The seventies were characterized by the activity of the Soviet foreign policy. In 1971, at the XXIV Congress of the CPSU, the Peace Program was adopted, which outlined “a set of specific tasks subordinated to one main goal - reducing the danger of a new war and strengthening peace.” History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P.469. The foreign policy of the USSR in these years was aimed at implementing this program.
The leadership of the USSR made significant efforts to ease international tension. In 1968, the UN General Assembly approved the draft non-proliferation treaty proposed by the USSR nuclear weapons. The treaty prohibited the transfer of nuclear weapons to non-possessing powers or military blocs. Ibid., p. 405 In March 1970, the agreement came into force. In 1972 session General Assembly The UN adopted a resolution on the non-use of force in international relations and a permanent ban on the use of nuclear weapons. The USSR signed such important documents with other countries as the Treaty on the Prohibition of the Placement on the Bottom of the Seas and Oceans and in Their Subsoil of Nuclear Weapons and Other Types of Weapons of Mass Destruction (February 1971), the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin weapons and their destruction (April 1972). Ibid., pp. 409-410. At the initiative of the USSR, the World Congress of Peace Forces was held in Moscow in October 1973. The congress was attended by 3,200 delegates from 143 countries. In their speeches, the congress delegates demonstrated their desire to deepen the peace movement.
The process of détente was consolidated by the Helsinki Conference on Cooperation and Security in Europe (1975) and the signing of the Final Act of the meeting, which recorded the political-military and socio-economic situation that developed in the world after World War II.
There were positive changes in relations between the USSR and developed capitalist countries. During the trip L.I. Brezhnev to France, which took place after the visit of French President Charles de Gaulle in 1966, a number of documents were signed in October 1971. In particular, the "Principles of Cooperation between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and France", as a result of which cooperation between the two countries rose to a higher level. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P.499. The USSR and France are moving towards concluding long-term agreements in their relations. In particular, in 1973, a 10-year program of Soviet-French cooperation in the field of economics and industry was signed. In 1977 L.I. Brezhnev again paid an official visit to France. A number of important political documents were signed: the Soviet-French Declaration, the Joint Statement of the Soviet Union and France on the Détente of International Tension, the Soviet-French Declaration on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, etc.
Significant progress has been made in solving the German problem. In 1970, an agreement was signed between the USSR and Germany on the recognition of post-war borders in Europe. Germany established diplomatic relations with the GDR. In 1971, the USSR, USA, France and Great Britain signed a quadripartite agreement on Berlin, which should “help eliminate tensions and prevent complications” in the West Berlin area. Ibid., p.497. In accordance with it, West Berlin was recognized as a separate state, not part of the Federal Republic of Germany. In 1971-1975 Regular meetings were held at the highest level of the leaders of the USSR and Germany. Chancellor W. Brandt made improving relations with the USSR an important part of his foreign policy, proclaiming the “new Eastern policy”. History of Russia in modern times: Textbook / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. - M., 2004. P. 219. Relations between the USSR and Italy, Great Britain and other capitalist countries developed successfully. In 1974, a ten-year agreement was signed on cooperation in various fields between the USSR and Italy, long-term agreements between the USSR and Germany and with a number of other countries. In 1978 L.I. Brezhnev again paid an official visit to Germany; as a result of the trip, documents were signed that significantly deepened the positive processes that began between the two countries.
Of primary importance in easing international tension were the relations between the leading world powers - the USSR and the USA. In the 70s, there was a turn in the relationship between the two powers from confrontation to cooperation. Bilateral meetings between the heads of the USSR and the USA also took practical steps towards warming the international climate. The result of the negotiations in 1972 was the signing of the Strategic Arms Limitation Agreement (SALT-1), as well as SALT-2 in 1979. In May 1972, a meeting was held in Moscow between the leaders of the two states L..I. Brezhnev and R. Nixon, who was the first US leader to pay an official visit to Moscow. As a result of the meeting, the document “Fundamentals of relations between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America” was signed, in which the principles of peaceful coexistence were the basis for relations between the two countries and it was especially emphasized that in the nuclear age “... there is no other basis for maintaining relations ... except for peaceful existence" Ibid., p. 219.. On May 26, two key agreements were signed: the open-ended Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Defense Systems (ABM-72) and the Interim Agreement on Certain Measures in the Field of Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT-1 ). The USSR and the USA agreed for the first time on concrete steps to contain and limit the further arms race in its most important areas. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P.503.
The Interim Agreement (SALT I) provided for the refusal of both sides for five years (1972-1977) to build new offensive missile launchers and limited the number ballistic missiles, other types of weapons were not regulated by the treaty. Nevertheless, the signing of this Treaty was of great importance, since for the first time since the start of the Cold War, modern and most powerful types of weapons were limited. The conclusion of this treaty marked the beginning of a policy of “détente” of international tension. Ibid., P.503.
Both countries abandoned the costly and destabilizing construction of missile defense systems along the perimeter of their borders. The ABM Treaty had a major stabilizing effect on the Soviet-American military balance. For the first time in post-war period The United States refused to deploy a large, strategically important system. Both sides agreed to have only two local missile defense rings - around the capital and around the main strategic missile center. Soon both sides came to the conclusion that only one defensive missile ring was “permissible.” The Soviet leadership built such a ring around Moscow, and the American leadership built such a ring around underground strategic missiles in Wyoming. The ABM Treaty remained in force until May 2002, when it was terminated at the request of the American side.
In June 1973, L.I. visited. Brezhnev in the USA. Was signed whole line documents that consolidated the turn in relations between the two countries from confrontation to normal mutually beneficial cooperation. The most important among the documents was the “Agreement on the Prevention of Nuclear War.” The United States and the USSR pledged to do everything in their power to prevent the outbreak of nuclear war. Soviet-American relations developed not only in the field of disarmament. In 1972-1973 23 agreements were signed between the USSR and the USA on cooperation in various fields. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P.504.
In June - July 1974, a new meeting between the leader of the USSR and US President R. Nixon. An important agreement was reached on the limitation of missile defense systems, on the agreed limitation of underground testing of nuclear weapons, on further efforts aimed at limiting strategic offensive weapons, on the adoption of measures aimed at eliminating chemical weapons from the arsenal of states.
In November 1974, a summit meeting of L.I. took place in the Vladivostok region. Brezhnev and the newly elected US President J. Ford, during which the most important problems of Soviet-American relations were discussed and the intentions to implement mutual obligations were fully confirmed. Ibid., p. 506.
The culmination of the “détente” process was the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), held in 1975 in the capital of Finland, Helsinki.
Consultations on it took place in 1972-1973. in the capital of Finland, Helsinki. The first stage of the meeting was held at the level of foreign ministers from July 3 to July 7, 1973 in Helsinki. Representatives of 33 European countries, as well as the USA and Canada took part in it.
