O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida;

Meu Twitter: https://twitter.com/PauloAlmeida53

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paulobooks

Mostrando postagens com marcador fim da União Soviética. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador fim da União Soviética. Mostrar todas as postagens

segunda-feira, 11 de novembro de 2019

O longo declinio da União Soviética sob a gerontocracia comunista

The Decline of the Soviet Union: The History of the Communist Empire in the Last 30 Years of Its Existence 


Leonid Brezhnev became First Secretary of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union in late 1964 after a plot to oust Khrushchev. Little is remembered in the public imagination about Brezhnev in comparison to Mikhail Gorbachev, Vladimir Lenin, or Joseph Stalin, despite the fact Brezhnev ruled the USSR from 1964-1982, longer than any Soviet leader other than Stalin. In fact, he held power during a tumultuous era that changed the world in remarkable ways, and that era has been favorably remembered by many former Soviet citizens. It marked a period of relative calm and even prosperity after the destruction of World War II and the tensions brought about by Khrushchev. Foremost amongst Brezhnev’s achievements would be the détente period in the early 1970s, when the Soviets and Americans came to a number of agreements that reduced Cold War pressures and the alarming threat of nuclear war. 

On the other side of the balance sheet, Brezhnev oversaw a malaise in Soviet society that later became known as an era of stagnation during which the Communist Bloc fell far behind the West in terms of economic output and standard of living. His regime also became notorious for its human rights abuses, and Soviet foreign policy in his later years took on some of the character of the earlier American behavior that he had so criticised. Most calamitous of all was the invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.

The Cold War moved into one of its most dangerous phases after Brezhnev’s death as both sides deployed nuclear weapons within alarming proximity in Europe. A NATO exercise, “Operation Able Archer,” almost led to a Soviet miscalculation, and when the Soviets shot down a South Korean airliner in September 1983, claiming it had strayed into Soviet airspace, the Cold War became very tense indeed. 

After going through three elderly leaders in three years, Mikhail Gorbachev was chosen as the new General Secretary at the relatively young age of 54 in March 1985. Gorbachev hoped to build the Soviet economy to relieve the persistent shortages of consumer goods it faced, which were caused by enormous military spending of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev tried to introduce some economic reforms, but they were blocked by communist hardliners. Gorbachev then came to the belief that the Soviet economy could not improved without political reform as well.

Limited political reforms, such as broadcasting uncensored debates in which politicians openly questioned government policy, backfired when they energized eastern European opposition movements which began to overthrow their communist governments in 1989. Gorbachev was unwilling to reoccupy these eastern European nations and use the Soviet army to put down these revolts.

In comparison with other Soviet leaders, Gorbachev was leader of the USSR for a relatively short period, but the changes that took place under his leadership were monumental, including some that were intended and others that were unforeseen. Gorbachev oversaw the end of the Cold War and the peaceful transition away from communism in Central and Eastern Europe, and he ended the war in Afghanistan and many other proxy conflicts in the developing world. Gorbachev improved relations with the West and developed enough trust with President Ronald Reagan and President George H.W. Bush to decommission thousands of nuclear weapons. He also liberalized the political environment within the Soviet Union itself, increased accountability, and brought in a certain degree of democracy. 
Gorbachev was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for these efforts in 1990, but his regime also left a legacy of turbulence and destruction in its wake. As a result of his policies, many Soviet people rose up against the status quo, demanding national self-determination and reviving old grievances. Gorbachev could not prevent the USSR from disbanding at the end of 1991.

terça-feira, 27 de dezembro de 2016

O fim da Uniao Sovietica, 25 anos atras (em 1991) - Rubens Barbosa

FIM DA UNIÃO SOVIÉTICA
 Rubens Barbosa
O Estado de S. Paulo, 27/12/2016

Ontem, 26 de dezembro, a dissolução da União Soviética completou 25 anos. Resolução do Soviet Supremo reconheceu a independência das antigas repúblicas soviéticas e criou a Comunidade de Estados Independentes (CEI). Mikhail Gorbachev, o oitavo e último líder da União Soviética, havia renunciado na véspera, declarando seu cargo extinto e passando o poder para o presidente russo Boris Ieltsin. Anteriormente, de agosto a dezembro de 1991, todas as repúblicas, incluindo a própria Rússia, foram se separando da União. Uma semana antes do histórico 26, onze repúblicas - todas, exceto a Georgia e os estados bálticos (Letônia, Estônia e Lituânia) - assinaram o Protocolo de Alma-Ata estabelecendo formalmente a CEI e declararam que a União Soviética tinha deixado de existir.

Nos últimos 25 anos, a Rússia tem mergulhado em profundas crises econômicas, políticas e éticas. Teve de enfrentar tentativas separatistas, como na Tchechenia, enfraqueceu-se militarmente com o fim do Pacto de Varsovia, sofreu com a queda do preço do petróleo, teve de enfrentar a rebelião na Georgia e mais recentemente envolveu-se na crise da Ucrânia com a reincorporação da estratégica Criméia. Teve de conviver com a imposição de sanções econômicas pelos EUA e Europa e com a crescente desconfiança do Ocidente. Em 2014, o governo russo criou a União Econômica Eurasiana, bloco econômico e comercial, integrado pelo Casaquistão, Bielorussia, Quirguistão e Armênia.

