DOCSLIB.ORG

Communist-Party-Of-The-Soviet-Union

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Communist-Party-Of-The-Soviet-Union Welcome Letter Dear Delegates, I am proud to welcome you to the 35th iteration of the North American Model United Nations at the world-renowned University of Toronto. I and the rest of our great crisis staff look forward to working with you and allowing you to demonstrate your research, teamwork, and negotiation skills through the medium of Model UN. For a brief introduction of myself, I am pursuing a double major in International Relations and East Asian Studies. I have done Model UN for three years and this will be my first time chairing a committee. This background guide provides a (somewhat) brief overview of the historical situation and important issues to the committee. Also included is a short list of potential research material, but I still urge you to do your own research on the topic. As you all know, the scenario that you will be dealing with is historically important as the Fall of the Soviet Union ended the Cold War and basically created the unipolar world that we now live in. But the USSR doesn’t have to fall, as you and other delegates will be given the reins of a weakened but still powerful Communist Party. Will you give more power to local leaders and create a more federalized union? Or will you rule with an iron fist and usher in a new age of Soviet strength and control not seen since Joseph Stalin? You might even concede to fate and work towards peaceful dissolution. Acting as a government bureaucrat, a military general, or even a secret police chief, you must make a choice for the future of the union and then do everything possible to accomplish that. Afterall, politics in the Soviet Union is a blood sport. Whatever you choose, I look forward to meeting you all and I hope you enjoy NAMUN 2020. Glory to the Eternal Socialist Revolution, Comrade Nathan Ye 1 Introduction The Soviet Union. To some it is a ray of hope for exploited workers and disadvantaged peoples across the world. To others, it is an “evil empire”, as succinctly stated by President Ronald Reagan, an enemy of freedom determined to keep an iron grip over its own people. Whatever view you have of the USSR, it is undeniable that by 1990 the Union is in a state of danger not seen since Operation Barbarossa in 1941. Plagued by longstanding economic problems, resurgent nationalisms, elite infighting, and a general loss of confidence by its population, the future of the Soviet Union is dark and discouraging. The notoriously lethargic Soviet economic system had begun to fail by the late 1970s and the young leader of Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, attempted to fix it with a series of free- market-inspired reforms known as “Perestroika.” These however failed to accomplish his goal and, in some ways, even made economic conditions worse. The second arm of Gorbachev’s reforms, “Glasnost”, focused on liberalizing the Soviet social system, meaning increased freedom of speech, freedom of demonstration, and freedom of the press. However, this only allowed previously repressed nationalisms to break out and caused a widespread loss of confidence in the Soviet state. All the while, elites in the Soviet Union are divided between liberals who want more reforms, and conservatives who don’t. In 1989, communism in Eastern Europe fell, the Berlin Wall came crashing down both literally and metaphorically. Depending on who you ask in the Soviet Union, the fall of their satellite states can be blamed on having too many reforms or not enough. Whatever the case is, something needs to be done or else it will soon join the likes of Czechoslovakia and East Germany in the graveyard of perished states. The future of the Union and the reputation of Socialism is at stake. 2 Definitions and other Useful facts Eastern Bloc: Ambiguous term that describes the Soviet sphere of influence and states under Soviet influence. Some include Communist China or Vietnam in the “Eastern Bloc”, but for the purposes of this background guide it will refer to the communist nations in Eastern Europe (excluding Yugoslavia and Albania) and the Soviet Union. USSR: Stands for “Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” Synonym for “Soviet Union.” Russification: A process of integrating the various ethnic and national minorities into the majority Russian culture. Russification has been implemented before the Soviet Union as well. Russification includes forcing the Russian language on minority eras, the teaching of Russian history in schools, etc. Iron Curtain: An imaginary line dividing the democratic-capitalist Western Europe and Communist Eastern Europe. Coined by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Soviet: A term referring to various types of national and social councils during