GKChP: just a conspiracy or a control shot in the USSR?
This text was supposed to be published in August, by the date, but ... It was then that the authors managed to find several foreign responses to the well-known events of August 1991 in the USSR. Reviews of completely extraordinary, for the sake of which the authors decided to temporarily postpone publications of that time in the Soviet, as well as in the first independent mass media.
Looking from London
By no means for everyone, an attempt at a coup, a kind of "revolution from above", not at all red in nature, but purely bureaucratic, bureaucratic, came as a complete surprise. Someone then quite openly provoked many members of the party elite to a showdown with the "Gorbachev clique", and someone predicted this kind of scrape long before it.
The Western media for the most part with some sadistic ecstasy followed the attempted coup in Russia, undertaken by the party-administrative elite of the country at the end of the summer of 1991. After all, before their very eyes the most daring predictions about the coming collapse of the Soviet Union - a communist colossus with feet of clay - came true.
But only a quarter of a century later, the London Financial Times, the mouthpiece of the business community, mustered up either the courage or the audacity to write that the failed putsch was a prelude to the collapse of the USSR:
Well, expectations were met completely. But wasn't that the main task of the well-orchestrated GKChP? But during the days of the notorious putsch, the assessments of the Western press were mostly neutral, stating everything for granted. Apparently, they were afraid to frighten off.
But ten years after August 1991, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who had recently ceded her post to John Major, in an interview with the BBC beautifully argued that:
But she also admitted something completely different:
In turn, US President George W. Bush not only did not recognize the State Emergency Committee on August 20, 1991, as it followed from the statement spread by the White House, but also demanded that the legitimate president of the USSR be returned to power. Otherwise, the United States threatened to withdraw the new Soviet-American trade agreement from Congress and increase military and political pressure on the USSR.
On the same day, the foreign ministers of the countries of the European Economic Community decided to freeze the EEC assistance programs to the Soviet Union totaling $ 945 million.And then, on August 20, representatives of the US and German embassies were freely visited by representatives of the US and German embassies, expressing their official support.
Looking from Beijing
It is unlikely that the organizers of the anti-Gorbachev speech were in any way worried about who and when would consider them to be the real authorities. But during the days of the coup, only two managed to officially recognize the State Emergency Committee: the leader of the Libyan revolution, Muammar Gaddafi, and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
At the same time, the real Colonel Gaddafi not only recognized, but also praised the coup, calling it "a well-done deed that cannot be delayed." And Saddam Hussein expressed the hope that "thanks to the Emergency Committee, we will restore the balance of power in the world and stop the rampant expansion of the United States and Israel."
The DPRK, Vietnam, Cuba and Laos had a similar position, but officially they did not dare to advertise it (apparently, under pressure from Beijing, which officially announced "non-interference in the internal affairs of the USSR, like other countries").
It is not surprising that in the power structures of the PRC, almost on the very first day of the failed coup, on August 19, they realized that the completion of the liquidation of the USSR with the failure of the clearly confused GKChP figures was a matter of the shortest time.
Moreover, as many Chinese political scientists now note, an alternative - the Stalinist Communist Party - was never created in the USSR. It is she, in the opinion of the Chinese comrades, who would be able to reverse the destructive processes in the country.
Although, recall, in the 60s - early 80s in Beijing, they declared the need to create such a party and made every effort to create it. However, in vain (see. The Great Lenin: 150 years without the right to oblivion).
On August 22, 1991, when the State Emergency Committee unexpectedly quickly faded into the past, Qian Qichen, the PRC foreign minister (1988-1997), in a conversation with the Soviet ambassador in Beijing, said that “Sino-Soviet relations will continue to develop on the basis of recorded in joint bilateral communiqués in May 1989 (Beijing) and in May 1991 (Moscow) ”.
At the same time, "the PRC does not intend to interfere in the internal affairs of the USSR, as well as in other countries." Although with a call to influence the situation in the Soviet Union, in order to change there "revisionist leadership, accelerating the collapse of the USSR", they repeatedly appealed to the leadership of the PRC in 1989-91. over 30 pro-Chinese foreign communist parties.