A percepção ocidental é a de que a Russia constitui uma ameaça militar concreta para a Europa, em especial para os estados bálticos e os ex-satélites do Leste Europeu. As invasões da Geórgia e da Ucrânia reforçaram a visão de que a Rússia, em declínio, mas com poderoso arsenal nuclear, teria pretensões imperialistas e bélicas na Europa. As intervenções russas em países vizinhos e no Oriente Médio, bem como os ataques cibernéticos contra alvos nos EUA aumentam a instabilidade global e as reservas em relação a Moscou.

Desde 1999, Vladimir Putin tem governado a Rússia como presidente ou primeiro ministro, imprimindo sua visão estratégica sobre o relacionamento com os EUA, com a Europa e seu interesse nos diferentes teatros globais. Quais as ações do Estado russo a partir das posições públicas expressadas por sua liderança politica?

Para entender a ação russa no tabuleiro político e econômico global é importante ter presente a visão de Putin para a defesa dos interesses de seu país. Ao assumir o governo, Putin chamou o colapso da URSS de “a maior catastrofe geopolitica do seculo XX”.  É sob esse prisma que as ações de Moscou deveriam ser entendidas. O restabelecimento da força e da importância da Russia é a principal prioridade de Putin, que viu nas ações da Europa e dos EUA uma grande conspiração para tentar cercar o pais. As sanções econômicas são vistas como parte de esforço geopolítico para limitar a influência de Moscou.

O pensamento estratégico russo atual foi muito influenciado, segundo Putin, pelo descumprimento de acordo que teria sido negociado depois do fim da União Soviética pelo qual a aliança ocidental, sem a ameaça do Pacto de Varsovia, teria se comprometido a não instalar mísseis e radares na Polônia e outros estados vizinhos da Rússia. A instalação de armamento pesado, a 300 km de Moscou, foi agravado pelo golpe de estado na Ucrânia onde, estimulado pelo ocidente, o governo pró-Rússia foi substituido por um presidente pró-ocidente que pediu formalmente apoio militar da OTAN. Essa nova situação, segundo o governo de Moscou, forçou a invasão da Ucrânia e a re-incorporação da Criméia, de modo a impedir a eventual perda de uma base naval estratégica no Mediterrâneo.

As sanções econômicas em vigor e a teoria do cerco militar ao país levaram Moscou a buscar alternativas geopolíticas e geoeconômicas. Depois de anos de afastamento, concretisou-se a aproximação com a China na assinatura de acordo de fornecimento de gás no valor de US$ 400 bilhões de modo a reduzir a então grande dependência do mercado europeu e avançou-se na construção de gasoduto na Turquia para evitar a passagem pela Ucrânia. Nova doutrina militar prevê agora a substituição de importações militares para reduzir a dependência externa. Prevê também a  ampliação do número de bases militares ao redor do mundo, inclusive com algum tipo de presença em Cuba e na Venezuela.

            No atual momento as iniciativas mais vigorosas da política externa e de defesa da Rússia estão concentradas no Oriente Médio, em especial no conflito na Siria. Apoiando o presidente Bashar Al Assad, Putin envolveu-se no bombardeio contra os rebeldes, sobretudo em Aleppo. A estratégia de Moscou é eliminar o Estado Islâmico primeiro e depois fazer a transição do governo sírio, com o afastamento de Al Assad, o que colocou os EUA e a OTAN contra a Russia. As implicações da politica russa tem desdobramentos no Irã e entre os Curdos, aumentando as resistências contra Putin. No conflito Israel-Palestina, a Rússia mantém attitude discrete, apesar de  membro do Quarteto, junto com os EUA, a União Européia e a Alemanha.

            As relações com os EUA, desgastadas pelas posições antagônicas no conflito com a Siria, ganharão maior visibilidade pelas anunciadas intenções do presidente eleito Donald Trump. Enquanto o CIA publica relatório em que acusa a Rússia de ter interferido na eleição presidencial e o futuro Secretario de Defesa faça ostensivamente criticas a Putin, Trump não se abstém de declarações no sentido de uma aproximação maior com o presidente russo, inclusive acenando com a mudança da estratégia no conflito da Siria, como quer Putin, visando ao exterminio do Estado Islâmico. A designação de um amigo de Putin, Rex Tillerson para Ministro do Exterior pode reforçar a política do presidente russo.

Rubens Barbosa, presidente do Instituto de Relações Internacionais e de Comércio Exterior (IRICE)

terça-feira, 26 de abril de 2016

Chernobyl: 30 anos da maior tragedia nuclear no mundo (e o comeco do fim do socialismo) - NYTimes

