"Economic consequences of the collapse of the USSR"

empire economic collapse politics

Introduction

The collapse of the USSR, formalized in Belovezhskaya Pushcha by the leaders of the three republics, is one of the most important events of the late 20th century, which resulted in the emergence of independent sovereign states. Moreover, the geopolitical situation has changed radically both in Europe and throughout the world. Here it is worth noting the economic crisis that overtook Russia and other states due to the severance of economic ties former Union SSR.

The USSR is a powerful empire and the process of its collapse is nothing more than the collapse of a large empire.

In this regard, there is an opposite statement, or rather an assumption, that all empires collapsed, disintegrated, perished due to the inability to combine the essence of the empire as a simultaneously self-disintegrating and self-destructive system. At the modern level, this should be taken as the country’s exhaustion of its spatial framework, and the state’s lack of understanding of the need to change the direction of external and, above all, domestic policy. Based on the principle of analogies, one can see here perhaps the main reason for the collapse of the USSR and, naturally, its internal economic relations, that is, the entire socialist national economic complex.

In the period from 1917 to 1991. took place nothing less than the Great Revolution, and the entire existence of the Soviet state was only a transition period to the new Russian statehood. It was the collapse of the army that led to the collapse of the USSR. There is an opinion about the discrepancy between ethnopolitics and geopolitics of the USSR.

The relevance of the topic lies in the fact that many issues related to the analysis of the causes and consequences of the collapse of the USSR are still the subject of heated debate to this day.

The purpose of the study is to examine the underlying preconditions and causes of the collapse of the USSR, as well as the economic consequences.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to complete the following tasks:

Study the events immediately preceding the collapse of the USSR;

Identify the main prerequisites and reasons for the fall of the world superpower;

Consider the process of collapse of the USSR itself;

Analyze the economic consequences of the collapse of the USSR;

Draw conclusions.

Moreover, it is necessary to pay special attention to the international aspects of the collapse of the USSR, since the international situation played a rather important role in the events that are the subject of the study.

The subject of the abstract is a set of theoretical and practical aspects of the mechanism of the collapse of the USSR.

1. Socio-economic state of the country

After the death of L.I. Brezhnev, Yu.V. became the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee in November 1982. Andropov, who previously headed the Committee state security. Administrative measures, measures to strengthen labor discipline, and expose corruption are associated with his name. However, the political and economic systems remained unchanged. K.U., who replaced Andropov, also did not strive to carry out any reforms. Chernenko, who served as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee from February 1984 for thirteen months.

After being elected General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee in 1985, M.S. Gorbachev, a new period is beginning in the USSR, the period of “perestroika” and a change in the socio-economic system.

In April 1985, at the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, a course was proclaimed to “accelerate social economic development"through more complete use of the potential of the socialist system - strengthening labor discipline and intensive exploitation of production facilities and the introduction of achievements of scientific and technological progress.

In May 1986, a decree of the CPSU Central Committee and the Council of Ministers “On measures to strengthen the fight against “unearned income” was published. A campaign against “unearned income” has begun. Formally, it was directed against large businessmen in the shadow economy; in practice, its main victims were artisans, small traders, collective farmers and townspeople who grew fruits and vegetables for sale.

Serious damage to the economy and financial system caused by the anti-alcohol campaign of 1985, which led to a catastrophic increase in moonshine and substance abuse and the loss of more than 63 billion rubles from trade turnover over the four years of this campaign. Many vineyards were cut down and wineries were destroyed.

In 1986, it became clear that the acceleration policy was ineffective and that the situation could not be corrected without serious political, economic and social changes. In February - March 1986, the XXVII Congress of the CPSU was held, at which a number of economic and social programs were adopted, providing for new investment and structural policies. The implementation of many long-term programs was also envisaged, for example, “Housing - 2000” and others.

At the XXVII Congress of the CPSU M.S. Gorbachev stated that the principle issue at this stage is the question of expanding glasnost; without glasnost there is and cannot be democracy, political creativity of the masses, their participation in consumption. The media began to receive more freedom in describing the problems that existed at that time. Since the end of 1986, previously banned books began to be published, and films that had previously been on the shelves for years were released.

Reform of the political system.

The process of “sovereignization of Russia” led on November 1, 1990 to the adoption of a resolution on the economic sovereignty of Russia.

During this period, various parties were formed that did not have significant influence. All of them were in opposition to the CPSU, which continued to control the allied power structures. However, the CPSU was also experiencing a rather serious crisis. The XXVIII Party Congress in July 1990 led to the exit of its most radical members, led by Boris Yeltsin. The size of the party in 1990 decreased sharply - from 20 to 15 million people. The political situation in the country is out of control. The struggle against communist ideology unfolded; Concepts such as internationalism, class struggle, proletarian solidarity, and friendship of peoples were particularly attacked. At the same time, nationalists in all republics of the USSR, on the basis of historical constructions and distortions of economic calculations, sought to separatism, to prove that they were nations living at the expense of others.

In the conditions of such a multinational state as the USSR, this propaganda was destructive in nature and contributed to the formation in society of an awareness of the necessity and inevitability of the collapse of the state. The main role in this propaganda was played by the nationalist intelligentsia, which, in fact, was the ideologist and mouthpiece of the nationalist party elite and a representative of the criminal shadow economy. All of them sought power, to achieve their narrow group interests and were against a strong central government that prevented them from achieving their goals. Interethnic conflicts flared up, which swept across the country in the late 1980s and early 1990s (in Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Moldova, Crimea and other republics). It was these conflicts that contributed to the collapse of the state, and from party functionaries and representatives of the nationalist intelligentsia emerged leaders who later became heads of new states created on the ruins of the USSR.

During 1990-1991, the so-called “parade of sovereignties” took place, during which all the union (including the RSFSR) and many of the autonomous republics adopted declarations of sovereignty, in which they challenged the priority of all-union laws over the republics, which began the so-called “ war of laws."

The leadership of the union republics, territories and regions saw the path to improvement in the decentralization of management, in providing even greater rights and economic opportunities to the regions in solving economic and social problems locally. At the same time, their demands were expressed in a movement for leaving at the disposal of the regions a larger share of the national income created there compared to the previous period. Naturally, this led to a decrease in the share going to the centralized funds of the state.

All of the above was reflected in the struggle between the union and republican parliaments. Economically unqualified deputies who came to the Supreme Council on the crest of the wave of the democratic movement, instead of looking for ways out of their crisis situation, creating legislative framework to improve the economic situation in the country, strengthen parliamentary control over the formation and use of budget funds by the government, they engaged in destructive political activity aimed at confrontation between the center and the regions.

Thus, calls for faster, radical reforms in politics and the economy contributed to the intensification of crisis phenomena in the economy and political crisis in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Lithuania, accompanied by mass protests of the population and bloody clashes. The popular fronts of the Baltic republics raised the question of secession from the USSR and began the process of transforming them into independent states. By 1991, the Supreme Council of Georgia declared independence.

2. Some features of the internal and foreign policy USSR in the late 1980s and early 1990s - content and most important results

In March 1991, by decision of the IV Congress of Soviets of People's Deputies of the USSR, a nationwide vote was held - a referendum - on the preservation of the USSR. 76.43% of voters were in favor of preserving the USSR. Under these conditions, the leadership of the USSR decided to prepare a new union treaty, which should have reflected the expansion of the rights of the union republics. Based on the concept of a referendum, it was planned to conclude a new union - the Union of Sovereign States.

However, in August 1991, on the eve of the signing of a new agreement, a group of people from the top leadership of the country - G. Yanaev, O. Baklanov, V. Kryuchkov, V. Pavlov, D. Yazov and others - took advantage of the absence of M.S. Gorbachev, who was on vacation, declared a state of emergency in the country and announced the creation of the State Committee for the State of Emergency, trying to remove the President of the USSR M.S. from power. Gorbachev and thereby prevent, in their opinion, the collapse of the USSR by signing a new union treaty. The resistance to the State Emergency Committee was led by the political leadership of the RSFSR - B.N. Yeltsin, A.V. Rutskoy, R.I. Khasbulatov.

