Gendering Soviet Dissent

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Gendering Soviet Dissent GENDERING SOVIET DISSENT: HOW AND WHY THE WOMAN QUESTION WAS EXCLUDED FROM THE AGENDA OF SOVIET DISSIDENTS (1964 – 1982). By Svetlana Zakharova Submitted to Central European University Department of Gender Studies In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of European Master in Women‘s and Gender History Supervisor: Professor Francisca de Haan Budapest, Hungary CEU eTD Collection 2013 Abstract This thesis is devoted to the phenomenon of Soviet dissent during the years when Leonid Brezhnev was the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1964 – 1982). This thesis aspires to contribute to the historiography of Soviet dissent by considering it as a complex and diversified phenomenon, by analyzing the gender dimension of Soviet liberal dissent and by placing the activities of dissenters in the wider context of the Cold War competition. In this thesis I focused on Soviet liberal dissent and explored the questions why the so- called ―woman question‖ was excluded from the agenda of Soviet dissidents, why women are excluded from the historiography of Soviet dissent and how the Cold War competition between the Soviet Union and the United States of America affected these issues. Based on research in the Open Society Archives in Budapest, I argued in my thesis that the Cold War and the situation at the international arena had and still have a profound impact on Soviet history, and particularly, on the history of Soviet oppositional movements. Moreover, I argue that the fact that almost all Soviet dissidents ignored the woman question was preconditioned by both the domestic situation in the Soviet Union and the global situation in the international arena, and that these two structural levels should be considered together. More broadly, I also tried to explore how the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union affected the ways, in which the history of the USSR and state socialism is constructed in contemporary historiography, and to challenge the approach that blurs more than seventy years of Soviet history into ahistorical sameness and replaces it with the image of Stalin‘s totalitarian rule. CEU eTD Collection ii Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my genuine gratitude to my supervisor Professor Francisca de Haan for her patient guidance, critique, thoughtful advices and encouragement, which enormously helped me to conduct my research and to write this work. I am also particularly grateful to my family and friends who were always supportive and encouraging in spite of everything that was going around, and, especially, to Tatiana Prusakova without whom this work would never have been written. CEU eTD Collection iii Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................ iii Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 Chapter 1 - Theoretical chapter .................................................................................................... 14 1.1 The Cold War and the New Cold War History ............................................................................... 14 1.2 Gender order in the Soviet Union ..................................................................................................... 18 1.3 Dissidence and dissent in the Soviet Union .................................................................................. 23 Chapter 2 - Historical background: why was the woman question re-opened in the Soviet Union during the Brezhnev years? .................................................................................. 32 2.1 The period of détente: origins, spirit, and consequences ........................................................ 33 2.2 Leonid Brezhnev’s years: the Era of stagnation or the Golden Age of the Soviet history? .............................................................................................................................................................................. 40 2.3 The Gender Order in the Soviet Union during Brezhnev’s years: re-opening of the woman question ............................................................................................................................................. 46 2.3.1 Transformations of the gender order in the Soviet Union: from 1917 to 1964 .................... 46 2.3.2 Gender order in the Soviet Union during Brezhnev’s years .......................................................... 51 Chapter 3 - Soviet dissidents: a history of Soviet dissent and of women’s exclusion from the historical narratives ........................................................................................................ 57 3.1 Soviet dissidents: A history of the movement .............................................................................. 57 3.1.1 Soviet dissent:a new milestone in the history of Russian oppositional movements or a product of the Soviet epoch? ................................................................................................................................. 58 3.1.2 The phenomenon of Soviet dissent from a historical perspective .............................................. 61 3.1.3 Samizdat: one of the key elements of Soviet dissent ........................................................................ 67 3.1.4 The Moscow Helsinki Group and the woman question: inclusive exclusion .......................... 