DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of Russian Governing Institutions On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Fragmented Diplomacy: The Impact Of Russian Governing Institutions on Foreign Policy, 1991-1996 Suzanne Marie Crow Thesis Submitted for the PhD Degree in International Relations The London School of Economics and Political Science The University of London 1998 UMI Number: U615575 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615575 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 ! |4£S £ S h 76sy 71^97 A b s t r a c t This is a study of foreign policy formulation in the Soviet Union and Russia starting in the Soviet era and continuing through the end of Boris Yeltsin's first term as president. Whereas during the period of rule under Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko the bureaucratic politics model could be applied with some success (albeit differently than in the United States), the institutional breakdown of the Gorbachev era saw a deterioration of the model's explanatory power which continued in independent Russia. For the Gorbachev period and policy formulation in the Russian Federation, an alternative model provides a more illuminating explanation of the process. The transition model emphasizes the particular characteristics of democratizing states. By taking into account the excessive accumulation of power by the executive, the prevalence of winner-take-all solutions, the contested and relative nature of laws, the instability or absence of procedures, and the influence of the military on the political process, the transition model offers a better explanation than the bureaucratic politics model for the way in which policy was formulated in Russia in the period 1991-1996. Given the hurdles Russia still faces in its democratic development, and the frequency with which institutions, individuals, and procedures change in the upper echelons of the political elite, it appears that the transition model will retain significant explanatory power for many years to come. 2 For Klaus This study was supported in part by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty 3 C o n t e n t s List of Abbreviations 5 1 The Framework of Theory 7 2 Soviet Foreign Policy 45 Decisionmaking under Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko 3 Soviet Foreign Policy 100 Decisionmaking under Gorbachev 4 Russian Foreign Policy 146 Decisionmaking in the First Republic 5 Russian Foreign Policy 224 Decisionmaking in the Second Republic 6 Case Study One: Sanctions Against 287 Rump Yugoslavia 7 Case Study Two: The CFE Treaty's 320 Flank Limits 8 Russia in the Comparative 3 54 Perspective 9 The Outlook for Russian Foreign 3 63 Policy Formulation Bibl i ograpy 369 Appendix 1: List of Interviews 388 Appendix 2: Members of Presidential 3 90 Council 4 A bbreviations U sed in t hi s S t u d y AFP Agence France Press CC Central Committee CFE Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty CIS Commonwealth of Independent States CPD Congress of People's Deputies CPSU Communist Party of the Soviet Union CSCE Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe EXOP Executive Office of the President FAPSI Federal Agency for Government Communications and Information (Federalnoe Agentsvo Pravitelstvennoi Svyazi i Informatsii) FBIS Foreign Broadcast Information Service FIS Foreign Intelligence Service FPA Foreign Policy Analysis GRU Main Intelligence Administration (Glavnoye Razveyvatelnoye Upravlenie) ID International Department I ID International Information Department INF Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces IR International Relations KGB Committee of State Security (Komitet Gosudardstvenii Bezopastnosti) KPSS Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza) LDP Liberal Democratic Party of Russia MFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs MGIMO Moscow State Institute of International Relations (Moskovskii Gosudarstvennii Institut Mezhdunarodykh Otnoshenii) NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NSC National Security Council 5 NTV (Berlin) News Television (Germany) NTV Independent Russian Television Network PDD Presidential Decision Directive RF Russian Federation RFE/RL Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty RSFSR Russian Socialist Federated Soviet Republic SC Russian Federation Security Council SS-23 The name of a Soviet/Russian missile TASS Telegraph Agency of the Soviet Union (Telegrafnoye Agenstvo Sovetskogo Soyuza) UN United Nations UNPROFOR United Nations Protection Force in Bosnia and Croatia UNSC United Nations Security Council US United States USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics 6 C h a p t e r 1 The Framework of Theory An observer of Russian foreign policy in the early 1990s would be struck by two phenomena: the openness with which Russian policymakers debated foreign policy and the disarray in Russian diplomacy. In contrast to the expression of strict unity in Soviet foreign policy, Russian foreign policy seemed disorganized and fragmented. How could Russia's foreign policy best be explained and understood? And what did Russia's foreign policy behavior between 1991 and 1996 (the period between the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Yeltsin's first term as president) presage for the long term? This study, which focuses on the period 1991-1996, attempts to answer these questions by analyzing how Russian governing institutions participated in the foreign policymaking process and affected (or failed to affect) policy outcomes. Two lines of inquiry are pursued. First, can the bureaucratic politics model help explain Russian foreign policy? Second, to what extent do the patterns of foreign policy formulation established during the Soviet period affect post-Soviet Russia and how does an understanding of the process of transition from communism to democracy help to explain Russian foreign policy behavior? Foreign Policy Analysis Foreign policy analysis (FPA) attempts to understand foreign policy output through the analysis 7 Chapter 1 The Framework of Theory of domestic input into foreign policy behavior. FPA focuses on the activity occurring below the level of the state or international system. It assumes that "in the social universe, events often have more than one cause, and causes can be found in more than one type of location."1 More specifically, it is the recognition that within-state processes can sometimes offer complementary, if not better, explanations for foreign policy behavior than explanations of processes at the international level. As Light and Hill put it: "While not the focal point of International Relations (IR), it is an indispensable level of analysis."2 As a field of inquiry within IR, foreign policy analysis can be traced back to the 1954 study by Snyder, Bruck, and Sapin: Decision-Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics.3 What was new about their approach was their emphasis on the domestic aspects of foreign policy behavior. In a 1962 article refining their work, Snyder, Bruck, and Sapin emphasized the importance of. understanding the makers of foreign policy as "participants in a system of actions" taken in a specific context which must be considered to understand a country's foreign policy.4 ^■Barry Buzan, "The Level of Analysis Problem in International Relations," in Ken Booth and Steve Smith, eds. International Relations Theory Today. (Cambridge: Policy Press, 1995), p. 189. 2Christopher Hill and Margot Light, "Foreign Policy Analysis," in Margot Light and A.J.R. Groom, eds. International Relations: A Handbook of Current Theory. (London: Pinter Publishers, 1985), p. 156. 3Steve Smith, "Theories of foreign policy: an historical overview," Review of International Studies. January 1986, p. 14. 4Richard Snyder, H.W. Bruck, and Burton Sapin, "The Decision- Making Approach," in Ernst-Otto Czempiel, ed. Die Lehre von den Internationalen Beziehungen. (Darmstadt, FRG: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1969), p. 238. 8 Chapter 1 The Framework of Theory Thus the emphasis was not on outcome alone but on the process that led to that particular outcome. FPA became more prominent as a subfield of International Relations as a result of inquiry into the level of analysis problem -- the effort to differentiate between policies taken at the level of individual, state, and international system. The level of analysis problem became prominent in the 1960s, having been popularized through the work of Singer.5 It reflected the desire to apply scientific rigor, as utilized in the study of the natural sciences, to social science research.6 By looking at the components of the foreign policymaking process in a disaggregated form, it was believed that analysis of foreign policy outcomes could be made more precise and foreign policy behavior more understandable. Foreign policy analysis seemed particularly useful in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s, a time which saw much questioning of authority and searching for reasons to explain what many considered home-made fiascoes in US behavior, both at home and abroad. "What went wrong?" and "how could this have happened?" were questions underpinning the popular debate as well as inquiry into US foreign policy undertaken by scholars of International
Recommended publications
  • Title of Thesis: ABSTRACT CLASSIFYING BIAS