The failure of the putsch accelerated the very process of the collapse of the USSR. In early September, the leadership of the USSR called for the independence of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

November 1991, by decree of President B.N. Yeltsin, the activities of the CPSU and the Communist Party of the RSFSR were terminated.

December 1991 in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, the presidents of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus B.N. Yeltsin, L.M. Kravchuk and S.S. Shushkevich signed the Agreement on the termination of the existence of the USSR (“The USSR as a subject of international law and geopolitical reality ceases to exist”) Agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth Independent States/ Vedomosti SND and VS RSFSR. 12/19/1991. No. 51. art. 1798. and formed the Commonwealth of Independent States. This agreement was ratified by the Supreme Council of the RSFSR on December 12, 1991.

Independent independent states were formed on the basis of the former Soviet republics. December 25, 1991 M.S. Gorbachev resigned as president. The Soviet Union ended its more than 70-year existence. The collapse of the USSR led to the elimination of the balance of power between the two world superpowers - the USSR and the USA.

International aspects of the collapse of the USSR

Most domestic and Western researchers consider the causes and consequences of the collapse of the USSR in the context of the Cold War. Note that this term was first used by B. Baruch, an American financier and adviser to the US President, during debates at the Congress in 1947.

It was the confrontation between the two world superpowers that determined the entire development of the world after 1945.

Here we cannot help but recall that Russia, and then the USSR, suffered colossal human, economic and territorial losses in two world wars. As for the USA, they emerged from the Second, as well as from the First World War, with the least losses of all the participating countries; Moreover, due to the supply of the same weapons they managed to make good money during the Second World War. This caused an unimaginable rise in their economy and helped overcome the consequences of the “Great Depression” of 1929 - 1933 Naumov N.V. International aspects of the collapse of the USSR.

The economic and social consequences caused by the Cold War varied significantly between the USSR and the USA. If during this period the United States spent an average of about 6 percent of its national income on military purposes, and about 30% on maintaining the necessary military potential of NATO, then the USSR's share in the military expenditures of the Warsaw Pact countries - Warsaw Pact - amounted to 80% Ibid.. Thus The USA, a richer power, spent less money on military purposes than the USSR.

The USSR withstood the confrontation with the economically powerful United States for more than 40 years, mainly by militarizing its economy and maintaining a low standard of living for its population (compared to the standards of developed industrial countries). Ultimately, by the end of the seventies, the general economic backwardness of the USSR led to a qualitative deterioration in the Soviet military-technical potential, and this in turn led to a weakening of the USSR’s already international positions.

The economic lag also had a negative impact on the internal socio-economic development of the USSR and its allies.

During “perestroika,” the leadership of the USSR, which attempted to apply methods to increase the efficiency of the economy (“accelerating socio-economic development”), came to the conclusion that reaching the global level was impossible without its integration into the world economy, and this, in turn, required radical changes, not only in economic forms, but also in the entire state-political system of the USSR. The Soviet leadership understood this and in 1987 - 1991 made an attempt to preserve the USSR as a great world power through a policy of new thinking. But this could only become possible with a global restructuring of the entire system. international relations, which, in itself, is practically unrealistic.

The international consequences of the collapse of the USSR are also viewed differently. Most researchers assess these consequences as global. According to some, the collapse of the USSR is a geopolitical catastrophe that goes beyond the concept of “system of international relations”; others believe that the collapse of the USSR can be considered as the end of the system of international relations that developed after the Second World War, as a transition from a bipolar to a multipolar world.

The territory of the former USSR has become an area of ​​instability and local armed conflicts. The collapse of the USSR can be qualified as the collapse of the once existing single international legal space.

As for modern times, the independent states that arose on the territory of the former Soviet Union, have not yet found a form of effective political and economic cooperation, although the CIS exists, there is no certainty that the disintegration will stop. It is for this reason that the former republics of the USSR are faced with the acute question of their place in the new world; they are faced with the task of being able to occupy their niche in the system of new international relations.

Consequences of the collapse of the USSR

In 1987, economic reform was adopted. Its main idea is the transition from administrative methods to economic ones. Ministries and departments were abolished, the independence of enterprises expanded, the shortage of food and goods intensified, planned targets in the national economy were not met, which resulted in a budget deficit and a reduction in oil exports, legislative acts were adopted, the purpose of which was to improve economic management. The policy that was initiated by this congress was called “perestroika”. It meant a transition from above to the democratization of the political system and the admission of market relations in the economy. This was expressed, first of all, in the reduction of the role of the CPSU in public life, in the revival of parliamentarism, glasnost, in the weakening of centralized management of the economy, in increasing rights and responsibilities regional bodies authorities. All these actions of the country's leadership had a positive direction, and this is the undoubted historical merit of M.S. Gorbachev. In essence, this meant that a variant of economic reform was being implemented, when, with the regulatory role of the state, there should have been a gradual denationalization of part of public property and the introduction of market relations into the economy.

In November 1986, the USSR Law “On Individual Labor Activity” was adopted, allowing individual entrepreneurship in the production of consumer goods and consumer services. In 1987, the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted a resolution “On the creation of cooperatives for the production of consumer goods,” which allowed the creation of joint ventures with the participation of Soviet organizations and firms from capitalist and developing countries.

Since 1987, the development of a deep economic reform began. Prominent Soviet economists participated in this work.

In the same year, the Law “On State Enterprise (Association)” was adopted, which provided for the transition of enterprises to self-financing and self-financing. Products produced after the government order was completed could be sold at free prices. The number of ministries and departments was reduced, and self-financing was introduced into all sectors of the national economy. However, granting labor collectives of state-owned enterprises the right to elect directors and granting enterprises the power to regulate wages led to the dependence of enterprise directors on the decisions of labor collectives and an increase in wages that was not ensured by the availability of an appropriate volume of goods on the consumer market.

The emerging decentralization of production has yielded certain positive results. In 1986, the indicators of the Soviet economy increased slightly, including in agriculture. This was largely determined by the growth of investments, which, however, was accompanied by an increase in the budget deficit, which in 1985 amounted to 18 billion rubles, and already in 1986 it almost tripled. Ibid. - With. 565. The deficit was partly caused by reduced foreign exchange earnings, the ongoing Afghan War, the Chernobyl tragedy of 1986 and losses from the anti-alcohol campaign. Since the budget deficit was financed by money emission, its growth led to an increase in the deficit in the consumer market. The most necessary things disappeared from the shelves; even soap, sugar and tobacco products did not arrive in stores. Coupons and buyer cards were reintroduced everywhere.

In May 1988, the USSR Law “On Cooperation in the USSR” was adopted, which allowed cooperatives to engage in any types of activities not prohibited by law, including trade, and significantly expanded the possibilities of cooperation.

In 1989 - 1990, the economic situation deteriorated rapidly. The old administrative management system was collapsing, a new, market system was not created due to the indecisiveness of the authorities. The government was forced to resort to foreign loans. Government debt by 1990 was more than double its 1985 level. In the summer of 1990, a resolution “On the concept of transition to a regulated economy” was adopted. Anti-crisis programs were developed. One of them is the “500 Days Program”, developed by S.S. Shatalin and G.A. Yavlinsky, which provided for the transfer of enterprises to lease and privatization. A program developed under the leadership of the director of the Institute of Economics of the USSR Academy of Sciences, L.I., was chosen for implementation. Abalkin, which provided for the preservation of the public sector in the economy for a longer time.

