DOCSLIB.ORG

Able Archer 83, Near Nuclear Catastrophe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Able Archer 83, Near Nuclear Catastrophe ABLE ARCHER 83, NEAR NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE Sonjia Enck Faculty Adviser: Dr. Sheila Rucki, Department of Political Science Abstract In 1983, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member states completed a command post exercise referred to as Able Archer 83 1. In response to the exercise, the Soviets nearly launched a nuclear strike. Did these events cause President Ronald Reagan’s military policy to change from a hostile policy to a cooperative one? Using a methodology that consisted of combing through Nate Jones’s published compilation Able Archer 83, I conducted a thorough review of intelligence documents, memorandums, President Reagan’s diary entries, and other documentation contained therein. I supplemented my research with information found in the digital collection of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum. My research indicated that President Reagan desired peace with the Soviets as early as 1981, but addressed the world with his reformed policy in January of 1984. Though an exact date and time for President Reagan's change in attitude could not be ascertained, it was clear that the near tragedy following Able Archer 83 had an effect on his policy. Introduction Able Archer 83 was the name of a command NATO’s Able Archer 83, he changed his policy as post exercise completed by North Atlantic Treaty well as his words. Reagan moved away from rhetoric Organization (NATO) member states in 1983, when describing the Soviets as evil or threatening to Cold War tensions were high. The realistic military writing handwritten letters to their leaders and giving operation, coming on the heels of hostile discourse a speech at a Moscow university. This was not a by President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leadership, linear change; there were times where Reagan was led to a close call but not nuclear war. As President ambivalent or changed his message based on Reagan became more informed of the Soviet recommendations from cabinet staff. Over time, response to American military operations and however, the shift was clear. 1 The author would like to thank the following people for their contributions in support of writing this essay: Dr. Sheila Rucki, the Political Science Department at Metropolitan State University of Denver, and my anonymous reviewers. This essay contains the following sections: a response to Able Archer. Other literature includes historical introduction, a review of pertinent secondary sources such as the article by Robert literature, an explanation of the utilized research Hamilton, a retired Colonel who served in the US model and methodology, a defense of the case Army for over 30 years. The literature supports the selection, my research results and analysis, and a thesis and is easily defensible in the subsequent text. conclusion. The literature review was performed on The research shows that Reagan learned of the key primary source documents, such as Central potential damage that could come from realistic Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports, or the President’s military training, especially when combined with Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Report from inflammatory discourse. 1990, which specifically deconstructed the Soviet What was Able Archer 1983? A Historical Description Ronald Reagan became president of the conference, Reagan established his opposition to United States in 1981, during the Cold War with the détente; he stated that it was a “one-way street” for Soviet Union (USSR). In the years following the the Soviets to “pursue its own aims... of world Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the United States and revolution and a one-world Communist state” (Jones the USSR had entered a period of détente, or reduced 2016, 15). Soviet KGB leadership were convinced tensions, between the two rivals. When the Soviets that the US was a threat and Reagan was invaded Afghanistan in 1979, and placed Saber unpredictable (Hamilton, Jones 2016, 20). In 1981, missiles in Europe (Jones 2016, 93), it signaled the they formed Operation RYaN to detect the first strike beginning of the end of détente. President Jimmy by the US. Throughout Reagan’s campaign and most Carter took actions that deteriorated relations further, of his first term, he made references to the Soviets such as boycotting the Moscow Olympics and that indicated a negative assessment of their placing embargoes on the Soviet Union. The détente character and a desire to weaken Soviet imperialism. was over as Reagan took office. In his first press During a speech in 1983 to the National Association of Evangelicals, Reagan said that the Soviet Union when Korean Airlines Flight 007 crossed into Soviet was “the focus of evil in the modern world,” and that airspace inadvertently, a tense Soviet leadership the struggle against communism was a spiritual one, ordered the plane shot down (Hamilton). Reagan a “test of moral will and faith” (Jones 16). He also condemned the act and lambasted them further likened the relationship with the Soviets to being (Hamilton). “two spiders in a bottle locked in a suicidal fight until