70 3.2 Женщина и Россия [Woman and Russia]: first feminist writing from the Soviet Union? .............................................................................................................................................................................. 73 3.3 Soviet dissidents in the Western and Soviet mass media: constructing the image of Soviet dissent .................................................................................................................................................. 77 3.3.1 The image of dissidents in the Soviet mass media ............................................................................ 78 3.3.2 The image of Soviet dissidents in the Western mass media .......................................................... 82 Chapter 4 - Gendering Soviet dissent: the domestic factors explaining why the woman question was absent from the Soviet dissidents’ agenda ..................................... 87 4.1 Women’s roles and responsibilities within the Soviet dissident movement .................... 88 4.2 Soviet dissidents and the woman question: the internal reasons of indifference .......... 90 Chapter 5 - Gendering Soviet dissent: external factors explaining why the woman question was absent from the Soviet dissidents’ agenda ..................................................... 99 5.1 The Cold War Competition and Women’s Rights: who was at the forefront? ................. 100 5.2 Soviet liberal dissidents and their contacts with the West ................................................... 108 CEU eTD Collection 5.3 Human rights and women’s rights ................................................................................................. 112 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 119 Bibliography ....................................................................................................................................... 121 iv Introduction This thesis analyses the phenomenon of Soviet dissent in the Soviet Union during the years of Leonid Brezhnev (1964 – 1982), the so-called Era of stagnation. Scholars widely agree on the significance of Soviet dissent for the development of the human rights movement in the USSR and the liberalization (and even dissolution) of the Soviet Union. The work of the people who tried to attract attention to the violation of human rights in the Soviet Union challenged Soviet authorities‘ monopoly on the truth and provided alternatives for the development of the country. However, the main body of historiography considers the phenomenon of Soviet dissent almost exclusively as liberal dissent, and the activities of liberal dissidents are surrounded by myths about the ―heroic dissidents‖1 that for a long time impeded critical historical analysis. This thesis aspires to move forward towards a re-thinking of Soviet dissent by considering it as a complex and diversified phenomenon; it does so by analyzing the gender dimension of Soviet liberal dissent and by placing the activities of dissenters in the wider context of the Cold War competition. Despite the fact that women actively participated in the Soviet dissident movement, they are mostly excluded from the mainstream narrative about heroic Soviet dissent. This situation is not unique: as Shana Penn pointed out in her 2005 book Solidarity’s Secret: the women who defeated communism in Poland, women are also excluded from the historiography about Poland‘s Solidarity, although, as the author convincingly shows, they were active participants in the movement.2 But according to historian Francisca de Haan, ―the question is not only who or what were excluded, but what worldview was constructed as a result.‖3 The exclusion of
Recommended publications
  • The Collapse and Recovery of Subjective Well-Being in Post-Communist Russia
    Ronald Inglehart, Roberto Foa, Eduard Ponarin, Christian Welzel UNDERSTANDING THE RUSSIAN MALAISE: THE COLLAPSE AND RECOVERY OF SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING IN POST-COMMUNIST RUSSIA BASIC RESEARCH PROGRAM WORKING PAPERS SERIES: SOCIOLOGY WP BRP 32/SOC/2013 This Working Paper is an output of a research project implemented at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE). Any opinions or claims contained in this Working Paper do not necessarily reflect the views of HSE. Ronald Inglehart1, Roberto Foa2, Eduard Ponarin3 and Christian Welzel4 UNDERSTANDING THE RUSSIAN MALAISE: THE COLLAPSE AND RECOVERY OF SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING IN POST-COMMUNIST RUSSIA This article analyzes the decline of subjective well-being and a sense of national self- esteem among the Russian people that was linked with the collapse of the communist economic, political and social systems in the 1990s—and a subsequent recovery of subjective well-being that began more recently. Subjective well-being is closely linked with economic development, democracy and physical health. The people of rich countries tend show higher levels than those of poor countries, but already in 1982, the Russia people ranked lower on happiness and life satisfaction than the people of much poorer countries such as Nigeria or India; external signs of this malaise were rising alcoholism and declining male life expectancy. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union, subjective well-being in Russia fell to levels never seen before, reaching a low point in 1995 when most Russians described themselves as unhappy and dissatisfied with their lives as a whole. Since 2000, this trend has been reversing itself, but in 2011 Russia still ranked slightly lower than its level in 1981.