In January 1991, the government exchanged 100 and 50 ruble bills for new banknotes within three days. Exchange amounts were strictly limited. Formally, this measure was directed against shadow businessmen; in practice, only 5% of the amount that was considered excessive was withdrawn from circulation. In April 1991, all government prices were doubled (in trade, transport, consumer services, etc.). A mechanical increase in prices, not accompanied by a pricing reform, also did not improve the economy, but only increased inflation.

On the way to market expansion:

Reorganization banking system;

The Law “On the General Principles of Entrepreneurship in the USSR” was adopted;

There have been changes in agricultural production. Agricultural production was divided into farms and peasant farms. In 1990, farming produced 1% of all agricultural output.

The non-state sector was becoming increasingly widespread in the economy.

Economic reform did not improve the situation in the national economy. In 1989-90 The growth rate of industrial production is falling sharply, but the state budget deficit has risen and unemployment has grown. In 1990, there were 6 million unemployed people. The economic components of the Belovezhskaya Act posed no less of a threat. The sudden, without any preliminary preparation, liquidation of the Union led to the disintegration of a single and smoothly functioning economy. This not only served as an impetus for the destruction of the state, but also became main reason a sharp drop in production in all former Soviet territories, which almost halved in the 1990s, which in turn contributed to the impoverishment of the population and the spread of social pathologies accompanying poverty, which remained the “main fact” Russian life and at the beginning of the 21st century.

Even more important consequences were the economic motivation underlying the behavior of the elites who supported Yeltsin in 1991. As one of Yeltsin’s former supporters wrote thirteen years later, “almost everything that happened in Russia after 1991 was largely the former USSR.” This phenomenon also had sad historical precedents. Twice in Russian history of the twentieth century, the main wealth of the nation was subject to large-scale confiscation: in 1917-1918, when the land, industrial and other property of the landowners and bourgeoisie was nationalized during the revolution, and in 1929-1933, when Stalin’s collectivization deprived 25 million peasants of their property . And in both cases, the consequences continued to plague the country for many years to come.

The Soviet elites appropriated the country's enormous wealth, which for decades had been defined by law and ideology as the “property of the entire people,” without caring at all about formal procedure or public opinion. In order to maintain a dominant position, as well as for personal enrichment, they needed the most valuable pieces of state property, which would be distributed “from above”, without the participation of legislative bodies or representatives of the public. And they got what they wanted - first on their own, through “spontaneous privatization,” and then, after 1991, “privatization,” and then, after 1991, with the help of Yeltsin’s presidential decrees. As a result, the shadow of double illegitimateness hung over privatization from the very beginning: in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of the population.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the following conclusions can be drawn.

The end of the 20th century was marked by such an event as the fall of the world superpower - the USSR. There were plenty of reasons and prerequisites for this event.

Since the mid-eighties, “perestroika” began not only of the political system, but also of the economic life of Soviet society; some democratic transformations were carried out, which resulted in the elimination of the monopoly of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on power and the transition to a multi-party system.

Everyone understood that it was necessary to move on to expanding market relations.

On the way to market expansion:

Individual labor activity is allowed;

Creation of cooperatives for the production of several types of goods;

Enterprises can independently sell above-plan products;

Reorganization of the banking system.

Today, more than 20 years after the events described above, debates continue about the causes and consequences of the cessation of the existence of this state, about possible ways to solve existing problems and about another possible fate of the USSR. This topic remains relevant to this day, since many materials and acts Soviet power were classified and only now, in the last 2-3 years, have become available for familiarization to ordinary citizens, and only now is it possible to answer a number of questions that, it seemed, could no longer be answered.

List of used literature

Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic / Gazette of the SND and Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. 1990. No. 2. Art. 22.

Agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States / Gazette of the SND and the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. 12/19/1991. No. 51. Art. 1798.

Actual problems modern history of Russia. -Armavir, 2010.

Batalov E. Perestroika and the fate of Russia. //HE IS WITH. - 2012. - No. 2.

Isaev I.A. History of state and law of Russia: textbook. -M.: Prospekt, 2010. - 800 p.

Kolubev A.V. Russia, twentieth century. //National history. -1992. - No. 4.

Cohen Stephen. Was it possible to reform the Soviet system // Freedom of Thought. -2012. -No. 1. pp. 136-162.

Cohen Stephen. Why did the USSR collapse? // Free thought. -2011. -No. 9-10. pp. 179-189

Naumov N.V. International aspects of the collapse of the USSR. Elections in Russia. // Science Magazine. Issue 1, 2000.

Sakva R. The end of the era of revolutions of 1989-1991. //Policy. - 2010. - No. 5.

Stelmakh V.G. productive view on the causes of the collapse of the USSR // ONS. -2011. -No. 1. pp. 106-125.

Tikhonov A.I. History of domestic state and law. -M., 2013.

Torutin U.K. Collapse of the Union. Was the collapse of the USSR inevitable? // Free Thought.-2012. -No. 1.P.163-177

Fortunatov V.V. History of the Russian state and law (documents, tables, dictionary). Tutorial. - M., 2010.

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Collapse of the USSR- processes of systemic disintegration that took place in the economy (national economy), social structure, social and political sphere of the Soviet Union, which led to the demise of the USSR on December 26, 1991.

The collapse of the USSR led to the independence of 15 republics of the USSR and their emergence on the world political stage as independent states.

Background

The USSR inherited most of the territory and multinational structure of the Russian Empire. In 1917-1921 Finland, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Tuva gained independence. Some territories in 1939-1946. were annexed to the USSR (the Polish campaign of the Red Army, the annexation of the Baltic states, the annexation of the Tuvan People's Republic).

After the end of World War II, the USSR had a huge territory in Europe and Asia, with access to seas and oceans, colossal natural resources, developed economy socialist type, based on regional specialization and interregional economic ties. In addition, the leadership of the “socialist camp countries” was under partial control of the USSR authorities.

In the 70-80s, interethnic conflicts (the 1972 riots in Kaunas, the 1978 mass demonstrations in Georgia, the 1980 events in Minsk, the December 1986 events in Kazakhstan) were insignificant, Soviet ideology emphasized that the USSR - Friendly family fraternal peoples. The USSR was led by representatives of various nationalities (Georgian I.V. Stalin, Ukrainians N.S. Khrushchev, L.I. Brezhnev, K.U. Chernenko, Russians Yu.V. Andropov, Gorbachev, V.I. Lenin). Russians, the most numerous people, lived not only on the territory of the RSFSR, but also in all other republics. Each of the republics of the Soviet Union had its own anthem and its own party leadership (except for the RSFSR) - the first secretary, etc.

Management multinational state was centralized - the country was headed by the central bodies of the CPSU, which controlled the entire hierarchy of government bodies. The leaders of the union republics were approved by the central leadership. This actual state of affairs differed somewhat from the idealized design described in the Constitution of the USSR. The Byelorussian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR, based on the results of the agreements reached at the Yalta Conference, had their representatives in the UN from the moment of its founding.

After Stalin's death, some decentralization of power took place. In particular, it became a strict rule to appoint a representative of the titular nation of the corresponding republic to the post of first secretary in the republics. The second secretary of the party in the republics was a protege of the Central Committee. This led to the fact that local leaders had a certain independence and unconditional power in their regions. After the collapse of the USSR, many of these leaders were transformed into presidents of their respective states (except Shushkevich). However, in Soviet times, their fate depended on the central leadership.