The following month, the US invaded both were dead,” (Jones 2016, 3). Grenada, a move that was vigorously opposed by Changes in the heads of the Kremlin had also Britain. It caused a flurry of encrypted resulted in a new desire to reverse gains made by the communications between the two countries (Jones U.S. globally (Jones 2016, 1). Starting in 1983, the 2016, 31), something that Operation RYaN US and USSR fought proxy wars in the Middle East, personnel had specifically told its operatives to with both nations providing arms and other watch for (Jones 2016, 32). This contributed to the assistance to opposing states (Jones 2016, 1). Both Soviets’ apprehension. the American and Soviet leadership had been hurling Able Archer 83 was the command post negative rhetoric towards each other before domestic exercise that was part of Autumn Forge 83 (Jones and international audiences (Hamilton, Jones 2016, 2016, 25). It was conducted during the time period 84). Then, in the spring of 1983, the US forces tested between November 7th, and November 11, 1983. Soviets’ responsiveness by conducting air and sea Able Archer simulated a nuclear release and was a exercises near their borders. The Soviets quickly test of the NATO communication systems (Jones grew intolerant of them (Jones 2016, 27). In August 2016, 25-26, 29). Mentions of a nuclear strike were of that year, NATO began conducting their Autumn broadcast on open radio during this time, while Forge 83 exercises (Jones 2016, 29). Autumn Forge dummy warheads had been used as training props 83 plans had directed noticeable movement of (Jones 2016, 32). These actions were understandably military cargo and large numbers of NATO troops troublesome for Soviet leadership. The actual level across Europe (Jones 2016, 29). Thus, in September, of danger has been debated. According to the Soviet double agent Oleg Gordievsky, the world was required (Jones 2016, 38). “frighteningly close” to nuclear war. Rainer Rupp, an Following the Able Archer event, Ronald East German spy, also believed danger was Reagan’s policy and discourse regarding the Soviet imminent and stated that he had provided Moscow Union changed. The potential for disaster was officials with information to assuage their fears of sobering, and it became an impetus for Reagan to Western invasion during Able Archer (Jones 2016, cooperate with the Soviets to reduce nuclear arms 34-35). Another explanation for the Soviet Union’s (Jones 2016, 47). When Mikhail Gorbachev became inaction could be that their intelligence personnel General Secretary of the Communist Party of the assessed that the threat was negligible. The Soviet Union in 1985, Reagan was ready to meet noticeable increase of Soviet activity was also picked with him. Political and economic factors played a up by U.S. intelligence, but the US did not act, as part too, but the end of the Cold War was largely they had assessed that further escalation was not attributable to the actions of Reagan and Gorbachev. Able Archer Enabled A Policy of Peace: Three Schools of Thought Reviewed NATO’s Able Archer exercises in 1983 One prevailing school of thought is that provoked a Soviet response that almost led to nuclear Soviet officials were acting rationally. The rational war. When President Reagan became aware of the actor model is widely cited in policy analysis, and Soviets’ actions, understandings, and intentions, he assumes that leadership will make “informed, ultimately changed both his mind and his policy calculated decisions that maximize value and regarding the USSR. The available literature reviews perceived benefits” (Norwich University Online the Able Archer events from three different 2017). Soviet intelligence gathered in the 1970s and perspectives: the Soviet Union as rational actor, early 1980s led them to believe the U.S. would attack Reagan as a leader lacking strategic empathy, and the them (PFIAB 1990). The President’s Foreign domestic institutional bias of the United States that Intelligence Advisory Board report is a primary gives rise to hostile containment policies. government document that was requisitioned specifically to determine the nature and reason the Soviet Union and the United States, as well as behind the Soviet Union’s response to NATO’s Able failures in intelligence (2018). Confirmation bias and Archer exercises (PFIAB 1990). The report provides the political structures that support them were behind solid historical background, names key players, and the Able Archer exercises and Reagan’s speech is one of the most recently declassified government denigrating communism, as well as the Soviet and documents regarding Able Archer. It is also more American responses to each other (Hamilton 2018). focused on the environment, and Soviet perceptions, Hamilton drew from declassified Soviet documents than Reagan and his actions. The perceived hostility KGB orders from 1981 and an analysis of the Able of the environment and opposing leadership, is Archer completed in a Soviet military journal in 1984 deemed the primary causation for the Soviet (2018).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J
    STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES 11 Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference by Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Center for Strategic Research Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University Institute for National Strategic Studies National Defense University The Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS) is National Defense University’s (NDU’s) dedicated research arm. INSS includes the Center for Strategic Research, Center for Complex Operations, Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs, Center for Technology and National Security Policy, Center for Transatlantic Security Studies, and Conflict Records Research Center. The military and civilian analysts and staff who comprise INSS and its subcomponents execute their mission by conducting research and analysis, publishing, and participating in conferences, policy support, and outreach. The mission of INSS is to conduct strategic studies for the Secretary of Defense, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Unified Combatant Commands in support of the academic programs at NDU and to perform outreach to other U.S. Government agencies and the broader national security community. Cover: Kathleen Bailey presents evidence of forgeries to the press corps. Credit: The Washington Times Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference Deception, Disinformation, and Strategic Communications: How One Interagency Group Made a Major Difference By Fletcher Schoen and Christopher J. Lamb Institute for National Strategic Studies Strategic Perspectives, No. 11 Series Editor: Nicholas Rostow National Defense University Press Washington, D.C. June 2012 Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Defense Department or any other agency of the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Trust, but Verify: Reagan, Gorbachev, and the INF Treaty William D
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ScholarWorks at WMU Masthead Logo The Hilltop Review Volume 5 Article 5 Issue 1 Fall December 2011 Trust, but Verify: Reagan, Gorbachev, and the INF Treaty William D. Watson Western Michigan University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/hilltopreview Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, Military History Commons, and the Political History Commons Recommended Citation Watson, William D. (2011) "Trust, but Verify: Reagan, Gorbachev, and the INF Treaty," The Hilltop Review: Vol. 5 : Iss. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/hilltopreview/vol5/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Footer Logo College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Hilltop Review by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 22 TRUST, BUT VERIFY: REAGAN, GORBACHEV, AND THE INF TREATY By William D. Watson Department of History [email protected] “Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slen­ derest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by miscalculation, or accident, or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished before they abolish us.1” ­ John F. Kennedy On December 8, 1987, President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev signed the Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty (INF), which aimed to eliminate short and medium range nuclear weapons from their respective national arsenals.
    [Show full text]
  • CIA Files Relating to Heinz Felfe, SS Officer and KGB Spy
    CIA Files Relating to Heinz Felfe, SS officer and KGB Spy Norman J. W. Goda Ohio University Heinz Felfe was an officer in Hitler’s SS who after World War II became a KGB penetration agent, infiltrating West German intelligence for an entire decade. He was arrested by the West German authorities in 1961 and tried in 1963 whereupon the broad outlines of his case became public knowledge. Years after his 1969 release to East Germany (in exchange for three West German spies) Felfe also wrote memoirs and in the 1980s, CIA officers involved with the case granted interviews to author Mary Ellen Reese.1 In accordance with the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act the CIA has released significant formerly classified material on Felfe, including a massive “Name File” consisting of 1,900 pages; a CIA Damage Assessment of the Felfe case completed in 1963; and a 1969 study of Felfe as an example of a successful KGB penetration agent.2 These files represent the first release of official documents concerning the Felfe case, forty-five years after his arrest. The materials are of great historical significance and add detail to the Felfe case in the following ways: • They show in more detail than ever before how Soviet and Western intelligence alike used former Nazi SS officers during the Cold War years. 1 Heinz Felfe, Im Dienst des Gegners: 10 Jahre Moskaus Mann im BND (Hamburg: Rasch & Röhring, 1986); Mary Ellen Reese, General Reinhard Gehlen: The CIA Connection (Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1990), pp. 143-71. 2 Name File Felfe, Heinz, 4 vols., National Archives and Records Administration [NARA], Record Group [RG] 263 (Records of the Central Intelligence Agency), CIA Name Files, Second Release, Boxes 22-23; “Felfe, Heinz: Damage Assessment, NARA, RG 263, CIA Subject Files, Second Release, Box 1; “KGB Exploitation of Heinz Felfe: Successful KGB Penetration of a Western Intelligence Service,” March 1969, NARA, RG 263, CIA Subject Files, Second Release, Box 1.
