… “There is one aspect of New Thinking on which I will keep
insisting. It is the rejection of nuclear weapons and militarism.” “As long as
nuclear weapons exist, there is a danger of nuclear war. It is like a gun on
the wall in the first act of a play. As the Russian playwright Anton Chekhov
once said, at some point it will fire.”
“When President Ronald Reagan and I stated in 1985 that a
nuclear war must never be fought, that meant one thing: the ultimate goal is
nothing short of the elimination of nuclear weapons. But talk about a world
without nuclear weapons, which is still supported rhetorically by all
countries, including the United States, will mean nothing if we do not put an
end to the current militarization of international politics and political
thinking.”
|
N |
ew Thinking
“Glasnost” and “Perestroika”
Though his comments were directed to the Soviet domestic situation,
they warn of an anachronistic America, a cabal pushing America backward.
Perestroika was meant for the people, he wrote. Its goal was to emancipate the human being, to give people ownership of their lives and of their country.
Perestroika was a wide-ranging humanist project.
It was a break with the past, with the centuries when the state—autocratic and then totalitarian—dominated over the human being. It was a breakthrough into the future.
Glasnost meant upholding the people’s right to know by reducing secrecy and “classified information” to a reasonable minimum.
Previously, statistics had been in the grip of censorship. Data on the economy and social and population statistics were only published if permitted by a special resolution of the Central Committee and had to be heavily redacted.
Crime statistics and environmental and medical data were shrouded in secrecy. The defense budget’s real numbers were secret. Not only the country’s citizens but even its leaders did not have a real and complete picture of many aspects of its life.
We put an end to that.
|
T |
he author of that text was said to have been of a Russian-Ukrainian
family, son of peasants, son of a father who had been wounded while serving in
the Russian Army when the Nazis invaded the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
(USSR): World leader, statesman, thinker and philosopher, Russian and Soviet leader
and politician Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev March 2, 1931-August 30, 2022
Key Public office Positions
- 1985-1991 General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
- 1988-1989 Chairman of the Presidium (council of executive officers) of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union
- 1989 – 1990 Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union
- March 1990 – 1991 President of the Soviet Union
Sage words of Mikhail Gorbachev Perhaps one of his final writings
No challenge or threat facing humankind in the twenty-first
century can have a military solution. No major problem can be solved
single-handedly by one country or even a group of countries.
As we ended the Cold War, the world community formulated a set of concrete tasks to be addressed by the new generation of political leaders. These include eliminating nuclear weapons, overcoming mass poverty in developing countries, providing equal opportunities for everyone in education and healthcare, and reversing the degradation of the environment. Yet the United Nations has had to recognize that progress on these tasks has been insufficient.
This is a call for urgent action, not an indictment of the
current generation of leaders. They must seriously reassess their political
thinking and consider the experience of their predecessors, who had to deal
with even more dangerous challenges. Their achievements are on record; no one
will be able to negate them.
I hope that this reminder of the goals and values of
perestroika and New Thinking will help readers who want to understand what is
happening today. I want this to be my contribution to the dialogue between the
past and the present. Linking them requires knowing the truth about the past
and learning lessons for the future. This is what we all need in a changing
world.”
1980s
The world was facing the rapidly rising threat of nuclear
war. The international community was at an impasse from which there seemed to
be no exit. The confrontation between the East and the West continued,
seemingly with no end in sight.
That was the assumption on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Of
course, no one wanted a nuclear war but no one could guarantee that it would
never start—even if as a result of technical failure, false alarm or accident.
The Soviet Union’s relations with many countries were tense. The protracted conflict with China, the all-encompassing confrontation with the United States, the deterioration of relations with Western European countries caused by the deployment of medium-range missiles, regional conflicts in various parts of the world, and the presence of tens of thousands of our troops in Afghanistan—all were poisoning the external environment in which we were undertaking our reforms, while the arms race was sapping our economy.
The militarization of the economy was a big burden for all
countries…. The military-industrial complex absorbed enormous resources, the
energy and talent of our most highly skilled workers; 90 percent of our science
was dedicated to defense needs.
However, excessive armament did not make our security more
reliable. People felt this, and a sense of alarm was always on their minds. … It
was therefore apparent both at home and abroad that we must not continue as
before.