the Russian empire. Eventually became an adjective to describe things related to the Soviet Union. What is a Soviet Republic? The Soviet Union is exactly as it sounds like, a collection of (nominally) independent Soviet Republics. It was the basic administrative unit of the Soviet Union. For example, there was a Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic and a Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic. Later, when elections were held, they were held by each of the Soviet Republics, much like provincial elections in Canada. Why do you not refer to Soviet Leaders by their official titles? Unlike the US leader, who is just called President, Soviet leaders often had many titles and titles changed after Gorbachev’s reforms. For clarity, it’s just easier to say “Soviet leader…”. 3 Timeline of Key Events 1985- Gorbachev becomes General Secretary of the Soviet Union 1986- Gorbachev starts to implement “Glasnost” reforms 1987- Gorbachev starts second round of “Perestroika reforms” and the process of democratization 1988- Beginning of protests • Protests in Baltics against anniversary of Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact • Ethnic violence in Armenia and Azerbaijan • Protests in Georgia • Demonstrations in Ukraine • Protests in Belarus 1989- Fall of Eastern Europe • Polish elections result in Communist Defeat • Hungary democratizes • Fall of East German regime and fall of the Berlin Wall • Semi-peaceful protests lead to fall of Communist regimes in Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia • Violent revolution in Romania and execution of Nicolae Ceaușescu • Further democratization of the USSR, with elections being held for the newly created Congress of People’s Deputies of the Soviet Union (basically a semi-independent parliament) • “Baltic Chain of Freedom” forms across the three Baltic States, increasing calls for full independence • Violent crackdown of students in China with the “Tiananmen Square Massacre”, an example of a successful crackdown by a communist government 4 Historical Background Beginnings The birth of the Soviet Union can be traced back to 1917, in the midst of the First World War. Russia was losing badly against the Germans and military incompetence was rife. This, along with widespread inflation, corruption, and food shortages, was all blamed on the Tsar.1 As a result, when food shortages hit the Russian capital of Petrograd, regular people began to protest, escalating into a general strike, which forced the Tsar to abdicate in favor of a provisional, and democratic, government.2 But this provisional government did little to solve Russia’s problems, and instead precipitated the rise of Vladimir Lenin, a Bolshevik and a Marxist. His famous slogan was “Peace, Land, and Bread”, that is peace with the Germans, redistribution of land for the peasants, and bread for everyone.3 It was a potent solution, and soon another uprising was launched in October of 1917, overthrowing the Provisional government and establishing the world’s first communist state. A brutal and bloody civil war would follow against loyalists of the Tsars as well as smaller wars against Poland, Ukraine, etc, leading to the Union Treaty of 1922 creating a Union of nominally independent and ethnicity-organized states, known as the Soviet Union.4 These wars and Lenin’s reign laid the basis for the Soviet State as we know it, with the creation of the secret police, centralization of government, hyper-propagandization, and the militarization of society.5 Stalin and the Growth of the Soviet Empire Succeeding Lenin was Joseph Stalin, a brutally authoritarian and decisive leader willing to do anything to shape the Soviet Union in his vision. With Stalin came the Five-Year Plans, plans dictated by Stalin that encompassed every aspect of society in order to modernize the Soviet Union, a symptom of ever greater centralization of power.6 Using the five-year plans, Stalin put a priority on heavy industry, resulting in the doubling of outputs in coal, iron, and the movement of millions of peasants to urban areas. This population shift combined with continuous draughts and the collectivization of agriculture resulted in a famine in 1932, which 1 Geoffrey Hosking, Russia and the Russians: From the Earliest Times to the Present (London: Penguin Press, 2012), 390-391. 2 Hosking, Russia and the Russians, 391. 3 Dmitri Volkogonov, The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Empire: Political Leaders from Lenin to Gorbachev (London: HarperCollins, 1998), 27. 4 Hosking, Russia and the Russians, 424-425. 5 Hosking, Russia and the Russians, 410-415. 6 Volkogonov, Rise and Fall, 104-105. 5 would kill upwards of 5 million people.7 Building on what Lenin already created, Stalin expanded the secret police and the repressive state, which he used to force the all aspects of Soviet society to conform to his thinking.8 For example, the “Great Terror” would see five million arrested and over a million shot.9 It was also under Stalin that we see both increased ethnic division as well as ethnic integration, with Stalin giving every nationality, regardless of size, its own republic or autonomous province but at the same time “Russifying” the Soviet Union,10 creating tension and resentment.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Conversation with Vladimir Kara-Murza
    AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE PUTINISM AT HOME AND ABROAD: A CONVERSATION WITH VLADIMIR KARA-MURZA INTRODUCTION AND MODERATOR: LEON ARON, AEI DISCUSSION: VLADIMIR KARA-MURZA, OPEN RUSSIA 9:30 AM – 11:00 AM FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 2015 EVENT PAGE: http://www.aei.org/events/putinism-at-home-and-abroad-a- conversation-with-vladimir-kara-murza/ TRANSCRIPT PROVIDED BY DC TRANSCRIPTION – WWW.DCTMR.COM LEON ARON: Welcome. Vladimir’s vita was part of the invitation and you also saw it and I saw some of you picked it up at the registration. So I will not go through it. He’s very well known. Let me mention only that he’s deputy leader of the Party of Russian Freedom, better known by the Russian acronym of PARNAS. He’s the resident coordinator of Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s Open Russia. He’s a resident because Vladimir actually moved. He lives in Russia now, or rather he’s recuperating and then he will move there, and we’ll get to that in a moment. He’s also a Cambridge trained historian and author of several monographs, one of which I hope to be able to discuss here. And he is, of course, a prolific and most enjoyable and insightful commentator on Russian domestic and foreign policies with publications in all leading Western and Russian media. So thank you very much, Volodya, for coming over. We’re honored to have you. VLADIMIR KARA-MURZA: Thank you very much, Leon. And thank you to the American Enterprise Institute for organizing and hosting our meeting today. MR. ARON: Volodya, we were all very saddened and disturbed by the news about your mysterious near fatal illness in the last week of May.
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Russian Foreign Policy
    02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 7 1 AN OVERVIEW OF RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY Forging a New Foreign Policy Concept for Russia Russia’s entry into the new millennium was accompanied by qualitative changes in both domestic and foreign policy. After the stormy events of the early 1990s, the gradual process of consolidating society around a strengthened democratic gov- ernment took hold as people began to recognize this as a requirement if the ongoing political and socioeconomic transformation of the country was to be successful. The for- mation of a new Duma after the December 1999 parliamen- tary elections, and Vladimir Putin’s election as president of Russia in 2000, laid the groundwork for an extended period of political stability, which has allowed us to undertake the devel- opment of a long-term strategic development plan for the nation. Russia’s foreign policy course is an integral part of this strategic plan. President Putin himself has emphasized that “foreign policy is both an indicator and a determining factor for the condition of internal state affairs. Here we should have no illusions. The competence, skill, and effectiveness with 02-4498-6 ch1.qxd 3/25/02 2:58 PM Page 8 which we use our diplomatic resources determines not only the prestige of our country in the eyes of the world, but also the political and eco- nomic situation inside Russia itself.”1 Until recently, the view prevalent in our academic and mainstream press was that post-Soviet Russia had not yet fully charted its national course for development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Armadollar-Petrodollar Coalition and the Middle East
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Rowley, Robin; Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, Jonathan Working Paper The Armadollar-Petrodollar Coalition and the Middle East Working Papers, Department of Economics, McGill University, No. 10/89 Provided in Cooperation with: The Bichler & Nitzan Archives Suggested Citation: Rowley, Robin; Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, Jonathan (1989) : The Armadollar-Petrodollar Coalition and the Middle East, Working Papers, Department of Economics, McGill University, No. 10/89, The Bichler and Nitzan Archives, Toronto, http://bnarchives.yorku.ca/134/ This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/157847 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an
    [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]
  • Kazakhstan and Perestroika: Was a Chance at “Heroism” Lost?