Beijing, for well-known geopolitical reasons, has not advertised support from the PRC for these parties with openly Stalinist, and more often simply Maoist positions since the mid-80s. But in September 1991, the leadership of the CPC Central Committee, according to a number of data, confirmed its same position during meetings with representatives of a number of the aforementioned parties.
In addition, a Chinese curtsey was made to the representatives of the DPRK leadership, who, according to available information, offered something like collective assistance to the "anti-Gorbachev" Soviet communists. And in September-October 1991, the Chinese leadership informed the authorities of the remaining socialist Vietnam, Laos and Cuba about this position.
The rapid collapse of the notorious GKChP on August 21, 1991, which lasted only three days, is considered to be the last attempt to save the USSR and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from collapse. But in the pro-Stalinist communist movement, to this day, they see in combination with the State Emergency Committee, and not without good reason, something like a special operation to publicly discredit the USSR.
In this regard, it is quite logical to conclude that it was about an operation either spontaneous or carefully planned, to accelerate the liquidation of the state and the party. It seems that the top Chinese leadership itself adhered to the same opinion about the State Emergency Committee, which is why it simply “washed its hands” in connection with the August 1991 situation in the USSR.
Looking from Berlin and Delhi
Such conclusions have not yet received wide coverage in the leading media of the former USSR and socialist countries. Meanwhile, many communist parties of the pro-Stalinist persuasion, operating to this day, give their extraordinary assessments of the GKChP. Here are the most uncompromising of them.
Willie Dikhut is an economist, author of the sensational 6-volume book "Restoration of Capitalism in the USSR", founder of the legal Communist Party of Germany, Stalinist in its charter and spirit, wrote:
Kazimierz Miyal, one of the leaders of socialist Poland in 1947-1955, founder of the semi-legal Communist Party of Poland, which was restored only in 2002 (Communists of Eastern Europe. They did not become “strange” allies), wrote:
The erosion of the Soviet leadership with the introduction of Western agents there, which began already in the time of Khrushchev, soon led to its link with the party leaders-changeling. All of them were waiting in the wings, and with the elimination of K. Chernenko this hour came. And the growing crisis in the country demoralized ordinary communists and the majority of the population. Moreover, both of them were demoralized by the anti-Stalinist hysteria of the Soviet leadership since 1956 and the failed Khrushchev program of the CPSU to create communism by 1980. Therefore, they did not defend the USSR.
Jose Marie Sison, Doctor of Law and historical Sciences, the leader of the semi-legal "Communist Party of the Philippines", wrote:
Emakulath Nambudiripad (1909-1998), Indian Communist, Prime Minister of Kerala State, Doctor of Law and History, stated:
For a long time, the aforementioned assessments were hidden both in the scientific and expert community and in the large Russian media for quite understandable reasons. But it is characteristic that there is no refutation of these estimates anywhere and, it seems, is not expected ...
For the sake of completeness, it remains to add the characterization of the State Emergency Committee, which was made by the irreconcilable opponents of the Stalinists - the Trotskyists. In the statement of the so-called International Communist League - IV Trotskyist International, on those days it was noted:
In an attempt to achieve recognition of Western, primarily American imperialism, the State Emergency Committee proclaimed a declaration that did not mention a single word about "socialism." On the contrary, they promised to continue Gorbachev's course, that is, they promised to promote private property and adhere to all of Gorbachev's foreign policy obligations. Inside the country, the State Emergency Committee declared martial law and ordered workers to stay at home. When Bush nevertheless made it clear that Yeltsin was his man in Russia, the GKChP quickly disintegrated. Yeltsin and his henchmen quickly filled the power vacuum.
Source: "Why did we fight in defense of the Soviet Union".
It is a rare case when the assessments of a historical event from the side of two warring Marxist trends turned out to be so close. Apparently, it is not just that it is recognized that the extremes converge.
- Alexey Chichkin, Alexey Podymov
- ria.ru, 24smi.org, aif.ru, nalin.ru, smart-lab.ru, softmixer.com
Information