Reasons for the collapse

Currently, there is no single point of view among historians on what was the main cause of the collapse of the USSR, and also on whether it was possible to prevent or at least stop the process of collapse of the USSR. Among possible reasons are called the following:

• centrifugal nationalist tendencies inherent, according to some authors, in every multinational country and manifested in the form of interethnic contradictions and the desire of individual peoples to independently develop their culture and economy;
• the authoritarian nature of Soviet society (persecution of the church, KGB persecution of dissidents, forced collectivism);
• the dominance of one ideology, ideological narrow-mindedness, a ban on communication with foreign countries, censorship, lack of free discussion of alternatives (especially important for the intelligentsia);
• growing dissatisfaction of the population due to shortages of food and the most necessary goods (refrigerators, televisions, toilet paper, etc.), ridiculous prohibitions and restrictions (on the size of a garden plot, etc.), a constant lag in living standards from developed Western countries;
• disproportions in the extensive economy (characteristic of the entire existence of the USSR), the consequence of which was a constant shortage of consumer goods, a growing technical gap in all spheres of the manufacturing industry (which can be compensated for in an extensive economy only by high-cost mobilization measures, a set of such measures under the general name “Acceleration "was adopted in 1987, but there was no longer any economic opportunity to implement it);
• crisis of confidence in the economic system: in the 1960-1970s. The main way to combat the inevitable shortage of consumer goods in a planned economy was to rely on mass production, simplicity and cheapness of materials; most enterprises worked in three shifts, producing similar products from low-quality materials. The quantitative plan was the only way to evaluate the efficiency of enterprises, quality control was minimized. The result of this was a sharp drop in the quality of consumer goods produced in the USSR, as a result, already in the early 1980s. the term “Soviet” in relation to goods was synonymous with the term “low quality”. The crisis of confidence in the quality of goods became a crisis of confidence in the entire economic system as a whole;
• a number of man-made disasters (plane crashes, the Chernobyl accident, the crash of the Admiral Nakhimov, gas explosions, etc.) and the concealment of information about them;
• unsuccessful attempts to reform the Soviet system, which led to stagnation and then the collapse of the economy, which led to the collapse of the political system (economic reform of 1965);
• the decline in world oil prices, which shook the economy of the USSR;
• monocentrism of decision-making (only in Moscow), which led to inefficiency and loss of time;
• defeat in the arms race, victory of “Reaganomics” in this race;
• The Afghan War, the Cold War, incessant financial assistance to the countries of the socialist camp, and the development of the military-industrial complex to the detriment of other areas of the economy ruined the budget.

The possibility of the collapse of the USSR was considered in Western political science (Hélène d’Encausse, “The Divided Empire,” 1978) and the journalism of Soviet dissidents (Andrei Amalrik, “Will the Soviet Union Exist Until 1984?”, 1969).

Course of events

Since 1985, the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee M. S. Gorbachev and his supporters began the policy of perestroika, the political activity of the people increased sharply, and mass movements and organizations were formed, including radical and nationalist ones. Attempts to reform the Soviet system led to a deepening crisis in the country. In the political arena, this crisis was expressed as a confrontation between USSR President Gorbachev and RSFSR President Yeltsin. Yeltsin actively promoted the slogan of the need for the sovereignty of the RSFSR.

General crisis

The collapse of the USSR took place against the backdrop of a general economic, foreign policy and demographic crisis. In 1989, the beginning of the economic crisis in the USSR was officially announced for the first time (economic growth was replaced by decline).

In the period 1989-1991. the main problem of the Soviet economy reaches its maximum - chronic commodity shortages; Almost all basic goods, except bread, disappear from free sale. Rationed supplies in the form of coupons are being introduced throughout the country.

Since 1991, a demographic crisis (an excess of mortality over the birth rate) has been recorded for the first time.

Refusal to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries entails the massive collapse of pro-Soviet communist regimes in Eastern Europe in 1989. Comes to power in Poland former leader trade union "Solidarity" Lech Walesa (December 9, 1990), in Czechoslovakia - former dissident Vaclav Havel (December 29, 1989). In Romania, unlike other countries of Eastern Europe, the communists were removed by force, and the dictator-president Ceausescu and his wife were shot by a tribunal. Thus, there is a virtual collapse of the Soviet sphere of influence.

A number of interethnic conflicts are flaring up on the territory of the USSR.

The first manifestation of tension during the Perestroika period was the events in Kazakhstan. On December 16, 1986, a protest demonstration took place in Alma-Ata after Moscow tried to impose its protege V. G. Kolbin, who had previously worked as the first secretary of the Ulyanovsk Regional Committee of the CPSU and had nothing to do with Kazakhstan, to the post of first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the KazSSR. This demonstration was suppressed by internal troops. Some of its participants “disappeared” or were imprisoned. These events are known as "Zheltoksan".

The Karabakh conflict that began in 1988 was particularly acute. Mutual ethnic cleansing is taking place, and in Azerbaijan this was accompanied by mass pogroms. In 1989, the Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR announced the annexation of Nagorno-Karabakh, and the Azerbaijan SSR began a blockade. In April 1991, a war actually began between the two Soviet republics.

In 1990, unrest occurred in the Fergana Valley, a feature of which was the mixing of several Central Asian nationalities (Osh massacre). The decision to rehabilitate the peoples deported by Stalin leads to increased tension in a number of regions, in particular, in Crimea - between returning Crimean Tatars and Russians, in the Prigorodny region of North Ossetia - between Ossetians and returning Ingush.

Against the background of the general crisis, the popularity of radical democrats led by Boris Yeltsin is growing; it reaches its maximum in the two largest cities - Moscow and Leningrad.

Movements in the republics for secession from the USSR and the “parade of sovereignties”

On February 7, 1990, the CPSU Central Committee announced the weakening of the monopoly on power, and within a few weeks the first competitive elections were held. Liberals and nationalists won many seats in the parliaments of the union republics.

During 1990-1991 the so-called “parade of sovereignties”, during which all the union republics (one of the first was the RSFSR) and many of the autonomous republics adopted Declarations of Sovereignty, in which they challenged the priority of all-union laws over republican ones, which began the “war of laws”. They also took actions to control local economies, including refusals to pay taxes to the union and federal Russian budgets. These conflicts cut off many economic ties, which further worsened the economic situation in the USSR.

The first territory of the USSR to declare independence in January 1990 in response to the Baku events was the Nakhichevan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. Before the August putsch, two union republics (Lithuania and Georgia) declared independence, four more refused to join the proposed new Union (USG, see below) and transition to independence: Estonia, Latvia, Moldova, Armenia.

With the exception of Kazakhstan, none of the Central Asian union republics had organized movements or parties that aimed to achieve independence. Among the Muslim republics, with the exception of the Azerbaijani Popular Front, the independence movement existed only in one of the autonomous republics of the Volga region - the Ittifak party of Fauzia Bayramova in Tatarstan, which since 1989 has advocated the independence of Tatarstan.

Immediately after the events of the State Emergency Committee, independence was declared by almost all the remaining union republics, as well as several autonomous ones outside Russia, some of which later became the so-called. unrecognized states.

Baltic secession process

Lithuania

On June 3, 1988, the Sąjūdis movement “in support of Perestroika” was founded in Lithuania, with the unspoken goal of secession from the USSR and the restoration of an independent Lithuanian state. It held rallies of thousands and carried out active work to promote its ideas. In January 1990, Gorbachev’s visit to Vilnius gathered on the streets of Vilnius a huge number of supporters of independence (although formally they were talking about “autonomy” and “expansion of powers within the USSR”), numbering up to 250 thousand people.

On the night of March 11, 1990, the Supreme Council of Lithuania, headed by Vytautas Landsbergis, declared the independence of Lithuania. Thus, Lithuania became the first of the union republics to declare independence, and one of two that did so before the August events and the State Emergency Committee. The independence of Lithuania was not recognized then either by the central government of the USSR or by other countries (except Iceland). In response to this, the Soviet government launched an “economic blockade” of Lithuania in mid-1990, and later used military force.