Front Page Image

Soviet Announces Nuclear Accident at Electric Plant



Power Reactor Damaged
Mishap Acknowledged After Rising Radioactivity Levels Spread to Scandinavia
By Serge Schmemann
Special to The New York Times
OTHER HEADLINES Deaver Requests a Special Inquiry Into his Lobbying: Justice Dept. Must Decide: Meese Removes Himself From Discussions on Naming of Independent Counsel
Judge Puts Off Gotti Crime Trial Until August to Revamp the Jury
Cuomo Presents Legislative Plan to Combat Craft: Ethics Bill Proposed to Deter Abuses by State Officials and Political Leaders
U.S. Plans End of Military Ties to New Zealand
Political Dueling on Capital Hill May Kill '87 Budget, Dole Warns
New Ring of Suburbs Springs Up Around City
Editor at U.S. Radio Reappears in Soviet, Assailing the West
Moscow, April 28, 1986 -- The Soviet Union announced today that there had been an accident at a nuclear power plant in the Ukraine and that ''aid is being given to those affected.''
The severity of the accident, which spread discernable radioactive material over Scandinavia, was not immediately clear. But the terse statement, distributed by the Tass press agency and read on the evening television news, suggested a major accident.
The phrasing also suggested that the problem had not been brought under full control at the nuclear plant, which the Soviet announcement identified as the Chernobyl station. It is situated at the new town of Pripyat, near Chernobyl and 60 miles north of Kiev.
Heightened Radioactivity Levels
The announcement, the first official disclosure of a nuclear accident ever by the Soviet Union, came hours after Sweden, Finland and Denmark reported abnormally high radioactivity levels in their skies. The readings initially led those countries to think radioactive material had been leaking from one of their own reactors.
The Soviet announcement, made on behalf of the Council of Ministers, after Sweden had demanded information, said in its entirety:
''An accident has occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant as one of the reactors was damaged. Measures are being taken to eliminate the consequences of the accident. Aid is being given to those affected. A Government commission has been set up.''
Concern Is Reinforced
The mention of a commission of inquiry reinforced indications that the accident was a serious one. [United States experts said the accident probably posed no danger outside the Soviet Union. But in the absence of detailed information, they said it would be difficult to determine the gravity, and they said environmental damage might conceivably be disastrous. Page A10. [The Chernobyl plant, with four 1,000-megawatt reactors in operation, is one of the largest and oldest of the 15 or so Soviet civilian nuclear stations. Nuclear power has been a matter of high priority in the Soviet Union, and capacity has been going into service as fast as reactors can be built. Page A10.] Pripyat, where the Chernobyl plant is situated, is a settlement of 25,000 to 30,000 people that was built in the 1970's along with the station. It is home to construction workers, service personnel and their families.
A British reporter returning from Kiev reported seeing no activity in the Ukrainian capital that would suggest any alarm. No other information was immediately available from the area.
But reports from across Scandinavia, areas more than 800 miles to the north, spoke of increases in radioactivity over the last 24 hours.
Scandinavian authorities said the radioactivity levels did not pose any danger, and it appeared that only tiny amounts of radioactive material had drifted over Scandinavia. All of it was believed to be in the form of two relatively innocuous gases, xenon and krypton. Scandinavian officials said the evidence pointed to an accident in the Ukraine.
In Sweden, an official at the Institute for Protection Against Radiation said gamma radiation levels were 30 to 40 percent higher than normal. He said that the levels had been abnormally high for 24 hours and that the release seemed to be continuing.
In Finland, officials were reported to have said readings in the central and northern areas showed levels six times higher than normal. The Norwegian radio quoted pollution control officials as having said that radioactivity in the Oslo area was 50 percent higher.
Since morning, Swedish officials had focused on the Soviet Union as the probable source of the radioactive material, but Swedish Embassy officials here said the Soviet authorities had denied knowledge of any problem until the Government announcement was read on television at 9 P.M.
The first alarm was raised in Sweden when workers arriving at the Forsmark nuclear power station, 60 miles north of Stockholm, set off warnings during a routine radioactivity check. The plant was evacuated, Swedish officials said. When other nuclear power plants reported similar happenings, the authorities turned their attention to the Soviet Union, from which the winds were coming.
A Swedish diplomat here said he had telephoned three Soviet Government agencies - the State Committee for Utilization of Atomic Energy, the Ministry of Electric Power and the three-year-old State Committee for Safety in the Atomic Power Industry -asking them to explain the high readings over Scandinavia. All said they had no explanation, the diplomat said.
Before the Soviet acknowledgment, the Swedish Minister of Energy, Birgitta Dahl, said that whoever was responsible for the spread of radioactive material was not observing international agreements requiring warnings and exchanges of information about accidents.
Tass, the Soviet Government press agency, said the Chernobyl accident was the first ever in a Soviet nuclear power plant.
It was the first ever acknowledged by the Russians, but Western experts have reported at least two previous mishaps. In 1957, a nuclear waste dump believed related to weapons production was reported to have resulted in a chemical reaction in the Kasli areas of the Urals, causing damage to the environment and possibly fatalities. In 1974, a steam line exploded in the Shevchenko nuclear breeder plant in Kazakhstan, but no radioactive material is believed to have been released in that accident.
Soviet authorities, in giving the development of nuclear electricity generation a high priority, have said that nuclear power is safe. In the absence of citizens' opposition to nuclear power, there has been virtually no questioning of the program.
The terse Soviet announcement of the Chernobyl accident was followed by a Tass dispatch noting that there had been many mishaps in the United States, ranging from Three Mile Island outside Harrisburg, Pa., to the Ginna plant near Rochester. Tass said an American antinuclear group registered 2,300 accidents, breakdowns and other faults in 1979.
The practice of focusing on disasters elsewhere when one occurs in the Soviet Union is so common that after watching a report on Soviet television about a catastrophe abroad, Russians often call Western friends to find out whether something has happened in the Soviet Union.
Construction of the Chernobyl plant began in the early 1970's and the first reactor was commissioned in 1977. Work has been lagging behind plans. In April 1983, the Ukrainian Central Committee chastised the Chernobyl plant, along with the Rovno nuclear power station at Kuznetsovsk, for ''inferior quality of construction and installation work and low operating levels.'' ---- U.S. Offers to Help AGANA, Guam, Tuesday, April 29 -Donald T. Regan, the White House chief of staff, said today that the United States was willing to provide medical and scientific assistance to the Soviet Union in connection with the nuclear accident but so far there had been no such request.

