As the putsch changed the Soviet Union in case of victory

History 26/01/20 Like a putsch changed the Soviet Union in case of victory

the Trend of increased nostalgia for the Soviet Union among Russians in recent years is becoming more noticeable. At last year’s data of “Levada-Center” about the collapse of the Soviet Union regret is exactly two-thirds – 66 percent of respondents. And although it is not the highest figure for the entire post-Soviet history of sociological observation, however, is the maximum over the last ten years.

naturally, the longing for the past times did not come alone. Many people today are trying to figure out what led to the collapse of a great power: historians looking for a starting point from which everything went wrong, experts theorize how it was possible to avoid tragedy. One of them blames the perestroika of Mikhail Gorbachev, someone- assertiveness of Boris Yeltsin, well, someone-“August coup”.

As of the GKCHP tried to save the Soviet Union

By the beginning of 1991, the situation in the USSR proved to be critical: control of the Soviet republics slipped away from the hands of the Central government, the economic power of the country was fading away, and social services collapsed. Within the ruling elite of the Soviet state, a growing discontent with the policies of President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990 among the elites start to Mature the idea of his ouster and the imposition of emergency. However, attempts to take the measures necessary constitutional means failed, it was decided to act by unlawful means.

on the night of 18 to 19 August 1991 the high rank officials announced the creation of the State emergency Committee (emergency Committee), previously isolated Gorbachev in the Crimean foros. Leader structure became Vice-President of the USSR Gennady Yanaev, appointed acting President.

However, to be the Savior of the Soviet Union, GKCHP was doomed. Opponents of the Committee headed by the President of the RSFSR Boris Yeltsin, declaring the coup, reconstituteservices, was able to exploit the confusion among the military and the uncertainty of “coup.” But most importantly – they managed to bring their supporters to the streets and organize thousands of protests, which proved the unpopularity of the actions and slogans Yanayev and the company.

Last hope

Despite the fact that the emergency Committee fought for the preservation of the USSR, supporters of the view that the victory of the “coup” have extended the existence of the great powers, now very little. Most experts believe that even under the most favorable scenario, the USSR would have had to reformat the signing of a new Union Treaty.

“I believe that the Soviet Union in the form in which it existed as of 1985, it was impossible to save… Another thing is that the Soviet Union could be saved partially. That is, could be saved in the United States, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and possibly Kazakhstan and some other Central Asian States”, — said the political scientist Vitaly Ivanov. Quoting him “Arguments and facts”.

“If Yeltsin lost, there would be the Belavezha accords, which were opposed and Nazarbayev, and the heads of the Central Asian republics. With the defeat of Yeltsin would have signed a Treaty of Alliance, and the Soviet Union would continue in a different form,” — said in comments to “Opinion” journalist and political analyst Maxim Shevchenko.

He is sure that in certain hands, even the Baltic States could remain in the Union. With modernization could be preserved and a planned economy. “Consistently, a clear and severe measures would be privatized – so that workers become owners, and would create a new social democratic model”, — added Shevchenko.

the Collapse of the Soviet Union was unstoppable

At the same time, the Director of the Center for political studies, Financial University under the government of the Russian Federation Pavel Salin doubt that the putsch was ready for the necessary transformation.

“If the coup had won, no serious the changes would not have occurred. If you look at the personal composition of the coup, it is obvious that they had no alternative plan for the development of the country,” he said in comments “Look”, adding that the triumph of the Committee only postponed to the story on “very short term”.

According to Salina, “the members of the emergency Committee sat for a couple months, and then they would have thrown off or Yeltsin or some other leader.”

I Agree with his point of view and the political scientist Paul svyatenkov. “The emergency Committee quickly would crash on the background of the collapse of the Soviet economy and mass national movements in the Union republics, and it is possible Russian refusal to defend the Soviet regime as completely alien to the Russian people” — he said “Look”.

According to the Professor of the Higher school of economy of Andrey Khazin, the problem of the emergency Committee was the fact that in the 1990s the society has not believed in the ideas of socialism. So, the attempt of the Committee to save the Soviet Union was initially disastrous. “I think that the attempt made by members of the emergency Committee, regardless of their inner motives, was doomed to failure, as the society was not quite ready for that moment to chew on this funny gum socialism. This is evidenced by what was said by the members of the emergency Committee. It was an attempt to buy people, and even longer to influence them ideologically,” — said the expert “Arguments and facts”.

Emigration, the collapse of the revolution

More dramatic consequences of a victory GKCHP imagine a political strategist Marat Gelman. From his point of view, events after the triumph of “gkchpistov” would develop in three stages.

“Most active people immediately after the victory of the coup began to leave and the authorities would close the border in both directions. Would be a new “philosophical steamship””, — he told his version of the “Look”.

Also, he says, rebelled Western-oriented St. Petersburg and Vladivostok. To normalize the situation, the authorities would have to give them a “status similar to Transnistria in Moldova.” The rest of the state would not have changed, but only before the crisis of 1998, which was supposed to happen under any scenario, stated Gelman, This shock, in his opinion, would have ended the secession of the Caucasus, Siberia, Tatarstan, Bashkiria and Yakutia.

“Finally, as a result, in 2000, in little Russia there is a democratic revolution, and everything returns to normal. I think in 2000, the Communist party, which would be a normal socialist party would break the military. The party would then be a progressive force”, he concluded.

However, to anticipate the confusion that promised victory GKCHP, does not have to be an expert. After a quarter-century after the “coup”, the public opinion Foundation found that 26 percent of Russians believe that the country would be worse if the Committee continued to control the USSR. Four percent of them believe that it would be a cause of the civil war. Four that janaev and the company is not fit for leadership. And two percent of the respondents said that the triumph of “coup” would have led to the preservation of the Communist system and disorder in the state.

Ivan Resepi

© Russian Seven

see also: editor’s choice, “Russian Seven”thieves in law on the eve of the Olympics-80 struggled with prestupnostyu snipers at the end of the great Patriotic was not wearing a distinctive Black snakepower devil in Khakassia: the most mysterious place in Sibirica special in men who are born only sinovialnaya article also Listen to the podcast “the Russian Seven”. Share: Comments Comments on the article “How the putsch changed the Soviet Union in case of victory” Please log in to leave a comment! br>
Share on Tumblr