The second phase of the meeting took place in Geneva from September 18, 1973 to July 21, 1975. It represented rounds of negotiations lasting from 3 to 6 months at the level of delegates and experts appointed by the participating states. At this stage, agreements were developed and agreed upon on all items on the meeting agenda.
The third stage of the meeting took place in Helsinki on July 30 - August 1, 1975 at the level of senior political and government leaders of the countries participating in the meeting, heading national delegations. The Soviet delegation was headed by L. I. Brezhnev. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P. 518. The heads of delegations signed the Final Act of the meeting. This document is still in effect today.
The core of the Final Act was the Declaration of Principles by which States pledged to adhere to mutual relations. It includes agreements that must be implemented in full as a whole on: 1) security in Europe, 2) cooperation in the field of economics, science and technology, environmental protection, 3) cooperation in humanitarian and other fields, 4) further steps after the meeting. The Final Act contains 10 principles defining the norms of relationships and cooperation: sovereign equality, respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty; non-use of force or threat of force; inviolability of borders; territorial integrity; peace settlement disputes; non-interference in internal affairs; respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; equality and the right of peoples to control their own destinies; cooperation between states; fulfillment of international legal obligations. The Final Act guaranteed the recognition and inviolability of post-war borders in Europe, which was beneficial to the USSR, and imposed obligations on all participating states to respect human rights, which became the basis for using the problem of human rights against the USSR.
By the summer of 1979, a Soviet-American compromise was reached, recorded in the SALT-2 Treaty, signed by the Soviet and American parties in Vienna on June 18, 1979. It determined the number of strategic weapons carriers for both sides. Contemporary history of Russia from the beginning of the twentieth century to the present day: textbook. Benefit /V.A. Dines, A.A. Vorotnikov, V.V. Vsemirov and others; Ed. V.A. Dinesa, A.A. Vorotnikova. - Saratov: Publishing center of SGSEU, 2006. P. 380.
Soviet Union, making a compromise, which was the SALT-2 Treaty, sacrificed a lot. First of all, the USSR agreed to reduce its strategic forces by 10% and abandoned a number of programs that were at various stages of development or deployment. But the treaty also posed significant barriers for the United States. Thus, the United States was forced to limit the number of ballistic missiles with multiple warheads (no more than 1,200 units), cruise missiles (no more than 3,000 aircraft cruise missiles). The total number of nuclear weapons carriers was fixed at 2250. According to the protocol to the SALT-2 Treaty, the deployment of land- and sea-based cruise missiles with a range of over 600 km was prohibited. Both sides - the USSR and the USA - declared that they would comply with its provisions as long as the opposing side did not violate its provisions. Ibid., S.380.
There is no doubt that the signing of the SALT II Treaty was a positive development. It meant that the United States considered it historically necessary to find certain limits during the arms race, that it had lost faith in the ability to force the USSR to adjust its foreign policy course in view of the strategic superiority of the United States.
The SALT II Treaty was signed by J. Carter and L.I. Brezhnev, but was never ratified by the US Congress. The reason was the input Soviet troops to Afghanistan. The administration of the next US president, Reagan, considered this agreement unprofitable, which led to an escalation of tensions between the USSR and the USA.
In the late 60s - 70s. The USSR did a lot to raise the level of economic and social development socialist countries of Eastern Europe. At the same time, the Soviet leadership strictly ensured that the foundations of the power of the Communist Parties were not undermined in these countries and that they remained within the sphere of influence of the USSR. During these years, a policy of paternalism towards socialist countries was formalized, which in the West was called the “Brezhnev Doctrine”. Its essence was that the USSR, in the interests of strengthening socialism, would limit the sovereignty of any socialist state. To implement it, the Soviet Union repeatedly resorted to military force or threat of force.
The USSR's desire to extend the socialist camp to countries Soviet model development caused discontent in Eastern European countries. In the spring of 1968, the leadership of Czechoslovakia, led by A. Dubcek, made an attempt to create “socialism with a human face” by democratizing society, introducing market principles into the economy, and reorienting foreign policy towards Western countries. The time of these transformations was called the “Prague Spring”. “When in January 1968 A. Dubcek became the first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, the Soviet leadership decided to use a proven technique: the new leader came under pressure continuous pressure from not only the Moscow leaders, but also their satellites,” writes D.A. Volkogonov. The Soviet leadership was very concerned about the “Czechoslovak problem.” During March - August 1968, the so-called. The “Czechoslovak question” is constantly discussed at meetings of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee. Volkogonov, D.A. Seven leaders. Gallery of leaders of the USSR. In 2 books. /YES. Volkogonov. - M.: Publishing house "News", 1997. Book 2. pp. 44-46. There was a threat of collapse of the Warsaw Pact. In August 1968, troops of the USSR and some ATS countries were brought into Czechoslovakia. A new government led by G. Husak came to power in Czechoslovakia. History of Russia in modern times: Textbook / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. - M., 2004. P. 220 -221. The invasion of Czechoslovakia by Soviet troops drew sharp condemnation from the West.
The country's leadership paid primary attention to relations with socialist countries. In 1971, the CMEA session, held in Bucharest, adopted the Comprehensive Socialist Program economic integration. It included the international division of labor, the rapprochement of the economies of the CMEA states, and the expansion of trade turnover between socialist countries. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P.478. In accordance with the plan for the international division of labor, bus manufacturing and the production of automobile parts developed in Hungary, and shipbuilding and textile engineering developed in the GDR. The comprehensive program was designed for 15-20 years; it marked the beginning of a qualitatively new stage in cooperation between the socialist countries.
The volume of trade turnover between the USSR and socialist countries increased. The USSR exported fuel, electricity, ores, and metals to socialist countries; imported machinery, equipment, vehicles.
In 1978, the construction of a complex of facilities for the Soyuz main gas pipeline (Orenburg - Western border USSR), according to which 15.5 billion cubic meters began to flow annually from the USSR to socialist countries. m of gas. In the same year, the construction of the first intersystem power transmission line Vinnitsa (USSR) - Albertirsha (Hungary) was completed, which was supposed to ensure the start of parallel operation of the united energy systems - members of the CMEA and the United energy system THE USSR.
During this period, relations between the USSR and China became complicated. The USSR fought to strengthen its influence in the Third World. This met with strong opposition from China. On March 2, 1969, Chinese military units attempted to seize Damansky Island on the Amur by force. The island was closely adjacent to the Chinese side, but its ownership was not clearly defined by the treaty documents of the two countries. The Soviet side brought in aviation, artillery, and infantry. The battles for Damansky lasted two months and almost escalated into the Sino-Soviet war. In September 1969, the Soviet side actually recognized the island's belonging to the Chinese side, and in 1991 this affiliation was legally secured. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. pp. 560-561.
The strengthening of the economic power of China with its colossal population worried the Soviet leadership. The USSR feared a military alliance between China and the United States. This forced us to maintain significant military forces on the border with China, build a strategic BAM, and support India’s military programs. Relations between the USSR and China became openly hostile. History of Russia in modern times: Textbook / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. - M., 2004. P.221.