    The Newsletter | No.60 | Summer 2012 14 | The Study Kazakhstan and Perestroika: was a chance at “heroism” lost? writer and the Deputy of the Congress of People’s Deputies On 17-18 December 1986, a students’ uprising took place in Almaty, the managed to establish the Commission of Investigation of the December events in 1989 and rejected the accusation capital of the Kazakh Soviet Socialist Republic (KazSSR). The pretext for the of nationalism among the young protesters. As a result, all participants were acquitted from all charges and released riots (commonly referred to as the December events) was the appointment from prison, or hospital (as the case was for many). Those who had perished during or after the events, had their names of the non-Kazakh and non-Kazakhstani “person from outside”, G. Kolbin, cleared posthumously. to the post of the First Secretary of the KazSSR Communist Party. The former Despite everything, the ideas of separatism did not gain wide support in the Republic. There was no wide public debate on First Secretary, D. Konayev, who had been leading the Republic since 1964, the issues discussed at the Congresses of People’s Deputies in Moscow in 1989-1991. Lacking their own vision on the reform, was removed from his post “due to the pension age”. The change of leader- the party elite continued to support Gorbachev’s course and did not reveal quests for political independence. Consequently, ship in Kazakhstan happened as a result of the rotation of cadres’ launched the Republic was the last one to announce its independence from the USSR, in 1991, when de facto the USSR had itself by M.
    [Show full text]
  • Maoism Versus Opportunism in Turkey
    Maoism Versus Opportunism in Turkey The article below is excerpted from a letter written by the Committee of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement (CoRIM) to the Communist Party of Turkey/Marxist-Leninist (TKP/ML) in mid-2001. The TKP/ML is one of several political centres that emerged from the formerly united Communist Party of Turkey Marxist-Leninist (TKPML), which was a founding participant of the Revolutionary Internationalist Movement in 1984. During the course of a series of splits and realignments among Party forces, several centres of the TKPML have emerged, each of which continues to use the name of the Party and claim its heritage. The names of the two largest groupings that exist today are distinguished only by punctuation marks: the TKP(ML) and the TKP/ML. In the RIM Committee letter, reference is made to other centres that have existed in the course of the Party’s history, in particular the TKP/ML (Maoist Party Centre), which continues today, and the TKP/ML East Anatolia Regional Committee, usually referred to by its Turkish initials DABK, which merged with the TKP/ML Central Committee to form the TKP/ML Provisional United Central Committee in 1994 and which subsequently split into the above-mentioned TKP/ML, which publishes Ozgur Gelecek, and TKP(ML). To minimise confusion concerning the names of the different Party centres, no punctuation is used when referring to the previously united TKPML of 1984 and earlier, and the other centres are referred to by the punctuation they use themselves. As the letter makes clear, from the formation of RIM onwards serious differences emerged between the TKPML and RIM, and a long process of discussion and struggle has gone on involving the different centres that emerged from the previously united TKPML.
