DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Zarekylin75** · 03-16-2010, 05:39 AM

I think you are correct in your comparison of the USSR and China.

We in the US often see independence as the natural progression for some countries. However, while it would have been difficult or impossible for a republic to break away from the USSR in an earlier time, given the circumstances of 1991 and the existence of the USSR even if they could republics might not want to have broken away. The fear of some of them could have been how would they maintain their independence from neighboring countries other than the USSR. Also, the US would have wanted Kazakstan and the Ukraine to stay within the USSR because of their nuclear missiles.

Also, while we generally believe independence is progress that was not the case in the former USSR. Most of the former Soviet Republics became dictatorships that adored Stalin. The USSR was a lesser danger to the US and world peace than the independent Soviet Republics.

The structure of the USSR had it's faults but it's fall was not the sure thing that people now see so clearly. The Russian Empire/USSR had stood for hundreds of years and if Iran had been more powerful some republics might not have wanted to break away. If China hadn't had the demonstrations in Tiananmen Square and was in a stronger position in terms of foreign affairs, it could have been different for the USSR regardless of it's faults.

Yes, that's all a reasonable assessment - it was frankly unimaginable that any of the republics could have safely walked away (or might even have wanted to) even as late as the late 1980s. But what I am talking about was the fatal crack in a disintegrating wall. Once it became obvious that the whole thing was falling apart - and this became obvious within a matter of days in the summer of 1991, which is what makes it all so astonishing - the legal fiction of Republican independence, which had been embedded in the Soviet system in 1918 but which had been thoroughly ignored ever since - suddenly became the vehicle that the republics used to head for the exits. Some of them did it for what we in the West would consider proper romantic revolutionary reasons - such as the Baltics and to some extent the Ukraine - while others, like Belorussia and all of the Central Asian Republics, did it for cynical reasons. They were in the hands of neo-Stalinist strongmen who quickly realized that they had a rare opportunity to be the Big Man in a small country instead of having to answer to the former Big Men in Moscow. But the fact is, whatever their motivation, they faced a largely forgotten and impossible to use escape valve that suddenly opened. And they had functioning provincial governments that made it at least marginally practical.

China has learned this lesson and allows relatively little power to local governments (and has made sure the Army shows its teeth once in a while to keep everyone in line). I think Putin has learned this lesson too; it likely isn't an accident that he sharply curtailed the power of regional governors and governments and made them more dependent on Moscow. He wouldn't want anyone trying to take advantage of a future crisis to try to head for the exits of the Russian Federation either.

03-16-2010, 05:39 AM	#10
Zarekylin75 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 440 Senior Member	I think you are correct in your comparison of the USSR and China. We in the US often see independence as the natural progression for some countries. However, while it would have been difficult or impossible for a republic to break away from the USSR in an earlier time, given the circumstances of 1991 and the existence of the USSR even if they could republics might not want to have broken away. The fear of some of them could have been how would they maintain their independence from neighboring countries other than the USSR. Also, the US would have wanted Kazakstan and the Ukraine to stay within the USSR because of their nuclear missiles. Also, while we generally believe independence is progress that was not the case in the former USSR. Most of the former Soviet Republics became dictatorships that adored Stalin. The USSR was a lesser danger to the US and world peace than the independent Soviet Republics. The structure of the USSR had it's faults but it's fall was not the sure thing that people now see so clearly. The Russian Empire/USSR had stood for hundreds of years and if Iran had been more powerful some republics might not have wanted to break away. If China hadn't had the demonstrations in Tiananmen Square and was in a stronger position in terms of foreign affairs, it could have been different for the USSR regardless of it's faults. Yes, that's all a reasonable assessment - it was frankly unimaginable that any of the republics could have safely walked away (or might even have wanted to) even as late as the late 1980s. But what I am talking about was the fatal crack in a disintegrating wall. Once it became obvious that the whole thing was falling apart - and this became obvious within a matter of days in the summer of 1991, which is what makes it all so astonishing - the legal fiction of Republican independence, which had been embedded in the Soviet system in 1918 but which had been thoroughly ignored ever since - suddenly became the vehicle that the republics used to head for the exits. Some of them did it for what we in the West would consider proper romantic revolutionary reasons - such as the Baltics and to some extent the Ukraine - while others, like Belorussia and all of the Central Asian Republics, did it for cynical reasons. They were in the hands of neo-Stalinist strongmen who quickly realized that they had a rare opportunity to be the Big Man in a small country instead of having to answer to the former Big Men in Moscow. But the fact is, whatever their motivation, they faced a largely forgotten and impossible to use escape valve that suddenly opened. And they had functioning provincial governments that made it at least marginally practical. China has learned this lesson and allows relatively little power to local governments (and has made sure the Army shows its teeth once in a while to keep everyone in line). I think Putin has learned this lesson too; it likely isn't an accident that he sharply curtailed the power of regional governors and governments and made them more dependent on Moscow. He wouldn't want anyone trying to take advantage of a future crisis to try to head for the exits of the Russian Federation either.
	Quote