The USSR's largest partner in the Third World was India. The USSR provided her with great economic assistance. The USSR also supplied India with the weapons it needed to counter China and Pakistan. On August 9, 1971, the Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation between the USSR and India was signed in Delhi. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P. 533. Importance To strengthen relations between the two countries, L.I. visited. Brezhnev to India in November 1973
The USSR provided support to the Arab peoples. The USSR signed Treaties of Friendship and Cooperation with Egypt on May 27, 1971, with Iraq on April 9, 1972. Ibid., p.533. This strengthened the position of the USSR in the Arab world, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and a number of monarchies Persian Gulf. In Egypt, the position of the USSR by the mid-70s. weakened, since in 1970 A. Sadat became the President of Egypt, who began to pursue a course of rapprochement with Israel and the United States, and in March 1976 he unilaterally terminated the Treaty.
In January 1973, agreements were signed in Paris to end the war and restore peace in Vietnam. Ibid., p.483. In 1975, the Vietnamese people achieved complete liberation south of Vietnam. In 1976, the state reunification of Vietnam took place and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (SRV) was proclaimed. The USSR began to provide comprehensive assistance to the Vietnamese people in the construction of socialist Vietnam. History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2. P. 489. On September 3, 1978, the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation between the USSR and Vietnam was signed. The USSR provided comprehensive assistance to Laos, where the Marxist-Leninist People's Revolutionary Party came to power.
The USSR actively influenced political process in Africa. The partisans of Angola, Mozambique, and Guinea-Bissau, who fought to overthrow the Portuguese colonial regime, received great help. In 1976, the People's Republic of Angola was proclaimed, and in the same year the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation was signed between the USSR and Angola. Relations between the USSR and Mozambique developed successfully. In 1977, a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation was concluded between the USSR and Mozambique. The USSR also provided great assistance to the people of Ethiopia, where in 1974 the monarchical regime was overthrown and General Mengistu Haile Mariam came to power. Ibid., p.532. On November 20, 1978, a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation was also signed between the USSR and Ethiopia.
In 1970, the socialist S. Allende (1970-1973) became President of Chile. At the beginning, the USSR supported President S. Allende, hoping that Chile would follow the socialist path. But unsuccessful economic policy S. Allende led to the fact that in 1973 his government was overthrown by General A. Pinochet. Ibid., p. 551. In 1979 in Latin America The USSR gained another ally - Nicaragua, in which, after the overthrow of dictator A. Somoza, supporters of the Sandinista National Liberation Front came to power, declaring their desire to build socialism. The USSR began to provide all possible support to Nicaragua.
By the end of the 70s. The USSR maintained diplomatic relations with more than 130 states. Almost half of them were developing countries. The USSR provided them with significant economic, scientific and technical assistance, provided preferential loans, and participated in the training of qualified personnel for National economy. As a rule, economic assistance to the USSR was provided practically free of charge, amounting to multibillion-dollar sums. The USSR consistently pursued a policy of supporting national regimes in developing countries that had chosen the path of socialist orientation. This policy was especially active in those regions that were in the direct sphere of influence of the USSR. Annual Soviet military assistance Afghanistan, Angola, Cuba, Nicaragua, Ethiopia, and Vietnam amounted to 15 billion rubles. The USSR was actively involved in selling weapons to developing countries (maintaining first place in the world for the last 30 years). Annual arms deliveries amounted to $12 billion (with many fraternal countries taking out billions of dollars in debt). In the Third World, the interests of the USSR collided with the interests of China, which also noticeably strengthened its position here. In the second half of the 70s, the USSR continued to globalize its foreign policy, intensifying its actions in the Middle East and Africa (Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia). History of foreign policy of the USSR. 1945-1980. In 2 volumes /Ed. A.A. Gromyko, B.N. Ponomareva. - 4th ed., revised. - M.: Nauka, 1980. T.2 P. 536-538.
In the West, there was an increasingly widespread belief that, under the guise of détente, the USSR was seeking to strengthen its own influence in the world and weaken its opponents. Fermentation began in the policy of the American elite towards the USSR, caused by pressure from right-wing forces, which considered détente a false concept that contributed, rather than hindered, the collapse of American positions in the world. In February 1974, Senator B. Goldwater expressed the credo of opponents of improved relations with the USSR: “We have never been in a worse position than today... The USSR is superior to us in every category of weapons... We were foolishly drawn into a treaty to terminate nuclear weapons testing and the SALT negotiations... All this will put the United States in a position of weakness.” Panarin, A. Project for Russia: fundamental liberalism or liberal fundamentalism / A. Panarin.- Znamya.- 1993.- No. 9.-S. 151.
The Soviet leadership was also dissatisfied with J. Carter's support for Soviet human rights activists.
Thus, the departure from the policy of confrontation led to the materialization of a climate of détente. The policy of détente contributed to the development of cooperation between East and West in various fields. In the first half of the 70s. Trade turnover between the CMEA countries and Western Europe and the USA increased 5 times. Restrictions imposed by the United States on trade with the USSR were significantly reduced. History of Russia in modern times: Textbook / Ed. A.B. Bezborodova. - M., 2004. P. 220. It seemed that there was new world with more hopeful prospects. But the process of “discharge” turned out to be short-lived. The departure of US President R. Nixon from the political arena after the Watergate scandal (1974) dealt a blow to the policy aimed against the continuation of the Cold War.
Domestic policy. Theoretical basis political system became a course towards “increasing the leading role of the party.” A situation arose when, in order to occupy any leadership position, for any advancement up the career ladder, it was necessary to have a card as a member of the CPSU. In 1977, a new Constitution of the USSR was adopted, and in 1978, the constitutions of the union republics were adopted. In these constitutions, the leading role of the Communist Party was legislatively strengthened (Article 6). The existence of other parties was not provided for by the constitution. Ordinary communists (and by the mid-80s there were about 18 million people in the party) were practically excluded from making party decisions and could not influence the state of affairs. Admission to the party was carried out according to the order, first of all workers were accepted. Elections central authorities were multi-stage. Primary organizations elected deputies to district conferences, district to city, city to regional, regional to the party congress, and the congress elected the Central Committee. With such a system, the decisive role belonged to the apparatus. A hereditary party-state nomenklatura was formed (transfer of positions “from father to son”), which became the leading stratum of society. Staying in leadership positions became lifelong. In the mid-70s. The cult of L.I. began to take hold in the country. Brezhnev. In 1977, he combined the post of Secretary General with the post of Chairman of the Presidium Supreme Council The USSR has already become the nominal head of state. Protectionism and nepotism flourished in the highest spheres. The same picture emerged in the republics, where the leading party and state elite was formed according to the clan principle. The "new nobility" moves from the role of managers to the position of real masters. In the most high circles Bribery and corruption were rampant. There is a contrast between the nomenklatura, both ordinary party members and the entire people. The growth of the ruling nomenklatura stratum, professing a double morality, and the strengthening of administrative methods of management gave rise to a movement of dissidents (dissidents) who criticized the political system and defended human rights. The group of human rights activists formed during the 60s included V. Bukovsky, P. Litvinov, L. Bogoraz, A. Marchenko, A. Yakobson, L. Alekseev, Yu. Galansky, A. Amalrik, A. Ginsburg and others. They acted from the position of customized liberalism - in the defense of human rights. Dissidents were arrested and tried for “anti-Soviet activities.” But the human rights movement was expanding. There are three main directions in it.