The Central Union Government made forceful attempts to suppress the achievement of independence by the Baltic republics. Starting from January 11, 1991, Soviet units occupied the Press House in Vilnius, television centers and hubs in cities, and other public buildings (so-called “party property”). On January 13, paratroopers of the 7th GVDD, with the support of the Alpha Group, stormed the television tower in Vilnius, stopping republican television broadcasting. The local population showed massive opposition to this, as a result of which 13 people were killed, including an Alpha Squad officer, and dozens of people were wounded. On March 11, 1991, the KPL (CPSU) formed the Committee for the National Salvation of Lithuania, and army patrols were introduced on the streets. However, the reaction of the world community and the increased influence of liberals in Russia made further forceful actions impossible.

Leningrad journalist A. G. Nevzorov (host of the popular program “600 Seconds”) covered events in the republic. On January 15, 1991, the First Program of Central Television showed his television film report entitled “Ours” about the January 1991 events at the Vilnius TV tower, which contradicted the interpretation in foreign as well as in Soviet liberal media. In his report, Nevzorov glorified the Vilnius riot police loyal to Moscow and Soviet troops located on the territory of Lithuania. The plot caused a public outcry; a number of Soviet politicians called it a fake, aiming to justify the use of troops against civilians.

On the night of July 31, 1991, unknown persons (later it was established that they were officers of the Vilnius and Riga OMON detachments) at the checkpoint in Medininkai (on the border of Lithuania with the Belarusian SSR) shot 8 people, including traffic policemen, employees of the Regional Security Department and 2 soldiers of the Aras special forces detachment of the self-proclaimed Republic of Lithuania. It is worth noting that earlier, for several months before this incident, riot police with “Nashi” stripes came to the border, using physical force to disperse unarmed Lithuanian customs officers and set their trailers on fire, as Nevzorov demonstrated in his reports. One of the three 5.45 caliber machine guns used to kill the Lithuanian border guards was subsequently discovered at the base of the Riga riot police.

After the events of August 1991, the Republic of Lithuania was immediately recognized by most countries of the world.

Estonia

In April 1988, the Estonian People's Front was formed in support of perestroika, which did not formally set as its goal the exit of Estonia from the USSR, but became the basis for achieving it.

In June-September 1988, the following events were held in Tallinn public events, which went down in history as the “Singing Revolution”, at which protest songs were performed, and propaganda materials and badges of the Popular Front were distributed:

• Night singing festivals on the Town Hall Square and on the Singing Field, held in June, during the traditional Old Town Days;
• rock concerts held in August;
• musical and political event “Song of Estonia”, which, according to the media, gathered about 300,000 Estonians, that is, about a third of the Estonian people, took place on September 11, 1988 at the Song Field. During the latest event, dissident Trivimi Velliste publicly voiced his call for independence.

On November 16, 1988, the Supreme Council of the Estonian SSR adopted the Declaration of Estonian Sovereignty by a majority vote.

On August 23, 1989, the Popular Fronts of the three Baltic republics held a joint action called the Baltic Way.

On November 12, 1989, the Supreme Council of the Estonian SSR adopted the Resolution “On the historical and legal assessment of the events that took place in Estonia in 1940,” recognizing as illegal the declaration of July 22, 1940 on the entry of the ESSR into the USSR.

On March 30, 1990, the Supreme Council of the ESSR adopted a decision on the state status of Estonia. Having confirmed that the occupation of the Republic of Estonia by the Soviet Union on June 17, 1940 did not de jure interrupt the existence of the Republic of Estonia, the Supreme Council recognized the state power of the Estonian ESSR as illegal from the moment of its establishment and proclaimed the restoration of the Republic of Estonia.

On April 3, 1990, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopted a law declaring legally void the declarations of the Supreme Councils of the Baltic republics on the annulment of entry into the USSR and subsequent decisions ensuing from this.

On May 8 of the same year, the Supreme Council of the ESSR decided to rename the Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic into Republic of Estonia.

On January 12, 1991, during the visit of the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR Boris Yeltsin to Tallinn, the “Agreement on the Fundamentals of Interstate Relations of the RSFSR with the Republic of Estonia” was signed between him and the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Estonia Arnold Ruutel, in which both parties recognized each other as independent states.

On August 20, 1991, the Supreme Council of Estonia adopted a resolution “On the state independence of Estonia,” and on September 6 of the same year, the USSR officially recognized the independence of Estonia.

Latvia

In Latvia in the period 1988-1990. The People's Front of Latvia, which advocates independence, is strengthening, and the struggle with the Interfront, which advocates maintaining membership in the USSR, is intensifying.

On May 4, 1990, the Supreme Council of Latvia proclaims the transition to independence. On March 3, 1991, the demand was supported by a referendum.

The peculiarity of the separation of Latvia and Estonia is that, unlike Lithuania and Georgia, before the complete collapse of the USSR as a result of the actions of the State Emergency Committee, they did not declare independence, but a “soft” “transition process” to it, and also that, in order to gain control on their territory in the conditions of a relatively small relative majority of the titular population, republican citizenship was granted only to persons living in these republics at the time of their annexation to the USSR, and their descendants.

Georgian branch

Since 1989, a movement has emerged in Georgia to secede from the USSR, which has intensified against the backdrop of the growing Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. On April 9, 1989, clashes with troops occur in Tbilisi with casualties among the local population.

On November 28, 1990, during the elections, the Supreme Council of Georgia was formed, headed by the radical nationalist Zviad Gamsakhurdia, who was later (May 26, 1991) elected president by popular vote.

On April 9, 1991, the Supreme Council declared independence based on the results of a referendum. Georgia became the second of the union republics to declare independence, and one of two (with the Lithuanian SSR) that did so before the August events (GKChP).

The autonomous republics of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which were part of Georgia, announced non-recognition of the independence of Georgia and their desire to remain part of the Union, and later formed unrecognized states (in 2008, after the armed conflict in South Ossetia, their independence was recognized in 2008 by Russia and Nicaragua, in 2009 by Venezuela and Nauru).

Azerbaijan branch

In 1988, the Popular Front of Azerbaijan was formed. The beginning of the Karabakh conflict led to the orientation of Armenia towards Russia, at the same time it led to the strengthening of pro-Turkish elements in Azerbaijan.

After demands for independence were heard at the beginning of the anti-Armenian demonstrations in Baku, they were suppressed on January 20-21, 1990 by the Soviet Army with numerous casualties.

Branch of Moldova

Since 1989, the movement for secession from the USSR and state unification with Romania has been intensifying in Moldova.

In October 1990, Moldovans clashed with the Gagauz, a national minority in the south of the country.

On June 23, 1990, Moldova declared sovereignty. Moldova declared independence after the events of the State Emergency Committee: August 27, 1991.

The population of eastern and southern Moldova, trying to avoid integration with Romania, declared non-recognition of the independence of Moldova and proclaimed the formation of the new republics of the Transnistrian Moldavian Republic and Gagauzia, which expressed a desire to remain in the Union.

Ukraine branch

In September 1989, the movement of Ukrainian national democrats was founded, the People's Movement of Ukraine (People's Movement of Ukraine), which participated in the elections on March 30, 1990 in the Verkhovna Rada (Supreme Council) of the Ukrainian SSR was in the minority with a majority of members of the Communist Party of Ukraine. On July 16, 1990, the Verkhovna Rada adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Ukrainian SCP.

As a result of the plebiscite, the Crimean region turns into the Autonomous Republic of Crimea within the Ukrainian SSR. The referendum is recognized by the Kravchuk government. Subsequently, a similar referendum is held in the Transcarpathian region, but its results are ignored.

After the failure of the August putsch on August 24, 1991, the Verkhovna Rada of the Ukrainian SSR adopted the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, which was confirmed by the results of the referendum on December 1, 1991.

Later in Crimea, thanks to the Russian-speaking majority of the population, the autonomy of the Republic of Crimea within Ukraine was proclaimed.