sexta-feira, 25 de dezembro de 2015

Uniao Sovietica: o fim oficial, no Natal de 1991 - NYTimes

Lembro-me como se fosse hoje: a imagem patética do "oitavo" (e final) líder da mais aberrante experiência de governança política na história da humanidade, declarando o fim do império que se manteve pela opressão, pelo crime, pela escravidão de milhões de pessoas, quando não pela eliminação física de uns quantos milhões também.
Imaginei que o mundo se tornaria mais cooperativo, e ameno, no que fui enganado em minha proverbial atitude otimista, alimentada por uma postura basicamente de Idealpolitik, ou seja, confiando na racionalidade dos homens...
Sempre pecamos por ingenuidade...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

ON THIS DAY

On Dec. 25, 1991, Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev went on TV to announce his resignation as the eighth and final leader of a Communist superpower that had already gone out of existence.

Front Page Image

Gorbachev, Last Soviet Leader, Resigns; U.S. Recognizes Republics' Independence



Communist Flag Is Removed: Yeltsin Gets Nuclear Controls
By FRANCIS X. CLINES
Special to The New York Times
RELATED HEADLINES Bush Lauds Vision of Soviet Leader: In Farewell, President Cites Gorbachev's Historic Role
The Soviet State, Born of a Dream, Dies
OTHER HEADLINES Retailers Report Sales Fell Short of Dim Forecasts: Last-Minute Buying Spree Fails to Carry Merchants Ahead of Last Year's Receipts
Pineapple, After Long Affair, Jilts Hawaii for Asian Suitors
From L.I. to Angry Illinois: A 5-Day Trash Odyssey
MOSCOW, Dec. 25 -- Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the trailblazer of the Soviet Union's retreat from the cold war and the spark for the democratic reforms that ended 70 years of Communist tyranny, told a weary, anxious nation tonight that he was resigning as President and closing out the union.
'I hereby discontinue my activities at the post of President of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,' declared the 60-year-old politician, the last leader of a totalitarian empire that was undone across the six years and nine months of his stewardship.
Mr. Gorbachev made no attempt in his brief, leanly worded television address to mask his bitter regret and concern at being forced from office by the creation of the new Commonwealth of Independent States, composed of 11 former republics of the collapsed Soviet empire under the informal lead of President Boris N. Yeltsin of Russia.
'A New World'
Within hours of Mr. Gorbachev's resignation, Western and other nations began recognition of Russia and the other former republics.
'We're now living in a new world,' Mr. Gorbachev declared in recognizing the rich history of his tenure. 'An end has been put to the cold war and to the arms race, as well as to the mad militarization of the country, which has crippled our economy, public attitudes and morals. The threat of nuclear war has been removed.' [A transcript of Mr. Gorbachev's speech and excerpts from interviews with Mr. Gorbachev and Mr. Yeltsin are on pages A12 and A13.]
Mr. Gorbachev's moment of farewell was stark. Kremlin guards were preparing to lower the red union flag for the last time. In minutes, Mr. Gorbachev would sign over the nuclear missile launching codes for safeguarding to Mr. Yeltsin, his rival and successor as the dominant politician of this agonized land.
Yeltsin's Assurance on Weapons
Earlier today, Mr. Yeltsin told his Russian Parliament that 'there will be only a single nuclear button, and other presidents will not possess it.'
But he said that to 'push it' requires the approval of himself and the leaders of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Kazakhstan, the four former republics that have strategic nuclear weapons on their soil.
'Of course, we think this button must never be used,' Mr. Yeltsin said.
Out in the night beyond the walled fortress as Mr. Gorbachev spoke, a disjointed people, freed from their decades of dictated misery, faced a frightening new course of shedding collectivism for the promises of individual enterprise. It is a course that remains a mystery for most of the commonwealth's 280 million people.
'I am very much concerned as I am leaving this post,' the union President told the people. 'However, I also have feelings of hope and faith in you, your wisdom and force of spirit. We are the heirs of a great civilization and it now depends on all and everyone whether or not this civilization will make a comeback to a new and decent living.'
Still Against Commonwealth
In departing, the Soviet leader took comfort in the world's supporting his singular achievements in nuclear disarmament. But even more, he firmly warned his people that they had not yet learned to use their newly won freedom and that it could be put at risk by the commonwealth, which he fought to the last.
'I am concerned about the fact that the people in this country are ceasing to become citizens of a great power and the consequences may be very difficult for all of us to deal with,' he declared, implicitly arguing that his union could have remained a superpower despite the cold war's end, which he helped engineer.
'We have paid with all our history and tragic experience for these democratic achievements,' Mr. Gorbachev said, assessing centuries of suffering across serfdom and revolution, 'and they are not to be abandoned whatever the circumstances, and whatever the pretext. Otherwise, all our hopes for the best will be buried.'
Mr. Gorbachev's stringent gaze and strong caution to the now dismembered nation were in contrast to the smiling ease displayed during this transition day by President Yeltsin, chief heir to this land's political and economic chaos.
'They Need Some Belief'
'The people here are weary of pessimism, and the share of pessimism is too much for the people to handle,' Mr. Yeltsin declared in an interview with CNN. 'Now they need some belief, finally.'