    [Show full text]
  • Helsinki Watch Committees in the Soviet Republics: Implications For
    FINAL REPORT T O NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARC H TITLE : HELSINKI WATCH COMMITTEES IN THE SOVIET REPUBLICS : IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SOVIET NATIONALITY QUESTIO N AUTHORS : Yaroslav Bilinsky Tönu Parming CONTRACTOR : University of Delawar e PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS : Yaroslav Bilinsky, Project Director an d Co-Principal Investigato r Tönu Parming, Co-Principal Investigato r COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER : 621- 9 The work leading to this report was supported in whole or in part fro m funds provided by the National Council for Soviet and East European Research . NOTICE OF INTENTION TO APPLY FOR COPYRIGH T This work has been requested for manuscrip t review for publication . It is not to be quote d without express written permission by the authors , who hereby reserve all the rights herein . Th e contractual exception to this is as follows : The [US] Government will have th e right to publish or release Fina l Reports, but only in same forma t in which such Final Reports ar e delivered to it by the Council . Th e Government will not have the righ t to authorize others to publish suc h Final Reports without the consent o f the authors, and the individua l researchers will have the right t o apply for and obtain copyright o n any work products which may b e derived from work funded by th e Council under this Contract . ii EXEC 1 Overall Executive Summary HELSINKI WATCH COMMITTEES IN THE SOVIET REPUBLICS : IMPLICATIONS FOR THE SOVIET NATIONALITY QUESTION by Yaroslav Bilinsky, University of Delawar e d Tönu Parming, University of Marylan August 1, 1975, after more than two years of intensive negotiations, 35 Head s of Governments--President Ford of the United States, Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada , Secretary-General Brezhnev of the USSR, and the Chief Executives of 32 othe r European States--signed the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperatio n in Europe (CSCE) .
    [Show full text]
  • Dissidents Versus Communists
    DISSIDENTS VERSUS COMMUNISTS An Examination of the Soviet Dissidence Movement Matthew Williams Professor Transchel History 419 May 12, 2016 Williams 1 On February 25, 1956, Nikita Khrushchev gave a speech to the Twentieth Congress and to the Communist Party stating that Joseph Stalin was responsible for all of the empire’s then-current issues. He also gave insight into the criminal actions performed by the man during his lifetime. This speech was called the “Secret Speech” as it was not publicized at first, but once word got out about the true nature of Stalin, people began to doubt everything they knew to be true. Khrushchev decreased the censorship and restrictions on people and also freed millions of political prisoners from Gulags, beginning what would come to be referred to as the “thaw”. Many people had practically worshipped Stalin and knew him to represent the Communist party’s creed of infallibility. The tarnishing of his image led many people to seriously doubt the capabilities of the party.1 As truths came out and people began to discuss issues, there was increasing dissatisfaction with the Communist Party and a community of dissenters was born. This community of dissenters would ultimately keep the fight for freedom going long after the end of the thaw era, until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. This paper will examine the dissent movement, from its roots in the end of the Stalin era to the collapse in 1991; it will address how the dissent movement came into being, and how it evolved as new challenges were presented to it.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernism and Andrei Amalrik's Nose! Nose? No-Se!
    Fall 1992 89 Dark Images of Dissidence: Modernism and Andrei Amalrik's Nose! Nose? No-se! Nancy Kindelan I Critics describe the dissident drama of Andrei Amalrik (1938-1980), especially Nose! Nose? No-se! (1968), as following the Russian tradition of the absurd, grotesque, and satire. Amalrik's adaptation of Gogol's short story, "The Nose" (1936), and his reading of Ionesco, Beckett, and the futuristic plays of Khlebnikov, link Amalrik to prior and modern perceptions of absurdist literary and dramatic techniques. In the absurdist world, reality is depicted as disjointed and disoriented, complete with characters who cannot communicate, fear authority and define life in isolation. Although it appears that Amalrik's play and the absurdist's world are similar, there is evidence that this play's intricate form allows for multiple interpretations. In Twentieth-Century Drama, Harold Segel notes that while there is a connection between Amalrik's plays and the absurdist and grotesque drama, "the complexity of his plays sets him apart." Particularly, he states that the "strange configurations of character and incident often make interpretation a matter of intuition or impression" (396). Nose! Nose? No-se! has received some literary and dramatic attention; however, little consideration has been afforded to how this play's "complexity," and the "strange configurations of character and incident" have combined to shape Amalrik's dramatic form. Russian dramatic criticism specifies that German expressionism played a minor role in the development of their drama; however, while there are no significant Russian expressionistic playwrights, Amalrik's play contains significant components of this form. More Nancy Kindelan is an Assistant Professor in the Theatre Department at Northeastern University.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Russian Literaturepart I Russian Literature: Background, Foreground, Creative Cognition
