The Policies of Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev - Term Paper Example

The Policies of Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics commonly known as USSR was a socialist state that was in existence between 1922 and 1991. It was a state ruled by one party, the Communist Party. The government and the economy were highly centralized in its capital city Moscow. In the late 1980s, Russia was in the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev who in history was the last Soviet leader. This paper provides a critical comparison of the policies of Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev detailing how these policies affected the management of the relationships within the communist parties. Khrushchev was optimistic about the industry. Stalin his predecessor had come up with strategies that Khrushchev thought had dragged down the progress of the industries and had an effect on the economy (Smith 23). He saw it wise to set new methods to cub this problem and boost the way of living of the Russians. He divided the civilians into groups and allocated them with fridges, vehicles, and even washing machines. He came up with a plan that would take 7 years, whose main goal was to improve the common mans’ standards. He gave the people consumer goods, recyclable plastics, and even chemicals. According to Khrushchev, Stalin had put up too many industries in Moscow and ignored the other parts of Russia. He (Khrushchev) wanted a decentralized system where industries were readily available in all parts of Russia (Smith 45). In 1957, Khrushchev closed down almost all the industries in Moscow and this provoked rivalry. He also made favorable the employees working conditions and increased their salary and ensured tax was lowered to favor the common person. He made sure goods were sold at a reasonable price, offered pension to the retirees and ensured children went to school even if they did not have tuition fees. Through his new techniques, the first man to go into space was from Russia. The journey to space however did not favor the less fortunate. Employees worked under minimal supervision, and local leaders were allowed to make decisions in regards to the industries without having to wait for instruction from their superiors. A council of leaders was formed in 1958 and they were allowed to make decisions on their own and decide what products they were to make. In 1977, Brezhnev gave the Russians a new constitution. The constitution gave the people several freedoms like freedom of speech and assembly (Ouimet 33). He wanted to undo the strategies set by Khrushchev and to bring back imprisonment, jail, and deportation. Due to shortage in men and alcoholism, life expectancy dropped. The urban population rate however rose by 11% (i.e. 53% to 64%) like Khrushchev; Brezhnev ensured that televisions, vehicles, and radios were readily available throughout the year of 1970. Brezhnev was enacting Stalin’s’ five year plan. Employees got better wages and conducive working environments. Unlike Khrushchev, Brezhnev was corrupt and so was his family. He let inexperienced and dishonest state officials keep their jobs. Through Brezhnev’s foreign trade, the relationship between Russia and other counties was enhanced, so was their economy. Brezhnev ruled from 1964 to 1982 when he died. Khrushchev preceded him and Andropov succeeded him. On March 11, 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev (54 years old then) became the secretary general of the Soviet Union elect. He was the youngest among all those that were leading Politburo. USSR improved drastically after he took office. Gorbachev and Reagan had there first meeting in November 1985 in Geneva. His reforms were also referred to as “new thinking”(Ouimet 21) The three main policies were perestroika, glasnost, and demokratizatsiya, which also mean rebuilding (restructuring), transparency (openness), and democratizing. Perestroika entailed the economy but it affected the society as a whole. With time, the Soviet Union became urbanized, complicated, and informed. In the economy, perestroika meant room for decision making for managers in firms and profit margins. Glasnost was a policy aimed at enlightening the Russians on the inefficiency and ineffectiveness of Brezhnev’s reign and that of his colleagues. To Gorbachev, demokratizatsiya meant the implementation of many candidates and not many parties. However, in 1988, almost 30,000 unofficial attendees entered the Soviet Union. A year down the line, and the number was more than 60,000 (Ouimet 33). These informal groups later turned it to political parties. The Democratic Union was the first to be formed in 1988, May. He became the Nobel Peace Prize Winner in October 1990 for his work well done in promoting peace. He resigned one year, two months later. According to Mathew J. Ouimet, a U.S policy analyst, the rise and fall of the Brezhnev doctrine in soviet foreign policy is a wide study entailing the breaking up of the Soviet Union on the east of Europe in 1989. Mathew sought to discover the fate of Brezhnev doctrine; “the doctrine of limited sovereignty” which was brought about by the Soviet Union in the year 1968 to justify the incoming of Czechoslovakia while at the same time trying to solve some of the questions in central history. According to Ouimet, the turning point for the Soviet Union (foreign) policy was the polish crisis, which occurred in the year 1980 to 1981 and not the taking of office by Mikhail Gorbachev (27). Andrei Grachev gives an over view of the occurrences during the making of foreign policy. He was a member of Mikhail Gorbachevs’ team who were the policy makers at the time. With the cold war ending in the 20th century, many questions were left unanswered as to how events had turned out. Those involved in the cold war (the champions and those who lost) give explanations that differ and are contradictory. Teaming them up seemed like the best way to get the truth from them but there was no satisfactory answer as to why it happened. Grachev further explained the relation between the internal and external issues in the Gorbachevs’ gamble. The explanation further provides an insight to the issue by showing how it is integrated in the democratic reforms of societies to the world. Grachev highlights the agendas and intentions of the authors of this project and pin points their desires and aspirations. He reminds us of the internal arguments and trouble they went through in Kremlin and the decisions they made secretly that made the Soviet leave Afghanistan, Berlin walls’ fall, Warsaw’s pact break up and then