    [Show full text]
  • Britain, British Petroleum, Shell and the Remaking of the International Oil Industry, 1957-1979
    Empires of Energy: Britain, British Petroleum, Shell and the Remaking of the International Oil Industry, 1957-1979 Author: Jonathan Robert Kuiken Persistent link: http://hdl.handle.net/2345/bc-ir:104079 This work is posted on eScholarship@BC, Boston College University Libraries. Boston College Electronic Thesis or Dissertation, 2013 Copyright is held by the author, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise noted. Boston College The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Department of History EMPIRES OF ENERGY: BRITAIN, BRITISH PETROLEUM, SHELL AND THE REMAKING OF THE INTERNATIONAL OIL INDUSTRY, 1957-1979 [A dissertation by] JONATHAN R. KUIKEN submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August, 2013 © copyright by JONATHAN ROBERT KUIKEN 2013 Empires of Energy: Britain, British Petroleum, Shell and the remaking of the international oil industry, 1957-1979 Jonathan R. Kuiken Dissertation Advisor - James E. Cronin Dissertation Abstract This dissertation examines British oil policy from the aftermath of the Suez Crisis in 1956-1957 until the Iranian Revolution and the electoral victory of Margaret Thatcher’s Conservative Party in 1979. It was a period marked by major transitions within Britain’s oil policy as well as broader changes within the international oil market. It argues that the story of Britain, and Britain’s two domestically-based oil companies, BP and Shell, offers a valuable case study in the development of competing ideas about the reorganization of the international oil industry in the wake of the rise of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting countries and the companies’ losing control over the production of oil.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1973 Oil Embargo Arab Oil Diplomacy
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 12-1980 The 1973 Oil Embargo Arab Oil Diplomacy Amal Mustafa Shamma Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the International Law Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Shamma, Amal Mustafa, "The 1973 Oil Embargo Arab Oil Diplomacy" (1980). Master's Theses. 1930. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/1930 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]. THE 1973 OIL EMBARGO ARAB OIL DIPLOMACY Amal Mustafa Shamma A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Department of Political Science Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan December, 1980 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. THE 1973 OIL EMBARGO ARAB OIL DIPLOMACY Araal Mustafa Shamma, M.A. Western Michigan University, 1980 1 The Arah oil producing countries, following years of a stalemate in the Arab-Israeli dispute,- decided to put their oil resource in the service of the Arab cause using it as an instrument of pressure against the West. Their objective was to induce a change in the Western world Middle East policy and to work toward achieving a lasting and peaceful solution for the Arab-Israeli problem. The purpose of this thesis is to show that the ap­ plication of Arab oil diplomacy has been effective into producing a more even handed policy in the area, and into breaking the deadlock in the search for peace.
    [Show full text]
  • From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research
    Dartmouth College Dartmouth Digital Commons Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty Faculty Work Spring 2002 From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research Stephen G. Brooks Dartmouth College, [email protected] William C. Wohlforth Dartmouth College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa Part of the International Relations Commons Dartmouth Digital Commons Citation Brooks, Stephen G. and Wohlforth, William C., "From Old Thinking to New Thinking in Qualitative Research" (2002). Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty. 2641. https://digitalcommons.dartmouth.edu/facoa/2641 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Work at Dartmouth Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Dartmouth: Published works by Dartmouth faculty by an authorized administrator of Dartmouth Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. New versus Old Thinking in Qualitative Research From Old Thinking Stephen G. Brooks and William C. to New Thinking in Wohlforth Qualitative Research Robert English has provided a strongly written critique of our article “Power, Globalization, and the End of the Cold War.”1 Unfortunately, his reply may have the unintended consequence of reinforcing a pernicious but popular view among political sci- entists that qualitative research—especially on single cases—cannot generate progress. Here we have a case of seminal importance that has attracted the sus- tained attention of dozens of international relations scholars for more than a decade, and yet it appears that scholars are still involved in what looks like an interminable historians’ debate over causes.
