Why Gorbachev destroyed the Soviet Union. Why Gorbachev destroyed the USSR

Sooner or later it will become known how Mikhail Gorbachev was tied to himself by the chairman of the KGB of the USSR Yuri Andropov, but the fact remains - M.S. Gorbachev was a faithful servant of his patron for many years. And after his death, he brought the work begun by Yuri Andropov in 1967 to the very end - in 1991 the USSR was still collapsed!

Now, from the height of the 21st century, it is clear that the collapse of the USSR could have been avoided, that if Gorbachev had followed the Chinese path, the USSR would still have remained a superpower - reformed, humanized, "revisionist", but a superpower!

However, the West, represented by the United States and Great Britain, foretold its greatest agent - Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov - a different scenario, which involved all kinds of support for the gerontocracy regime and "stagnation" headed by Brezhnev, who fell into insanity, drawing the country into the insane Afghan war (remember who it was initiated by Andropov personally!); Belovezhskaya agreements, a chain of national conflicts in Tbilisi, Vilnius, Fergana, Baku, Dushanbe, Yerevan; dismemberment and economic enslavement of the Soviet Union into pieces - former republics that have become "independent" states.

Indirect evidence that Yu.V. Andropov was for the West the most valuable agent of all times and peoples, there is a fact that for the first and last time in history, the heads of the United States and Great Britain, President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, personally flew to Moscow for his funeral.

It is possible that it was on February 14, 1984, on the day of Andropov's funeral, that M.S. Gorbachev was invited to the "casting" in the UK, which took place in December of the same 1984.

Materials about this visit were recently declassified by the National Archives of Great Britain, which they did not fail to write about on all the Internet.

But few people know that along with Gorbachev, his strongest competitor, the "owner" of Leningrad, Grigory Romanov, also went to the "casting". Romanov relied on the army, Gorbachev on the KGB. The result of the "smotrin" was the election in the spring of the following 1985, M.S. Gorbachev as the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, and Romanov was "woven bast shoes".

Starting from this incident and right up to Putin, all local princes who wanted to reign as some fragment of the former USSR had to go (and go!) to the "bride" in Washington. Since then, the expression "Washington Regional Committee operates."

Interestingly, immediately after the election of Vladimir Putin as President of the Russian Federation, information was posted on the Internet that Yu.V. Andropov is a Jew, the son of a wealthy St. Petersburg jeweler, a bigamist, a coward and, in general, a vile person.

Before Putin, the Internet sang the exact opposite: Andropov positioned himself as a 100% proletarian Rusak, originally from Ossetia.

In the photo: Andropov in his youth. Draw your own conclusions about his nationality. In my opinion - one hundred percent Jewish.

In 1967, unknown forces pushed Yu.V. Andropov to the post of chairman of the all-powerful KGB of the USSR, and two years later he invited the 36-year-old Mikhail Gorbachev to become his deputy. This did not happen, but since 1971 Gorbachev began to actively travel around Western Europe and America - semi-officially, sometimes even privately, without the strict control of the KGB of the USSR, which was supposed at that time.

It is possible to assume that the plan for the collapse of the USSR by the hands of Andropov and Gorbachev was concocted in the Washington kitchen in the late 60s and early 70s of the twentieth century, and later it was only improved and supplemented.

One way or another, but the plan of the overseas strategists was a success - the scrapping of the Soviet system, brought to the point of absurdity, was perceived by our people with a bang. Against the backdrop of the death of the hated regime, the collapse of the USSR as a state seemed to all of us a logical and desirable phenomenon.

Many of us are experiencing the consequences of our delusion now, when a significant part of the former USSR (Moldova, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) have turned into zones of instability or "hot spots", and Ukraine is generally called "European Somalia".

So, hello to you, Mikhail Sergeevich, from the "Somali"! We wish you health and good luck so that everyone else, looking at you, would be reluctant to sell their homeland!

On March 2, 1931, a boy was born in the village of Privolnoye, Stavropol Territory. He will grow up, graduate from Moscow University, fate will lift him to the very pinnacle of the power of a mighty and great country, he will be enthusiastically received outside his homeland and cursed at home. He will change the map of the planet and reverse evolution. He will undoubtedly end up in the history books, even already. The only pity is that he forgot that you can not only get into history, but also get stuck.

Stavropol Judas M. Gorbachev, brought to power in the USSR with the help of external forces, played a major role in the collapse of the USSR. For 6 years of his leadership of the USSR, the external debt increased by 5.5 times, and the gold reserves DECREASED by 11 times. The USSR made unilateral military-political concessions. M. Gorbachev inflicted the maximum damage to his Fatherland in the history of the country. No country in the world has NEVER had such a leader. Therefore, a Public Tribunal over Judas is needed to identify the reasons that contributed to his coming to power and destructive anti-state activities.

“When WE received information about the imminent death of the Soviet leader (it was about Yu. V. Andropov.), We thought about the possible coming to power with our help of a person thanks to whom we could realize our intentions. This was the assessment of my experts (and I always formed a very qualified group of experts on the Soviet Union and, as necessary, contributed to the additional emigration of the necessary specialists from the USSR). This person was M. Gorbachev, who was characterized by experts as a careless, suggestible and very ambitious person. He had good relations with the majority of the Soviet political elite, and therefore his coming to power with our help was possible.. Margaret Thatcher. Member of the Trilateral Commission - January 1992.

Reading the book by Panarin Igor Nikolaevich "The First World Information War" I came across an interesting material about M.S. Gorbachev. He cites some excerpts from an article dated December 29, 2004 in the Rossiyskiye Vesti newspaper by Leonid Smolny "The General Liquidator".