    The Mythopoetic “Vectors” of Russian LiteraturePART I Russian Literature: Background, Foreground, Creative Cognition Chapter 1 The Mythopoetic “Vectors” of 27. Russian Literature1 Any national literature is to some significant extent a mirror held up to its people’s collective countenance: its myths, aspirations, national triumphs and traumas, current ideologies, historical understanding, lin guistic tra- ditions. But it is also more than that — more than a reflection in the glass of what has come before and what is now, even as one glances into it, passing from view. It is, in a real sense, generative of new meaning, and thus capable of shaping that countenance in the future. For the society that takes its literary products seriously, the text of a novel or poem can be a kind of genetic code2 for predicting, not concrete outcomes or actual progeny, but something no less pregnant with future action: the forms of a culture’s historical imagination. The variations seem limitless, and yet how is it we are able to determine any given work of literature is clearly identifiable as Russian? Why could Flaubert’s Emma Bovary in some sense not be imagin- ed by the great realist who created Anna Karenina? How is Dostoevsky’s 1 Originally appeared 2 See Chapter 4 in Part 1 as part 1 of the essay/chapter of the present volume with its “Russian Literature,” in Cambridge discussion of how genes and Companion to Modern Russian “memes” work together to create Culture, ed. Nicholas Rzhevsky an individual’s and a culture’s (Cambridge: Cambridge University views of itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”?
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 8-1974 Systemic Adaptation: Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”? Phillip A. Petersen Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Petersen, Phillip A., "Systemic Adaptation: Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”?" (1974). Master's Theses. 2588. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2588 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SYSTEMIC ADAPTATION: CAN THE SOVIET SYSTEM ACCOMMODATE THE "DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT"? by Phillip A. Petersen A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1974 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to begin by thanking Dr. Craig N. Andrews of Wayne State University for introducing me to the phenomenon of dissent in the Soviet Union. As for the project itself, Dr. John Gorgone of Western Michigan University not only suggested the approach to the phenomenon, but also had a fundamental role in shaping the perspective from which observations were made. The success of the research phase of the project is due, in great part, to the encouragement and assistance of Lt. Col. Carlton Willis of the Army Security Agency Training Center and School.
    [Show full text]
  • Post-Soviet Political Party Development in Russia: Obstacles to Democratic Consolidation
    POST-SOVIET POLITICAL PARTY DEVELOPMENT IN RUSSIA: OBSTACLES TO DEMOCRATIC CONSOLIDATION Evguenia Lenkevitch Bachelor of Arts (Honours), SFU 2005 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS In the Department of Political Science O Evguenia Lenkevitch 2007 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY 2007 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Evguenia Lenkevitch Degree: Master of Arts, Department of Political Science Title of Thesis: Post-Soviet Political Party Development in Russia: Obstacles to Democratic Consolidation Examining Committee: Chair: Dr. Lynda Erickson, Professor Department of Political Science Dr. Lenard Cohen, Professor Senior Supervisor Department of Political Science Dr. Alexander Moens, Professor Supervisor Department of Political Science Dr. llya Vinkovetsky, Assistant Professor External Examiner Department of History Date DefendedlApproved: August loth,2007 The author, whose copyright is declared on the title page of this work, has granted to Simon Fraser University the right to lend this thesis, project or extended essay to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. The author has further granted permission to Simon Fraser University to keep or make a digital copy for use in its circulating collection (currently available to the public at the 'Institutional Repository" link of the SFU Library website <www.lib.sfu.ca> at: <http://ir.lib.sfu.ca/handle/1892/112>) and, without changing the content, to translate the thesis/project or extended essays, if technically possible, to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation of the digital work.