    [Show full text]
  • Egyptian Foreign Policy (Special Reference After the 25Th of January Revolution)
    UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS POLÍTICAS Y SOCIOLOGÍA DEPARTAMENTO DE DERECHO INTERNACIONAL PÚBLICO Y RELACIONES INTERNACIONALES TESIS DOCTORAL Egyptian foreign policy (special reference after The 25th of January Revolution) MEMORIA PARA OPTAR AL GRADO DE DOCTORA PRESENTADA POR Rania Ahmed Hemaid DIRECTOR Najib Abu-Warda Madrid, 2018 © Rania Ahmed Hemaid, 2017 UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID Facultad de Ciencias Políticas Y Socioligía Departamento de Derecho Internacional Público y Relaciones Internacionales Doctoral Program Political Sciences PHD dissertation Egyptian Foreign Policy (Special Reference after The 25th of January Revolution) POLÍTICA EXTERIOR EGIPCIA (ESPECIAL REFERENCIA DESPUÉS DE LA REVOLUCIÓN DEL 25 DE ENERO) Elaborated by Rania Ahmed Hemaid Under the Supervision of Prof. Dr. Najib Abu- Warda Professor of International Relations in the Faculty of Information Sciences, Complutense University of Madrid Madrid, 2017 Ph.D. Dissertation Presented to the Complutense University of Madrid for obtaining the doctoral degree in Political Science by Ms. Rania Ahmed Hemaid, under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Najib Abu- Warda Professor of International Relations, Faculty of Information Sciences, Complutense University of Madrid. University: Complutense University of Madrid. Department: International Public Law and International Relations (International Studies). Program: Doctorate in Political Science. Director: Prof. Dr. Najib Abu- Warda. Academic Year: 2017 Madrid, 2017 DEDICATION Dedication To my dearest parents may god rest their souls in peace and to my only family my sister whom without her support and love I would not have conducted this piece of work ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Acknowledgments I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Prof. Dr. Najib Abu- Warda for the continuous support of my Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of Russian Grand Strategy - Implications for Europe’S North
    THE EVOLUTION OF RUSSIAN GRAND STRATEGY - IMPLICATIONS FOR EUROPE’S NORTH Henrikki Heikka POLSIS, University of Birmingham Programme on the Northern Dimension of the CFSP, Ulkopoliittinen Instituutti & Institut für Europäische Politik 2 The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist. Madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribblers of a few years back. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachments of ideas. - John Maynard Keynes Without a theory, the facts are silent. - F.A. Hayek 3 1 Introduction A study about Russian grand strategy is certain to raise more than a few eyebrows among observers of Russian foreign policy. How can one possibly assume that in a country with constantly changing prime ministers and an economy on the verge of bankruptcy there could be a commonly accepted Grand Plan about anything? Moreover, the record of post-cold war Russian foreign policy is so full of reckless moves and unpredictable u-turns, that it seems rather far-fetched to suggest that there could be, even in theory, a common logic behind it. Judging by the steady flow of publications on the role of self-interested politicians, parties, business elites, and organizational and bureaucratic actors in the formation of Russian foreign policy, it does indeed seem that most scholars see Russia’s external policy driven by the day- to-day power struggles of various groups within the Russian political elite rather than by a common national strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • August 17, 1945 Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman
    Digital Archive digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org International History Declassified August 17, 1945 Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman Citation: “Draft Message from Joseph Stalin to Harry S. Truman,” August 17, 1945, History and Public Policy Program Digital Archive, RGASPI Fond 558, Opis 11, Delo 372, List 111. Translated by Sergey Radchenko. http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/122330 Summary: Stalin requests that the Soviet Union gain possession of the Kurile Islands and the northern half of the island of Hokkaido, Japan. Original Language: Russian Contents: English Translation I received your message with “General Order No. 1.” In the main I do not object to the content of the order. With this, one has in mind that Liaodong Peninsula is a constituent part of Manchuria. However, I propose to introduce the following amendments to “General Order No. 1”: 1. Include all of the Kurile Islands, which, according to the decision of the third powers in the Crimea must pass into the possession of the Soviet Union, into the region of surrender by Japanese armed forces to Soviet forces. 2. Include the northern half of the island of Hokkaido, which adjoins in the North the Laperouse Strait, located between Karafuto and Hokkaido, into the region of surrender by Japanese armed forces to Soviet forces. The demarcation line between the northern and southern halves of the island of Hokkaido is to be drawn along the line, extending from the town of Kushiro on the eastern coast of the island until the town of Rumoe [sic] on the western coast of the island, including the said towns in the northern half of the island.
    [Show full text]