The Collapse Of The Soviet Union

Throughout its long history, Russia has been trapped in a continuous cycle of authoritarian regimes; only interrupted briefly with periods of tumultuous democratic transitions that were plagued by poor bureaucracy and weak institutions. Therefore, time and time again, Russia has turned towards authoritarianism. In the late 1900’s to early 2000’s, Russia again saw the fall of democracy coincide with the rise of a competitive authoritarian regime. This rise of competitive authoritarianism in Russia in the late 1900’s to early 2000’s was largely the result of the resource curse which granted Putin’s Administration false economic performance legitimacy. This in turn reinvigorated past strongman ideals, while at the same time solidified negative

The December of 1991 marked the end of the Soviet Union—and with it, an entire era. Like the February Revolution of 1917 that ended tsardom, the events leading up to August 1991 took place in rapid succession, with both spontaneity and, to some degree, retrospective inevitability. To understand the demise of Soviet Union is to understand the communist party-state system itself. Although the particular happenings of the Gorbachev years undoubtedly accelerated its ruin, there existed fundamental flaws within the Soviet system that would be had been proven ultimately fatal. The USSR became a past chapter of history because it was impossible to significantly reform the administrative

The democratization, economic liberalization, and eventual collapse of the Soviet Union is commonly attributed to Mikhail Gorbachev's Perestroika and Glasnost reforms during the period of 1985-1991. This purpose of these reforms is still a trenchant question as the countries of the old Soviet Union, particular Russia, are being pressured to further liberalize their economies.

One country is comparable to the United States of America in terms of world power and prominence. Russia makes their name known beginning in World War 2 (WW2), later in the Korean War, Cold War, and today’s proxy war in the Syria. Russia’s culture, environment, politics, military, and economy do not just make Russia a regional powerhouse, but slowly becoming a region of influential power to surrounding countries with the end state of a global superpower. All the factors that make Russia the powerhouse that it is slowly becoming, highlights the impressive trend that supersedes the previous Soviet Union and past leaders.

Since then President Putin of Russia has gradually attempted to re-unite the Soviet Union by re-staking claims to certain of the previous member states. This post-cold war resurgence by Russia to dominate other states is another illustration of the struggle between power and freedom or

Russia has many cultural characteristics that have shaped the country we know today. A nation 's culture can define its actions and make them more predictable as a state on the international level. Understanding a nation’s culture gives great insight into the motives and reasoning behind their aggression or acts of force. Factors such as geography, weather, political landscape, military, and key infrastructure provide a clear understanding of Russian culture and how it has shaped the nation over the past century.

The foreign policies of Russia also compliments in many ways its domestic policies, both in the apparent want for dominance and security in the focal point on sovereignty. These aims lead to an importance on bringing back Russia’s international status and removing positions of power that Western states have had in Russia

In 1989, the world saw the fall of the United Soviet Socialist Republic (U.S.S.R.), which was also known as the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was a block of 15 Communist Eastern European states that was ruled by one government with various puppet governments located throughout the states. Its collapse brought about new issues that the world had never had to deal with before. The fall of such a large block of Soviet states created many problems and some of the solutions that were used to solve these problems, as well as many of the tensions that were created during this time, still affect the world today. Some of the ramifications resulting from the Soviet Union’s collapse are still being felt; however, many problems have been solved

Moscow, U.S.S.R. 19 September, 2020. Instead of in our world when it collapsed in 1989, the Soviet Union managed to pull through the tough time, but now it couldn’t. Rioters crowded the streets, attempting to penetrate the defenses of the buildings holding state officials. Only the KGB remained loyal to its government, while the U.S.S.R.’s enemies watched smugly, and the Warsaw Pact Nations defected to NATO. A civil war in Cuba ended communism there, and Anti-Communist factions in all nations were at strong points.