Declaration of Sovereignty of the RSFSR

On June 12, 1990, the First Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the RSFSR. The Declaration approved the priority of the Constitution and Laws of the RSFSR over the legislative acts of the USSR. Among the principles of the declaration were:

• state sovereignty (clause 5), ensuring everyone’s inalienable right to a decent life (clause 4), recognition of generally recognized norms of international law in the field of human rights (clause 10);
• norms of democracy: recognition of the multinational people of Russia as the bearer of sovereignty and source of state power, their right to directly exercise state power (clause 3), the exclusive right of the people to own, use and dispose of the national wealth of Russia; the impossibility of changing the territory of the RSFSR without the will of the people, expressed through a referendum;
• the principle of providing all citizens, political parties, public organizations, mass movements and religious organizations with equal legal opportunities to participate in the management of state and public affairs;
• separation of legislative, executive and judicial powers as the most important principle of the functioning of the rule of law in the RSFSR (clause 13);
• development of federalism: a significant expansion of the rights of all regions of the RSFSR.

Parade of sovereignties in the autonomous republics and regions of the RSFSR

On August 6, 1990, the head of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, Boris Yeltsin, made a statement in Ufa: “take as much sovereignty as you can swallow”.

From August to October 1990, there was a “parade of sovereignties” of the autonomous republics and autonomous regions of the RSFSR. Most of the autonomous republics proclaim themselves Soviet socialist republics within the RSFSR and the USSR. On July 20, the Supreme Council of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. Following this, on August 9, the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Karelian ASSR was adopted, on August 29 - the Komi SSR, on September 20 - the Udmurt Republic, on September 27 - the Yakut-Sakha SSR, on October 8 - the Buryat SSR, on October 11 - the Bashkir SSR-Bashkortostan, on October 18 - Kalmyk SSR, October 22 - Mari SSR, October 24 - Chuvash SSR, October 25 - Gorno-Altai ASSR.

Attempt to secede from Tatarstan

On August 30, 1990, the Supreme Council of the Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Republic of Tatarstan. The declaration, unlike some union and almost all other autonomous Russian (except Checheno-Ingushetia) republics, did not indicate that the republic was part of either the RSFSR or the USSR and declared that, as a sovereign state and subject of international law, it concludes treaties and alliances with Russia and other states. During the massive collapse of the USSR and later Tatarstan, with the same wording, adopted declarations and resolutions on the act of independence and entry into the CIS, held a referendum, and adopted a constitution.

On October 18, 1991, the Resolution of the Supreme Council on the act of state independence of Tatarstan was adopted.

In the fall of 1991, in preparation for the signing on December 9, 1991 of the Treaty on the creation of the GCC as a confederal union, Tatarstan again announced its desire to independently join the GCC.

On December 26, 1991, in connection with the Belovezhskaya agreements on the impossibility of establishing the GCC and the formation of the CIS, a Declaration was adopted on Tatarstan's entry into the CIS as a founder.

At the end of 1991, a decision was made and at the beginning of 1992 an ersatz currency (surrogate means of payment) - Tatarstan coupons - was introduced into circulation.

"Chechen Revolution"

In the summer of 1990, a group of prominent representatives of the Chechen intelligentsia took the initiative to hold the Chechen National Congress to discuss the problems of reviving national culture, language, traditions, historical memory. On 23-25, the Chechen National Congress was held in Grozny, which elected an Executive Committee headed by Chairman Major General Dzhokhar Dudayev. On November 27, the Supreme Council of the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, under pressure from the executive committee of the ChNS and mass actions, adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Chechen-Ingush Republic. On June 8-9, 1991, the 2nd session of the First Chechen National Congress took place, which declared itself the National Congress of the Chechen People (NCCHN). The session decided to overthrow the Supreme Council of the Chechen Republic and proclaimed the Chechen Republic of Nokhchi-cho, and declared the Executive Committee of the OKCHN, headed by D. Dudayev, to be the temporary authority.

The attempted coup in the USSR on August 19-21, 1991 became a catalyst for the political situation in the republic. On August 19, at the initiative of the Vainakh Democratic Party, a rally in support of the Russian leadership began on the central square of Grozny, but after August 21 it began to be held under the slogans of the resignation of the Supreme Council along with its chairman for "aiding the putschists", as well as parliamentary re-elections. On September 1-2, the 3rd session of the OKCHN declared the Supreme Council of the Chechen-Ingush Republic deposed and transferred all power in the territory of Chechnya to the Executive Committee of the OKCHN. On September 4, the Grozny television center and the Radio House were seized. Chairman of the Grozny Executive Committee Dzhokhar Dudayev read out an appeal in which he named the leadership of the republic "criminals, bribe-takers, embezzlers" and announced that with "On September 5, before democratic elections are held, power in the republic passes into the hands of the executive committee and other general democratic organizations". In response, the Supreme Council declared a state of emergency in Grozny from 00:00 on September 5 until September 10, but six hours later the Presidium of the Supreme Council canceled the state of emergency. On September 6, the Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, Doku Zavgaev, resigned, and acting. Ruslan Khasbulatov became the chairman. A few days later, on September 15, the last session of the Supreme Council of the Chechen-Ingush Republic took place, at which a decision was made to dissolve itself. As a transitional body, a Provisional high council(VVS), consisting of 32 deputies.

By the beginning of October, a conflict arose between supporters of the OKCHN Executive Committee, led by its chairman Khussein Akhmadov, and his opponents, led by Yu. Chernov. On October 5, seven of the nine members of the Air Force decided to remove Akhmadov, but on the same day the National Guard seized the building of the House of Trade Unions, where the Air Force met, and the building of the Republican KGB. Then they arrested the republic's prosecutor, Alexander Pushkin. The next day, the Executive Committee of the OKCHN “for subversive and provocative activities” announced the dissolution of the Air Force, taking over the functions “a revolutionary committee for the transitional period with full power”.

Declaration of Sovereignty of Belarus

In June 1988, the Belarusian Popular Front for Perestroika was officially established. Among the founders were representatives of the intelligentsia, including the writer Vasil Bykov.

On February 19, 1989, the organizing committee of the Belarusian Popular Front held the first sanctioned rally demanding the abolition of the one-party system, which attracted 40 thousand people. The BPF rally against the allegedly undemocratic nature of the 1990 elections attracted 100 thousand people.

Following the elections to the Supreme Soviet of the BSSR, the Belarusian Popular Front managed to form a faction of 37 people in the parliament of the republic.

The Belarusian Popular Front faction became the center of unification of pro-democratic forces in parliament. The faction initiated the adoption of a declaration on the state sovereignty of the BSSR and proposed a program of large-scale liberal reforms in the economy.

1991 referendum on preserving the USSR

In March 1991, a referendum was held in which the overwhelming majority of the population in each of the republics voted in favor of preserving the USSR.

In the six union republics (Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Georgia, Moldova, Armenia), which had previously declared independence or a transition to independence, an all-Union referendum was not actually held (the authorities of these republics did not form Central Election Commissions, there was no general voting of the population ) with the exception of some territories (Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transnistria), but at other times referendums on independence were held.

Based on the concept of the referendum, it was planned to conclude a new union on August 20, 1991 - the Union of Sovereign States (USS) as a soft federation.

However, although the referendum overwhelmingly voted for preserving the integrity of the USSR, it had a strong psychological impact, calling into question the very idea of ​​the “inviolability of the union.”

Draft of a new Union Treaty

The rapid increase in the processes of disintegration is pushing the leadership of the USSR, led by Mikhail Gorbachev, to the following actions:

• Conducting an all-Union referendum, in which the majority of voters spoke in favor of preserving the USSR;
• The establishment of the post of President of the USSR in connection with the prospect of the CPSU losing power;
• A project to create a new Union Treaty, in which the rights of the republics were significantly expanded.

Mikhail Gorbachev's attempts to preserve the USSR were dealt a serious blow with the election of Boris Yeltsin on May 29, 1990 as Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. This election took place in a bitter struggle, on the third attempt and with a margin of three votes over the candidate from the conservative part of the Supreme Council, Ivan Polozkov.

