The collapse of the USSR: millions of lives in exchange for "freedom and independence"
It is customary to speak of the collapse of the USSR as a bloodless, relatively peaceful event. According to the independence singers throughout the CIS, there is not a minute to regret the collapse of the USSR, since what happened in December 1991 was the most successful option of the inevitable divorce. They argue that if the matter went differently, and if Moscow tried to keep the Union, it would have been possible to avoid multimillion-dollar human sacrifices. Was the collapse of the USSR so bloodless and was our peaceful divorce the way many anti-Russian propagandists try to present it, and after them ordinary advocates of independence in some former Soviet republics, including those who are categorically opposed to the reunion?
It is very significant that the peaceful nature of the collapse of the USSR is recognized and emphasized by the official historical the science of most CIS countries, both loyal to Russia, and not so. According to a “strange” coincidence, Russian liberals also like to talk about the bloodlessness of the destruction of a single country and that it has become a saving good for its peoples. What do Russian liberals and Esengovian historians have in common, reveling in their independence? The answer, presumably, is obvious: both Russia is deeply disgusted by a strong Russia, and they both try to belittle the significance of all that is connected with its image, and everything Soviet becomes the main object of this humiliation.
Moreover, an unambiguous negative assessment of the collapse of the USSR has not yet been given by the Russian state itself, which, by the way, continues to be the official legal successor of the USSR, its historical continuation. Around the problem of the collapse of the country, public discussions continue, during which there are "undoubted advantages", "achievements" that would be impossible, do not collapse the USSR. Only Putin openly declared the tragedy of the collapse of the Union of all the representatives of the Russian authorities, let’s recall his famous words about “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20 century”. It seems that a person’s position on this key issue for modern history easily determines his moral nature and true ideological affiliation, putting everything in its place. The failure to recognize the collapse of the USSR as the greatest catastrophe, which entailed a series of tragic events, testifies either to the nearness or to the anti-Russian bias of the individual - everything is simple here.
So, we will answer the praises of the collapse of the country, who dream of continuing the separation, and say a few words about the "bloodless" nature of the divorce of the Soviet republics. At the end of last year, material was published on the website of expert.ru expert.ru, which was devoted to assessing the consequences of the collapse of the USSR in terms of real casualties. According to the publication, the number of victims of the collapse can be estimated in numbers from 100 thousand to 600 thousand people. First of all, direct losses that occurred during military conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union: in Transnistria, Karabakh, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Tajikistan and Chechnya are taken into account.
The authors of the material draw attention to the horrific number of victims of these conflicts, giving eloquent numerical comparisons with the results of similar events in world history:
Losses in some civil conflicts
The number of dead and refugees (internally displaced persons) in armed conflicts on the territory of the former USSR
100000 killed in conflicts in the post-Soviet space - it is only officially confirmed losses that occurred without any doubt. Given the fact that maintaining adequate statistics during the same Karabakh conflict was complicated by the extreme degree of chaos characteristic of that war. In the course of this conflict, there have been cases of massive civilian deaths. In addition, the Karabakh events are also known for the fact that many so-called soldiers of fortune participated in them, accounting for the losses among which also raises big questions. The issue of civilian casualties, which continues to remain extremely painful for both parties to the conflict and has ghostly chances for clarification, deserves special attention.
Estimating the real number of casualties in conflicts in the post-Soviet space is also a very difficult task, because all these conflicts are characterized by the fact that they do not have exact start and end dates. For example, researcher Vladimir Mukomel in his work “The demographic consequences of ethnic and regional conflicts in the CIS”, analyzing the consequences of the first Chechen war, begins the counting of the conflict, and, consequently, takes into account its victims, from 1994 year. After the signing of the Khasavyurt agreements, in the period of anarchy, the record of crimes committed in Chechnya was not carried out at all. Thus, an adequate assessment of the victims among the Russian population of Chechnya seems completely impossible. The researcher of this issue, Sergey Maksudov, notes that in the period between 1989 and 2002, the number of the Russian population of the republic decreased from 300000 to 20000 people. How many of the 280000 Russians fled from the republic, and how many were killed over the years, it is very difficult to guess.
If so much in the evaluation of direct losses resulting from the collapse of the USSR, so many contradictions and insurmountable difficulties arise, then what can we say about the assessment of indirect losses, which are probably much more terrible than direct military ones. The collapse of health care, mass production shutdown, rampant criminality, the dominance of imported food poison, total alcoholism and drug addiction, as well as despair affecting millions of ordinary people — all of these phenomena resulting from the collapse of the country could not but affect the health of citizens in the most harmful way and do not take away thousands, if not millions, of lives ... Such is the true price of “freedom and independence” that Russian liberals and some esengovia historians like to say so much about.
Information