    Title of Thesis: ABSTRACT CLASSIFYING BIAS

    ABSTRACT Title of Thesis: CLASSIFYING BIAS IN LARGE MULTILINGUAL CORPORA VIA CROWDSOURCING AND TOPIC MODELING Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang Thesis Directed By: Dr. David Zajic, Ph.D. Our project extends previous algorithmic approaches to finding bias in large text corpora. We used multilingual topic modeling to examine language-specific bias in the English, Spanish, and Russian versions of Wikipedia. In particular, we placed Spanish articles discussing the Cold War on a Russian-English viewpoint spectrum based on similarity in topic distribution. We then crowdsourced human annotations of Spanish Wikipedia articles for comparison to the topic model. Our hypothesis was that human annotators and topic modeling algorithms would provide correlated results for bias. However, that was not the case. Our annotators indicated that humans were more perceptive of sentiment in article text than topic distribution, which suggests that our classifier provides a different perspective on a text’s bias. CLASSIFYING BIAS IN LARGE MULTILINGUAL CORPORA VIA CROWDSOURCING AND TOPIC MODELING by Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Gemstone Honors Program, University of Maryland, 2018 Advisory Committee: Dr. David Zajic, Chair Dr. Brian Butler Dr. Marine Carpuat Dr. Melanie Kill Dr. Philip Resnik Mr. Ed Summers © Copyright by Team BIASES: Brianna Caljean, Katherine Calvert, Ashley Chang, Elliot Frank, Rosana Garay Jáuregui, Geoffrey Palo, Ryan Rinker, Gareth Weakly, Nicolette Wolfrey, William Zhang 2018 Acknowledgements We would like to express our sincerest gratitude to our mentor, Dr.
  • Threats to Russian Democracy and US-Russian Relations