"For some people, autumn comes early and stays for life ... Where do they come from? From the dust. Where do they go? To the grave. Does the blood flow in their veins? No, then - the night wind. Is the thought knocking in their heads "No, that is a worm. Who speaks with their lips? A toad. Who looks with their eyes? A snake. Who listens with their ears? Black abyss. They stir up human souls with an autumn storm, they gnaw at the foundations of reason, they push sinners to the grave. They rage and in explosions of rage they are fidgety, they sneak, hunt, lure, from them the moon sullen face and clear flowing waters are clouded. Such are the people of autumn. Beware of them on your way ". Ray Douglas Bradbury "Something Terrible Is Coming"

Coming down from the mountains

By the beginning of the 1980s, the Soviet Union was still outwardly strong, but invisible "worms" and "moles" were already undermining it from the inside. The country needed reforms, it was clear to everyone. The question was whose group would come to power and, accordingly, whose strategic line would prevail. The Brezhnev clan was preparing its candidacy for a "successor" to replace the leader who had fallen into senile impotence. At one time, certain forces pushed forward the first secretary of the Central Committee of the Belarusian Republican Party Committee, Pyotr Masherov, who mysteriously died in a car accident. They also talked about St. Petersburg Romanov. But he was compromised by the secret services. However, unexpectedly for many, Yuri Andropov comes to the post of Secretary General. It seemed to be for a long time. Despite the rumors that were widely spreading about Yuri Vladimirovich's poor health, he could have held out in the Kremlin for more than one year. Did not work out. Just as fleetingly flew in the people's memory Konstantin Chernenko. The country was tired of the funeral, and in March 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev became the new General Secretary.

Much has been written about the intrigues that accompanied the nomination and promotion of Mikhail Sergeevich to this high position. But not all. Writers and analysts who thoughtfully talk about the undercurrents in the "Kremlin aquarium" for some reason do not mention one remarkable circumstance. Gorbachev is a southerner, next to his Stavropol are the mystical Caucasus Mountains. And in the south, everything is not only growing rapidly, but also taking root that you can’t immediately figure out.

Yes, there is a certain secret in the mechanism of moving the MSG upwards. A provincial secretary with an appropriate outlook, a limited vocabulary from old political economy textbooks, objectively had no chance of moving to Moscow. But he was moved. As they say, including the chairman of the KGB of the USSR, Yuri Andropov (which is not so, but more on that below). Gorbachev was the first secretary of the Stavropol Regional Committee, the king and god of the country's largest region, where party bosses like Andropov and Suslov liked to relax, and the curator of "failed" agriculture.

Another mystery: Heydar Aliyev, head of the Azerbaijani KGB, must have known something about Gorbachev's Stavropol past and tried to stop him. Yuri Andropov at one time promoted Aliyev to Moscow in order, apparently, to use his dossier against Mikhail Sergeevich at the last moment. And therefore, it is no coincidence that Gorbachev, almost immediately after coming to power, struck a blow at the Azerbaijani Chekist. So what could the "competent authorities" know about the last Soviet general secretary? What scared Mikhail Sergeyevich so much?

Party intrigues

The reform plans that Yuri Andropov started included a lot, but there was never any talk of the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was subsequently done by Gorbachev, who did not hesitate to call himself Yuri Vladimirovich's nominee. Andropov intended to move the CPSU away from governing the country, transferring full power to the Soviet "business executives". The Soviet government, and not the conclave of elders of the Politburo, was to head the administrative vertical. And Andropov also wanted to create a two-party system in the country, where the ruling party would constantly feel the breath of a competitor on its neck. This version of the reforms seems to be very different from what Mikhail Sergeevich subsequently did with the gullible people.

It is clear that the removal of the CPSU from power was not a simple matter. It was necessary first to "bleed" the party, to introduce disorganization into the well-ordered ranks. The reason for the offensive was the financial sins of the Soviet economic elite, whose affairs became the subject of attention of the KGB officers. However, before the arrival of Andropov, they could not put the accumulated information into action, because the "business executives" were covered by high-ranking party officials. But now, in 1982, the "committee" took seriously the Krasnodar and Astrakhan secretaries. But few people know that the third in this list was the former secretary of the Stavropol Regional Committee of the CPSU, Mikhail Gorbachev.

A small digression into history. The southern direction has become a matter of concern for law enforcement agencies since a certain time. From the Republic of Afghanistan, where the contingent of Soviet troops carried out an "international mission", along with the coffins of the dead servicemen, "hard" drugs also began to arrive. Analysts of the KGB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR saw a particular danger in the fact that the transit and distribution of narcotic substances were "covered" by both high-ranking officers of law enforcement agencies and individual representatives of the party apparatus. Attempts to calculate the geography of the transit flows of Soviet drug traffickers were made by the Minister of Internal Affairs of the USSR Vasily Fedorchuk, his deputy for personnel Vasily Lezhepekov and the chairman of the KGB of the USSR Viktor Chebrikov. On the instructions of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, they sent Mikhail Vinogradov, head of the psychophysiological laboratory of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, the task of developing a method of covert identification of law enforcement officers who either used drugs or were in contact with narcotic substances. The republics of Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan were chosen as a testing ground for testing the method, a special team took part in the annual preventive examination of the personnel of the internal affairs bodies. As a result, it turned out that the police officers of these republics, from generals to privates, in 60 cases out of a hundred personally used drugs. But the most important thing, for which the operation was planned, and which the immediate supervisor of the study, Mikhail Vinogradov, did not know at that time, was the confirmation of the information that all drug flows from Central Asia and the Caucasus converged in the Stavropol Territory from the very beginning. And now it became clear why, back in 1978, Mikhail Gorbachev was "pushed" from the first secretaries of the Stavropol Territory to the insignificant post of secretary of the CPSU Central Committee for "failed" agriculture. Removed from under attack? Or maybe, on the contrary, they were framed under the repressive skating rink of the "committee"? After all, by that time the Chekists had launched an "outdoor" after him.

Mysticism of Malta

Gorbachev was saved by a miracle. True, it can be said that this miracle was man-made. The strange quick deaths of two general secretaries, Andropov and Chernenko, who, in theory, were supposed to be groomed and cherished by the doctors of the Fourth Directorate of the USSR Ministry of Health, still haunt many specialists and historians. Be that as it may, but after coming to power, Mikhail Sergeevich immediately defeated a group of experts from the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs who were involved in the scandalous "Stavropol drug transit", sending some to resign, some to retire. But the southern accent in the activities of the Secretary General only intensified. It is no coincidence that Gorbachev pulled out the Georgian Shevardnadze, placing him in a key area - foreign policy, appointing Eduard Amvrosievich, who hitherto had nothing to do with diplomatic work, to the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR. Shevardnadze covered Gorbachev from the rear, together they then quietly and not without benefit for themselves surrendered the foreign policy positions of a great country. They went too far, they could be exposed by secret services loyal to the oath. And therefore, in order not to fall under the rink of the "committee", Gorbachev and Shevardnadze deliberately forced the processes of the collapse of the USSR.

