Paul Goble
Staunton, May 8 – Russia is an
historically saturated country in which the present and future are almost
inevitably discussed in terms of the past. And that makes a Moscow commentary
today about “the top five unsuccessful putsches in the history of Russia”
especially intriguing.
Many have suggested that the Putin
regime can’t be changed from below but only by the actions of those closest to
him and that the future of that country will thus be determined not by a
revolutionary upsurge on the part of the population but rather by a conspiracy
within the elite against the Kremlin leader.
On the Svobodnaya pressa portal
today, Moscow commentator Aleksandr Yevdokimov examines what he calls “the most
significant putsches in the history of Russia” both to distinguish them from
the October 1917 revolution which he insists was not one and to consider why
they failed (svpressa.ru/post/article/171813/).
The first such putsch in Yevdokimov’s
telling was the revolt of the streltsi in 1698, which failed according to him
because those who started it did not have a clear program which would allow
them to gain support beyond the narrow confines of the direct participants in
the operation.
The second, the Decembrist uprising
of 1825, was more than just a fight between the regime and disgruntled officers
in Palace Square, he argues. It involved a conflict between two potential
tsars, Konstantin and Nikolay. The first supported a more democratic approach
for Russia’s future; the second backed authoritarianism and being more ready to
act harshly won the day.
The third putsch, the Kornilov
rising of August 1917, failed not only because of the overconfidence of its
leader General Lavr Kornilov but also because those he was seeking to
overthrow, the members of the Provisional Government of Aleksandr Kerensky,
were prepared to form an alliance with their opponents on the left, the
Bolsheviks. Kerensky armed them, they helped defeat Kornilov, and then they
overthrew Kerensky.
The third failed putsch in
Yevdokimov’s telling concerned plans by Soviet commander Mikhail Tukhachevsky to
replace Stalin and his immediate entourage.
As the commentator points out, “before the 20th CPSU Congress
few had doubts that it was real, but until about 2000, few believed in its
existence.”
In the last 15 years, the idea that
Tukhachevsky really did plan to overthrow Stalin has gained support not only
because of the writings of historians but also because of a popular television
series that laid out the evidence in fictionalized form. Something clearly was afoot, Yevdokimov
suggests.
Perhaps the best evidence is that
Stalin’s moves against Tukhachevsky became the model 16 years later for Nikita
Khrushchev’s actions against Lavrenty Beria, Stalin’s secret police chief, whom
the other members of the party leadership feared would launch a new purge
beginning with themselves.
And the fifth failed putsch, of
course, is the failed effort of those who plotted to overthrow Mikhail
Gorbachev in August 1991. Those who led
promised the Soviet people a better future and the recovery of the country’s
pride, but beyond promises, they couldn’t do anything and could not mobilize the
party or state on their behalf. Consequently, they failed.
Yevdokimov’s list
of failed Russian putsches suggests that any future one would be likely to fail
as well. But his commentary also makes clear that those who would hope to carry
one out would need to avoid the errors of their predecessors, something that
those now in power certainly know as well – and can be counted on to monitor
and vigorously suppress.
No comments:
Post a Comment