Soviet communism: A Postscript. Transaction Publishers.

World Bank and OECD (1991). A Study of the Soviet economy 3. International Monetary Fund.