Remarkable touch. The famous meeting in Malta, December 1989. Secretary General Mikhail Gorbachev and US President George W. Bush said at the end of the meeting that their countries were no longer adversaries. And on the eve of the historic visit, a terrible storm broke out at sea. It seemed that nature itself was preventing something, trying to prevent some terrible tragedy. But what? Knowledgeable people tell how, during the negotiations, a stunned American journalist appeared on the deck of a Soviet ship, who in the purest Russian told his colleagues: "Guys, your country is finished ..."

Stavropol Judas

In the last years of perestroika, the country went haywire. Gorbachev cheerfully replied to the alarming remarks of officials of the party apparatus that something was wrong: "We have everything calculated." But the processes were controlled not only on the Old Square. In April 1991, a plenum of the Moscow City Party Committee was held. The first secretary of the city committee, a member of the Politburo of the CPSU, Yuri Prokofiev, announced the agenda. It stated that a group of the Moscow Party Organization, together with a block of secretaries of Siberian and Ural party organizations, including committees of the largest industrial enterprises, was submitting a single item for consideration by the upcoming plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU: the removal of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Mikhail Gorbachev. However, behind the scenes, Mikhail Sergeevich outplayed his opponents. It so happened that the plenum was postponed to the end of August. And in the interim, it was planned to sign the Union Treaty developed in Novo-Ogaryovo.

GKChP.

Suppose that Kryuchkov and his comrades would not have performed in August 1991. So what? Nothing special. A plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU was held, President Gorbachev was removed from party power. In the future, the course of events could develop as follows: the CPSU would lose its influence, embarking on the path of reform (a split into two or three parties - the same Andropov’s version), the transition of the economy to a market economy would be planned (according to the Chinese model), democracy would be built, but not according to Western false patterns. With such a combination, both Gorbachev and Yeltsin would have been taken out of the "big game." So the August plot objectively played into the hands of Mikhail Sergeyevich, who thus tried to outplay the party opposition. Yeltsin also won, who, in the event of the signing of the Union Treaty, retained the post of chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. However, after the GKChP, the chances were missed ....

Once, one of the former presidents of the former Soviet republic asked Gorbachev: "Why are you tearing our people away from the Russians?" In response, Gorbachev simply lowered his eyes. He betrayed those who at first believed his demagogy and hoped to lead the country out of the political and economic impasse through a single maneuver, playing on the principle of "both ours and yours." Selfishness in life and politics, personal irresponsibility - this is the verdict of history.

Starting the reforms of the USSR in 1985, M.S. Gorbachev acted according to the clearly developed “Council on Foreign Relations”. Of course, he did not know its content, and he hardly knew about its existence. Real architects of perestroika know how to keep secrets. M. Gorbachev simply knew that he was helped to come to power by external forces, whose requests he had to listen to. Only D. Rockefeller knew about the contents of the plan in full. M. Thatcher, G. Kissinger, Z. Brzezinski and a number of other people knew about some components of the plan. Let's call it the plan "Combineer" conditionally. Like the top-secret 1943 Rankin information warfare plan against the USSR, the Combiner plan will never be published. It is symbolic, however, that if W. Churchill was the initiator of the Rankin plan, then the British M. Thatcher played a key role in the Combiner plan. In fact, it was she who managed to carry out a successful recruiting approach to M.S. Gorbachev, using his suggestibility and ambition in 1984. At the same time, she had a chubby folder with compromising information on the former Stavropol combine operator, prepared for her by a resident of the foreign intelligence service of the KGB of the USSR in London and at the same time an agent of British intelligence MI-6 (since 1974), Colonel Oleg Antonovich Gordievsky. November 14, 1985 O.A. Gordievsky was sentenced in absentia "for treason to the motherland" to death with confiscation of property. The verdict was not canceled even after the collapse of the USSR.

The Combiner plan also had a clear economic component, aimed at disorganizing the Soviet economy and its fall under the influence of transnational corporations. To some extent, it was the "Marshall Plan-2", for the economic enslavement of the USSR.

At the end of 1987, when the Government of the USSR prepared its proposals for the country's economy for 1988. According to these proposals, a solid national economic plan was transformed into a state order, fully provided with financial and material resources. At the same time, the order was reduced to 90 - 95% of the total production volume, and the remaining 5 - 10% of the company's products received the right to dispose of it at its discretion on the basis of contractual relations. In subsequent years, using the experience gained, it was supposed to gradually establish the optimal level of state orders. At a meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU at the end of 1987, M. Gorbachev made a decision to finalize the draft Government, as a result of which the level of state orders was reduced by one third, and for a number of ministries - more than half. Obviously, M. Gorbachev acted on external instructions. I believe that these were targeted actions to destroy the Soviet economy.

Everything went in accordance with the note of the KGB of the USSR in 1977 on the formation of the Fifth Column. Let us recall some of its provisions:

"one. The US CIA, based on the analysis and forecast of its specialists on the further paths of development of the USSR, is developing plans to intensify hostile activities aimed at the decomposition of Soviet society and the disorganization of the socialist economy.

2. For these purposes, American intelligence sets the task of recruiting agents of influence from among Soviet citizens, training them and further promoting them in the sphere of managing the politics, economy and science of the Soviet Union.

3. The CIA has developed individual training programs for agents of influence, providing for the acquisition of espionage skills by them, as well as their concentrated political and ideological indoctrination. In addition, one of the most important aspects of the training of such agents is the teaching of management methods at the leading level of the national economy.