    [Show full text]
  • Poetry Sampler
    POETRY SAMPLER 2020 www.academicstudiespress.com CONTENTS Voices of Jewish-Russian Literature: An Anthology Edited by Maxim D. Shrayer New York Elegies: Ukrainian Poems on the City Edited by Ostap Kin Words for War: New Poems from Ukraine Edited by Oksana Maksymchuk & Max Rosochinsky The White Chalk of Days: The Contemporary Ukrainian Literature Series Anthology Compiled and edited by Mark Andryczyk www.academicstudiespress.com Voices of Jewish-Russian Literature An Anthology Edited, with Introductory Essays by Maxim D. Shrayer Table of Contents Acknowledgments xiv Note on Transliteration, Spelling of Names, and Dates xvi Note on How to Use This Anthology xviii General Introduction: The Legacy of Jewish-Russian Literature Maxim D. Shrayer xxi Early Voices: 1800s–1850s 1 Editor’s Introduction 1 Leyba Nevakhovich (1776–1831) 3 From Lament of the Daughter of Judah (1803) 5 Leon Mandelstam (1819–1889) 11 “The People” (1840) 13 Ruvim Kulisher (1828–1896) 16 From An Answer to the Slav (1849; pub. 1911) 18 Osip Rabinovich (1817–1869) 24 From The Penal Recruit (1859) 26 Seething Times: 1860s–1880s 37 Editor’s Introduction 37 Lev Levanda (1835–1888) 39 From Seething Times (1860s; pub. 1871–73) 42 Grigory Bogrov (1825–1885) 57 “Childhood Sufferings” from Notes of a Jew (1863; pub. 1871–73) 59 vi Table of Contents Rashel Khin (1861–1928) 70 From The Misfit (1881) 72 Semyon Nadson (1862–1887) 77 From “The Woman” (1883) 79 “I grew up shunning you, O most degraded nation . .” (1885) 80 On the Eve: 1890s–1910s 81 Editor’s Introduction 81 Ben-Ami (1854–1932) 84 Preface to Collected Stories and Sketches (1898) 86 David Aizman (1869–1922) 90 “The Countrymen” (1902) 92 Semyon Yushkevich (1868–1927) 113 From The Jews (1903) 115 Vladimir Jabotinsky (1880–1940) 124 “In Memory of Herzl” (1904) 126 Sasha Cherny (1880–1932) 130 “The Jewish Question” (1909) 132 “Judeophobes” (1909) 133 S.
    [Show full text]
  • "China, the Fun House Mirror: Soviet Reactions to The
    UC Berkeley Recent Work Title China, the Fun House Mirror: Soviet Reactions to the Chinese Cultural Revolution, 1966- 1969 Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0fs1526m Author McGuire, Elizabeth Publication Date 2001-05-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California University of California, Berkeley CHINA, THE FUN HOUSE MIRROR: SOVIET REACTIONS TO THE CHINESE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, 1966-1969 Elizabeth McGuire Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Working Paper Series This PDF document preserves the page numbering of the printed version for accuracy of citation. When viewed with Acrobat Reader, the printed page numbers will not correspond with the electronic numbering. The Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies (BPS) is a leading center for graduate training on the Soviet Union and its successor states in the United States. Founded in 1983 as part of a nationwide effort to reinvigorate the field, BPSs mission has been to train a new cohort of scholars and professionals in both cross-disciplinary social science methodology and theory as well as the history, languages, and cultures of the former Soviet Union; to carry out an innovative program of scholarly research and publication on the Soviet Union and its successor states; and to undertake an active public outreach program for the local community, other national and international academic centers, and the U.S. and other governments. Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies University of California, Berkeley Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 260 Stephens Hall #2304 Berkeley, California 94720-2304 Tel: (510) 643-6737 [email protected] http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~bsp/ CHINA, THE FUN HOUSE MIRROR: SOVIET REACTIONS TO THE CHINESE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, 1966-1969 Elizabeth McGuire Spring 2001 Elizabeth McGuire is a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights and History a Challenge for Education
    edited by Rainer Huhle HUMAN RIGHTS AND HISTORY A CHALLENGE FOR EDUCATION edited by Rainer Huhle H UMAN The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Genocide Convention of 1948 were promulgated as an unequivocal R response to the crimes committed under National Socialism. Human rights thus served as a universal response to concrete IGHTS historical experiences of injustice, which remains valid to the present day. As such, the Universal Declaration and the Genocide Convention serve as a key link between human rights education and historical learning. AND This volume elucidates the debates surrounding the historical development of human rights after 1945. The authors exam- H ine a number of specific human rights, including the prohibition of discrimination, freedom of opinion, the right to asylum ISTORY and the prohibition of slavery and forced labor, to consider how different historical experiences and legal traditions shaped their formulation. Through the examples of Latin America and the former Soviet Union, they explore the connections · A CHALLENGE FOR EDUCATION between human rights movements and human rights education. Finally, they address current challenges in human rights education to elucidate the role of historical experience in education. ISBN-13: 978-3-9810631-9-6 © Foundation “Remembrance, Responsibility and Future” Stiftung “Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft” Lindenstraße 20–25 10969 Berlin Germany Tel +49 (0) 30 25 92 97- 0 Fax +49 (0) 30 25 92 -11 [email protected] www.stiftung-evz.de Editor: Rainer Huhle Translation and Revision: Patricia Szobar Coordination: Christa Meyer Proofreading: Julia Brooks and Steffi Arendsee Typesetting and Design: dakato…design. David Sernau Printing: FATA Morgana Verlag ISBN-13: 978-3-9810631-9-6 Berlin, February 2010 Photo Credits: Cover page, left: Stèphane Hessel at the conference “Rights, that make us Human Beings” in Nuremberg, November 2008.