    Threats to Russian Democracy and US-Russian Relations

    After Chechnya: Threats to Russian Democracy and U.S.-Russian Relations ARIEL COHEN Introduction : All Politics Is Local , Al¡ Foreign Policy Is Domestic Half a year alter Russian tanks rolled into Chechnya, the future of Russian democracy and free markets is under threat. The internal situation in Russia bears a direct influence on Russia's relations with the outside world and the United States. While the world's leaders gather in Moscow to celebrate the victory over Nazism, Russian Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev is calling for the use of force to "protect" Russian co-ethnics living outside the borders of the Russian Federation. Kozyrev's declarations go beyond mere rhetoric. Russia is introducing its new 58th field army in the Northern Caucasus, in clear and conscious violation of the Conventional Forces Europe (CFE) Treaty, a centerpiece of post-Cold War European security. If Russia is not planning an agressive action either against Ukraine or its Transcaucasus neighbors, why does it need to revise upwards the CFE limitations of 164 tanks and 414 artillery systems? Why was General Alexander Lebed, a self-proclaimed restorer of the old Soviet Union and Commander of the l4th Army in Moldova, applauding Kozyrev? Chechnya became the testing ground for the new Russian policy, both foreign and domestic. The people who engineered it, the so-called Party of War in Moscow, are watching for reactions at honre and abroad to this version of the "last thrust South." The West is facing its greatest challenge since the collapse of communism: how to deal with the Russia that is emerging from under the rubble.
  • Yevgeny Primakov's Operational Code and Russian Foreign Policy

    Yevgeny Primakov's Operational Code and Russian Foreign Policy

    University of Tampere Faculty of Management Politics/International Relations YEVGENY PRIMAKOV’S OPERATIONAL CODE AND RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY Pihla Bernier Master’s Thesis in International Relations Advisor: Tuomas Forsberg ABSTRACT University of Tampere Faculty of Management BERNIER, PIHLA: Yevgeny Primakov’s Operational Code and Russian Foreign Policy Master’s Thesis, 82 pages International Relations August 2018 Keywords: Yevgeny Primakov, Operational Code, Russian Foreign Policy, Russia, Primakov Doctrine Yevgeny Primakov was an important figure in both Soviet and Russian foreign policy circles throughout his lifetime until 2015. He was a critical leader in the 1990s holding positions of both Minister of Foreign Affairs and Prime Minister, which also coincided with times when Russia was charting a new foreign policy course. He reinvented a foreign policy school of thought called Statism which has been the most influential with Russian leaders for many years and continues to be so today. Current research has not adequately addressed his importance. This thesis set out to investigate his beliefs and worldview utilizing the operational code method using Alexander George’s ten question model. Research was conducted based on Primakov’s own writings, speeches and interviews. Yevgeny Primakov has been called both a westernizing leader and a hard-liner, but it was found both of these labels are incorrect. Rather, he should be viewed as a patriotic pragmatist. His actions were motivated by advancing Russian interests of which one of the greatest was restoring Russia as a major player in international relations again. His attitude towards the United States was complex, viewing them as a rival, yet not as an enemy.
  • Russia and Asia: the Emerging Security Agenda