4. The leadership of American intelligence plans purposefully and persistently, regardless of costs, to search for persons who, by their personal and business qualities, will in the future take administrative positions in the control apparatus and fulfill the tasks formulated by the enemy.

After MS Gorbachev's instructions, using free contract prices, many enterprises at first began to receive huge amounts of money - super profits, but not due to increased production, but due to their monopoly position. As a result, revenues in 1988 increased by 40 billion rubles, in 1989 - by 60 billion rubles, and in 1990 - by 100 billion rubles. (instead of the usual increase of 10 billion rubles). The consumer market was blown up, all goods literally "flew" from the shelves. Unprofitable products began to be removed from production everywhere - cheap assortment was washed out. If the state order was sharply reduced in mechanical engineering and a number of other industries, then in the fuel and energy complex it amounted to 100%. Miners bought everything they needed for production at negotiated prices, and sold coal at state prices. This was one of the main reasons for the outbreak of miners' strikes. Justice has been violated. There was a break in the established relationships in the national economy. Regional interests began to come to the fore, which became a breeding ground for separatism.

The result of perestroika was a socio-economic collapse: control over production, finances, and money circulation was lost. But after all, this was the main goal of Operation Perestroika as part of the Kombainer information warfare plan against the USSR. Before perestroika, the state budget of the USSR was adopted and executed without a deficit. For 1988, it was adopted for the first time without an excess of income over expenses in a balanced amount. But already in 1989, the state budget of the USSR was already adopted with a budget deficit of about 36 billion rubles, but the budget revenues included loans from the State Bank, which had never before been included in budget revenues in the amount of more than 64 billion rubles. That is, in fact, the budget deficit amounted to 100 billion rubles!

Therefore, soon the consumer market was “exploded”, problems began with the food supply of the population. The abandonment of the monopoly on the production and sale of alcoholic beverages only in 1989 led to the loss of more than 20 billion rubles of turnover tax revenues from the state budget. The country's economy began to experience problems, production volumes decreased by 20% compared to 1985, prices steadily crept up, and unemployment appeared. During the years of perestroika, the state external debt increased many times over and became the main means of covering the budget deficit. The public domestic debt grew even more rapidly.

After M. Gorbachev came to power, crime increased sharply. The number of crimes increased annually by 30%. Already in 1989, the number of prisoners in the USSR (1.6 million people) became 2 times more than in 1937. The number of premeditated murders in 1989 (19 thousand) was one and a half times more than the number of dead Soviet soldiers in Afghanistan in ten years.

And in these unstable socio-economic conditions, the implementation of POLITICAL REFORM begins. A similar scheme was used by the CIA and MI6 in 1953 to overthrow the government of Mossadegh in Iran, after which oil production came under the control of transnational corporations. In the course of the POLITICAL REFORM, the informational moral liquidation of all the heroes and prominent people who were the pride of the Russian people was carried out. In its course, the emphasis was placed on the implementation of Allen Dulles' keynote speech in 1945. Almost all the heroes of the Great Patriotic War were subjected to sophisticated slanderous accusations and outrage, the same was done in relation to more distant Russian history, including Peter I, Catherine II, Ivan the Terrible. The devilization of individual personalities and historical periods of Russia began. All Russian history, according to the versions of the late 80s, was the history of nonentities. So, gradually, step by step, the idea of the inferiority of the Russian people began to be instilled. These information and ideological actions were successfully carried out by the "Colombian" A.N. Yakovlev, who was at the same time close to both M.S. Gorbachev and the CIA agent O. Kalugin. The media, supervised by A.N. Yakovlev, proclaimed the concept of freedom of speech and launched a phased anti-state campaign. Taking into account the interaction carried out by the "Colombian" A.N. Yakovlev with another "Colombian" - the general of the KGB of the USSR and the CIA agent O. Kalugin, it can be assumed that the main "temniki", comments for the Soviet media were developed overseas. The comments developed in New York were based on the conclusions of the so-called "Harvard Project", a study led by Allen Dulles, aimed at studying the deep mechanisms of public consciousness in the USSR and finding "pain points" for its destruction. Under external information and ideological control, the Soviet media began to work for the destruction of the state. The media was led by a group of globalist-Trotskyists (A. Yakovlev, V. Medvedev, V. Korotich, D. Volkogonov, etc.), who had previously severely punished dissent and carried out strict censorship of "anti-socialist" views. They were M. Gorbachev's closest associates in the cause of the collapse of the USSR.

The rewriting of history began to be widely used. An illustration is the replacement of the crimes of the Western colonialists, who carried out the enslavement and mass destruction of defenseless peoples, by their supposedly enlightening civilizing mission with the establishment of democratic ideals. But the development of the West, starting from the 15th century, was largely due to the robbery of the colonies. In fact, Western Europe as a whole exploited huge masses of enslaved people. The colonial model of world development created by the British Empire was unfair. Internal European contradictions were smoothed out by receipts from the colonies. Russia, on the other hand, lived at the expense of its labor, it created its own wealth. She also had to constantly repel external invasions from the West and East.

The globalists-Trotskyists, having organized an information cover from the media and the loyal West, launched a total cleansing in all levels of the USSR administration. In 1986-1989 under the pressure of M. Gorbachev, 82.2% of the secretaries of regional committees, regional committees and republican Central Committees of the CPSU were removed from their posts. It was the largest purge in the history of the CPSU. And it was not just a shuffling of frames. It was their defeat, in accordance with the recommendations of the Council on Foreign Relations. The country was preparing for collapse. A massive fire was opened to kill the "headquarters". Powerful anti-state propaganda was launched on Soviet TV channels, ostensibly to combat the mythical BRAKING MECHANISM on the part of party cadres. The term itself, BRAKING MECHANISM, was coined by experts at Harvard University. In the defeat of the Soviet system of government at the first stage, the "dogmatists-Suslovites" also took part, led by Yegor Ligachev, a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Then it will be the turn of the "dogmatists". But it was they who were used at first as a battering ram, to destroy the CPSU. After all, the positions of the globalist-Trotskyists until 1987 were weak in the Soviet system of government. And without the support of "technocrats" and "dogmatists" they could not do.

