Misidentified Gorbachev

                        

This article is translated from Chinese to English by Google Translate software

  Misidentified Gorbachev

    On the Chinese Internet, when it comes to Gorbachev, there are almost one-sided voices of abuse and ridicule. Such remarks as "the chief culprit for the disintegration of the Soviet Union", "the historical sinner who led to the decline of Russia", "a puppet supported by the West", and "a traitor to socialism" are overwhelming. It seems that Gorbachev is really heinous and useless Treacherous and evil. Chinese officials also regard Gorson as a negative example. "China cannot follow Gorbachev's old path" has become a mantra often repeated by the CCP regime and Chinese nationalists.

    So, is this really the case? Did Gorbachev really have these "crimes" and is he really so unbearable?

    The answer is not only negative, but the real situation is quite different from the rumors and evaluations mentioned above or even completely opposite.

    Let me talk about the well-known side first. After Gorbachev came to power, he promoted "democratization" and "openness", advocated "humane and democratic socialism", promoted the democratic reform and ideological emancipation of the Soviet Union, overthrew the long-suffering "Stalinist system", and ended the The evil dictatorship and tyranny of the Soviet Union since the Lenin-Stalin era was eradicated, and the Soviet people knew the historical truth and gained real democratic rights. These alone are enough for the liberal camp to call Gorbachev a great man.

   However, totalitarians, nationalists, and Leninist-Stalinists dismissed all of the above, and even regarded these achievements as cancer. They still label Gorbachev as "bringing down the Soviet Union" and "a Western puppet", believing that Gorbachev caused the Soviet Union, a great socialist country, to collapse. Just the fact that "caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union" is enough to make these people fundamentally deny Gorbachev.

    But in fact, these accusations, which can be collectively referred to as "non-liberal" groups, are also untenable from the facts themselves. The above-mentioned accusations against Gorbachev by Chinese officials and people are not only reactionary, backward, and stupid from the perspective of values, but also wrong, absurd, and ignorant from the perspective of facts. Many of Gorbachev's actual positions and actions are exactly the opposite of these accusations.

    First, Gorbachev was a staunch socialist and even a communist, not an anti-communist. Regardless of his resume before he became the general secretary or the years when he was the top leader, he has never had an anti-communist tendency. On the contrary, he has actively defended and saved socialism. Even when he left office as the supreme leader and the Soviet Union had disintegrated, he was still not anti-communist, but had more reflections on socialism and communism, and less persistence.

    Needless to say, Gorbachev's experience as an enlightened but not out-of-order bureaucrat before he became general secretary. When he held power and promoted reforms, he did not regard the overthrow of the socialist system as his political goal. As he advocated, it is "humane and democratic socialism", but he only opposes the "Stalinist system" that he believes has deviated from the track of socialism, and hopes that humanitarian and democratic elements will be added to the socialist system, and the emphasis on openness and pursuit of The truth, not the overthrow of the socialist system and its value system.

    In his economic reforms, Gorson still emphasized the importance and dominance of the public sector of the economy, and even emphasized that heavy industry, the representative industry of the "socialist economy," was still given priority. In the political reform, while emphasizing the importance of democratic politics, Gorbachev did not abandon the basic nature of the Soviet Union as a socialist country. There is no democracy; there is no socialism without democracy”. In terms of foreign relations, the Soviet Union still regarded itself as the leader of the socialist camp, easing up with the West while still insisting on competition with the Western capitalist model. Reagan called Gorbachev a "stubborn Bolshevik" after meeting him.

    All indications are that Gorbachev did not attempt to subvert socialism, but insisted on socialism. His series of reforms only made socialism more humane and democratic, more dynamic and sustainable. It's just that after many saboteurs, especially the rule of Stalin and Brezhnev, the Soviet Union's politics, economy, culture, and society were severely damaged, and it was no longer possible to embark on the track of democratic socialism.