- 1. Marxist (R.A. Medvedev, P. Grigorenko) - believed that all the shortcomings of the socio-political system stem from Stalinism and are the result of a distortion of the basic Marxist-Leninist provisions. They set the task of “purifying socialism.”154
- 2. Liberal-democratic (A.D. Sakharov) - preached the principle of “convergence,” rapprochement and subsequent merging of the two systems. It is necessary to take all the best that is in a planned and market economy, in political and social systems West and East. Humanity has entered such
a stage of development when not class, national and other group interests, but universal human interests come to the fore.
3. National-patriotic (A.I. Solzhenitsyn, I.R. Shafarevich) - spoke from Slavophile positions. They believed that Marxism and revolution were completely alien to the Russian people. The model for Russia was considered to be a state structure that existed not even before October, but until February 1917.
After the Czechoslovak events of 1968, the dissident movement entered a new stage. Human rights activists now have an ideological leader, A.D. Sakharov. In 1971, Sakharov sent letters to L.I. Brezhnev and members of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, where he expressed his views on freedom of emigration, and opposed the use of psychiatric institutions by the KGB to suppress dissent. HELL. Sakharov believed that solving the problems facing humanity is possible only through the united efforts of all mankind. In 1975 A.D. Sakharov, as an outstanding fighter for human rights, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Since 1975, the next stage of the dissident movement began, which can be called “Helsinki.” Its participants set the task of monitoring the strict implementation of the Helsinki Agreement on Human Rights, signed by the USSR in 1975. Groups were created to promote the implementation of the agreements. To combat the human rights movement, the fifth Main Directorate of the KGB was created. For protesting against the introduction of Soviet troops into Afghanistan, he was exiled to A.D. Gorky. Sakharov. By 1984, the dissident movement was crushed. In 1982, L.I. died. Brezhnev. Yu.V. became the new leader of the party and the country. Andropov. He set a course for strengthening the rule of law in the country. First of all, the fight against corruption began, including in higher authorities authorities. Andropov managed to stop negative trends in the economy. After the death of Yu.V. Andropov's country was headed by K.U. Chernenko (Sept. 1983).
Economy. In September 1965, a reform of industrial management was carried out. A new system of “planning and economic incentives” was adopted. On the one hand, economic councils were liquidated and line ministries were revived again. On the other hand, the rights of the enterprises themselves were significantly expanded, and their economic independence increased. In March 1965, agricultural reform was announced. The role of economic incentives for labor increased (purchase prices were raised, a firm government procurement plan was established, and a 50 percent premium to the base price for products above the plan was introduced). The independence of collective and state farms expanded somewhat. Capital investments in agricultural development have increased sharply.
These reforms have had a positive effect. But there was no dramatic improvement. The main reason for the failure of the reforms was the excessive centralization of management and the resistance of the administrative bureaucratic system itself.
On the one hand, the economic development of the USSR was quite stable. The Soviet Union was ahead of the United States and Western European countries in such indicators as the production of coal and iron ore, oil, cement, and the production of tractors and combines. But as for qualitative factors, the lag was obvious. There was a drop in rates economic development. The Soviet economy became unresponsive to innovation and was very slow to master the achievements of science and technology.
Foreign policy. A period begins that will go down in history as the period of détente in international tension. In the 70s, a number of agreements were signed that reduced the danger of nuclear war and improved the international situation (1972 - Treaty between the USSR and the USA on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (ABM); Agreement on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (SALT-1); 1973 d. - Agreement between the USSR and the USA on the prevention of nuclear war; 1974 - agreement on limiting underground tests of nuclear weapons, etc. A significant step was made in the field of ensuring European security. In 1970, agreements were signed between Germany and the USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, in 1971 - a quadripartite agreement between the USSR, the USA, England, and France on West Berlin. Thus, the source of tension in the center of Europe was eliminated. Relations with the socialist countries also developed ambiguously. In 1969, relations between the USSR and China. people's republic escalated to such an extent that it led to armed clashes on the border. At the end of the 60s, the government of Czechoslovakia, which set a course for the consistent introduction of elements of a market economy, went along this path much further than the framework of the “socialist path of development” allowed. This caused sharp dissatisfaction with the leadership of the USSR. In 1968, the united armed forces of the Warsaw Pact were introduced into Czechoslovakia. The sharp deterioration of the international situation began with the decision to send Soviet troops into Afghanistan in 1979 to provide international assistance to the Afghan revolution. This decision was perceived in the West as a rejection of détente. By sending troops into Afghanistan, according to NATO countries, the Soviet Union intervened in the affairs of a sovereign state in order to forcefully change its socio-political system. In the context of intensifying confrontation between two socio-economic systems - capitalist and socialist, US President Reagan headed for a tough confrontation with the USSR. The doctrine of “limited nuclear war” was put forward, providing for the delivery of the first disarming strike on missile launchers and control centers of the USSR and other countries people's democracy. In the United States, work has begun to create a space missile defense (SDI) system. The arms race in the USSR and the USA was gaining a new turn. 159159 Culture. After removing N.S. Khrushchev very soon came the end of the “thaw”. The pressure of censorship increased. In 1966, Y. Daniel and A. Sinyavsky were convicted of publishing “anti-Soviet works.” The editorial board of Novy Mir was dissolved, A.T. Tvardovsky was removed from the post of editor, etc. Literature was divided, as it were, into two branches. Such works as “The Gulag Archipelago”, “In the First Circle”, “Cancer Ward” by A.I. were published abroad. Solzhenitsyn; “Burn” and “Island of Crimea” by V. Aksenov, “Foreign Woman” by S. Dovlatov, “The Life and Adventures of Soldier Ivan Chonkin” by V. Voinovich, “Look into the Abyss” by Y. Maksimov and others. The poet I. Brodsky was awarded for his works awarded Nobel Prize. In the USSR, countryside writers F. Abramov, V. Belov, V. Astafiev, B. Mozhaev, V. Rasputin firmly entered the literature. A special place in the literature was occupied by the books of V.M. Shukshin with his unique vision of the world. The work of the writers of the union republics is inseparable from Russian culture: the Kyrgyz Ch. Aitmatov, the Belarusian V. Bykov, the Georgians N. Dumbadze, Ch. Amiradzhibi, F. Iskander and others. The poetry of the bards A. Galich (who later emigrated), B. Okudzhava, V. Vysotsky, Y. Kim and others. They enjoyed popularity and universal love.