International relations and nuclear nonproliferation
“My first meeting with U.S. President Ronald Reagan, which
took place in Geneva in November 1985, broke the ice that had been building up
for decades. This happened despite the fact that after our first conversation
I, speaking to members of the Soviet delegation, called him not just a
conservative but “a real dinosaur,” and we later learned that Reagan had called
me “a die-hard Bolshevik.” “And yet, two factors were crucial: responsibility and intuition. We both
felt that, however difficult our dialogue, we needed to persist.”
At a summit in Geneva, Switzerland, we signed a statement declaring that …
The leaders of the USSR and the United States agree “that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”
The two sides “will not seek to achieve military superiority.’”
We also agreed to expand exchanges between our countries—both people-to-people and youth contacts—and to resume airline flights. Our speeches at the closing ceremony reflected a new tone that had for many years been absent from the rhetoric of Soviet and American leaders. It was the first step on the road to trust—something that is hard to achieve but is essential.
“Nevertheless, in 1986 it became clear that Cold War inertia
and the routine of formal diplomacy might thwart the efforts to reach
agreements. The attempts of U.S. Navy ships to enter our territorial waters,
spy scandals and ‘the same old tune’ in disarmament negotiations convinced me
that it was once again up to the leaders to make their position clear and their
voice heard. I proposed to President Reagan that we meet ‘somewhere halfway’
between Moscow and Washington and discuss ways of getting things off the
ground. The idea of Reykjavík was born.”
The US president’s response was positive but he “wanted not
just to intensify his Star Wars program, but also to make us (the USSR) give
the go-ahead to testing missile defense systems in space. This was something to which I could not agree. Nevertheless, the
progress achieved on a number of important issues and the two leaders’ agreement
that the ultimate goal of the negotiations was to rid the world of nuclear
weapons allowed me to say immediately after the conclusion of the summit that
Reykjavík was not a failure but a breakthrough, a new beginning in nuclear arms
negotiations.”
1987
“Throughout 1987, there were many attempts to scuttle the
negotiations on INF (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) missiles and the
conclusion of the treaty eliminating two classes of nuclear weapons hung in the
balance, but Reykjavík’s impetus proved strong. In December 1987, the Treaty
was signed…” and the signing “set in motion the process of dramatic reductions
in practically all categories of nuclear weapons, particularly in Europe….
“This is what happens when leaders have the courage to act realistically and abandon outdated concepts of security.…” The US “president’s firm stand (for the INF) opened the way to the emergence of mutual trust. This created an environment in which we took decisions that reduced tensions in many of the world’s regions and moved toward the settlement of conflicts that for many years had seemed impossible to resolve.”
Afghanistan “It was then that we corrected another mistake that had cost our country and our people dearly: we withdrew Soviet troops from Afghanistan. The orderly withdrawal of our troops created the conditions for starting a process of internal settlement in that country. We proposed that the great powers and Afghanistan’s neighbors work together to support national reconciliation in Afghanistan.”
1988
“By late 1988, we had managed to solve most of the problems related to ending the Cold War and the nuclear arms race, to reach a new level of relations with Western European countries, and to prepare the ground for normalizing relations with the People’s Republic of China.
This was by no means easy. The country’s leaders, diplomats, military officials and experts put enormous effort into it.”
1989
The start of 1989 brought “unexpected developments, problems and daunting dilemmas. But even more importantly, it turned out to be the year when the changes brought to our country and the world by perestroika and New Thinking became irreversible.”
At the United Nations that year, “I spoke about the need to demilitarize and democratize international relations…; (and) “on the day I spoke to the United Nations, I also had a meeting in New York with President Reagan and President-elect George (HW) Bush. We noted the impressive results achieved in relations between the two nuclear powers over the less than three years of our joint efforts. I am proud of what we have been able to do together, Ronald Reagan said. For his part, George Bush stated that he hoped to continue our joint efforts. I replied by saying that this was fully in line with our intentions. … I gave a frank account of the processes under way in our country, of our achievements, problems and plans. … And President Reagan said, ‘I want you to know … that you have our support in this difficult undertaking. …’”
1992
On a visit to the United States in 1992, “I was invited to speak to the U.S. Congress. The welcoming speeches by the leaders of both chambers of Congress were constructive both in tone and in content, with not a word about the ‘victory of the United States in the Cold War.’ The same is true of major speeches by President George Bush and Secretary of State James Baker in April 1992 and of my conversation with them at the White House.