    [Show full text]
  • (Penguin Classics) by Clarence Brown
    Read Online and Download Ebook THE PORTABLE TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIAN READER (PENGUIN CLASSICS) BY CLARENCE BROWN DOWNLOAD EBOOK : THE PORTABLE TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIAN READER (PENGUIN CLASSICS) BY CLARENCE BROWN PDF Click link bellow and free register to download ebook: THE PORTABLE TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIAN READER (PENGUIN CLASSICS) BY CLARENCE BROWN DOWNLOAD FROM OUR ONLINE LIBRARY THE PORTABLE TWENTIETH-CENTURY RUSSIAN READER (PENGUIN CLASSICS) BY CLARENCE BROWN PDF Reserve The Portable Twentieth-Century Russian Reader (Penguin Classics) By Clarence Brown is one of the priceless worth that will make you always abundant. It will certainly not suggest as abundant as the cash give you. When some people have lack to deal with the life, individuals with lots of e-books sometimes will certainly be better in doing the life. Why must be book The Portable Twentieth-Century Russian Reader (Penguin Classics) By Clarence Brown It is in fact not suggested that publication The Portable Twentieth-Century Russian Reader (Penguin Classics) By Clarence Brown will certainly give you power to get to everything. The book is to review and what we suggested is guide that is reviewed. You can likewise see exactly how the book qualifies The Portable Twentieth-Century Russian Reader (Penguin Classics) By Clarence Brown and also numbers of e-book collections are offering here. Language Notes Text: English, Russian (translation) About the Author Clarence Brown is an acclaimed translator and professor of comparative literature at Princeton University. He is
    [Show full text]
  • In March 1972 the Leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet
    MueRecognitionller in Return for Détente? Recognition in Return for Détente? Brezhnev, the EEC, and the Moscow Treaty with West Germany, 1970–1973 ✣ Wolfgang Mueller Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/jcws/article-pdf/13/4/79/697792/jcws_a_00167.pdf by guest on 24 September 2021 In March 1972 the leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), Leonid Brezhnev, unexpectedly suggested that the Soviet Union might be willing to recognize the European Economic Community (EEC). Until that point, the Soviet Union had refused to recognize the EEC and had regularly and vigorously attacked it as a “community of monopolists” and a stalking horse for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Brezhnev’s predecessor, Nikita Khrushchev, had conveyed similar signals re- garding possible recognition in 1962, but he never turned the idea into reality. In contrast, some ten years later, Brezhnev inspired the start of negotiations between the EEC and the Soviet bloc’s Council of Mutual Economic Assis- tance (CMEA). This article draws on Soviet archival documents as well as Western and Russian publications and memoirs to analyze the background, circumstances, and consequences of Brezhnev’s initiative. The article gives special attention to the following questions: What convinced Brezhnev and his colleagues in 1972 to change their hitherto uniformly negative assessment of the EEC? Was this change the result of a major policy reassessment or simply a byproduct of other considerations? How was the initiative linked with broader Soviet foreign policy goals? Why was it not ultimately successful? In answering these questions, the article traces the external and internal factors that inspired the Soviet initiative, including the EEC enlargement process, East-West détente, CMEA integra- tion, Ostpolitik, and Soviet and East European economic and political develop- ments.
    [Show full text]