    Russia and Asia: the Emerging Security Agenda

    Russia and Asia The Emerging Security Agenda Stockholm International Peace Research Institute SIPRI is an independent international institute for research into problems of peace and conflict, especially those of arms control and disarmament. It was established in 1966 to commemorate Sweden’s 150 years of unbroken peace. The Institute is financed mainly by the Swedish Parliament. The staff and the Governing Board are international. The Institute also has an Advisory Committee as an international consultative body. The Governing Board is not responsible for the views expressed in the publications of the Institute. Governing Board Professor Daniel Tarschys, Chairman (Sweden) Dr Oscar Arias Sánchez (Costa Rica) Dr Willem F. van Eekelen (Netherlands) Sir Marrack Goulding (United Kingdom) Dr Catherine Kelleher (United States) Dr Lothar Rühl (Germany) Professor Ronald G. Sutherland (Canada) Dr Abdullah Toukan (Jordan) The Director Director Dr Adam Daniel Rotfeld (Poland) Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Signalistg. 9, S-1769 70 Solna, Sweden Cable: SIPRI Telephone: 46 8/655 97 00 Telefax: 46 8/655 97 33 E-mail: [email protected] Internet URL: http://www.sipri.se Russia and Asia The Emerging Security Agenda Edited by Gennady Chufrin OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1999 OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Athens
  • The Diary of Anatoly S. Chernyaev 1986

    The Diary of Anatoly S. Chernyaev 1986

    The Diary of Anatoly S. Chernyaev 1986 Donated by A.S. Chernyaev to The National Security Archive Translated by Anna Melyakova Edited by Svetlana Savranskaya http://www.nsarchive.org Translation © The National Security Archive, 2007 The Diary of Anatoly S. Chernyaev, 1986 http://www.nsarchive.org January 1st, 1986. At the department1 everyone wished each other to celebrate the New Year 1987 “in the same positions.” And it is true, at the last session of the CC (Central Committee) Secretariat on December 30th, five people were replaced: heads of CC departments, obkom [Oblast Committee] secretaries, heads of executive committees. The Politizdat2 director Belyaev was confirmed as editor of Soviet Culture. [Yegor] Ligachev3 addressed him as one would address a person, who is getting promoted and entrusted with a very crucial position. He said something like this: we hope that you will make the newspaper truly an organ of the Central Committee, that you won’t squander your time on petty matters, but will carry out state and party policies... In other words, culture and its most important control lever were entrusted to a Stalinist pain-in-the neck dullard. What is that supposed to mean? Menshikov’s case is also shocking to me. It is clear that he is a bastard in general. I was never favorably disposed to him; he was tacked on [to our team] without my approval. I had to treat him roughly to make sure no extraterritoriality and privileges were allowed in relation to other consultants, and even in relation to me (which could have been done through [Vadim] Zagladin,4 with whom they are dear friends).
  • After the Revolution: Rethinking U.S.-Russia Relations

    After the Revolution: Rethinking U.S.-Russia Relations

    After The Revolution: Rethinking U.S.-Russia Relations Speech by Bill Bradley at the Keenan Institute, Washington, DC - August 8, 1995 “For the mystery of man’s being is not only in living, but in what one lives for.” – Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov I Four years ago Boris Yeltsin mounted a tank outside the Russian White House and helped to seal the fate of an empire. His act of defiance consigned the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the dustbin of history and launched his country – and ours – into uncharted waters. Today, America’s policy toward Russia has strayed off course. To manage this essential relationship requires a clear view of Russia. Lacking such a vision, we are like the proverbial blind man before the elephant. II From the end of World War II until the advent of Mikhail Gorbachev in 1985, U.S. policy was largely based on the analysis of Soviet behavior first set out in George Kennan’s seminal 1947 Foreign Affairs arti - cle, “The Sources of Soviet Conduct”. For 40 years, through periods of evil empire and détente, we sought to contain an adversary we viewed as inherently expansionist. The marriage of ideology and circumstances that Kennan identified eventually eroded under the deadening weight of a stagnant party bureaucracy and a withering command economy. By the time Gorbachev took power, he inherited a spiritually and economically bankrupt empire. Over time, as glasnost exposed the soviet Union’s underlying weakness, and perestroika tried to bolster its waning strength, it became clear that we were seeing something new, a Soviet union that had to reform or die.
  • Impacts on Nato Expansion: the Partnership for Peace Program and the Kosovo War

