There are lots of videos and articles about how USSR collapsed, but all fall short of getting at how it really happened. The real reason lies in intricate system of governance and layers of bureaucracy as well as convention and practice of governance that together made the Soviet system. Eventually these ambiguities and loopholes led to a system crash. At certain point a small nearly unrelated event led to a chain reaction that led to a complete collapse at the only possible outcome. The outcome that sometimes puzzles even people within the system itself.
Social and economic measures of years 87-88 are unrelated to it so I will begin with the first free elections of 1989.
Contrary to popular believe first free election in USSR did not produce a pro-reform anti-communist majority. In contrast commies received 87% of the vote just as Gorbi and the government expected. They were calculative enough to not commit to it if there is a real risk they would lose power.
The elections did conform to their calculations and produced a strong pro-government majority. After holding these free elections Gorbi could get more loans from the US in exchange for his democratization exercise and keep the power too. It was a win-win for him.
Sure, there is now opposition fraction in parliament, the Interregional Group, but they are minority, outnumbered 10 to 1, there is no way they can beat the majority, can they? Turned out they could.
How did that happen? Due to a difference between the character of the typical pro and anti-government MP. While many in Interregional Group were people with strong opinion and drive to achieve their agenda, the average pro-government MP was not like that at all. Most of pro-government MPs were total tools who hardly cared for policy or even understood what it was about. The most thing they cared for in their job was an opportunity to travel to Moscow and shop better goods there. They did not pay any attention to the process and just reflexively voted 'Yes' for every government proposal with consistency Pavlov's dogs.
The reasons for that were the fact that by convention it was political bureau that formed policy and debated it. Once Political Bureau and General Secretary would approve it, it would be forwarded to a relative government body to rubber stamp approval.
That gave an Interregional Group an idea to table couple of private bills and see if the government majority will vote them in just out of inertia and habit. Gorbi, who was at that time the Speaker of parliament, allowed.it. He saw it as an opportunity to both demonstrate adherence to democratic principles as well as humiliate the opposition by defeating their bills on the floor.
It was the Interregional Group who laughed last as both of their bills were voted in. Gorbachev even took his time to call MPs to vote against the bills, but in a huge building with more than 2250 MP that was a fool's errand.
Gorbachev later responded with creating the post of President of USSR and automatically electing himself to it for the first 5 years. He did it to safeguard himself from Interregional Group tabling the private bill of electing Sakharov to the Gorbi's post of Speaker.
The bills the Interregional Group managed to get through later came to play important role in many further events and eventual dissolution of the USSR as well.
The first one ended up as mostly a moral victory. It abolished CPSU monopoly on power (so called article 6 of Soviet constitution) and allowed formation of different political parties. However, few new parties were formed in the next 2 years, and they did not play major role in the events to come.
The second one called for free elections in the consisted republics of the USSR. USSR had a (con)federal structure and consisted of 15 republics just like USA consist of 50 states. Elections to these republics ended up shaping the future of the country as well as the world. I will cover them in a separate article.
Gorbi was frustrated that they passed but did not try to stop them afterwards. I am not sure if Soviet constitution would have allowed Gorbi or someone else to just blatantly refuse to implement duly voted bills, but he did not try it. Blocking the bills would have ruined his relationship with the US and jeopardized further loans. On the other hand, allowing them to go through did not pose significant threats to the system.
No comments:
Post a Comment