The Collapse of the U.S.S.R - Research Paper Example

The Collapse of the U.S.S.R. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical The collapse of USSR was expected to happen if the grounds upon which the regime had rested can be fully known and understood. The absence of military defeat and relatively low violence makes its fall unique. Imperial overstretch is used to describe one of the main causes for the fall but a deeper underlying reason has to go down to what is the better alternative to communism in relation to the right of the people governed to survive and to enjoy life. 1. Introduction To ever imagine a collapse of the regime after the World War may be almost beyond imagination for some without knowing what really happened with the Union Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Communism as an alternative economic order was argued to have been “designed to avoid the wasteful and chaotic competition of capitalism and to move the country quickly ttoward industrial development.” (Strayer, 1998, page 6). It was the economy of Soviet Union that had given the material foundation for the country to become victorious in the Second World War. It also viewed as a model of rapid industrial growth for a number of Third World countries. Such was a planned economy which believed in the power of the state to plan and dictate what needs to be produced for users and consumers (Strayer, 1998). This paper will attempt to explain the collapse of USSR as a regime in the light of the experience of other empires, in relation to how ordinary mortals behave and the underlying concepts of communism and alternative economic order of capitalism 2. Why USSR Collapse? Imperial Overstretch as Reason Soviet was known to have its huge and growing military expertise during the Cold War. However such claims to superpower status were believed to be grounded on breakable and weakening economic foundation as seen in the 1970s and 1980s. This weak economic condition was said to have been caused by an "imperial overstretch". (Strayer, 1998, p.17). Instead of prioritizing its economic needs, USSR needed to join or maintain the race for nuclear and conventional weapons. This was also the reason why USSR made its expensive commitments in Eastern Europe and Third World. This heavy spending was believed to have undermined strongly its domestic consumer economy in the process. The Soviet leadership was aware of the problems of relationship between its international standing and declining economic base and the perception substantially caused the needed reform. Reform efforts in the late 1980s because of these perceived problems in the regime were actually made but they were not enough to prevent the collapse. The failure of communism as its economic system is more or less predicted to happen by events that were actually occurring in the USSR. The bigness of the regime with its being considered a superpower was simply not resting on solid ground. It is comparable to the rise of stock price of corporations which are grounded not well on how productive the company was operating but in now the speculators may have attempted to put in the minds of investors. In business language, it may be considered a bubble that must eventually come to burst (Cagan and Somensatto, 1987). The demise of the USSR was however noted to have different characteristics in some aspects compared to countries or regimes with good international standing in the past before their fall. One is the fact that it was sudden and quite unexpected compared to other countries which allowed decades to pass. There was also the absence of military defeat which normally characterized the previous great powers like Spain, France and Britain. Successor states including the Russian Federation, had not enjoyed the powerful international position that the Soviet Union even undergone even for a brief time. This is the reason why it is comparable to a stock market bubble where the fall in the stock price of company could be more sudden than one which may have shown operating losses in the meantime. Stock prices could still be average if investors perceived that losses are temporary due to economic recessions. But like a bubble the ground upon which USSR was resting could not be sustained to its theoretical conclusion. 3. Empires Fall It is said that empires fall. Such was the story of three great-land based empires of the nineteenth century. These empires include The Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman and Russian. Of course it took some time before these regimes collapsed. The collapse of Soviet Union was reflection of that reality and can be considered as bringing to the final chapter the global process towards imperial disintegration or decolonization (Strayer, 1998). Such was characteristics of the world of the twentieth century and what happened to Soviet Union is only confirming that observed reality. It must be noted though that from the three empires above only Russian has survived the devastating effect of World War I. What can observed from the fall of empires especially the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman were the undistinguishable blows of military downfall and nationalism that was asserted by their subject people. The same causes may be said about the other empires overseas like that of Belgium, Italy, Britain, France and Portugal. These caused the creation of new nations in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East as independence was asserted from the empires (Strayer, 1998). Given the characteristics describing the creation of USSR, there is also basis to understand the same in relation with others which has similar ways for purposes of understanding the eventual collapse. It is just like an evolution where change has to come as permanent reality. Note however about the speed and suddenness of the Soviet collapse as contrasted with Byzantine, Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires, endured in decline for centuries. Soviet collapse happened in less than a century from its established in 1917 to its end in 1991. A few years and with little overt warning is comparable to fall in stock price without warning. The fall is occurred in the absence of military defeat combined with only moderately little violence makes its fall unique (Strayer, 1998). 4. Fall of Empire Compared to Ordinary Mortal A regime is comparable to the life of an ordinary person who can become excellent in doing something great. Such a person however has a basic need to satisfy his/her economic needs before becoming powerful or excellent. Still the same person can through life and he or she can still become so more powerful by trying to acquire more skills to greatness. But he/she could become neglectful of his/her basic needs if he/she spent much resource in training for the skills. His/her basic needs must be satisfied first before continuing his/her greatness to a certain human endeavor. A country or a nation may just become powerful because of its economic base but if it neglects that it has its citizens who are human beings and whose economic needs must be satisfied first, then that nation and country could face the wrath of a hungry stomach. It is said that a hungry stomach knows no law. This is what happened in USSR. It had to collapse for failing to address the basic needs to its people. It may have forgotten that it was the same reason that brought the regime to its creation like the Bolshevik revolution. It was the hungry and deprived people who were finding ways to survive and to practice their human rights that caused the revolution. Their form of government is only a representation of the need. Governments then are just means to an end – the need for humans to survive and to be happy. That capitalism appears as better alternative to communism sounds true as between the experience of the United States (US) and USSR because of the strong theoretical and empirical basis of the more advantages of capitalism over that of communism. People choose their government and not government choosing for their people. Whatever system one may call it, the people will have to find a way to survive. Such was the concept of creating a state from a political science point of view. The collapse of Russia has something to do with the need for human beings survive and enjoyment of basic humans. Governments, its structure or its form come to birth because they are needed by people and so must they come to an end when they are no longer needed. This must come on the premise that it is people who will eventually conceive and effect any change precisely because they need that change. It must be very interesting to relate this concept with the collapse of USSR. By going back to understand how USSR came to birth there must be a reason why it came to birth in the first and whether the reason was consistent when the system of government collapse. In other words, the need for human to survive and attain human happiness is generic. 