    Impacts on Nato Expansion: the Partnership for Peace Program and the Kosovo War

    IMPACTS ON NATO EXPANSION: THE PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE PROGRAM AND THE KOSOVO WAR by James Jarosz A research study submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Global Security Studies Baltimore, Maryland August 2020 © 2020 James Jarosz All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Considerable academic debate has arisen about the causes of the deteriorating U.S.- Russia relationship. Despite the early promise for improved relations after the Soviet Union’s collapse, Washington and Moscow have struggled to move forward with a productive relationship. A constructive relationship has failed to materialize for numerous reasons, but one of the most prominent legacy issues for today’s adversarial relationship is the original decision to expand NATO in the 1990s and the failure to integrate Russia into the post-Cold War European security architecture. This research paper is attempting to answer how and why Russia failed to become integrated into NATO during the debates surrounding NATO expansion in the 1990s. This paper hypothesizes that Russia’s discontentment with the Partnership for Peace (PFP) and NATO’s Kosovo campaign served as “rupture points” in the relationship that ultimately precluded them from joining. By utilizing a historical methods approach, leveraging recently declassified primary source documents, memoirs, diaries and secondary sources, this paper constructs a broader narrative about the arguments surrounding PFP and NATO involvement in the Balkans, in order to assess the impacts of the Partnership for Peace Program and the Kosovo war on Russia’s failure to join NATO. The paper finds split causality, with evidence supporting the Kosovo hypothesis, but not the PFP.
  • Russia's Islamic Diplom

    Russia's Islamic Diplom

    Russia's Islamic Diplom Russia's Islamic Diplomacy ed. Marlene Laruelle CAP paper no. 220, June 2019 "Islam in Russia, Russia in the Islamic World" Initiative Russia’s Islamic Diplomacy Ed. Marlene Laruelle The Initiative “Islam in Russia, Russia in the Islamic World” is generously funded by the Henry Luce Foundation Cover photo: Talgat Tadjuddin, Chief Mufti of Russia and head of the Central Muslim Spiritual Board of Russia, meeting with the Armenian Catholicos Karekin II and Mufti Ismail Berdiyev, President of the Karachay-Cherkessia Spiritual Board, Moscow, December 1, 2016. Credit : Artyom Korotayev, TASS/Alamy Live News HAGFW9. Table of Contents Chapter 1. Russia and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation: Conflicting Interactions Grigory Kosach………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5 Chapter 2. Always Looming: The Russian Muslim Factor in Moscow's Relations with Gulf Arab States Mark N. Katz………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 1 Chapter 3. Russia and the Islamic Worlds: The Case of Shia Islam Clément Therme ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 25 Chapter 4. A Kadyrovization of Russian Foreign Policy in the Middle East: Autocrats in Track II Diplomacy and Other Humanitarian Activities Jean-Francois Ratelle……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 1 Chapter 5. Tatarstan's Paradiplomacy with the Islamic World Guzel Yusupova……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3 7 Chapter 6. Russian Islamic Religious Authorities and Their Activities at the Regional, National, and International Levels Denis Sokolov………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 41 Chapter 7. The Economics of the Hajj: The Case of Tatarstan Azat Akhunov…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4 7 Chapter 8. The Effect of the Pilgrimage to Mecca on the Socio-Political Views of Muslims in Russia’s North Caucasus Mikhail Alexseev…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5 3 Authors’ Biographies……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5 9 @ 2019 Central Asia Program Chapter 1.
  • SALZMAN-DISSERTATION-2016.Pdf

    SALZMAN-DISSERTATION-2016.Pdf

    BRICS IN RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY BEFORE AND AFTER THE ONSET OF THE CRISIS IN UKRAINE by Rachel S. Salzman A dissertation submitted to the Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland December 11, 2015 © Rachel S. Salzman All Rights Reserved Abstract The focus of this dissertation is the evolution of BRICS in Russian foreign policy. It tells this overarching story through the lens of three overlapping narratives. The first is the evolution of Russian elite rhetoric about the West, and the increasing antagonism of that rhetoric, since the turn of the millennium. The second is how Russian leaders have framed the idea of the BRICS group in the narrative they created about Russian relations with the West and Russia’s role in the international system. The third is the story of BRICS itself: its development as a group in the international arena, its past achievements and future prospects, and its broader impact on global governance. The main argument is as follows: BRICS has become more important to Russia as a result of the rupture in relations with the West following the onset of the crisis in Ukraine in February 2014. Simultaneously, BRICS itself has begun to constitute an important part of a changing world order, primarily because the imbalances in global economic governance it originally sought to address remain unresolved. These two phenomena, combined with the silence of the BRICS countries in the face of Russian violations of international norms during the Ukraine crisis, are evidence of an accelerating fragmentation of the current international order.
  • The Kgb's Image-Building Under