A KEY FACTOR in the collapse of the USSR is M. Gorbachev's anti-state course.

It was M. Gorbachev who laid the main mines, the explosion of which in 1991 led to the collapse of the USSR. Having reviewed the system of former geopolitical priorities of the USSR-Russia, M. Gorbachev set about forming a new foreign policy course. It was based on the abstract primacy of universal human values. The implementation of the new foreign policy course in practice led to unilateral concessions and took destructive forms. The overly forced withdrawal of our troops from Eastern Europe had its consequences in a sharp weakening of the geopolitical interests of the USSR-Russia. The collapse of many years of contacts with former allies led to the displacement of the USSR-Russia from many regions of the world, to large geopolitical and economic losses.

On December 15, 1991, the American newspaper THE WASHINGTON POST published an article analyzing the reign of MS Gorbachev. These newspapers show what is the economic efficiency, one might say "profitability" of the information war against the USSR.

Name ..............................1985 ................1991
Soviet gold reserves ....... 2500 tons .............. 240 tons
The official dollar exchange rate..0.64 rubles.............90 rubles
Economic growth rates.........+2.3%..................- 11%
External debt, USD..............10.5 billion..............52.0 billion

If you try to objectively analyze the reasons for the defeat of the USSR in the information war, then the main reason is the inability of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the KGB of the USSR to counteract, which led to the creation of the Fifth Column inside the USSR and the coming to the leadership of the country of a group of globalist Trotskyists headed by M. Gorbachev.

Mikhail Gorbachev, first president of the USSR

Gorbachev: This topic is the chatter of ignorant people

I have already commented on this many times everywhere, including in my books. There are already 12 books devoted to perestroika, apparently, we are already talking about the thirteenth, one must think, thirteen is an entertaining figure. Here is one newspaper recently conducted a survey, collected votes. Not a study that is usually carried out by research centers, but immediately voices. They asked who people consider the best ruler of Russia in the twentieth century. Putin was expelled from there because he is the current president and it is clear that his influence is stronger than that of others. Among the worst rulers, they chose Gorbachev first, Yeltsin second, Stalin third, and Brezhnev the best. Well, listen, it’s like our newspaper, it seems that everyone is not headless there, and suddenly some kind of fake polls are being done. Am I supposed to react to this in some way? This topic is the chatter of ignorant people who talk about it in hatred, envy and, to some extent, intellectual stupidity.

Sergei Stankevich, Anatoly Sobchak Foundation expert, political adviser to President Boris Yeltsin

Stankevich: The USSR was a project state

The USSR was a project state, forcibly created under the Bolshevik project. Basically it was a Stalinist project, because all the essential features of this project were formed under Stalin, then partially modified under Khrushchev, and then consolidated under Brezhnev. The project came to a standstill by the 1980s, a group of communist reformers led by Mikhail Gorbachev desperately tried to save it, but failed to save it. The last chance was in August 1991, it was an attempt to create a new union of 9 republics, and not by force, but by voluntary means, like a real federation. This attempt was thwarted by a revolt of communist reactionaries. Gorbachev, of course, made mistakes, as a communist reformer, and, first of all, he did it because he was regularly late, events were ahead of him. Society and its demands were changing faster than Gorbachev had time to respond to them. In addition, the Communist Party, which never became a party of reformers, lay like a stone weight on his shoulders. So if you specify someone's fault, then it should be attributed to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which was the ruling monopoly and could not find a normal solution to save its own project. And then other political forces acted, which tried to form their own project on the ruins of the collapsed communist idea.

Mikhail Vinogradov, political scientist

Vinogradov: Ignoring the collapse of the USSR is a way not to analyze history

Some people are hostages to the very term “collapse of the USSR”, because it is quite easy to distinguish between experts who say “collapse of the USSR” and “collapse of the USSR”. In one case, we are talking about a conscious action, in the other - about something chaotic. I think that after all, the question of the purposeful collapse of the USSR is still the thesis of 2000-2010, when it seems to experts that events do not happen by themselves, but are controlled by the authorities or some players. Many experts cannot imagine any events except as the result of the actions of certain politicians. This is a simplified concept of the world, and it is much easier to live in it than to compare any facts. Therefore, it seems to me that this is, by and large, an attempt to hide from the topic of the collapse of the USSR, to ignore it, to avoid reflection on what really was the reason and whether this could happen again in the future, as it correlates with other large countries. This is a way of not analyzing history.

Valery Solovey, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor at MGIMO

Nightingale: The collapse of the USSR was not due to ethnic conflicts

Not only in Russia, but also in the world, although in Russia to a greater extent, it is customary to personify all problems: if the collapse of the Soviet Union occurred under Gorbachev, then the assumption automatically arises that it happened thanks to Gorbachev, but this point of view still seems to me a serious exaggeration. For the first two or three years, when Gorbachev first came to power, Gorbachev himself and his activities were widely acclaimed because he did what society expected. Subsequently, the situation simply began to get out of control and develop on its own.

I am not inclined to believe that the collapse of the USSR was due to interethnic conflicts, nevertheless, the decisive moment occurred in 89, when the European socialist camp began to disintegrate.

December 25 marks twenty years since the famous "renunciation" of the first and last President of the USSR Mikhail Gorbachev from power. But few people remember that a few days before that there was another speech by Gorbachev, in which the president of the USSR firmly and decisively said that he would protect the country from disintegration with all the means at his disposal.
Why did Mikhail Gorbachev refuse to defend the USSR and renounce power?

Was the USSR doomed or destroyed? What caused the collapse of the USSR? Who is to blame?

The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was created in December 1922 by the unification of the RSFSR, Ukrainian SSR, BSSR and ZSFSR. It was the largest country, occupying 1/6 of the earth's land. According to the agreement of December 30, 1922, the Union consisted of sovereign republics, each retained the right to freely secede from the Union, the right to enter into relations with foreign states, and participate in the activities of international organizations.

Stalin warned that such a form of union was unreliable, but Lenin reassured him: as long as there is a party that holds the country together like reinforcement, the integrity of the country is out of danger. But Stalin was more far-sighted.

