(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
Putin and Russia are products of a tragic missed opportunity when Gorbachev was in power [1]
['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']
Date: 2022-09-15
Russia invasion of Ukraine is about more than just the expansion of NATO
The recent death of Mikhail S. Gorbachev is reason to consider the lost opportunity that his leadership of the Soviet Union presented to the world. President George H.W. Bush is often granted much credit for taking no action to hinder the collapse of the Soviet Union under Gorbachev at the end of the Cold War. However, Vladimir Putin’s war in Ukraine gives us much reason to examine that lack of response. Putin’s actions have deeper roots than just the expansion of NATO.
In the 20th Century, the failed response to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 can only be rivaled in impact by the failed response to the defeat of Germany in 1918. Abandoning Germany after the First World War created an environment of hunger and desperation where Hitler and the Nazis could thrive. The end of World War II gave the Allies another chance and the United States with its allies and through enormous financial aid and commitment helped create a world where the defeated foes, Japan and Germany, became allies, not future enemies.
This did not just happen. Creative and assertive conceptions and actions by leaders in the Truman Administration made it happen. Recognition of what the end of the war meat to a devastated Europe and as well as the slow breakdown of the wartime alliance with the Soviet Union triggered action, not caution. The programs and initiatives were boundless: the Truman Doctrine, the Marshall Plan, NATO, the UN, the United National Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, the list goes on. All this happened not just because the United States had the money to do this. Policymakers also had the foresight to try to create a better world.
Contrast that with the Bush Administration’s reaction to the cataclysmic collapse of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev presented the United States with a great opportunity. His policies of Perestroika (restructuring the economy) and Glasnost (openness, freedom of the press and expression) opened the door for dramatic change as did the adoption of a range of market-oriented policies by the Supreme Soviet. As early as a 1989 meeting with Bush in Malta, Gorbachev must have thought there was great potential in a partnership with the US. “The world is leaving one epoch and entering another,” Gorbachev said. “We are at the beginning of a long road to a lasting, peaceful era."
A creative decision to aid Gorbachev in a major way might have helped his reforms succeed and could have fostered a far more positive transformation of Russia than we face today. Gorbachev was almost begging for the aid and as Gorbachev himself said: History punishes those who act too late.
Instead, despite the virtual revolution Gorbachev had unleashed across eastern Europe, Bush and the old Cold Warriors exercised enormous caution, only going so far as to drop openly hostile policies, offer arms reduction talks, and to tell Gorbachev he should seek financial help elsewhere. Bush complained that the US had enough of its own financial woes. And yet Bush had plenty of money to attack Panama and then spend over $116 billion in a war against Iraq in 1991. In that case, perhaps spurred by his obsession with Saddam, Bush was assertive and forceful and opportunistic in creating a coalition with a purpose – everything that was missing with regard to the Soviet Union. Panama and Kuwait were liberated while Russia was lost.
Failing to receive useful financial aid from the US, Gorbachev asked to meet with the Group of Seven industrialized nations where he planned to ask for $100 billion in assistance. Gorbachev told the New York Times on May 23, 1991, that the problems facing the Soviet Union deserved more attention and support from the Group of Seven. The Soviet Union has become “one of the solid reliable pillars of today’s world,” he told the Times. “If that pillar disappears, we should consider all of the possible consequences.”
Yet, Bush, amazingly, felt aid from the Group of Seven would only raise Gorbachev’s hopes of financial support for his reforms. In July, the Group of Seven chose not to provide Gorbachev any financial aid. Soon, without any financial support and with domestic turmoil now mounting, Gorbachev was ousted and the opportunity was gone. Much as the Germans had been left to fester in their humiliation after World War I, the Russians watched their world fall apart as the West mainly stood by and watched, smug in Cold War victory. It would have not been necessary to throw money at the Soviet Union but certainly more creativity was called for in facing such an opportunity.
The world’s problems with Vladimir Putin today thus stem not from nations trying to find safety within NATO. It stems from narrow-minded politicians allowing the creation of an environment where Putin and the oligarchs could thrive and block democratic reforms. The Bush Administration failed to seize the moment and we are all now facing what Gorbachev termed those “possible consequences.”
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/9/15/2123133/-Putin-and-Russia-are-products-of-a-tragic-missed-opportunity-when-Gorbachev-was-in-power
Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/