No. 5 FEATURES OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF RUSSIA AT THE BEGINNING OF THE XX CENTURY
In the first half of the 19th century. the decomposition of the feudal-serf system and the formation of a capitalist structure in its depths was accompanied by new phenomena in the economy. In 1893, an industrial boom began in Russia, which lasted until 1899. There was a rapid development of all branches of industry, but especially heavy industry. The largest increase in production was in the mining and metallurgical industries. The industrial boom of the 90s gave way to recession. Usually 1900-1903. characterized as a crisis phase, and 1904-1908. - as a state of depression in Russian industry.
In the 90s, a number of economic measures were adopted aimed at developing industry and banking.
- - in 1891, construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway began;
- - in 1895 a wine monopoly was introduced;
- - in 1897, a monetary reform was carried out, etc.
These and other events led to an industrial boom. Transport, especially railways, played a huge role in the post-reform development of Russia. Railway linked large grain regions with industrial centers and ports. The main part of the Trans-Siberian Railway was built. For the second half of the 19th century. characterized by significant growth in the domestic and foreign markets. Russia's main foreign trade partners were England and Germany. 1909-1913 marked by a new significant economic recovery in all industries. It took place under conditions of monopoly dominance in the Russian economy. Agriculture has achieved noticeable success. Russia ranked first in the world in terms of grain production. At the beginning of the 20th century. The production of industrial crops - potatoes, sugar beets, flax and hemp - increased. A characteristic phenomenon in the economic life of Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. There was a rapid growth of the cooperative movement. IN economic field the government had to take into account the requirements of capitalist development - to support industry and trade. Since the beginning of the century, the autocracy has consistently pursued a policy of protectionism, in other words, high protective duties on industrial goods imported from abroad: this was aimed at ensuring the development of domestic industry, protecting it from foreign competition. Commercial and Manufacturing Councils were established, which included representatives of merchants, manufacturers and factory owners.
From the end of the 19th century. Russia relied heavily on foreign investment in its industrial development. The influx of foreign capital, on the one hand, accelerated the process of industrialization of Russia, on the other hand, could not but generate dependence on foreign capital. Under pressure from domestic industrialists, Nicholas 2 issued a decree according to which foreign capital was allowed to freely locate in Russia, but the export of raw materials and profits was limited. Russia lagged behind in general economic level and in the standard of living of the population, only in comparison with the most developed industrial countries - the USA, England, France, Germany. Russia owed the development of its economy not so much to the concerns of the government as to the work of many millions of peasants and workers. In 1907, a political system was established in Russia, which marked a turn towards political reaction, but at the same time carrying out the necessary reforms designed to prevent social upheaval and contribute to the modernization of the country. The conductor of this course was Stolypin. The name of Stolypin is associated with the reform of peasant allotment land ownership. The agrarian question occupied the most important place in the socio-economic and socio-political life of Russia. In economic terms, the Stolypin reform had its own positive sides. During the seven years of its implementation, notable successes were achieved in the growth of agricultural production.
2.1.The concept of “developed socialism”
Marxist theory, which became the foundation of Soviet state ideology, was based on very simple and widespread ideas: it is possible to build a fair society where there would be no self-interest, violence and exploitation in relations between people. The sources of all these troubles were declared private property and the state. Thus, the path to the ideal had to lie through the destruction of all signs of the state and through the elimination of the stratum serving state power - the bureaucracy.
However, the entire history of socialism in the USSR came into blatant contradiction with the conclusions of Marxism about the withering away of the state. With the death of Stalin, the last obstacles to the transformation of the bureaucracy from a “servant” of state power into an independent public and political force, claiming complete mastery of this power. The situation was further complicated by the fact that within the ruling elite there was a separation of separate groups based on various government departments and structures. In people's minds, the Soviet state was increasingly associated not with communist ideals, but with the interests of the bureaucracy.
The energy charge contained in Marxist-Leninist ideology appeared in the second half of the 60s. on the verge of extinction. This was manifested in the obvious decline in mass labor enthusiasm, the growth of social apathy, the increasingly widespread spread of “ideologically alien” phenomena, etc. The main task in ideology is to form among workers faith in the possibilities of the Soviet system.
In December 1966, an article by F.M. appeared in the main Soviet newspaper Pravda. Burlatsky “On the construction of a developed socialist society.” A new ideological concept was taking shape: the completion of the full construction of socialism (which was announced at the 21st Congress of the CPSU) marks a new long period - the stage of “developed socialism”, during which the advantages of the socialist system are fully realized. Entry into communism was postponed indefinitely. In 1967, Brezhnev himself spoke about building “developed socialism” in the USSR in a speech on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution, and this conclusion was finally consolidated at the 24th Party Congress in 1971.
The concept of “developed socialism” was intended, firstly, to “reconcile” the fundamental provisions of Marxist-Leninist theory with the established realities of socialism: the preservation of the class division of society, various forms property, property commodity-money relations and, finally, the state itself with its bureaucratic apparatus. Secondly, to justify a departure from previous grandiose projects (the economic reform of 1965 is one of them) to a calmer, more stable development. Thirdly, to instill in the consciousness of citizens that the reality around them is a value in itself, which should bring satisfaction and instill pride.
Of course, life in the Soviet Union was far from ideal, there was a lot of good, and there was also bad. But there is something unconsciously attractive about that time, something that constantly asks for it back. Life in the USSR in the 70-80s. So what was good then?