    [Show full text]
  • COLD WAR, DETENTE & Post- Cold War Scenario
    Lecture #01 Political Science COLD WAR, DETENTE & Post- Cold War Scenario For B. A.(Hons.) & M.A. Patliputra University, Patna E-content / Notes by Prof. (Dr.) S. P. Shahi Professor of Political Science & Principal A. N. College, Patna - 800013 Patliputra University, Patna, Bihar E-mail: [email protected] 1 Outline of Lecture Cold War: An Introduction Meaning of Cold War Causes of Cold War DETENTE End of Cold War International Scenario after Cold War Conclusion Cold War: An Introduction After the Second World War, the USA and USSR became two Super Powers. One nation tried to reduce the power of other. Indirectly the competition between the super powers led to the Cold War. It is a type of diplomatic war or ideological war. The Cold War was a period of geopolitical tension or conflict between two superpowers i.e., the United States of America and USSR, after World War-II. 2 The period is generally considered to span the Truman Doctrine (1947) to the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1991), but the first phase of the Cold War began immediately after the end of the Second World War in 1945. The conflict was based around the ideological and geopolitical struggle for global influence by the two powers. United States of America was a representative of Capitalistic ideology and Soviet Union was a representative of Socialist ideology. The United States created the NATO military alliance in 1949 in apprehension of a Soviet attack and termed their global policy against Soviet influence containment. The Soviet Union formed the Warsaw Pact in 1955 in response to NATO.
    [Show full text]
  • The Marshall Plan and the Beginnings of Comecon
    THE MARSHALL PLAN AND THE BEGINNINGS OF COMECON Cristian BENȚE Abstract: The integration of the Eastern-European states into the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence at the end of the Second World War represented a complex process that aimed all the vital sectors in those states. In a relatively short period of time, the political, economic, social and cultural life of the Eastern-European states was radically transformed, according to the models imposed by Moscow. The Soviet Union imposed its control over Eastern Europe because it had strategic, political, military and economic interests in this region. The states in this region became, after the Soviet Union broke relations with its former Western allies, the main suppliers of resources for the recovery of the soviet economy. The soviet control over the Eastern-European economies took many forms: from the brutal transfer of raw materials, finite products and technology during the first years after the war, to more subtle methods, as the establishment of “mixed enterprises”, the initialization of bilateral agreements and finally by establishing the COMECON. The establishment of the COMECON in January 1949 was one of the measures taken by Moscow in order to counteract the effects of the Marshall Plan and to consolidate the Soviet influence in the satellite-states from Eastern Europe. This measure was preceded by other actions meant to strengthen Moscow’s political, economic and ideological control over these states. Keywords: Marshall Plan, COMECON, Cold War economic integration, Iron Curtain The launch of the Marshall Plan in the summer of 1947 and its rejection by the Soviet Union represents a turning point in the evolution of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • A Killing That Shook the KGB the EARLY Years of the Gorbachev Era Saw a Change in the KGB's Attitude to Terrorism
    How Moscow supported assassinations overseas until Gorbachev came to power A killing that shook the KGB THE EARLY years of the Gorbachev era saw a change in the KGB's attitude to terrorism. Moscow's growing distaste for some of its Third World terrorist associates was particu- larly evident in the case of Colonel Gadaffi. The turning point in that relationship was the demonstration outside the Libyan "Peo- ple's Bureau" in London in April 1984 when Death that disenchanted Moscow: WPC Fletcher and a tribute where she was killed a Libyan intelligence man opened fire and killed WPC Yvonne Fletcher. which refused to have them followed up. were attacking him in the western media. Pravda's report of the shooting was The KGB residency in Dublin was usually Moscow Centre made available the re- unusually frank, but the KGB knew more reluctant to make contact with any illegal sources of a secret KGB laboratory. The first than Pravda told its readers. The day after group because of what it regarded as the near- target was another Bulgarian emigre living in the shooting, the London residency received impossibility of keeping secrets in the Irish England. While on holiday on the Continent, a telegram" from Moscow saying the KGB Republic. Officers of the KGB claimed they surfaces in the room he was using were had reliable information that the shooting could learn a surprising amount merely by smeared with a poison which, once absorbed had been ordered by Gadaffi. An experi- listening to conversations in public houses 'through the skin, would prove fatal and leave enced hitman from the Libyan intelligence frequented by Sinn Fein supporters.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War Triumphalism and the Reagan Factor
