Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 24 – Vladimir Putin
at a meeting with leaders of the systemic parties said that the USSR did not
have to fall apart but that it had done so as a result of mistaken policies of
the CPSU which opened a Pandora’s box of discussions about problems in the
history of the country and allowed nationalists and others to exploit the
situation.
At the same time, the Kremlin leader
insisted that he wasn’t trying to “settle accounts” with the current KPRF
because such actions invariably entail bad outcomes. He said he would leave it to historians to
sort out the facts of the case (rg.ru/2016/09/23/reg-cfo/putin-sssr-ne-nado-bylo-razvalivat.html).
And Putin argued that while the USSR
needed reforms, including “democratic” ones, the way in which the CPSU sought
to carry them out was responsible for the disintegration of the country, an
implicit suggestion that the Soviet Union could have survived well into the
future save for the party’s actions.
Putin has insisted for more than a
decade that the disintegration of the USSR was “the greatest geopolitical
tragedy of the 20th century” and has argued this year that Lenin
bore some responsibility for that outcome because the founder of the Soviet
state created the non-Russian republics which were given the right to secede.
But his comments yesterday suggest three
things. First, Putin clearly wants to put the blame on the Communist Party for
what happened in order to distract attention from the role of the KGB of which
he was an officer and other security agencies, many of which played an equally
fateful role concerning the end of the Soviet Union, as during the failed
putsch.
Second, while he may say that he isn’t
settling accounts with the communists, he clearly is and will be seen as such,
especially given recent reporting that the Kremlin leader wants to reduce the
number of political parties and simply Russia’s political landscape. (See windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2016/09/will-russia-soon-cease-to-have-president.html).
And third, Putin is unwilling to
recognize what many now have that a liberal Soviet Union would have been a
contradiction in terms because it was a country held together largely by force. Tragically from his point of view, the same
thing could be said about the Russian Federation – and consequently, he won’t
liberalize because he won’t risk its disintegration.
No comments:
Post a Comment