Russia was also part of the USSR as one of the union republics, representing the overwhelming majority of the population of the USSR, its territory, economic and military potential. The central bodies of the RSFSR were also located in Moscow, like the all-Union ones, but were traditionally perceived as secondary in comparison with the authorities of the USSR.

With the election of Boris Yeltsin as the head of these government bodies, the RSFSR gradually set a course towards declaring its own independence, and recognizing the independence of the remaining union republics, which created the opportunity to remove Mikhail Gorbachev by dissolving all all-union institutions that he could lead.

On June 12, 1990, the Supreme Council of the RSFSR adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty, establishing the priority of Russian laws over union laws. From that moment on, the all-Union authorities began to lose control over the country; The “parade of sovereignties” intensified.

On January 12, 1991, Yeltsin signed an agreement with Estonia on the fundamentals of interstate relations, in which the RSFSR and Estonia recognized each other as sovereign states.

As Chairman of the Supreme Council, Yeltsin was able to achieve the establishment of the post of President of the RSFSR, and on June 12, 1991, he won the popular election for this position.

State Emergency Committee and its consequences

A number of government and party leaders, under the slogans of preserving the unity of the country and to restore strict party-state control over all spheres of life, attempted a coup d'etat (GKChP, also known as the “August putsch” on August 19, 1991).

The defeat of the putsch actually led to the collapse of the central government of the USSR, the resubordination of power structures to republican leaders and the acceleration of the collapse of the Union. Within a month after the coup, the authorities of almost all the union republics declared independence one after another. Some of them held independence referendums to give legitimacy to these decisions.

Since the Baltic republics left the USSR in September 1991, it has consisted of 12 republics.

On November 6, 1991, by decree of the President of the RSFSR B. Yeltsin, the activities of the CPSU and the Communist Party of the RSFSR on the territory of the RSFSR were terminated.

The referendum in Ukraine, held on December 1, 1991, in which supporters of independence won even in such a traditionally pro-Russian region as Crimea, made (according to some politicians, in particular B. N. Yeltsin) the preservation of the USSR in any form completely impossible.

On November 14, 1991, seven of the twelve republics (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan) decided to conclude an agreement on the creation of the Union of Sovereign States (USS) as a confederation with its capital in Minsk. The signing was scheduled for December 9, 1991.

Declaration of independence by the republics of the USSR

Union republics

Republic	Declaration of Sovereignty	Declaration of Independence	De jure independence
Estonian SSR
Latvian SSR
Lithuanian SSR
Georgian SSR
Russian SFSR
Moldavian SSR
Ukrainian SSR
Byelorussian SSR
Turkmen SSR
Armenian SSR
Tajik SSR
Kirghiz SSR
Kazakh SSR
Uzbek SSR
Azerbaijan SSR

ASSR and JSC

• January 19 - Nakhichevan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic.
• August 30 - Tatar Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (formally - see above).
• November 27 - Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (formally - see above).
• June 8 - Chechen part of the Chechen-Ingush Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic.
• September 4 - Crimean ASSR.

None of the republics complied with all the procedures prescribed by the USSR law of April 3, 1990 “On the procedure for resolving issues related to the secession of a union republic from the USSR.” The State Council of the USSR (a body created on September 5, 1991, consisting of the heads of the union republics chaired by the President of the USSR) formally recognized the independence of only three Baltic republics (September 6, 1991, resolutions of the USSR State Council No. GS-1, GS-2, GS-3). On November 4, V.I. Ilyukhin opened a criminal case against Gorbachev under Article 64 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR (treason) in connection with these resolutions of the State Council. According to Ilyukhin, Gorbachev, by signing them, violated the oath and the Constitution of the USSR and damaged the territorial integrity and state security of the USSR. After this, Ilyukhin was fired from the USSR Prosecutor's Office.

Signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords and creation of the CIS

In December 1991, the heads of the three republics, the founders of the USSR - Belarus, Russia and Ukraine gathered in Belovezhskaya Pushcha (the village of Viskuli, Belarus) to sign an agreement on the creation of the GCC. However, early agreements were rejected by Ukraine.

On December 8, 1991, they stated that the USSR was ceasing to exist, announced the impossibility of forming the GCC and signed the Agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The signing of the agreements caused a negative reaction from Gorbachev, but after the August putsch he no longer had real power. As B.N. Yeltsin later emphasized, the Belovezhskaya Agreements did not dissolve the USSR, but only stated its actual collapse by that time.

On December 11, the USSR Constitutional Supervision Committee issued a statement condemning the Belovezhskaya Agreement. This statement had no practical consequences.

On December 12, the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, chaired by R.I. Khasbulatov, ratified the Belovezhsky Accords and decided to denounce the RSFSR Union Treaty of 1922 (a number of lawyers believe that the denunciation of this treaty was meaningless, since it lost force in 1936 with the adoption of the USSR Constitution) and on the recall of Russian deputies from the Supreme Soviet of the USSR (without convening the Congress, which was regarded by some as a violation of the Constitution of the RSFSR in force at that time). Due to the recall of deputies, the Council of the Union lost its quorum. It should be noted that formally Russia and Belarus did not declare independence from the USSR, but only stated the fact of the end of its existence.

On December 17, the Chairman of the Council of the Union, K. D. Lubenchenko, stated that there was no quorum at the meeting. The Council of the Union, having renamed itself the Conference of Deputies, turned to the Supreme Soviet of Russia with a request to at least temporarily cancel the decision to recall Russian deputies so that the Council of the Union could resign. This appeal was ignored.

On December 21, 1991, at a meeting of presidents in Alma-Ata (Kazakhstan), 8 more republics joined the CIS: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and the so-called Alma-Ata Agreement was signed, which became the basis of the CIS.

The CIS was founded not as a confederation, but as an international (interstate) organization, which is characterized by weak integration and a lack of real power among the coordinating supranational bodies. Membership in this organization was rejected by the Baltic republics, as well as by Georgia (it joined the CIS only in October 1993 and announced its withdrawal from the CIS after the war in South Ossetia in the summer of 2008).

Completion of the collapse and liquidation of the power structures of the USSR

The authorities of the USSR as a subject of international law ceased to exist on December 25-26, 1991. Russia declared itself a continuator of the USSR membership (and not a legal successor, as is often erroneously indicated) in international institutions, assumed the debts and assets of the USSR and declared itself the owner of all property of the USSR abroad. According to data provided by the Russian Federation, at the end of 1991, the liabilities of the former Union were estimated at $93.7 billion, and assets at $110.1 billion. Vnesheconombank's deposits amounted to about $700 million. The so-called “zero option,” according to which the Russian Federation became the legal successor of the former Soviet Union in terms of external debt and assets, including foreign property, was not ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, which claimed the right to dispose of the property of the USSR.

On December 25, USSR President M. S. Gorbachev announced the termination of his activities as President of the USSR “for reasons of principle,” signed a decree resigning from the powers of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Soviet Armed Forces and transferred control of strategic nuclear weapons to Russian President B. Yeltsin.

On December 26, the session of the upper chamber of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which retained a quorum - the Council of Republics (formed by the USSR Law of September 5, 1991 N 2392-1), - from which at that time only representatives of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan were not recalled, adopted under the chairmanship of A. Alimzhanov, declaration No. 142-N on the termination of the existence of the USSR, as well as a number of other documents (resolution on the dismissal of judges of the Supreme and Higher Arbitration Courts of the USSR and the collegium of the USSR Prosecutor's Office (No. 143-N), resolutions on the dismissal of the chairman State Bank V.V. Gerashchenko (No. 144-N) and his first deputy V.N. Kulikov (No. 145-N)). December 26, 1991 is considered the day the existence of the USSR ceased to exist, although some institutions and organizations of the USSR (for example, the State Standard of the USSR, the State Committee for Public Education, the Committee for the Protection of the State Border) still continued to function during 1992, and the Committee for Constitutional Supervision of the USSR did not exist at all officially disbanded.