    Cold War Triumphalism and the Reagan Factor Onur İŞÇİ* Abstract Key Words Three decades after Gorbachev’s 1986 Cold War Triumphalism, Reagan Victory Glasnost campaign, the sudden death of School, US-Soviet Confrontation, Demise of the the Soviet Union still continues to keep USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev. diplomatic historians busy with its momentous implications. The mutually excluding political realms of the Cold War forged a conservative In 1986 the Union of Soviet Socialist American historical discourse, which perceived the Soviet Union as an evil empire. Existing Republics finally became the toast of biases against Moscow continued after the American diplomats, who believed Soviet collapse and were conjured up in a new that global harmony was a step closer. scholarly genre that might properly be termed as After four decades of superpower “the Reagan Victory School”. The adherents of conflict, the new Russia was seen as a this school suggest that President Reagan’s resolve and unsophisticated yet faithfully pragmatic long lost friend that reemerged from its foreign policy designs – the Strategic Defense ashes, promising to adopt democracy Initiative (SDI) in particular – became the and a liberal market economy. Mikhail major factor behind the Soviet Union’s demise Gorbachev’s Glasnost and Perestroika and America’s “triumph” after the Cold War. signaled the end of a modern period Looking at several influential monographs on the subject, this paper seeks to demonstrate the in history that had been economically well nuanced yet often mono-causal notions and politically exhausting for virtually vocalized by American scholars of Cold War the whole world. Faced with a serious triumphalism.
    [Show full text]
  • HJS 'Putin Sees and Hears It All' Report.Qxd
    Putin SeeS and HearS it all: How ruSSia’S intelligence agencieS Menace tHe uK BY DR ANDREW FOXALL DEMOCRACY | FREEDOM | HUMAN RIGHTS November 2018 First published in 2018 by The Henry Jackson Society. The Henry Jackson Society Millbank Tower 21-24 Millbank London SW1P 4QP Registered charity no. 1140489 Tel: +44 (0)20 7340 4520 www.henryjacksonsociety.org © The Henry Jackson Society, 2018. All rights reserved. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and are not necessarily indicative of those of The Henry Jackson Society or its Trustees. Title: “PuTiN SEES AND HEARS iT ALL: HOW RuSSiA’S iNTELLigENcE AgENciES MENAcE THE uK” By: Dr Andrew Foxall Putin SeeS and HearS it all: How ruSSia’S intelligence agencieS Menace tHe uK BY DR ANDREW FOXALL November 2018 PuTiN SEES AND HEARS iT ALL “Dr. Foxall’s report forcefully reminds us that Russian Intelligence activity in the West is still large scale and intrusive, and that we need to devote significant resources and expertise ourselves to monitoring and blunting this threat to our national security. As during the Cold War an effective counterintelligence capability remains an essential part of our own intelligence and security community.” Sir richard dearlove KcMg oBe chief of the Secret intelligence Service (Mi6) (1999-2004) “Anyone who is relaxed or complacent about Russian intelligence activity in the United Kingdom should read this Report. Not only have we experienced the murder of Litvinenko and the attempted murder of the Skripals on British soil, Britain and the West as a whole face an unrelenting assault from Putin’s bloated intelligence and security agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of the Cold War