1. Education
Soviet education was completely free and accessible to absolutely everyone. Any school graduate from a small collective farm somewhere near Dushanbe could freely enter Moscow State University, study for free, live in a dormitory for free, and even receive a scholarship for good studies. And, of course, the quality of education: it was quite rightly considered the best in the world at that time.2. Medicine
Medicine in the Union was also free. Yes, it is still free - you may object, but the quality of the services provided cannot be compared. The most powerful medical examination and vaccination system in the world at that time, the availability of sanatorium-resort treatment. Try now to get a ticket to a sanatorium at the regional clinic on the first visit - I sympathize...3. Free housing
Yes, the apartments were not given right away, you had to wait your turn, but at least they were given. One-room rent was given to a young specialist, and after the birth of two children one could get three-ruble rubles. And again, all this is completely free.4. Unemployment
Or rather, its absence. There has been no unemployment in the USSR since 1929. This looked especially advantageous against the backdrop of the then Great Depression in the West.5. Equality
The standard of living of the “upper” and “lower”, of course, differed, but certainly not tenfold. The vast majority of the population was precisely the Soviet middle class. There were often situations when a skilled worker at a plant earned even more than the director of that same plant.6. Rest
By 1988, there were 16,200 sanatoriums, dispensaries and rest homes operating in the Union, where citizens only partially paid for accommodation and treatment. The right to rest was not an empty phrase and was observed very strictly.7. Science
Whatever you say, science in the USSR was very powerful. Approximately half of all the world's scientists and engineers worked in the Soviet Union. It is not surprising that it was the USSR that was the first to launch a man into space, the first to go into outer space, and made many other discoveries.8. Army
By the mid-1980s Armed forces Unions were the largest in the world in terms of numbers with total number more than 5 million soldiers, and possessed the world's largest stockpiles of nuclear and chemical weapons. In addition, the USSR Armed Forces had the largest tank groups on earth - about 60 thousand tanks, which was 2.5 times greater than the number of Siege and US tanks combined.9. Confidence in the future
Citizens of the USSR were absolutely sure that nothing would happen either to the country in which they live, or to the enterprise where they work, or to the university where they study. I could go to bed peacefully every night without fear of being fired the next day. Or they will raise the rent. Or they will raise prices. Or they will do some other mean thing against the state. level.10. Public education
From the very early years Soviet children were instilled with a love of work, respect for elders, and norms of behavior in society. As a result, there was no such rampant crime as there is now, and there was even much less banal garbage on the streets.11. Queues for kindergarten
Yes, in the USSR there were also queues for kindergarten, because the birth rate was very low. high level. But at worst, Soviet children waited 1-2 months for their turn. Compared to what we have now, this is just a fairy tale.12. Friendship of peoples
This was not an empty phrase. The consciousness of a “Soviet person” in many cases prevailed over the consciousness of belonging to one or another nationality. No one, in fact, even thought about these nationalities; everyone was each other’s comrades.13. Culture
It’s somehow even awkward to compare the level of Soviet and current Russian cinema. Literature, theaters, exhibitions and museums. Yes, censorship interfered very strongly in all spheres of culture. But this did not stop the directors of that time from making films that we have been watching for decades.14. Products in stores
Yes, there was a “shortage”, relatively speaking, instead of 100 varieties of sausage there were 2 varieties on the counter, but both of them were made from meat. The vast majority of products were own production and at the same time excellent quality.15. Plants and factories
There were a huge number of industrial enterprises, and all of them always had jobs. The Soviet Union was not just an oil and gas producing state. Everything needed for life was produced there.Of course, the USSR was not a utopia, where everyone lived easily and simply, and certainly the USSR was not some kind of Garden of Eden, where a person could live carefree, without worrying about anything. Life was difficult, many ordinary and familiar things for us today had to be “obtained”, exchanged for something, in many situations it was almost impossible to do without “pull” and the necessary acquaintances. But no matter what, there was always a cloudless sky above the head of the Soviet people, and a confident life and a bright future ahead.
2.1.The concept of “developed socialism”
Marxist theory, which became the foundation of Soviet state ideology, was based on very simple and widespread ideas: it is possible to build a fair society where there would be no self-interest, violence and exploitation in relations between people. Private property and the state were declared the sources of all these troubles. Thus, the path to the ideal had to lie through the destruction of all signs of the state and through the elimination of the stratum serving state power - the bureaucracy.
However, the entire history of socialism in the USSR came into blatant contradiction with the conclusions of Marxism about the withering away of the state. With the death of Stalin, the last obstacles to the transformation of the bureaucracy from a “servant” of state power into an independent social and political force, claiming full mastery of this power, disappeared. The situation was further complicated by the fact that within the ruling elite there was a separation of separate groups based on various government departments and structures. In people's minds, the Soviet state was increasingly associated not with communist ideals, but with the interests of the bureaucracy.
The energy charge contained in Marxist-Leninist ideology appeared in the second half of the 60s. on the verge of extinction. This was manifested in the obvious decline in mass labor enthusiasm, the growth of social apathy, the increasingly widespread spread of “ideologically alien” phenomena, etc. The main task in ideology is to form among workers faith in the possibilities of the Soviet system.
In December 1966, an article by F.M. appeared in the main Soviet newspaper Pravda. Burlatsky “On the construction of a developed socialist society.” A new ideological concept was taking shape: the completion of the full construction of socialism (which was announced at the 21st Congress of the CPSU) marks a new long period - the stage of “developed socialism”, during which the advantages of the socialist system are fully realized. Entry into communism was postponed indefinitely. In 1967, Brezhnev himself spoke about building “developed socialism” in the USSR in a speech on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution, and this conclusion was finally consolidated at the 24th Party Congress in 1971.
The concept of “developed socialism” was intended, firstly, to “reconcile” the fundamental provisions of Marxist-Leninist theory with the established realities of socialism: the preservation of the class division of society, various forms of property, commodity-money relations and, finally, the state itself with its bureaucratic apparatus. Secondly, to justify a departure from previous grandiose projects (the economic reform of 1965 is one of them) to a calmer, more stable development. Thirdly, to instill in the consciousness of citizens that the reality around them is a value in itself, which should bring satisfaction and instill pride.
New Constitution
The new development concept influenced the country's legislation. The Constitution of 1936 ceased to meet the objectives set. For example, the first article of the Constitution called the USSR “a state of workers and peasants,” the second article spoke of “the conquest of the dictatorship of the proletariat,” which in no way connected with the declaration of “genuine” democracy. In addition, in the existing image of state power there were practically no “proletarian” features. A new definition of the political system, social structure, and the nature of the economic and interethnic development of the USSR was necessary.
In February 1976, at the XXV Congress of the CPSU, it was decided to begin practical preparations for the adoption of a new Constitution of the USSR. Preparations were carried out under the slogan of improving socialist democracy, and as a real confirmation of this, a nationwide discussion of the project was organized in May 1977. The draft Constitution was published in newspapers, and citizens were given the opportunity to propose amendments to it. Thus, the appearance of a democratic process was respected. The final text of the Constitution was approved on October 7, 1977 at a session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. The most important article in it was Article 6, which read: “The guiding and directing force Soviet society, the core of its political system, state and public organizations is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." This led to an even greater strengthening of the importance of the party apparatus throughout the power pyramid, and finally established party membership as required condition for any career. At the same time, the very fact that a special article about the CPSU appeared in the Constitution spoke of a weakening of the party’s ideological influence. Earlier in the formal consolidation of her role guiding force there was simply no need.
The state was declared “national”, i.e. from now on it was supposed to equally represent the interests of all social strata. This provision was supposed to become the justification for the triumph of “genuine” democracy in the Soviet Union.
The social structure that had developed in the USSR was interpreted in a new way: Soviet society was declared homogeneous. There were still classes - the worker and collective farm peasantry and the “social stratum” - the intelligentsia, but their differences were declared insignificant. In fact, Soviet society was not only not homogeneous, but its structure became increasingly hierarchical, resembling a kind of social pyramid. The main sign of social status was the place a citizen occupies in relation to the authorities.
The most important place in the characteristics of the society of “developed socialism” occupied new Constitution the question of the state and development of interethnic relations. It was proclaimed that as a result of the rapprochement of nations and nationalities in the USSR, a “new historical community - the Soviet people” had emerged. But at the same time, it was not explained by what criteria some nationalities have the constitutional status of a nation, and others - a nationality, why some were allowed to have statehood in the form of a union republic, others - only an autonomous one, and still others did not even have this.