On December 25-26, 1991, the USSR ceased to exist as a subject of international law.
This was preceded by the signing in Belovezhskaya Pushcha on December 8, 1991 of an agreement on the creation of the CIS. The Belovezhskaya agreements did not dissolve the USSR, but only stated its actual disintegration by that time. Formally, Russia and Belarus did not declare independence from the USSR, but only recognized the fact of the termination of its existence.

The exit from the USSR was a collapse, since legally none of the republics did not comply with all the procedures prescribed by the law "On the procedure for resolving issues related to the withdrawal of a union republic from the USSR."

The following reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union can be distinguished:
1\ the totalitarian nature of the Soviet system, extinguishing individual initiative, the absence of pluralism and real democratic civil liberties
2\disproportions of the planned economy of the USSR and the shortage of consumer goods
3\ interethnic conflicts and venality of elites
4\ "cold war" and the US plot to lower world oil prices in order to weaken the USSR
5\ Afghan war, man-made and other large-scale disasters
6\ "sale" to the West of the "socialist camp"
7 \ subjective factor, expressed in the personal struggle between Gorbachev and Yeltsin for power.

When I served in the Northern Fleet, in those years of the Cold War, I myself guessed and explained in political information that the arms race serves the purpose not to defeat us in the war, but to economically undermine our state.
80% of the budget expenditures of the USSR went to defense. They drank alcohol more than under the king by about 3 times. In the state budget from vodka were every 6 rubles.
Perhaps the anti-alcohol campaign was and was needed, but as a result the state did not receive 20 billion rubles.
In Ukraine alone, people accumulated 120 billion rubles in their savings books, which it was impossible to redeem. It was necessary to get rid of this burden on the economy in any way, which was done.

The collapse of the USSR and the socialist system led to an imbalance and caused tectonic processes in the world. But it is more correct to speak not about the collapse, but about the deliberate collapse of the country.

The collapse of the USSR was a Western project of the Cold War. And the Westerners successfully implemented this project - the USSR ceased to exist.
US President Reagan made it his goal to defeat the "Evil Empire" - the USSR. To this end, he negotiated with Saudi Arabia to lower oil prices in order to undermine the economy of the USSR, which was almost entirely dependent on the sale of oil.
On September 13, 1985, Saudi Oil Minister Yamani said that Saudi Arabia was ending its policy of curbing oil production and was beginning to regain its share of the oil market. Over the next 6 months, Saudi Arabia's oil production increased by 3.5 times. After that, prices decreased by 6.1 times.

In the United States, in order to constantly monitor developments in the Soviet Union, the so-called "Center for the Study of the Course of Perestroika" was created. It consisted of representatives of the CIA, DIA (military intelligence), the Office of Intelligence and Research of the State Department.
US President George W. Bush declared at the Republican Party Convention in August 1992 that the collapse of the Soviet Union was due to "the foresight and decisive leadership of presidents from both parties."

The ideology of communism turned out to be just a bogey of the Cold War. “They were aiming at communism, but they hit the people,” admitted the well-known sociologist Alexander Zinoviev.

“Whoever does not regret the collapse of the USSR has no heart. And the one who wants to restore the USSR has neither mind nor heart.” According to various sources, 52% of the respondents in Belarus regret the collapse of the Soviet Union, 68% in Russia and 59% in Ukraine.

Even Vladimir Putin acknowledged that “the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. For the Russian people, it has become a real drama. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and compatriots ended up outside Russian territory.”

Obviously, the chairman of the KGB, Andropov, made a mistake in choosing Gorbachev as his successor. Gorbachev failed to carry out economic reforms. In October 2009, in an interview with Radio Liberty, Mikhail Gorbachev acknowledged his responsibility for the collapse of the USSR: “This issue has been resolved. Ruined…”

Someone considers Gorbachev an outstanding figure of the era. He is credited with democratization and glasnost. But these are only means of carrying out economic reforms that have not been implemented. The goal of "perestroika" was to preserve power, as well as the "thaw" of Khrushchev and the famous XX Congress to debunk Stalin's "personality cult".

The USSR could have been saved. But the ruling elite betrayed socialism, the communist idea, their people, they exchanged power for money, Crimea for the Kremlin.
The "terminator" of the USSR Boris Yeltsin deliberately destroyed the Union, urging the republics to take as much sovereignty as they could.
In the same way, at the beginning of the 13th century, in Kievan Rus, the appanage princes ruined the country, placing the thirst for personal power above national interests.
In 1611, the same elite (boyars) sold out to the Poles, letting the false Dmitry into the Kremlin, if only they would retain their privileges.

I remember Yeltsin's speech at the higher Komsomol school under the Komsomol Central Committee, which became his triumphant return to politics. Against the background of Gorbachev, Yeltsin seemed consistent and resolute.

The greedy "young wolves", who no longer believed in any fairy tales about communism, began to destroy the system in order to get to the "trough". It was for this that it was necessary to destroy the USSR and remove Gorbachev. To get unlimited power, almost all the republics voted for the collapse of the USSR.

Stalin, of course, let out a lot of blood, but did not allow the collapse of the country.
What is more important: human rights or the integrity of the country? If the collapse of the state is allowed, then it will be impossible to ensure the observance of human rights.
So either the dictatorship of a strong state, or pseudo-democracy and the collapse of the country.

For some reason, in Russia, the problems of the country's development are always a problem of the personal power of a particular ruler.
I happened to visit the Central Committee of the CPSU in 1989, and I noticed that all the talk was about the personal struggle between Yeltsin and Gorbachev. The worker of the Central Committee of the CPSU who invited me said directly: “the gentlemen are fighting, and the lads are cracking their foreheads.”

Boris Yeltsin's first official visit to the United States in 1989 was regarded by Gorbachev as a plot to seize power from him.
Is it because, immediately after the signing of the CIS treaty, the first person Yeltsin called was not Gorbachev, but US President George W. Bush, who had apparently promised in advance to recognize Russia's independence.

The KGB knew about the plans of the West for the controlled collapse of the USSR, reported to Gorbachev, but he did nothing. He has already won the Nobel Peace Prize.