   Second, Gorbachev was the defender of the Soviet Union, not the cause of its disintegration. Same as his position and behavior on the issue of socialism, Gorbachev not only did not attempt to disintegrate the Soviet Union, but instead worked hard to maintain and defend the existence of the Soviet Union as a union state.

    While Gorbachev boldly launched economic and political reforms, he was quite cautious and conservative about the ethnic and regional issues in the Soviet Union. Gorson also thought that the democratization of the Soviet Union would lead to the rise of nationalist forces everywhere. Out of this concern, he took many steps to avoid the growth of separatism. For example, when assigning deputy prime ministers and other symbolic deputy positions in the Soviet Union, the Gorbachev regime adopted a method that no previous leader had practiced, that is, almost every member of the republic was given some important positions in parallel. The "spectacles" of several deputy prime ministers. In addition, Gorson also adopted various decentralization measures to transfer some powers of the CPSU Central Committee/Soviet Central Government to local party and government organizations. Gorbachev tried to win over local forces in these ways and avoid splitting.

    Gorbachev was not lenient when dealing with rising separatism in the localities. Whether it is against Russian nationalists like Yeltsin (Yeltsin advocates strengthening the power of the republic of Russia while weakening the power of the central government of the Soviet Union), or the separatist forces in the Baltic states such as Lithuania and the Caucasus states, all have adopted various measures. The means are strongly suppressed. Gorson repeatedly used political and legal means to suppress Yeltsin's rise. The main purpose was not to fight for power with Yeltsin, nor to have fundamental differences with Yeltsin on the line of freedom and democracy, but to worry about the rise of Russian nationalism represented by Yeltsin. There were bloody conflicts in the Baltic Sea region and the Caucasus region. Gorbachev chose to suppress them with limited force rather than letting them go. Of course, this kind of suppression is naturally not as strong as the iron fist and bloodyness of Stalin's period, but it still shows Gorbachev's tough stance on national unity.

    So why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? That is because the separatist forces have a strong centrifugal tendency, the popular will, and the inevitable side effects of democratization and openness. Lithuania and other Baltic countries have blood feuds with Russia and the Soviet Union, and are culturally closer to the West or Central Europe than to Russia. Whether it was a decades-long violent resistance or a longer-lasting peaceful resistance, especially the "Baltic Road" in 1989, where millions of people formed a human chain to protest, they all demonstrated a strong desire for national self-determination and independence. In the Caucasus region, the contradictions among the member countries (especially between Armenia and Azerbaijan) are profound and difficult to reconcile.

    The most important thing is that Russia, the largest member of the Soviet Union, has been suppressed and weakened, and the deep-rooted and long-standing Russian nationalism is revived day by day, and there is an instigator like Yeltsin fanning the flames, so it strongly demands to separate from the Soviet Union or Have greater autonomy. The largest member of the Soviet Union wanted to split, which made the central government of the Soviet Union very embarrassed. Under the impact of ethnic minority separatism and Russia, the largest member country and the largest nation, "drawing from the bottom", it is an accident that the Soviet Union did not disintegrate.

   Also, it is undeniable that democratization and openness must lead to the rise of separatist thought. Because once democracy is implemented and the truth is made public, it will inevitably lead to the rise of nationalist sentiments and the breeding of ethnic hatred among the ethnic groups with deep hatred in history. This is not to say that there should be no democracy and openness, but democracy and openness are to bear this possible consequence, although it is not completely inevitable or reduce the impact.

   In such a situation, Gorbachev still worked hard for national reunification, and promoted a referendum in favor of the reunification of the Soviet Union, persuading the people of most of the member countries to support reunification. However, when the "8.19 coup" occurred, Gorbachev lost control and political authority over the Soviet Union. The power was occupied by the "Emergency Committee" composed of Yanayev and others, and the authority was taken away by Yeltsin. last hope lost. In order to keep the Soviet Union, Gorbachev racked his brains, but he was considered by the Chinese people as the chief culprit for the disintegration of the Soviet Union. How unfair?