the Soviet Unions’ fall (Grachev 49). Andrei Grachev bases his book on interviews conducted with the heads of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev inclusive, notes, and personal diaries gotten from the leaders’ subordinates and advisors (Ouimet 45). It is also based on minutes that were taken during the meetings inside Politburo. All this sources show the proceedings in the private meetings, and act as an eye-opener through which we are able to understand the root and see how the events took their twists and turns, which ended the Cold War, and in late 1980s and early 1990s, saw the worlds politics transformed completely. Mid 1950s, until the end of the Cold War, transfer of weapons played a very important role in the relation between the Soviet Union and the foreign world. The Soviet Society supplied arms to the up coming countries(less developed) and to more than six guerilla movements in the foreign world. The leaders of the Soviet Society tried to build a bond between themselves and the foreign countries using various techniques like foreign trade, programs on education, and many more. However, in the late 1970s, the Soviet Union had exhausted their resources and were not seen as the champions anymore. Their supply of arms to the Third World was the only thing enabling them to race with the countries in the West and China. The relation between the Soviet and the Third World was stronger (through the transfer of weapons) in March 1985 by the time, Mikhail Gorbachev was taking the office of the general secretary of the communist party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) (Ouimet 59). This is in comparison to the United States 16% arms transfer, the Soviet weapons trade added up to 46%, and it dominated from the late 1970s until early 1980s. Three years(i.e. from 1985to 1988) after Gorbachev became Secretary General of the Soviet Union, the Soviet arms deliveries to the Third World shot up, by a difference of $4.8 billion (from $16.8 billion to $21.6billion) and a peak of $29.8 billion was reached in 1986 adding up to roughly 57%. However, a decrease of about 58% was reckoned in the Soviets’ weapons trade in the year 1986 to 1988. Another 12% drop was noted in 1989, these drops added up to $18.8 billion. In 1988 to 1989, all Soviet Combat Coups were withdrawn from Afghanistan with the introduction of the “new thinking” policy (Grachev 71). This new policy was working hand in hand with the endless efforts Gorbachev was making to improve the relationship between the East and West. They had incurred massive losses prompted by their involvement with the Third World either directly or indirectly thereby hindering the good ties that would have been built between them and the West. The primary goal for the arms delivery was to compete for influence (political) in the Third World and to gain favor from the local government. Heavy deliveries by the Soviet Union to the Arab countries were made to outdo the support from the United States; they did the same with India to push the Unites States’ support to Pakistan. SA-8 air defense interceptors, MiG coups, SS-21, and surface-to-surface missiles were supplied by the Soviet Union to India and Syria with the aim of maintaining a good relationship (Ouimet 91). The Soviet Union’s arms support to Afghanistan and India in the early 1960s was aimed at making sure that China was contained in South Asia. The Soviet Union had the same in mind when aiding Vietnam. The military support that was send by the Soviet Union was to prepare the Vietnamese for a revolution in hostility directly with China in the year 1979. The other goal that the Soviet Union had was to acquire bases, rights to land, and port facilities. Through the transfer of arms to the African countries in the west (Guinea Bissau, Benin, Congo, Mali) the Soviet Union was able to obtain access to airfields that were of great help in 1975 to 1976 during the delivery operation to Angola. The base at Khormaksar, Aden port facilities and Yemeni airfields were made available to the Soviet Union during their deliveries to south Yemen. These made it easy for the Soviet Union to transfer weapons to Angola, Mozambique, Seychelles, Syria, and Libya through Ethiopia. Military facilities were open for the Soviet Union to use in East Asia because of their weapons. The Cam Ranh Bay Base in Vietnam was opened for the Soviet Union Army in the 1970s and were required to regularly deliver arms to them in return. SA-3 surface-to-air missiles, AA-7 air-to-air missiles, and MiG-23 coups were shipped by the Soviet Union to the Northern Korea in exchange for port facilities and rights of over flight (Grachev 64). Soviet weapons deliveries were aimed at supporting Third World countries in war. With the prices of natural gas and oil going down, the prices of other products like gold declined too in the mid 1980s. The currency in arms trade amounted to 25 to 30 percent of the Soviet Unions’ total foreign trade income in 1986. The United States generated about 3% as trade revenue from their arms sales. The economy of the Soviet Society benefited from the arms business and so did their troops who allowed the Soviet Defense to put up firms and plants at a reasonable cost. The soviets’ revenue gotten from the weapons deliveries was used to settle the expense of producing more military goods to be sold abroad (Grachev 79). Weapons’ shipping reduced the cost per unit of the soviet arms by letting production durations to be longer. Collectively, from 1980 to 1986, the number of soviet tanks and airplanes exported to the Third World totaled up to 32% of the arms the Soviet Union had produced in that time. The production of more arms that were sold abroad helped the industries in the Soviet Society and boosted their economy. The business of arms transfer occasionally led to a consensus in economy. For instance, in the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Union delivered military weapons worth $1.6 billion to the Peruvian government in exchange the soviet fishing equipment were allowed to use the Peruvian ports. The fishing equipment brought forth revenue of about $120 million, every year, for the Soviet Society in the mid 1980s. Work Cited Grachev, A S. Gorbachev's Gamble: Soviet Foreign Policy and the End of the Cold War. Cambridge: Polity, 2008. Print. Ouimet, Matthew J. The Rise and fall of the Brezhnev Doctrine in Soviet Foreign Policy. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2003. Print. Smith, Jeremy. Khrushchev in the Kremlin: Policy and Government in the Soviet Union, 1953–64. New York: Taylor & Francis, 2011. Print. Read More