2.3.Political “stagnation”. "Gerontocracy"
If previously the overwhelming majority of party workers, civil servants and business leaders were from the common people who showed business abilities, then in the 60s, and especially in the 70s and 80s. the replenishment of the power elite took place through a special system of selection and training of future leaders: higher party, Komsomol and trade union schools, the Academy social sciences, Diplomatic Academy. It was possible to get into them only on the recommendation of influential officials. The formation of the elite also occurred through “natural reproduction.” Children and other relatives of bosses from the very beginning of joining independent life found themselves in a special position. They studied at prestigious universities, then many of them occupied promising positions, almost automatically making a career.
The bureaucracy of the times of “stagnation” is characterized by the fact that the country’s top leadership began to consist mostly of very elderly people. Average age members of the Politburo by the end of the 70s. reached 68 years old. Many of them suffered from serious illnesses, including L.I. himself. Brezhnev, who suffered a stroke in 1976. According to the testimony of his attending physician E.I. Chazov, Brezhnev in the last years of his reign turned into a frail old man.
Television reports and radio broadcasts unwittingly demonstrated the oddities caused by his physical condition. A truly “gerontocracy” (the power of the old people) has been established in the country. The efforts of doctors, who ensured that the workload on elderly leaders was reduced to a minimum (for example, Politburo meetings often lasted no more than 15-20 minutes), did not save the situation.
Against the backdrop of all this, there is a rapid decomposition of power and management structures, law enforcement agencies, economic, scientific, and educational institutions. Bribery, theft of state property, false reporting on the state of the economy, the establishment of connections between government officials and the criminal world - all this reaches such proportions that it becomes impossible to prevent scandalous situations. For example, the so-called “fishing business” in the early 1980s. about the smuggling of red caviar and valuable fish abroad with damage to the state in the tens of millions of rubles. The threads of criminal connections stretched to the very leadership of the Ministry of Fisheries.
National politics
National relations in the USSR it was customary to consider it a source of pride for party and state politics. Indeed, officially proclaimed in the 60-70s. the new historical community of people really existed. Soviet history provided many examples that ethnic, cultural, and racial differences did not prevent people from getting along. The main thing that made it possible to achieve this was the feeling of involvement in a common great cause. This was the case during the first five-year plans, during the Great Patriotic War and the Virgin Lands epic. Troubles and misfortunes that suddenly happened in different parts countries, evoked empathy and a desire to help on the part of the entire multinational Soviet people. An example of this is the earthquake in Tashkent in 1966, which completely destroyed the entire city and killed tens of thousands of its inhabitants. Just a year later, on the site of the ruins, a virtually new city arose, entire streets of which were built largely through gratuitous efforts and at the expense of all the republics of the USSR. The basis national policy the idea of achieving actual equality of nations was laid down. This idea went back to Lenin’s ideas that the internationalism of a “great” nation should consist “in the inequality that would compensate on the part of the oppressing nation, the large nation, for the inequality that actually develops in life.” In other words, the Russians, as the largest and formerly “oppressive” nation, must take responsibility for the development of all nations of the Soviet Union, paying a particularly high price for this.
Such “donation” of the Russian people was justified from the point of view of overcoming mistrust of them on the part of minorities, but something else happened. While helping all the republics, Russia was unable to properly take care of solving its own pressing problems. One of them already in the 60s. There is a real extinction of the Non-Black Earth Region - a huge region that includes about 30 regions of the RSFSR. Chronic domestic instability pushed many residents Russian outback to leave their native land and seek happiness in more prosperous places in a huge country. The Non-Black Earth Development Program (1974) turned out to be ineffective, since the main emphasis in it was on economic development, rather than social sphere. Moreover, it proclaimed a policy of eliminating “unpromising” villages, which only accelerated the process of extinction. From 1959 to 1979, according to population census data, the number of villages in the non-black earth zone of the RSFSR decreased from 294 to 177 thousand.
In ideas about actual equality, all republics should not only be the same in terms of living standards and social security, but their economic and social structures should also be similar so that integration (unification into a whole) would be easier and more natural. Enormous funds were invested in the construction of factories in Central Asia, Transcaucasia, and the Baltic states. However, from the very beginning there was a problem of personnel for these enterprises. The deficit was made up almost exclusively through the resettlement of labor and specialists from Russia, Ukraine and Belarus to the republics. As a result, in the capitals and large cities of the republics, representatives of the “titular” nations in a number of cases found themselves in a minority compared to the Russians.
Very serious contradictions arose on this matter.
In the Baltics, Georgia, and Moldova, the growing presence of Russians was perceived as deliberate Russification and assimilation. In Muslim republics, the cause of discontent was the unconventional behavior of visitors to these places. In addition, the national elite saw the Russians as their competitors and an obstacle to the realization of narrow national interests.
At first sight social structure union republics more and more resembled the Russian model, but in reality it turned out that the division into social groups in most republics it occurs on a strictly national basis. “Indigenous” residents preferred traditional types of economic activity - agriculture, services, trade. The state apparatus and the education sector were staffed primarily with national personnel. Russians, as a rule, made up the main backbone of the working class, engineering and technical workers, i.e. those layers whose social status was never high, and in “stagnant” years it generally fell. Thus, “indigenous” rural residents felt disadvantaged in comparison with Russian city dwellers; at the same time, social differences in cities often placed Russians in the position of “second-class” citizens.
Some leaders of the republics sought to increase the share of representatives of “their” nationalities in capitals and large cities by attracting people from rural areas. As a result, cultural and social differences became much more pronounced, and national isolation arose. The Russians became increasingly uncomfortable in this atmosphere. At every opportunity they sought to return to Russia.
The problem of a number of repressed peoples also remained unresolved. Crimean Tatars and Volga Germans advocated the restoration of their autonomies liquidated during the Great Patriotic War. Meskhetian Turks and Greeks demanded permission to return to their former places of residence.
A separate problem in the USSR was the so-called “Jewish question”. In June 1967, in connection with the Six-Day Arab-Israeli War, the USSR broke off diplomatic relations with Israel. UN Security Council Resolution No. 242 identified Israel as an aggressor country. A powerful anti-Israeli campaign began in Soviet newspapers. At the same time, there was a surge in everyday anti-Semitism. The reaction to this on the part of Soviet Jews was the struggle for the right to leave the USSR for their “historical homeland.”
This stage in the history of the Soviet Union coincided with the growth of ethnic self-awareness among the majority of the peoples of the USSR. However, the lack of a proper reaction to this on the part of the central government contributed to the fact that this process began to result in the “jealousy” of peoples towards each other, infatuation with illusions about a separate “national paradise”.