    Third, Gorbachev was a patriot, and what he did was to safeguard the national interests of the Soviet Union, not to betray the motherland and be willing to be a puppet of Western countries.

    People who believe that Gorbachev is a traitor and a puppet of Western countries can generally be divided into two reasons. One is that Gorbachev made too many concessions to the West during his administration, and the other is that the disintegration of the Soviet Union benefited the West and Happy.

   The second point I have already said before, this is not what Gorbachev wants to see, on the contrary he is trying to save the Soviet Union. The disintegration of the Soviet Union was something he was powerless to prevent, rather than deliberately promoted. What's more, although this has indeed benefited and pleased the West, the Russians are not necessarily sad. Many polls have proved that Russians today are not willing to return to the Soviet era, even if the national power was stronger then. This is not only due to a certain degree of democratic freedom, but also because Russians have gotten rid of the "shackles" of the Soviet Union and can freely promote Russian nationalism (in the Soviet era, Russian nationalism and other minority nationalisms were also suppressed). The people of most other republics are also unwilling to return to the Soviet Union, as evidenced by the failure of the CIS. Is it possible to keep the evil empire of the Soviet Union at all costs just to prevent the West from benefiting and happy? Just let Russia and the people of various ethnic minorities continue to live in cages?

   So what about the first point? Did Gorbachev make many concessions to the West? Yes. From 1985 when Gorbachev came to power until the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev did make a lot of concessions and renunciations in foreign affairs. But what are the specific reasons for these concessions and abandonment, and what results did they produce?

   As we all know, the US-Soviet struggle for hegemony in the Cold War was very fierce, and the two sides once developed to the point where they were ready to use nuclear weapons to destroy each other. The Cuban Missile Crisis is a typical example. This fierce struggle for hegemony has shrouded the whole world, including the United States and the Soviet Union, in the terror of total destruction. Although during the Khrushchev and Brezhnev periods, the Soviet Union adopted some concessions in exchange for relaxation, and the United States also made some compromises, the world is still trembling under the cloud of the Third World War. The global cold war dominated by the United States and the Soviet Union was also mixed with local hot wars. The Korean War and the Vietnam War were typical proxy wars between the United States and the Soviet Union. The two major wars and other related conflicts resulted in the death of millions to tens of millions of people. More disabled and displaced persons. Many people suffered on both sides of the Cold War Iron Curtain. Among them, the Soviet camp strictly controlled its allies, imposed the authoritarian and brutal "Stalinist system" on these countries, and even brutally suppressed the rebels (such as the June 17 incident in East Germany, the Hungarian incident, and the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan). more painful.

   Therefore, an early end to the Cold War or a major detente is beneficial to the people of all countries in the world, especially the people of the Soviet camp. It was against this background that after Gorbachev came to power, he vigorously reduced armaments (especially signed the "Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty"), dissolved the "Warsaw Pact", withdrew troops from Eastern Europe and Afghanistan, and cooperated with the West and other conflicting countries (including China) to improve relations, indulge and even urge the allies of the satellite countries to carry out democratic reforms are all good things that benefit the people of the Soviet Union and the people of the world. What's more, the West also made some concessions accordingly, and also reduced its armaments.

    As for the "color revolution" that occurred later, or the countries that used to be in the Soviet camp fell to the Western camp, and even became hostile to Russia, it was because people's hearts were against each other, and the people's hearts were for democracy and freedom. They should not be restrained for the selfish interests of the Soviet Union/Russia. the autonomy of the people. As for NATO’s failure to disband on a reciprocal basis, it even expanded eastward to Russia’s doorstep, deployed anti-missile systems in Eastern Europe, and other things that the West took advantage of and Russia suffered. , It cannot simply be said that the West is treacherous and Russia suffers. Of course Russia has the right to take countermeasures, but such countermeasures may not be a good thing or even a bad thing for people outside Russia or even for the people of Russia itself.