“Later, however, the American political establishment changed its tune. That was a major error in judgment and a failure to meet their responsibility to history. Instead of recognizing our common victory over the Cold War, they decided to declare themselves the sole winners. Within just a few weeks, ‘victory in the Cold War’ became the buzzword of the election campaign. It was picked up by the U.S. media and even quoted approvingly by quite a few people in our country.”
“That about-turn set the course of world events on the wrong track. It is the root of many mistakes and failures that undermined the foundations of new international politics.”
“In politics, triumphalism gives bad advice. It is, among other things, immoral. The need to bring together morality and politics is one of the main principles of New Thinking. I am convinced that only an ethical approach can help overcome the paralysis of political will…“In a global world, relations among states must be governed not just by the norms of international law but also by certain rules of behavior rooted in universal moral principles. Such rules of behavior should include restraint, consideration of the interests of all sides, and consultations and mediation if the situation deteriorates and a dangerous crisis is looming. Many crises could have been averted if the parties directly involved and, to an even greater degree, outside parties followed such rules of behavior.…
“No challenge or threat facing humankind in the twenty-first century can have a military solution. No major problem can be solved single-handedly by one country or even a group of countries.“As we ended the Cold War, the world community formulated a set of concrete tasks to be addressed by the new generation of political leaders. These include eliminating nuclear weapons, overcoming mass poverty in developing countries, providing equal opportunities for everyone in education and healthcare, and reversing the degradation of the environment. Yet the United Nations has had to recognize that progress on these tasks has been insufficient.
“This is not an indictment of the current generation of leaders, but a call for urgent action. They must seriously reassess their political thinking and consider the experience of their predecessors, who had to deal with even more dangerous challenges. Their achievements are on record; no one will be able to negate them.
“I hope that this reminder of the goals and values of perestroika and New Thinking will help readers who want to understand what is happening today.
"I want this to be my contribution to the dialogue between the past and the present.
Linking them requires knowing the truth about the past and learning lessons for the future. This is what we all need in a changing world.”
[Wherever emphasis exists, it was added]
Sources and news reporting
Gorbachev, Mikhail S (translation by Pavel Palazhchenko), “Perestroika and New Thinking: A Retrospective,” August 9, 2021, Global Affairs Journal, https://eng.globalaffairs.ru/articles/perestroika-and-new-thinking/
Editor’s Note: The article is a translation of a Russian-language text by Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, General Secretary of the Communist Party from 1985 until 1991, President of the USSR in 1990-1991,” previously published in Russia in Global Affairs. The original is available at: https://globalaffairs.ru/articles/ponyat-perestrojku/.
PravdaRU “Mikhail Gorbachev dies at age 92,” August 31, 2022
“Mikhail Gorbachev was a great man.
He was not a perfect, but an outstanding man, a prominent politician. We all
make mistakes, and Gorbachev was no exception. While possessing such enormous
power, Mikhail Gorbachev managed to stay true to himself. It was Gorbachev, who
saved the world from a major war many years ago. Mikhail Gorbachev shall stay
in our memories forever.
“Mikhail Gorbachev will be buried at the Novodevichy Cemetery in Moscow, in a family burial next to his wife, a source told TASS.” https://english.pravda.ru/news/society/153819-mikhail_gorbachev_dies/
TASS “”Russia remembers Gorbachev.” Press Review August 31, 2022: “He was a politician whose name will be forever linked with the end of the Cold War era. Politicians and experts say Gorbachev was an important figure for Russia whose name will remain in history. Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed his deep condolences over the passing of the ex-USSR president.” https://tass.com/pressreview/1500299
Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR) leader and Chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs Leonid Slutsky: “‘Gorbachev was, undoubtedly, the most striking politician of his time. Yet, for everyone born in the Soviet Union he remains a complex and contradictory historical figure.’”
Head of the Ad Hoc Commission on Protecting State Sovereignty and Preventing Interference in the Domestic Affairs of the Russian Federation Council Andrey Klimov: “It is difficult to provide an assessment since a lot of things have happened since then. Yet he tried, as much as he could, to maneuver between those forces and circumstances our state found itself in at the time.”
“Mikhail Gorbachev,” Biography: The Arena Group, https://www.biography.com/political-figure/mikhail-gorbachev
Mikhail Gorbachev, Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Gorbachev
World and National
Sources
Collage composed of individual Internet images
Composition, Commentary excluding quoted material and individual images
Copyright © Carolyn LaDelle Bennett
No comments:
Post a Comment