home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac of the 20th Century
/
TIME, Almanac of the 20th Century.ISO
/
1990
/
90
/
jan_mar
/
0312990.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-02-27
|
6KB
|
132 lines
<text>
<title>
(Mar. 12, 1990) Why The Empire Should Crumble
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
Mar. 12, 1990 Soviet Disunion
</history>
<link 07993>
<link 00764>
<link 00004>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
SPECIAL SECTION: THE SOVIET EMPIRE
ESSAY, Page 52
Why The Empire Should Crumble
</hdr>
<body>
<p>By Yuri Afanasyev
</p>
<p> [Yuri Afanasyev, 55, is a Soviet historian who, along with
Andrei Sakharov, helped found the Interregional Group of
Deputies, a radical group of parliamentarians that has
increasingly criticized Gorbachev for moving too slowly on
reforms.]
</p>
<p> People are losing their confidence in perestroika,
considering it for the most part to be rhetoric. Many have lost
their faith in Mikhail Gorbachev. But the biggest trouble in our
house has come from the least expected place: our rich family
of nationalities.
</p>
<p> Our misfortune is being played out on two fronts: the
flare-ups of ethnic hatred within the republics and the growing
opposition of the republics themselves to Moscow. These
calamities have been as unexpected to us as the disintegration
of the world colonial system was to many Marxists. We had
rejoiced at the crumbling of that system. At the same time, we
believed our empire was protected from such troubles; after all,
didn't we enjoy an immunity of sorts in our "eternal brotherhood
of peoples"?
</p>
<p> Such slogans have not helped. An enormous fire of national
strife burns in the U.S.S.R.
</p>
<p> The embarrassed initiators of perestroika are still unable
to define this problem and rely instead on such terms as
nationalism, conflict and separatism. They still don't have
enough courage to use the appropriate words, for we are
witnessing the crash of the last world empire, coupled with the
downfall of what was most Stalinist in the Stalinist system.
</p>
<p> To understand today's events, we must go back to the
beginning. It is December 1922, and Lenin has just retired into
his final illness. But his mind is still pulsing. On Dec. 30 the
First Congress of Soviets of the U.S.S.R. is scheduled to devise
a structure for the union. Joseph Stalin is pushing for national
groups to join the Russian Federation as autonomous republics.
But Lenin wants all the regions, including Russia, to sign a
treaty of equality and form a union. His view will ultimately
prevail.
</p>
<p> But Lenin immediately begins to have second thoughts.
Perhaps the union will still have too much power over the
republics. He dictates a letter--one can only call it
apocalyptic--in which he laments that he has "failed the
Russian workers for not interfering strongly enough in the
so-called issue of autonomy." Lenin concludes that the next
Congress of Soviets should amend the plan once more so that the
union would retain only its diplomatic and military functions.
</p>
<p> All the participants in the birth of the U.S.S.R. believed
they were choosing the best method of solving the nationalities
question. Instead, they were setting a huge time bomb. No matter
what the reasons were behind the formulation of the union--according to Lenin, to stimulate the world revolution; according
to Stalin, to build socialism in one country--it would even
out the various levels of development of many peoples and bring
different nations, cultures and civilizations into a common
framework. But only one method could be used to achieve this
Utopian goal: mass violence. The union was doomed from the very
beginning.
</p>
<p> Thus, at the very moment the U.S.S.R. was being formed,
Lenin was aware of its explosive nature. He realized that if his
original proposal was formally implemented without guaranteeing
the rights of republics, the union would eventually be
transformed into a notorious ruler of the center over the
republics, overseen by what he called the "Great-Russian
chauvinist, villain and tyrant, which is what a typical Russian
bureaucrat is." After Lenin died in 1924, his worst fears became
a reality under Stalin.
</p>
<p> Today we are confronted with a Stalinist map of the country,
and have used it as the basis for carrying out perestroika,
accepting this unified landmass as a historic entity. Our
tensions spring from an inadequate understanding of a most
crucial fact: the U.S.S.R. is not a country, nor is it a state.
The Eurasian territory that is marked as such on the maps is a
world of worlds made of different cultures and civilizations.
It is a neighborhood of states and nations that are tired of
their colonial and colonizing past, that have been tortured and
humiliated by Stalinist efforts at unification.
</p>
<p> We cannot reconcile ourselves to the idea that the U.S.S.R.
as a country has no future. Each of the existing worlds within
the empire longs for nothing less than sovereignty. But the
Soviet leadership is unable to shake its belief that a
fundamental revision of our national system would result in
anarchy and disintegration. In reality, the Kremlin is actually
pushing the republics toward secession. The Baltic states have
found themselves forced to move in that direction. This tendency
could affect the other republics as well unless we come up with
the only possible alternative to secession: sovereign and
politically independent national states.
</p>
<p> Many of us still hope to overcome the multitude of
difficulties that besiege us by our usual method--by means of
force, this time ordered by a President empowered to do so. Such
is the dramatic and even tragic nature of the present situation:
instead of moving ahead toward doing away with the empire, we
have become like rabbits transfixed before a boa constrictor.
All we are doing is returning to an age of centralization and
dictatorship--this time in the form of the presidency, since
the President of a disintegrating Soviet Union can only emerge
as its dictator.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>