Mr. Yeltsin made a point in the interview of sending Christmas wishes to his listeners today as the West celebrated the holiday, although the Russian Orthodox Christmas is not until Jan. 7. Mr. Yeltsin also took care in addressing the outside world to stress that commonwealth leaders had agreed to fulfill the disarmament commitments made by Mr. Gorbachev.
'I don't want the international community to be worried about it,' President Yeltsin said, vowing that there would 'not be a single second after Gorbachev makes his resignation' that the missile codes would go astray.
The weapons are only one item in a long list of needed precautions that the commonwealth republics must attend to if they are to establish credibility in a decidedly skeptical world that has watched the Soviet Union reverse its totalitarian course and collapse in a matter of a few years.
Mr. Yeltsin is first among equals in the 11-member commonwealth. This is a very loose political association resorted to by the former Soviet republics because of their disenchantment with the very notion of union and their need, nonetheless, for some common arrangement that might ease the escape from post-Communist destitution.
The commonwealth members are free to decide their individual economic and political plans. But they are pledged to a common military command for joint defense needs and to certain economic denominators as well, including the hope of a resuscitated ruble as their common currency.
Russia has already taken the lead in economics as well as defense, with the giant republic of 149 million people bracing for Mr. Yeltsin's first steps toward free-market reform next week. Sweeping price rises are to be legalized on Jan. 2 as an end comes to much of the consumer-goods subsidies that Communism maintained to make its regime minimally palatable.
Mr. Yeltsin made a point in his CNN interview of expressing some displeasure at the limited amount of aid that has been extended by the outside world.
'There has been a lot of talk, but there has been no specific assistance,' he said, offering a small smile. He quickly offered an explanation that with the union collapsing for the last year, willing nations probably found no clear address to which to donate.
'Now everything is clear, and the addressees are known,' he said, beaming as if in invitation. 'And I think that this humanitarian aid will step up now.'
A Poke at Baker
He offered the same hint of mischief in dealing with the fact that Secretary of State James A. Baker 3d waited until he headed home from an initial visit before talking quite pessimistically of the commonwealth's chances.
'Mr. Baker, when he and I had a four-and-a-half-hour meeting here in Moscow, Mr. Baker never told me that,' Mr. Yeltsin said. 'So those who doubt as to the success of the commonwealth should beware and not be so pessimistic,' he advised. 'We are sick and tired of pessimism.'
In leaving, Mr. Gorbachev had no kind words in the televised speech for the commonwealth and never mentioned Mr. Yeltsin.
He reviewed his own campaign to preserve a drastically revised union. It would have accepted the sovereignty the republics gained after the hard-line Communist coup failed in August. This led to the fall of the Communist Party and, tonight, of the union's most prominent defender, Mr. Gorbachev.
'The policy prevailed of dismembering this country and disuniting the state, which is something I cannot subscribe to,' Mr. Gorbachev told the nation, his jaw set forward firmly in defeat as the presidential red union flag gleamed its last behind his right shoulder.
As Mr. Yeltsin deftly acquired the Moscow remnants of the union's powers and real estate across the last few weeks, the huge red union flag atop the Kremlin's domed Council of Ministers building had waved mainly as a symbol of Mr. Gorbachev's holdout resistance to the commonwealth.
The Flag Comes Down
The flag was lowered from its floodlit perch at 7:32 tonight. A muted moment of awe was shared by the few pedestrians crossing Red Square.
'Why are you laughing at Lenin?' a man, obviously inebriated against the winter cold, suddenly shouted in the square. He reeled near Lenin's tomb.
The mausoleum was dusky pink against the evergreen trees outside the Kremlin walls. Within, for all the sense of history wheeling in the night sky, the embalmed remains of the Communst patriarch still rested.
The drunk was instantly shushed by a passer-by who cautioned that 'foreigners' were watching and he should not embarrass the reborn Russia.
'Foreigners?' laughed another Muscovite. 'Who cares? They're the ones who are feeding us these days.'
In the Gorbachev era there were countless moments of floodlit crisis and emergency solutions hurriedly concocted and rammed through in the Kremlin. Previously, Mr. Gorbachev prevailed and often proved brilliant in his improvising. Tonight, though, he was the executive focus for the last time and he seemed brisk and businesslike, a man containing himself against defeat.
In an interview with CNN later, when asked about his plans, he said he would not comment now on the 'many proposals and offers' he had received. He said he would 'have to recover a little bit, relax, take a rest.'
'Respect' From Rival
'Today is a difficult day for Mikhail Gorbachev,' President Yeltsin said a few hours before the Soviet President resigned, when the Russian leader was invited to describe Mr. Gorbachev's main mistakes along the difficult road of reform.
'Because I have a lot of respect for him personally and we are trying to be civilized people and we are trying to make it into a civilized state today, I don't want to focus on these mistakes,' Mr. Yeltsin responded.

quinta-feira, 26 de dezembro de 2013

Este dia na Historia: 1991, o fim da Uniao Sovietica - The New York Times

ON THIS DAY

On This Day: December 25

Updated December 25, 2013, 1:28 PM
On Dec. 25, 1991, Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev went on TV to announce his resignation as the eighth and final leader of a Communist superpower that had already gone out of existence.