The Russian government is creating a notable history of political and economic system changes, as well as leaders. Although the age of the Russian Empire was the beginning of the established long-lasting power, it had some fundamental faults in terms of wealth and equality of its citizens. Tsars and tsarinas had too much power to provide the necessary equilibrium of social growth and development. This problem was developed and used to convert the country into the era of socialism, which later became the communist era. Despite strong hopes of positive changes after the Dissolution of the Soviet Union, the current, “semi-presidential” Russian federation hasn’t gone too far from its wealth-egoist past. However, it raises the question: what

In order to improve and conduct a nation, new reforms and new implementation are essential to be addressed. Valdimir Putin, the current president of Russia, has diligently delegated and decided upon many proposals, and therefore assured the safety of his people. Putin has considerably secured Russia’s stability by founding a family holiday, influencing a decrease in poverty, and deciding upon opposing NATO.

In Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?, Karen Dawisha relates Russian President Vladmir Putin’s rise to power. She overarchingly claims that Putin is an authoritarian leader who has obstructed and even reverted Russia’s path of democratization, citing, amongst many factors that enabled his ascension, his “interlocking web of personal connections in which he was the linchpin” (100), money-laundering to tax havens and personal projects, and the complicity of the West. With copious research, journalistic interviews, legal documents, and even sporadic informational diagrams, it is evident why her book is so popular amongst scholars and history enthusiasts. Unfortunately however, in spite of the grand yet oftentimes substantiated claims she generates, a more subtle yet noteworthy assumption is made: that the state is a protector, as Olson proffered. She employs this theoretical underpinning from the beginning, though is not representative of Putin’s actual authoritarian regime.

Under Mikhail Gorbachev the Soviet Union underwent massive social, political and economic reform that drifted away from communist ideology and this ultimately lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union and failure of communism in Eastern Europe. This essay will focus on how the Perestroika reform and Glasnost policy programs as well as other external and internal pressures contributed to the failure of communism under Gorbachev. The aim of the Perestroika and Glasnost reforms was to restructure and strengthen the Soviet political and economic system and provide more freedom and democracy within the Soviet Union while strengthening Communism. However, these changes had achieved exactly what they aimed to prevent when they were first elaborated and led to the failure of communism and collapse of the Soviet Union. While focusing on the policies this essay will also focus on the major increase in nationalism that occurred in the Soviet Republics as a result of the Glasnost. External pressure from the western world was also a factor and the role that the United States and the Ronald Reagan administration played in the downfall of communism under Gorbachev will be examined. The essay will also discuss how the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the 1991 Coup d’état led to the failure of the policies and failure of communism.

The present day Russian Federation involves a democratic system, given the presence of elections, an independent judiciary, and the supremacy of law. Yet, in democracy, the crux of it involves an inevitable paradox: law limits state power, but the state must have the power to enforce the law. However, finding the balance of the ability to enforce laws, and therefore maintaining order, while not infringing on civil liberties, requires a mutual understanding, a social contract, between the rulers and the ruled. This requirement has not found its place in the Russian political arena, especially since “creating a rule-of-law-based sate out of dictatorship is not easy” (Bressler 2009). In addition, the Russian psyche views authority as a source of force and violence (Yakovlev 1996), an etymological result of a continuity beginning from imperial Russia. Although the Russian Federation, the Union Soviet Socialist Republics, the Russian Empire, and the Tsardom of Russia differ significantly, a strong state remains prevalent in the core of Russian history and politics. In short, the nature of political rule in Russia involves a never ending tug of war between the seemingly undying authoritative soulless entity known as the state and the equally undying Russian people’s hunger for liberty.

Russia’s Return as a Superpower. There are concerns that Russia may once again “reassert itself militarily” (Wood 7). After the original fall of communism in 1991, Russia seemed to be on a path to democracy. Currently the notion of a democratic Russia seems to be fading as Russia “has been centralizing more and more power in the Kremlin” (Putin 2). Regional governors, who were once elected by the people, are now being appointed by Moscow.