Elite just bought. The West bought the former secretaries of the regional committees with the presidential honors accorded to them.
In April 1996, I witnessed a visit by US President Clinton to St. Petersburg, I saw him near the Atlanteans near the Hermitage. Anatoly Sobchak got into Clinton's car.

I am against totalitarian and authoritarian power. But did Andrei Sakharov, who fought for the abolition of Article 6 of the Constitution, understand that the ban on the CPSU, which was the backbone of the state, would automatically lead to the collapse of the country into national specific principalities?

At that time, I published a lot in the domestic press, and in one of my articles in the St. Petersburg newspaper "Smena" I warned: "the main thing is to prevent confrontation." Alas, it was "the voice of one crying in the wilderness."

On July 29, 1991, Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Nazarbayev met in Novo-Ogaryovo, at which they agreed to start signing a new Union Treaty on August 20, 1991. But those who led the GKChP proposed their plan to save the country. Gorbachev decided to leave for Foros, where he simply waited to join the winner. He knew everything, since the GKChP was formed by Gorbachev himself on March 28, 1991.

During the days of the August coup, I rested in the Crimea next to Gorbachev - in Simeiz - and I remember everything well. The day before, I decided to buy an Oreanda stereo tape recorder in the local store, but they didn’t sell it with a USSR bank checkbook, due to local restrictions at that time. On August 19, these restrictions were suddenly lifted, and on August 20, I was able to make a purchase. But already on August 21, restrictions were again introduced, apparently as a result of the victory of democracy.

The rampant nationalism in the Union republics was explained by the unwillingness of the local leaders to sink along with Gorbachev, whose mediocrity in carrying out reforms was already understood by everyone.
In fact, it was about the need to remove Gorbachev from power. Both the top of the CPSU and the opposition, led by Yeltsin, aspired to this. Gorbachev's failure was obvious to many. But he did not want to hand over power to Yeltsin.
That is why Yeltsin was not arrested, hoping that he would join the conspirators. But Yeltsin did not want to share power with anyone, he wanted complete autocracy, which was proved by the dispersal of the Supreme Soviet of Russia in 1993.

Alexander Rutskoi called the GKChP a "spectacle". While the defenders were dying on the streets of Moscow, on the fourth underground floor of the White House, the democratic elite arranged a banquet.

The arrest of members of the GKChP reminded me of the arrest of members of the Provisional Government in October 1917, who were also released soon after, because such was the "agreement" on the transfer of power.

The indecision of the State Committee for the State of Emergency can be explained by the fact that the "putsch" was only a staging with the aim of "getting off beautifully", taking with it the country's gold and foreign exchange reserves.

At the end of 1991, when the Democrats seized power and Russia became the legal successor of the USSR, Vnesheconombank had only $700 million in its account. The liabilities of the former Soviet Union were estimated at 93.7 billion dollars, the assets - at 110.1 billion dollars.

The logic of the reformers Gaidar and Yeltsin was simple. They calculated that Russia could survive on the oil pipeline only if it refused to feed its allies.
The new rulers had no money, and they devalued the money deposits of the population. The loss of 10% of the country's population as a result of shock reforms was considered acceptable.

But it was not economic factors that dominated. If private property had been allowed, the USSR would not have collapsed from this. The reason is different: the elite stopped believing in the socialist idea and decided to cash out their privileges.

The people were a pawn in the struggle for power. Commodity and food shortages were deliberately created to cause people's discontent and thereby destroy the state. Trains with meat and butter stood on the tracks near the capital, but they were not allowed into Moscow in order to arouse dissatisfaction with Gorbachev's power.
It was a war for power, where the people served as a bargaining chip.

The conspirators in Belovezhskaya Pushcha were not thinking about preserving the country, but about how to get rid of Gorbachev and gain unlimited power.
Gennady Burbulis - the one who proposed the wording about the termination of the USSR as a geopolitical reality - later called the collapse of the USSR "a great misfortune and tragedy."

The co-author of the Belovezhskaya Accords, Vyacheslav Kebich (in 1991, the Prime Minister of the Republic of Belarus) admitted: “If I were Gorbachev, I would send a group of OMON and we would all sit quietly in Matrosskaya Tishina and wait for an amnesty.”

But Gorbachev thought only about what position he would be left in the CIS.
And it was necessary, without hiding your head in the sand, to fight for the territorial integrity of our state.
If Gorbachev had been elected popularly, and not by congress deputies, it would have been more difficult to delegitimize him. But he was afraid that the people would not elect him.
After all, Gorbachev could have handed over power to Yeltsin and the USSR would have survived. But, apparently, pride did not allow. As a result, the struggle of two vanities led to the collapse of the country.

If not for Yeltsin's maniacal desire to seize power and topple Gorbachev, to avenge his humiliation, then one could still hope for something. But Yeltsin could not forgive Gorbachev for publicly discrediting him, and when he “dumped” Gorbachev, he appointed him a humiliatingly low pension.

We have often been told that the people are the source of power and the driving force of history. But life shows that sometimes it is the personality of this or that political figure that determines the course of history.
The collapse of the USSR is largely the result of the conflict between Yeltsin and Gorbachev.
Who is more to blame for the collapse of the country: Gorbachev, unable to retain power, or Yeltsin, unrestrainedly striving for power?

In a referendum on March 17, 1991, 78% of citizens voted in favor of maintaining the renewed union. But did the politicians listen to the opinion of the people? No, they realized personal selfish interests.
Gorbachev said one thing and did another, gave orders and pretended to know nothing.

For some reason, in Russia, the problems of the country's development have always been a problem of the personal power of a particular ruler. Stalinist terror, Khrushchev's thaw, Brezhnev's stagnation, Gorbachev's perestroika, Yeltsin's collapse...
In Russia, a change in the political and economic course is always associated with a change in the personality of the ruler. Is this why the terrorists want to topple the leader of the state in the hope of changing course?

Tsar Nicholas II would have listened to the advice of smart people, would have shared power, made the monarchy constitutional, would have lived like a Swedish king, and his children would now live, and not die in terrible agony at the bottom of the mine.