   In addition, before and after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Gorbachev successfully avoided the possibility of extremists in the Soviet Union "holding nuclear self-respect" and even destroying the world together. It is also a great merit that the security was handed over to Yeltsin and the Russian government (and part of it was handed over to Ukraine, Kazakhstan and other countries where nuclear weapons are located). Those who accuse Gorbachev of not being tough enough, do they hope that there will be a crazy person who "I can't live better than everyone else", throwing nuclear bombs and spreading biochemical viruses everywhere when the Soviet Union was on the verge of disintegration (not only intentional use, but the instability of the handover process may also cause nuclear or biohazard)?

    Apart from these concessions, Gorbachev has no suspicion of "traitorous" on other issues. As the leader of the Soviet Union, he also fulfilled his responsibilities to the Soviet country and the Soviet people in the diplomatic field. He did not sell the national interests, but actively fought for the national interests of the Soviet Union on various international occasions. As for some people retroactively saying that he "traitored the country and sought glory" based on the honors given to him by the West later, looking at the achievements mentioned above, didn't he deserve those honors? Isn't it much better to safeguard and develop the interests of all mankind, including the Soviet people, than to narrowly safeguard the illegitimate interests of the country? (During the Crimean crisis in 2014, Gorson also supported the "return" of Crimea to Russia, which shows that he also has some nationalist sentiments and a strong patriotic (loving Russia) stance)

    Those who deny Gorbachev are nothing more than criticizing and mocking the above three aspects. But obviously, in these three aspects, Gorbachev is not only an anti-communist, a person who caused the disintegration of the Soviet Union, and a traitor as they said, but a loyal believer in socialism, a staunch defender of Soviet national unity, and a leader of Soviet patriotism. .

    As for some people directly questioning its political reform, that is even more unreasonable. The Soviet Union has been plagued by serious illnesses for a long time, and in a country where everyone has to face the serious illness. If there is no reform, the danger will only accumulate and the tragedy in the future will be even greater. Of course, all resistance can also be suppressed in extremely crazy ways, such as North Korea. But if that is the case, coupled with the size of the Soviet Union, wouldn't it be a greater tragedy for the Soviet people and the whole world?

    In fact, such a fact is not difficult to see as long as one has the heart to understand that period of history and get rid of all kinds of prejudice and preconceived ideas. However, because of stupidity or corruption, or stupidity plus corruption, how many people blatantly turned black and white, and became the mainstream view of the Chinese people, which is really regrettable and angry. That's why I wrote this article to clarify some facts and historical facts, and to restore a real Gorbachev.

   Of course, I do not think that Gorbachev is a perfect person. The economic and political reforms he implemented in the Soviet Union failed after all, and he did not build a strong, humane and democratic socialist Soviet Union. The leader disintegrated. Gorbachev also left behind a mess that has not been fully cleaned up so far, and there has been a decline in people's livelihood in the Yeltsin era and the return of autocracy in the Putin era. All of these consequences have to bear certain direct and indirect responsibilities, which also shows that he cannot be regarded as a person who "turned the tide". However, our criticism must be based on facts, and we should not add a single point of meritorious deeds, nor add a single point of crimes made out of nothing. On the whole, especially in light of his contribution to the democratic, peaceful and progress of all mankind, Gorbachev is still worthy of being a hero of his generation and a great man in the world.

bibliography

"Lonely Companion--Memoirs of Gorbachev"--Gorbachev 2015 Yilin Publishing House

"The Fate of the Soviet Union--Gorbachev's Memoirs"--Gorbachev 2018 Yilin Publishing House

"The Russian Road from Gorbachev to Putin" -- David Koz, Fred Weir 2015 Renmin University of China Press

"Biography of Gorbachev" -- Joles Medvedev 1988 World Knowledge Publishing House

"The Last Stand to Defend the Soviet Union" -- Gennady Yanayev 2012 Social Sciences Literature Publishing House

other references

Reference materials such as Chinese high school history textbooks and test questions

Chinese and English Wikipedia related information

Documentary related to NHK TV station in Japan

Hong Kong Phoenix Satellite TV related documentaries