2.5.Completion of the period of “gerontocracy”
In November 1982 L.I. Brezhnev died. Yu.V. was elected General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. Andropov. From 1967 until the beginning of 1982, he was chairman of the KGB of the USSR. Andropov’s weight in the circles of the country’s leadership was, firstly, determined by the influence that he acquired through his leadership of the state security agencies. Secondly, his personal qualities played a role: intelligence, high education, asceticism (combined with authoritarianism and intolerance of dissent).
Andropov’s personality corresponded to the interests of various groups within the Central Committee and the Politburo. He clearly outlined his priorities new policy: “Although everything cannot be reduced to discipline, it is necessary to start with it” (December 1982). In the first half of 1983, a campaign was launched to strengthen labor discipline. In particular, they conducted raids in cinemas, bathhouses, and shops in order to identify those who were there during working hours.
Soviet citizens learned about the scale of the revealed abuses. For example, during Operation Web, multimillion-dollar thefts in trade, which were widespread, were proven. Investigations such as the “Uzbek case”, which revealed many years of large-scale fraud in cotton, the “Krasnodar case” (about corruption in the Krasnodar region), and the “case of the leadership of the Ministry of Internal Affairs”, which affected Minister N.A., had a wide resonance. Shchelokov and his deputy, Brezhnev's son-in-law Yu.M. Churbanova.
A number of major leaders were sentenced to severe punishments, some committed suicide. The fight against corruption was accompanied by a serious personnel renewal - on average, more than 30% of party functionaries were forced to leave their posts.
For the first time in many years, there were objective assessments of the state of Soviet society, recognition of contradictions and accumulated problems. The new secretary general stated bluntly: “We don’t know the society in which we live very well.”
But Andropov's reign lasted less than a year and a half.
In February 1984, Yu.V. Andropov, who suffered from many chronic diseases, passed away.
The complete opposite The new General Secretary of the Central Committee, K.U., appeared to Andropov. Chernenko, Brezhnev's closest friend and ally. The appearance of such a person in power indicates that the party bureaucracy dreamed of eliminating the threat to its quiet existence. The Stalinists also pinned their hopes on Chernenko. However, the short reign of the elderly and sick Chernenko did not allow these hopes to come true. In March 1985, K.W. Chernenko died.
2.6. Economic “stagnation”
By this time, new resources had been discovered on the territory of the USSR, opening up the possibility of further extensive development, in the form of gigantic reserves of oil, gas, non-ferrous metals, etc. All this predetermined the development that was established in the 70s. socio-economic “stagnation” in the country.
The transition to “stagnation” was marked by the proclamation of a course toward “improving the economic mechanism.” Externally, this course differs little from the previous one. The same tasks were set - the development of cost accounting, material incentives, turning production to the needs of workers, etc. However, in practice this was expressed in strengthening centralized management and a return to indicators focused on quantitative rather than qualitative growth of production. In the plans of the ninth (1971-1975) and tenth (1976-1980) five-year plans, the task of increasing growth rates was no longer set; it was only intended to increase the production of total output. As a result, during the ninth five-year plan the gross volume industrial production grew by 43%, in the tenth - by 24%, in agriculture, respectively - by 13% and 9%. At the same time, the planned targets of the five-year plans were not fulfilled: in the ninth five-year plan, the implementation of the plan in industry was 91% (in agriculture - 68%), in the tenth - 67% (in agriculture - 56%). Thus, in the 70s. The Soviet economy sank to the level of simple reproduction, which was only capable of satisfying the already established needs of the population.
Meanwhile, people's demands gradually grew and came into increasingly sharp conflict with the capabilities of the domestic economy. The result of this was a chronic shortage of industrial and food products, often affecting essential goods. The situation with commodity supplies was worst in the regions of the RSFSR remote from the Center - in Siberia, the North, the Urals and the Far East. Moscow, Leningrad, the capitals of the Union republics and some other cities, including the so-called science cities, remained “islands” of very relative prosperity.
Not last role The existing imbalances in the Soviet economy associated with the intensifying arms race also played a role in creating this situation. Defense spending diverted funds and effort from civilian production.
The refusal of reforms inevitably pushed towards a routine solution of socio-economic problems: the lack of quality goods and food of own production begins to be compensated for by ever-increasing imports. The Soviet Union became the world's largest grain importer, even ahead of traditional grain importer Japan.
By the mid-80s. every third ton of bread products was produced from imported grain. The production of livestock products was based on grain imports. The USSR was forced to enter into long-term agreements on grain supplies, to undertake obligations to annually purchase at least 9 million tons from the USA, 5 million. tons in Canada, 4 million tons in Argentina.
The sources of funds for purchases abroad are gold and foreign exchange reserves, external loans and export earnings. The use of gold reserves during Brezhnev's times was a relatively rare occurrence. The main focus was on increasing profitability from foreign trade. The easiest way to gain a place in the foreign market was through the export of fuel and minerals.
During the global energy crisis of 1973, as a result of a 20-fold increase in world oil prices and an 8-10-fold increase in raw materials, the USSR received significant income. The proceeds from the sale of raw materials and fuel were used to purchase consumer goods and equipment for their production.
In connection with this, the main priority of industrial development in the 70s. becomes a mining, primarily fuel and energy, complex. Since 1969, by a special decision of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR, the accelerated development of oil and gas production in Western Siberia. Over 10 years, the volume of oil produced here has increased 10 times. At the same time, rapid growth occurred in other sectors of raw materials production - coal, timber, mining and processing of non-ferrous metals. The costs of maintaining these priorities were constantly growing, since it required the creation of acceptable social infrastructure in remote areas, and most importantly, the development of the transport system. In 1974, the grandiose construction of the Baikal-Amur Mainline began practically from scratch, which lasted 10 years. In 1970, the first Soviet-German “gas-pipe” contract was concluded, according to which the USSR received pipes from Germany for the construction of a gas pipeline from Western Siberia, then paying for gas supplies to Europe.
Tremendous successes have been achieved in the development of the fuel and energy complex and in the development of the natural resources of Siberia. To this day, the basis of the Russian economy is the extractive industries.
All these activities were carried out due to the lag of those industries that determined scientific and technological progress - electronics, mechanical engineering, robotics, etc.
Thus, the policy of the period of “stagnation” made it extremely difficult to solve the objective task of transitioning the Soviet economy to intensive development. The Soviet economy became part of the world market, with prices for its main export (oil) largely dependent on Saudi Arabia, and for its main import (grain) on the United States. Possible sharp price fluctuations posed a threat to the future of the Soviet economy. But the Soviet leaders, led by Brezhnev, preferred not to look for the deep reasons for what was happening, and they perceived reality itself in an increasingly distorted form.
Related information.
Surveyor. Who is a surveyor? Description of the profession. Profession surveyor Surveyor training
Magellanic clouds: who are they?
Pepper Steak Sauce Creamy Pepper Sauce
How to create a competent portfolio for a designer
If you dreamed that a house burned down - interpretation of the dream according to the dream book