But history teaches no one. Since the time of Confucius, it has been known that officials need to be examined for a position. And we are assigned. Why? Because it is not the professional qualities of an official that are important, but personal devotion to the authorities. And why? Because the chief is not interested in success, but, above all, in maintaining his position.

The main thing for the ruler is to maintain personal power. Because if the power is taken away from him, then he will not be able to do anything. No one has ever voluntarily renounced their privileges, has not recognized someone else's superiority. The ruler cannot simply give up power himself, he is a slave of power!

Churchill compared power to a drug. In fact, power is about maintaining control and management. Whether it's a monarchy or a democracy, it doesn't matter. Democracy and dictatorship are just a way to most effectively achieve the desired goals.

But the question is: is democracy for the people or the people for democracy?
Representative democracy is in crisis. But direct democracy is no better.
Management is a complex activity. There will always be those who want and can manage and make decisions (rulers), and those who will be happy to be the executor.

According to the philosopher Boris Mezhuev, "democracy is an organized distrust of the people in power."
Managed democracy is being replaced by post-democracy.

When they say that the people made a mistake, then those who think so are mistaken. Because only the one who says such a thing definitely does not know the people about whom he has such an opinion. People are not so stupid in their mass, and they are not at all rednecks.

In relation to our soldiers and athletes, and all others who fought for the victory of our country and its flag with tears in their eyes, the destruction of the USSR was a real betrayal!

Gorbachev "voluntarily" abdicated not because the people abandoned the USSR, but because the West abandoned Gorbachev. “The Moor has done his job, the Moor can leave…”

Personally, I support the trial of former politicians: French President Jacques Chirac, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, Chilean dictator Pinochet and others.

Why is there still no trial of those who are guilty of the collapse of the USSR?
The people have the right and SHOULD know who is to blame for the destruction of the country.
It is the ruling elite that is responsible for the collapse of the country!

Recently, I was invited to a regular session of the Russian Thought seminar at the Russian Christian Academy for the Humanities in St. Petersburg. Doctor of Philosophical Sciences, Professor of the Department of Political Science of the Faculty of Philosophy of St. Petersburg State University Vladimir Alexandrovich Gutorov delivered a report on "The USSR as a Civilization".
Professor Gutorov V.A. believes that the USSR is the only country where the elite conducted an experiment, destroying their own people. It ended in complete disaster. And now we live in a situation of catastrophe.

Nikolai Berdyaev, when F. Dzerzhinsky interrogated him, said that Russian communism is a punishment for the Russian people for all those sins and abominations that the Russian elite and the renegade Russian intelligentsia have committed over the past decades.
In 1922, Nikolai Berdyaev was expelled from Russia on the so-called "philosophical ship".

The most conscientious representatives of the Russian elite, who ended up in exile, admitted their guilt for the revolution that had taken place.
And does our current "elite" really recognize its responsibility for the collapse of the USSR? ..

Was the USSR a civilization? Or was it a social experiment of unprecedented scale?

The signs of civilization are as follows:
1\ The USSR was an empire, and an empire is a sign of civilization.
2\ Civilization is distinguished by a high level of education and a high technical base, which obviously were in the USSR.
3\ Civilization forms a special psychological type, which takes about 10 generations. But for 70 years of Soviet power, he could not develop.
4\ One of the signs of civilization are beliefs. The USSR had its own belief in communism.

Even the ancient Greeks noticed the cyclicity in the change of forms of power: aristocracy - democracy - tyranny - aristocracy ... For two thousand years, mankind has not been able to come up with anything new.
History knows numerous social experiences of people's democracy. The socialist experiment will inevitably repeat itself. It is already being repeated in China, Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and elsewhere.

The USSR was a social experiment of unprecedented scale, but the experiment turned out to be unviable.
The fact is that justice and social equality come into conflict with economic efficiency. Where the main thing is profit, there is no place for justice. But it is inequality and competition that make a society efficient.

Once I saw two men, one of whom was digging a hole, and the other was digging a hole after him. I asked what they were doing. And they answered that the third worker, who plants trees, did not come.

The specificity of our mentality is that we do not see happiness in progress and do not strive for development like a Westerner. We are more contemplative. Our national hero Ivan the Fool (Oblomov) lies on the stove and dreams of a kingdom. And he only gets up when he wants to.
We develop from time to time only under the pressure of the vital necessity of survival.

This is also reflected in our Orthodox faith, which evaluates a person not by deeds, but by faith. Catholicism speaks of personal responsibility for choice and calls for activity. And with us everything is determined by the providence and grace of God, which is incomprehensible.

Russia is not just a territory, it is an Idea! Regardless of the name - the USSR, the SSG, the CIS or the Eurasian Union.
The Russian idea is simple: we can only be saved together! Therefore, the revival of great Russia in one form or another is inevitable. In our harsh climatic conditions, what is needed is not competition, but cooperation, not rivalry, but commonwealth. And therefore external conditions will inevitably restore the union form of government.

The USSR as an Idea in one form or another is inevitable. The fact that the communist idea is not utopian and quite realistic is proved by the successes of communist China, which managed to become a superpower, having overtaken the idealess Russia.

The ideas of social justice, equality and fraternity are ineradicable. Perhaps they are embedded in the human mind as a matrix that periodically tries to come true.

What is wrong with the ideas of freedom, equality and fraternity, the universal happiness of people, regardless of religion and nationality?
These ideas will never die, they are eternal because they are true. Their truth lies in the fact that they truly grasp the essence of human nature.
Eternal are only those ideas that are consonant with the thoughts and feelings of living people. After all, if they resonate in the souls of millions, then there is something in these ideas. People cannot be united by someone's one truth, because everyone sees the truth in their own way. Everyone cannot be wrong at the same time. An idea is true if it reflects the truths of many people. Only such ideas find a place in the recesses of the soul. And whoever guesses what is hidden in the souls of millions will lead them along.”
LOVE CREATE NEED!
(from my novel "Alien Strange Incomprehensible Extraordinary Stranger" on the site New Russian Literature

And in your opinion, WHY did the USSR die?