Gorbachev, Last Soviet Leader, Resigns; U.S. Recognizes Republics' Independence



Communist Flag Is Removed: Yeltsin Gets Nuclear Controls

By FRANCIS X. CLINES
Special to The New York Times
RELATED HEADLINESBush Lauds Vision of Soviet Leader: In Farewell, President Cites Gorbachev's Historic Role
The Soviet State, Born of a Dream, Dies
OTHER HEADLINESRetailers Report Sales Fell Short of Dim Forecasts: Last-Minute Buying Spree Fails to Carry Merchants Ahead of Last Year's Receipts
Pineapple, After Long Affair, Jilts Hawaii for Asian Suitors
From L.I. to Angry Illinois: A 5-Day Trash Odyssey
MOSCOW, Dec. 25 -- Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the trailblazer of the Soviet Union's retreat from the cold war and the spark for the democratic reforms that ended 70 years of Communist tyranny, told a weary, anxious nation tonight that he was resigning as President and closing out the union.
'I hereby discontinue my activities at the post of President of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics,' declared the 60-year-old politician, the last leader of a totalitarian empire that was undone across the six years and nine months of his stewardship.
Mr. Gorbachev made no attempt in his brief, leanly worded television address to mask his bitter regret and concern at being forced from office by the creation of the new Commonwealth of Independent States, composed of 11 former republics of the collapsed Soviet empire under the informal lead of President Boris N. Yeltsin of Russia.
'A New World'
Within hours of Mr. Gorbachev's resignation, Western and other nations began recognition of Russia and the other former republics.
'We're now living in a new world,' Mr. Gorbachev declared in recognizing the rich history of his tenure. 'An end has been put to the cold war and to the arms race, as well as to the mad militarization of the country, which has crippled our economy, public attitudes and morals. The threat of nuclear war has been removed.' [A transcript of Mr. Gorbachev's speech and excerpts from interviews with Mr. Gorbachev and Mr. Yeltsin are on pages A12 and A13.]
Mr. Gorbachev's moment of farewell was stark. Kremlin guards were preparing to lower the red union flag for the last time. In minutes, Mr. Gorbachev would sign over the nuclear missile launching codes for safeguarding to Mr. Yeltsin, his rival and successor as the dominant politician of this agonized land.
Yeltsin's Assurance on Weapons
Earlier today, Mr. Yeltsin told his Russian Parliament that 'there will be only a single nuclear button, and other presidents will not possess it.'
But he said that to 'push it' requires the approval of himself and the leaders of Ukraine, Byelorussia and Kazakhstan, the four former republics that have strategic nuclear weapons on their soil.
'Of course, we think this button must never be used,' Mr. Yeltsin said.
Out in the night beyond the walled fortress as Mr. Gorbachev spoke, a disjointed people, freed from their decades of dictated misery, faced a frightening new course of shedding collectivism for the promises of individual enterprise. It is a course that remains a mystery for most of the commonwealth's 280 million people.
'I am very much concerned as I am leaving this post,' the union President told the people. 'However, I also have feelings of hope and faith in you, your wisdom and force of spirit. We are the heirs of a great civilization and it now depends on all and everyone whether or not this civilization will make a comeback to a new and decent living.'
Still Against Commonwealth
In departing, the Soviet leader took comfort in the world's supporting his singular achievements in nuclear disarmament. But even more, he firmly warned his people that they had not yet learned to use their newly won freedom and that it could be put at risk by the commonwealth, which he fought to the last.
'I am concerned about the fact that the people in this country are ceasing to become citizens of a great power and the consequences may be very difficult for all of us to deal with,' he declared, implicitly arguing that his union could have remained a superpower despite the cold war's end, which he helped engineer.
'We have paid with all our history and tragic experience for these democratic achievements,' Mr. Gorbachev said, assessing centuries of suffering across serfdom and revolution, 'and they are not to be abandoned whatever the circumstances, and whatever the pretext. Otherwise, all our hopes for the best will be buried.'
Mr. Gorbachev's stringent gaze and strong caution to the now dismembered nation were in contrast to the smiling ease displayed during this transition day by President Yeltsin, chief heir to this land's political and economic chaos.
'They Need Some Belief'
'The people here are weary of pessimism, and the share of pessimism is too much for the people to handle,' Mr. Yeltsin declared in an interview with CNN. 'Now they need some belief, finally.'
Mr. Yeltsin made a point in the interview of sending Christmas wishes to his listeners today as the West celebrated the holiday, although the Russian Orthodox Christmas is not until Jan. 7. Mr. Yeltsin also took care in addressing the outside world to stress that commonwealth leaders had agreed to fulfill the disarmament commitments made by Mr. Gorbachev.