5. Does it mean that capitalism was better than socialism or communism? In capitalism there are money investments by capitalists or investors who have the right to expect a profit given the risks involved from making the investment (Fulcher, 2004). The word capitalism is therefore normally associated with economic order and as an alternative to communism. If capitalism has its origin in trade or exchanges of good and services in the past where ships carrying these goods like pepper or spices had to different islands if search of the latter. They had the expectation that after making the movement of the goods they would benefit from the scarcity of goods in one place and abundance in another place. Ships were required to travel and incur costs to the goods and transporting same in process. However the related revenues above costs from the price of sold goods were expected in return for them to continue doing their business (Fulcher, 2004). Together with the benefits are risks in not being able to recover the cost of their investments. This of course may be due other factors that may become part of the reality of doing business (Fulcher, 2004). Capitalism has evolved in degree from the old times but it is fundamentally referring to an economic order that supports the presence of private property ownership which makes it different from communism. Capitalism was therefore the perceived evil that as practiced by the emperors and aristocrats before the Bolsheviks revolution which lead to the creation of USSR. Thus for communist regimes like the USSR before, capitalism was evil. In fact this was the reason for the cold war. Those on the side of democracy with the related capitalism as economic order was necessary deemed as diametrically opposed to communism. It is assumed that capitalism is a consequence of democracy because of the nature of political and economic rights given to individuals. Communism on the other hand, does not fully follow the democratic process as that those in power are under the Communist party which chose their leaders based on their designed process of succession. The strength of that power allows therefore the control by state on the production of goods and services which is basically centrally planned then in the USSR. There is therefore no private ownership, and no law of the market or the law of supply and demand that is allowed since what the government wants to happen the same must be done (Slavin, 1996). The terms command economy was therefore associated with communism. Capitalism on the other hand is closer to market economy than a command economy (Slavin, 1996). With the means of production owned by the state, the worker is theoretically considered to be having the same right just like everybody. Since there are no capitalists in communism, the ideology was believed a panacea for the sufferings the Russians got from the emperors, aristocrats and czars. With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, this false belief was made clear. By its collapse, the present Russia after the disintegration has adopted a market economy or capitalism. In other words, the market forces of supply and demand dictating what gets produced and how much it gets produced was more applicable as far as serving the needs of the Russian people are concerned. 6. Berlin Wall experience as evidence capitalism vs. communism The case of East Germany and West Germany should be a very relevant point to emphasize the pressure economics pressures for political change and the difference between communism and capitalism. East Germany was formed with a communist government as it became part of Soviet sphere of influence, while West Germany was with a democratic government. In 1961, there was the need to erect the Berlin Wall for the purpose of preventing people from East Berlin to flee to West Berlin (Darraj, 2009). It must be interesting questions to ask: “Why prevent people from moving?”; “Why freedom needed to be restricted?” The answer could now be considered obvious that one which restricts must have a problem at it may entail distrust. The reality however was that many escaped to the other side and even died in the attempt in their efforts to become free. Of course the party who stopped them must be the result of Soviet rule as its negative aspects of became outward (Darraj, 2009). President Reagan was one of the greatest supporters for tearing the wall that separates the two of course by contrasting between East Berlin and West Berlin which he found to be very striking not only in terms of economically but also politically. With the western side giving far more freedom to its citizens and a higher standard of living compared with Soviet-influenced East Berlin, it was clear that communism as imposed in the latter was a dying proposition. Reagan thus pointed the technological deterioration and the weakening standards of health as evidence of communism’s failure to provide the basic needs of humans in the East Berlin under Soviet’s influence. He contrasted the same with the freer world and higher living standard in the West Berlin (Darraj, 2009). Reagan did challenge Michael Gorvachev, the Soviet leader Gorbachev in 1987 that they key to achieving peace and prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe is the opening up of the gate in Berlin wall. Reagan was saying that “physical manifestation of the tension that existed between the West and its capitalist system and its Communist regime” (Darraj, 2009, p. 90) must come to pass. He was of course referring to the Berlin Wall as symbol. 7. Conclusion It can be concluded that collapse of USSR is not unpredictable as empires before they have fallen before. Soviet’s bigness and length of its existence that has given significance to researchers since as argued its life was too short. Whether or not the characteristics surrounding the fall of USSR are not exactly similar with lessons from old regimes, it would have to include the realization that there are basic human needs that must be satisfied first. If everything exists for human beings, the latter must be made first to survive life and to enjoy the same. Their capacity or organize and to choose a strategy toward that a goal are their exclusive prerogatives. They have them because they can free to choose. Of course the government that they put through various leaders would just have to put into action what is collectively believed by these people as the most relevant strategy in relation to changing times. Changing their structure of government and adopting and economic order that would to their needs is just one of them. References Cagan and Somensatto (1987). Contemporary economic problems. American Enterprise Institute Darraj, S. (2009). The Collapse of the Soviet Union Milestones in modern world history. Infobase Publishing Fulcher. (2004). Capitalism: a very short introduction. Oxford University Press Slavin, S. (1996). Economics. Fourth Edition. London: IRWIN Strayer, R. (1998).Why did the Soviet Union collapse?: understanding historical change. M.E. Sharpe Read More