    Timeline of the Cold War 1945 Defeat of Germany and Japan February 4-11: Yalta Conference meeting of FDR, Churchill, Stalin - the 'Big Three' Soviet Union has control of Eastern Europe. The Cold War Begins May 8: VE Day - Victory in Europe. Germany surrenders to the Red Army in Berlin July: Potsdam Conference - Germany was officially partitioned into four zones of occupation. August 6: The United States drops atomic bomb on Hiroshima (20 kiloton bomb 'Little Boy' kills 80,000) August 8: Russia declares war on Japan August 9: The United States drops atomic bomb on Nagasaki (22 kiloton 'Fat Man' kills 70,000) August 14 : Japanese surrender End of World War II August 15: Emperor surrender broadcast - VJ Day 1946 February 9: Stalin hostile speech - communism & capitalism were incompatible March 5 : "Sinews of Peace" Iron Curtain Speech by Winston Churchill - "an "iron curtain" has descended on Europe" March 10: Truman demands Russia leave Iran July 1: Operation Crossroads with Test Able was the first public demonstration of America's atomic arsenal July 25: America's Test Baker - underwater explosion 1947 Containment March 12 : Truman Doctrine - Truman declares active role in Greek Civil War June : Marshall Plan is announced setting a precedent for helping countries combat poverty, disease and malnutrition September 2: Rio Pact - U.S. meet 19 Latin American countries and created a security zone around the hemisphere 1948 Containment February 25 : Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia March 2: Truman's Loyalty Program created to catch Cold War
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolving Interpretations of the Origins of the Cold War
    Háskóli Íslands Hugvísindasvið Rússneska The Evolving Interpretations of the Origins of the Cold War Have Historians Reached a Consensus on the Origins of the Cold War? Ritgerð til B.A. prófs Saga Helgason Morris Kt.: 011097-3329 Leiðbeinandi: Jón Ólafsson 1 Abstract The Cold War and its origins have been a constant source of debate among historians and quite rightly so. With no access to Soviet archives until 1991 and the outcome of the hostilities unknown, historians were left to draw their own conclusions from official documents and published propaganda. Hence, as with any historical event, interpretations have changed over time. In this paper, I set out to explore whether assessments have shifted to a degree whereby historians today have come together in their understanding of the origins of the Cold War. In order to answer this question, an investigation is required to explore how and why these historical perspectives have changed. First, the two traditional viewpoints of the Cold War are discussed, namely the orthodox and revisionist interpretations. The orthodox view places responsibility on the USSR for the development of the Cold War whereas the revisionist view argues that the hostilities developed as a result of reacting to one another’s actions. Subsequently, the viewpoints of a selected group of post-Cold War historians are explored. Gaddis argues that hostilities between the United States and Soviet Union had their roots in the nations’ different perceptions of security. Zubok and Pleshakov maintain that Stalin’s character and diplomatic actions were of particular importance in the onset of the Cold War.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Soviet Collapse and the Charm of Hindsight 75
    The Soviet Collapse and the Charm of Hindsight 75 Chapter 4 The Soviet Collapse and the Charm of Hindsight Rodric Braithwaite Those on the spot always get some things wrong: memory later be- trays them. Those who subsequently try to disentangle the story always miss part of the context. In politics, perceptions and emotions are as important as reason. The theme of what follows is that we cannot un- derstand the causes and consequences of the Soviet collapse unless we take every account of its deep roots in the past and the strong emotions that accompanied it. It is of course imprudent, or even impertinent, for foreigners to pontificate about how “most Russians” think or feel. But it is an essential part of the story. In this deliberately personal account I attempt to recreate how the collapse looked to me at the time and in the aftermath, drawing on a detailed diary, my reporting to London, and on later writings. I. How it Looked at the Time A Kind of Democracy Poland shows the way I witnessed two attempts to bring a kind of democracy to the com- munist world. The Polish experiment of the late 1950s and the Soviet experiment of the late 1980s are now largely forgotten or ignored. Both are significant for the history of the time, and for an understanding of the events of today. In October 1956 the Poles expelled their Soviet advisers, abolished the collective farms, allowed people to travel abroad, and gave a de- gree of freedom to the press. They were encouraged by Khrushchev’s denunciation of Stalin, and driven by a combination of patriotism, a 75 76 exiting the cold war, entering a new world liberal faction inside the Party, and an alliance between students and workers.
    [Show full text]