    The Kgb's Image-Building Under

    SPREADING THE WORD: THE KGB’S IMAGE-BUILDING UNDER GORBACHEV by Jeff Trimble The Joan Shorenstein Center PRESS ■ POLI TICS Discussion Paper D-24 February 1997 ■ PUBLIC POLICY ■ Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government INTRODUCTION The KGB, under many different sets of graduate student at the Pushkin Russian Lan- initials, evokes frightening memories of the guage Institute in Moscow during the 1979-80 Soviet period of Russian history. A garrison academic year, later as Moscow correspondent state within a state, it provided the terror that for U.S. News & World Report from 1986 to glued the Soviet Union into a unitary force for 1991, Trimble observed the changes not just in evil. Few bucked the system, and dissent was the old KGB but in the old Soviet Union and, in limited, for the most part, to whispers over this paper, based on his own research, he ex- dinner or under the sheets. Millions were herded plains their significance. At a time in American into the communist version of concentration life when we seem to be largely indifferent to the camps, or transported to Siberia, or simply rest of the world, we are indebted to Trimble for executed for crimes no more serious than having his reminder that the past is not too far removed the wrong economic or ideological pedigree. from the present. The KGB, by its brutal behavior, came to be The question lurking between the lines is identified throughout the world with the Soviet whether the changes in image are in fact system of government. When the system, with changes in substance as well.
  • Anatoly Chernyaev, Georgi Arbatov, and the Foundations of the Soviet Collapse, 1970-1979

    Anatoly Chernyaev, Georgi Arbatov, and the Foundations of the Soviet Collapse, 1970-1979

    THE RUSTY CURTAIN: ANATOLY CHERNYAEV, GEORGI ARBATOV, AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE SOVIET COLLAPSE, 1970-1979 Michael Ginnetti A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2015 Committee: Douglas Forsyth, Advisor Beth Griech-Polelle © 2015 Michael Ginnetti All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Douglas Forsyth, Advisor “It seems the Western interpreters of Marxism are right when they say it is an outdated gospel.” Such a harsh condemnation of communist ideology might be expected from some persecuted Soviet dissident or perhaps a war-drumming functionary in Washington. However, this quote is from none other than Anatoly Chernyaev, a high-level apparatchik working for the International Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union who found himself disillusioned with the state of Soviet society in the 1970s. In much the same way, Georgi Arbatov, the director of the Soviet Institute for the Study of the USA and Canada, declared that, “one had a particularly sickening feeling inside because of the intolerable propaganda.” From these perceptions of the Soviet Union in the 1970s, Chernyaev and Arbatov would rise to become personal foreign policy advisors to Mikhail Gorbachev and active reformers in the 1980s. The current restrictions on research in Russia have turned the personal writings of Chernyaev and Arbatov into resources of nearly exclusive importance on the history of the Soviet Union in the 1970s. Not only were Chernyaev and Arbatov highly placed individuals within the Soviet government, they were remarkably intelligent, creative, and observant men who recorded their thoughts, impressions, and memories of the Soviet Union as it was before the implosion of the communist system.
  • Chechnya the Russian Federation in Crisis

    Chechnya the Russian Federation in Crisis

    arl rvic CIJ IEF ealt 0 ISSN 1321-1560 Copyright Commonwealth of Australia 1995 Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means including information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written coiisent of the Department of the Parliamentary Library, other than by Members of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official duties. Published by the Department of the Parliamentary Library, 1995 Foreign Affairs, De 7 February 1995 ri si Further copies of this publication may be purchased from the Publications Distribution Officer Telephone: (06) 277 2711 A list of Parliamentary Research Service publications is available on the ISR database A quarterly update of PRS publications may be obtained from the PRS Head’s Office Telephone: (06) 277 7166 The author of this paper would like to thank Dr Frank Frost, Dr Robert Miller, Mr Gary Brown and Dr Ravi Tomar for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper and Helen Phillips and Doreen White for their technical assistance. This paper has been prepared for general distribution to Members of the Australian Parliament. Readers outside the Parliament are reminded that this is not an Australian Government document, but a paper prepared by the author and published by the Parliamentary Research Service to contribute to consideration of the issues by Senators and Members. The views expressed in this Paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Parliamentary Research Service and are not to be attributed to the Department of the Parliamentary Library.