'I don't want the international community to be worried about it,' President Yeltsin said, vowing that there would 'not be a single second after Gorbachev makes his resignation' that the missile codes would go astray.
The weapons are only one item in a long list of needed precautions that the commonwealth republics must attend to if they are to establish credibility in a decidedly skeptical world that has watched the Soviet Union reverse its totalitarian course and collapse in a matter of a few years.
Mr. Yeltsin is first among equals in the 11-member commonwealth. This is a very loose political association resorted to by the former Soviet republics because of their disenchantment with the very notion of union and their need, nonetheless, for some common arrangement that might ease the escape from post-Communist destitution.
The commonwealth members are free to decide their individual economic and political plans. But they are pledged to a common military command for joint defense needs and to certain economic denominators as well, including the hope of a resuscitated ruble as their common currency.
Russia has already taken the lead in economics as well as defense, with the giant republic of 149 million people bracing for Mr. Yeltsin's first steps toward free-market reform next week. Sweeping price rises are to be legalized on Jan. 2 as an end comes to much of the consumer-goods subsidies that Communism maintained to make its regime minimally palatable.
Mr. Yeltsin made a point in his CNN interview of expressing some displeasure at the limited amount of aid that has been extended by the outside world.
'There has been a lot of talk, but there has been no specific assistance,' he said, offering a small smile. He quickly offered an explanation that with the union collapsing for the last year, willing nations probably found no clear address to which to donate.
'Now everything is clear, and the addressees are known,' he said, beaming as if in invitation. 'And I think that this humanitarian aid will step up now.'
A Poke at Baker
He offered the same hint of mischief in dealing with the fact that Secretary of State James A. Baker 3d waited until he headed home from an initial visit before talking quite pessimistically of the commonwealth's chances.
'Mr. Baker, when he and I had a four-and-a-half-hour meeting here in Moscow, Mr. Baker never told me that,' Mr. Yeltsin said. 'So those who doubt as to the success of the commonwealth should beware and not be so pessimistic,' he advised. 'We are sick and tired of pessimism.'
In leaving, Mr. Gorbachev had no kind words in the televised speech for the commonwealth and never mentioned Mr. Yeltsin.
He reviewed his own campaign to preserve a drastically revised union. It would have accepted the sovereignty the republics gained after the hard-line Communist coup failed in August. This led to the fall of the Communist Party and, tonight, of the union's most prominent defender, Mr. Gorbachev.
'The policy prevailed of dismembering this country and disuniting the state, which is something I cannot subscribe to,' Mr. Gorbachev told the nation, his jaw set forward firmly in defeat as the presidential red union flag gleamed its last behind his right shoulder.
As Mr. Yeltsin deftly acquired the Moscow remnants of the union's powers and real estate across the last few weeks, the huge red union flag atop the Kremlin's domed Council of Ministers building had waved mainly as a symbol of Mr. Gorbachev's holdout resistance to the commonwealth.
The Flag Comes Down
The flag was lowered from its floodlit perch at 7:32 tonight. A muted moment of awe was shared by the few pedestrians crossing Red Square.
'Why are you laughing at Lenin?' a man, obviously inebriated against the winter cold, suddenly shouted in the square. He reeled near Lenin's tomb.
The mausoleum was dusky pink against the evergreen trees outside the Kremlin walls. Within, for all the sense of history wheeling in the night sky, the embalmed remains of the Communst patriarch still rested.
The drunk was instantly shushed by a passer-by who cautioned that 'foreigners' were watching and he should not embarrass the reborn Russia.
'Foreigners?' laughed another Muscovite. 'Who cares? They're the ones who are feeding us these days.'
In the Gorbachev era there were countless moments of floodlit crisis and emergency solutions hurriedly concocted and rammed through in the Kremlin. Previously, Mr. Gorbachev prevailed and often proved brilliant in his improvising. Tonight, though, he was the executive focus for the last time and he seemed brisk and businesslike, a man containing himself against defeat.
In an interview with CNN later, when asked about his plans, he said he would not comment now on the 'many proposals and offers' he had received. He said he would 'have to recover a little bit, relax, take a rest.'
'Respect' From Rival
'Today is a difficult day for Mikhail Gorbachev,' President Yeltsin said a few hours before the Soviet President resigned, when the Russian leader was invited to describe Mr. Gorbachev's main mistakes along the difficult road of reform.
'Because I have a lot of respect for him personally and we are trying to be civilized people and we are trying to make it into a civilized state today, I don't want to focus on these mistakes,' Mr. Yeltsin responded.


domingo, 11 de dezembro de 2011

Faltou tinta no fim da Uniao Sovietica - Economist book review

Um dos meus assuntos favoritos -- tenho vários, talvez uns dez ou vinte, o que é um bocado, ao que parece -- e sempre presente em boas revistas como esta que leio sempre...
Aliás, falar do final do comunismo me lembra uma históra contada por John Lewis Gaddis, no seu livro-síntese Cold War, A New History.
Quando Gorbachev foi assinar o decreto de dissolução da URSS, e tirou sua caneta do bolso, não conseguiu assinar: faltou tinta.
Teve de assinar com uma bic emprestada pelo cinematografista da CNN que estava ali apenas para ser testemunho da história, não para fornecer a caneta com que foi escrita a história.
História prosaica, mas verdadeira: o socialismo não conseguiu nem fornecer a tinta do seu próprio desaparecimento...
Paulo Roberto de Almeida 

The collapse of the Soviet Union

Russia’s imperial agony

The cost of the Soviet collapse has been huge and ongoing

Post-Imperium: A Eurasian Story. By Dmitri Trenin. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; 270 pages; $49.95 and £34.99. Buy from Amazon.com,Amazon.co.uk
8 Pieces of Empire: A 20-Year journey Through the Soviet Collapse. By Lawrence Scott Sheets. Crown; 313 pages; $28. Buy from Amazon.com
“THE dying process has begun”, wrote Alexander Kugel, a journalist and theatre critic, a few months after the bloody Bolshevik revolution of 1917. “Everything that we see now is just part of the agony. Bolshevism is the death of Russia. And a body the size of Russia cannot die in one hour. It groans.” The agony lasted over 70 years. On December 25th 1991 Mikhail Gorbachev, on television, relinquished his duties as the last president of the USSR. The hammer and sickle flag was lowered from the Kremlin without fanfare. The empire expired with a sigh.
There was almost no blood on the streets of Moscow that year; the only deaths were those of three young men killed on the night of the failed coup in August 1991. (Today almost no one in Russia remembers their names or celebrates their sacrifice.) The disintegration of the Soviet empire was “relatively peaceful and orderly”, as Dmitri Trenin writes in a sober and analytical book, “Post-Imperium”. It could certainly have been worse, but the collapse unleashed civil and ethnic wars on the periphery—in the Caucasus, Moldova and the most deadly one, Tajikistan. Estimates vary, but about 200,000 people are believed to have died in the post-Soviet conflicts.
“8 Pieces of Empire” by Lawrence Scott Sheets, an American reporter who spent 20 years covering the post-Soviet conflagrations for Reuters and National Public Radio, is a powerful reminder of how relative the words “peaceful and orderly” really were. His book takes the reader inside some of these wars, which were largely ignored by a world preoccupied with the reunification of Germany and the disintegration of Yugoslavia. Different in genre and scope, both books are nonetheless shaped by personal experience.
Mr Trenin, who heads the Carnegie Moscow Centre, served the empire as a military officer in East Germany. Mr Sheets, who now works for the International Crisis Group in South Caucasus, went to the Soviet Union to study Russian in 1987 and returned shortly before Mr Gorbachev’s final presidential speech, hoping to become a foreign correspondent. His book is an invaluable eyewitness account of the traumas of the Soviet collapse told through the lives of those who were caught up in it and often buried under it. The book is written with a disarming honesty, sympathy and humility.
The “pieces” in the title refers not only to geography but to people who were scattered: a Bulgakov-loving, rebellious racketeer in Leningrad; a Russian officer left behind at a forlorn border post between Armenia and Turkey, guarding a foreign frontier with another foreign state and trying to flog snake venom to passing journalists; an ageing former Soviet foreign minister, Eduard Shevardnadze, who helped to end the cold war but failed to prevent a hot one from starting in his native Georgia, which he came to rule in the 1990s.
Stalin’s birthplace, the “wine-and-song-filled Georgia”, was one of the first to descend into anarchy. In 1992 two gangsters (both with artistic backgrounds) pushed out a crazy nationalist president (himself a former writer) and roamed into an autonomous Abkhazia on the pretext of having to guard passenger trains with tanks. Soon, a nasty ethnic war consumed this former Soviet playground. It was a “war that nobody started”, as a Georgian put it at the time. It lacked a plan, strategy, front line or regular armies, but it had plenty of vandalism and ethnic hatred.
The tragic absurdity of the war comes alive in the detail. A bunch of armed men calling themselves “knights” and “guards” downed chacha (moonshine) while they waited in the sweltering heat for a pilot to fly them and their tethered lamb to Abkhazia. “Sweaty with gregariousness, they act like they’re going to a party,” writes Mr Sheets. “Or a funeral pyre for the empire.” A few weeks later he flew back from Abkhazia on another rickety plane, this time overloaded with zinc coffins and lucky refugees jammed in the toilet.
Russia’s intervention in 1993 resulted in Georgia’s defeat. But the wounds left by the wars never healed, in part because they continued to be prodded by all sides. They were reopened in 2008, when Russia attacked NATO-aspiring Georgia over South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The consequences of Russia’s own two wars with Chechnya, north of the Caucasus Mountains, have also been grievous. Mr Sheets ends his book with a description of one of the most horrific episodes of those wars: the school siege in Beslan in 2004, when more than 1,000 people, mostly children, were taken hostage by terrorists. In the worst Soviet tradition, the state lied about the number of hostages and the terrorists’ demands. After two days government forces stormed the school, using tanks and flame-throwers. Mr Sheets met hostages emerging from the inferno, wounded, filthy and in shock. A wailing teenage boy tried to call his dead sister on Mr Sheets’s mobile phone.
“Feeling at best an interloper and at worst a tragedy speculator, I put my equipment away,” he says. Writing for nearly 20 years about people being killed “is a bit like exposing oneself to radiation”; both mind and body are affected. Today Mr Sheets works to prevent more conflicts. It is in this capacity that he warns darkly in the last paragraph of the book that the Russian empire could easily fragment still further.
This might seem odd when so many are worried about Russia’s neo-imperialist rhetoric. Yet as Mr Trenin convincingly argues, Russia is not a neo-imperialist state, but a post-imperialist one that lacks both vision and appeal, and the economic and human resources for any expansion. With a shrinking population, that accounts for only 2% of the human race, and a declining share of former Soviet trade, “the Russian empire is over, never to return.” Mr Trenin sees Russia’s policy as pragmatic and responsive, perhaps transferring his own sensibility onto the government. But he remains honest in his analysis. The current system which is based, he says, on economic growth without development, capitalism without democracy and great-power policies without international appeal, is unsustainable. Russia’s main threat is not to the outside world, but to itself.