After the collapse of the USSR, Russia and the “near abroad” constitute the so-called. post-Soviet space.

Impact in the short term

Transformations in Russia

The collapse of the USSR led to the almost immediate launch of a broad program of reform by Yeltsin and his supporters. The most radical first steps were:

• in the economic field - price liberalization on January 2, 1992, which served as the beginning of “shock therapy”;
• in the political field - the ban on the CPSU and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (November 1991); liquidation of the Soviet system as a whole (September 21 - October 4, 1993).

Interethnic conflicts

IN last years Since the existence of the USSR, a number of interethnic conflicts have flared up on its territory. After its collapse, most of them immediately went into the phase of armed clashes:

• Karabakh conflict - the war of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh for independence from Azerbaijan;
• Georgian-Abkhaz conflict - conflict between Georgia and Abkhazia;
• Georgian-South Ossetian conflict - conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia;
• Ossetian-Ingush conflict - clashes between Ossetians and Ingush in the Prigorodny region;
• Civil war in Tajikistan - inter-clan Civil War in Tajikistan;
• First Chechen War- the struggle of Russian federal forces with separatists in Chechnya;
• the conflict in Transnistria is the struggle of the Moldovan authorities with the separatists in Transnistria.

According to Vladimir Mukomel, the number of deaths in interethnic conflicts in 1988-96 is about 100 thousand people. The number of refugees as a result of these conflicts amounted to at least 5 million people.

A number of conflicts have not led to a full-scale military confrontation, but continue to complicate the situation in the territory of the former USSR to this day:

• friction between Crimean Tatars and the local Slavic population in Crimea;
• the situation of the Russian population in Estonia and Latvia;
• state affiliation of the Crimean peninsula.

Collapse of the ruble zone

The desire to isolate themselves from the Soviet economy, which had entered a phase of acute crisis since 1989, pushed the former Soviet republics to introduce national currencies. The Soviet ruble survived only on the territory of the RSFSR, but hyperinflation (in 1992 prices increased 24 times, in the next few years - an average of 10 times per year) almost completely destroyed it, which served as the reason for replacing the Soviet ruble with the Russian one in 1993 . From July 26 to August 7, 1993, a confiscation monetary reform was carried out in Russia, during which treasury notes of the State Bank of the USSR were withdrawn from the monetary circulation of Russia. The reform also solved the problem of separating the monetary systems of Russia and other CIS countries that used the ruble as a means of payment in internal money circulation.

During 1992-1993 Almost all union republics are introducing their own currencies. The exceptions are Tajikistan (the Russian ruble remained in circulation until 1995), the unrecognized Transnistrian Moldavian Republic (introduced the Transnistrian ruble in 1994), and partially recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia (the Russian ruble remained in circulation).

In a number of cases, national currencies come from the coupon system introduced in the last years of the USSR by transforming one-time coupons into constant currency (Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Georgia, etc.).

It should be noted that the Soviet ruble had names in 15 languages ​​- the languages ​​of all union republics. For some of them, the names of national currencies initially coincided with the national names of the Soviet ruble (karbovanets, manat, rubel, som, etc.)

Collapse of the unified Armed Forces

During the first months of the existence of the CIS, the leaders of the main union republics considered the issue of forming a unified armed forces of the CIS, but this process did not develop. The USSR Ministry of Defense functioned as the Main Command of the United Armed Forces of the CIS until the October events of 1993. Until May 1992, after the resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev, the so-called. The nuclear suitcase was in the possession of USSR Defense Minister Yevgeny Shaposhnikov.

Russian Federation

The first military department appeared in the RSFSR in accordance with the law “On Republican Ministries and State Committees of the RSFSR” dated July 14, 1990, and was called the “State Committee of the RSFSR for Public Security and Interaction with the Ministry of Defense of the USSR and the KGB of the USSR.” In 1991 it was reorganized several times.

The RSFSR's own Ministry of Defense was established temporarily on August 19, 1991, and abolished on September 9, 1991. Also, during the 1991 coup, the authorities of the RSFSR attempted to establish the Russian Guard, the formation of which was entrusted by President Yeltsin to Vice President Rutskoi.

It was supposed to form 11 brigades numbering 3-5 thousand people. each. In a number of cities, primarily in Moscow and St. Petersburg, recruitment of volunteers began; in Moscow, this recruitment was stopped on September 27, 1991, by which time the Moscow City Hall commission had managed to select about 3 thousand people for the proposed Moscow Brigade of the RSFSR National Guard.

A draft corresponding decree of the President of the RSFSR was prepared, and the issue was discussed in a number of committees of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR. However, the corresponding decree was never signed, and the formation of the National Guard was stopped. From March to May 1992, Boris Yeltsin was... O. Minister of Defense of the RSFSR.

The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation were formed by decree of the President of the Russian Federation Boris Nikolaevich Yeltsin dated May 7, 1992 No. 466 “On the creation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.” In accordance with this decree, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is re-established.

On May 7, 1992, Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin took office as Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, although the law “On the President of the RSFSR” in force at that time did not provide for this.

On the composition of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation Order Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation In accordance with Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 7, 1992 No. 466 “On the creation of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation” and the act “On the composition of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation”, approved by the President of the Russian Federation on May 7, 1992, I order: The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation shall include: associations, formations, military units, institutions, military educational institutions, enterprises and organizations of the Armed Forces of the former USSR, stationed on the territory of the Russian Federation; troops (forces) under the jurisdiction of the Russian Federation stationed in the territory of the Transcaucasian Military District, Western, Northern and Northwestern Groups of Forces, Black Sea Fleet, Baltic Fleet, Caspian Flotilla, 14th Guards. army, formations, military units, institutions, enterprises and organizations on the territory of Mongolia, the Republic of Cuba and other states. The order is sent to a separate company. Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation, Army General P. Grachev

On January 1, 1993, instead of the regulations of the Armed Forces of the USSR, temporary general military regulations of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation came into force. On December 15, 1993, the Charter of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation was adopted.

In Estonia in the period 1991-2001. In accordance with the decision of the Supreme Council of Estonia on September 3, 1991, the Defense Forces were formed (est. Kaitsejoud, Russian Ka?itseyyud), including the Armed Forces (est. Kaitsevagi, Russian Ka?itsevyagi; army, air force and navy; formed on the basis of conscription) numbering about 4,500 people. and the voluntary paramilitary organization “Defense Union” (est. Kaitseliit, Russian Ka?itselit) numbering up to 10 thousand people.

Latvia

The National Armed Forces (Latvian) have been formed in Latvia. Nacionalie brunotie speki) numbering up to 6 thousand people, consisting of the army, aviation, navy and coast guard, as well as the voluntary paramilitary organization “Guardian of the Earth” (literally; Latvian. Zemessardze, Russian Ze?messardze).

Lithuania

The Armed Forces have been formed in Lithuania (lit. Ginkluotosios pajegos) numbering up to 16 thousand people, consisting of the army, aviation, navy and special forces, formed on the basis of conscription until 2009 (since 2009 - on a contract basis), as well as volunteers.

Ukraine

At the time of the collapse of the USSR, there were three military districts on the territory of Ukraine, numbering up to 780 thousand military personnel. They included numerous formations of the Ground Forces, one missile army, four air armies, an air defense army and the Black Sea Fleet. On August 24, 1991, the Verkhovna Rada adopted a resolution on the subordination of all the Armed Forces of the USSR located on its territory to Ukraine. These included, in particular, 1272 intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, there were also large reserves of enriched uranium. On November 3-4, 1990, the Ukrainian Nationalist Society (UNS) was created in Kyiv. On August 19, 1991, the UNSO was created to resist the troops of the State Emergency Committee

Currently, the Armed Forces of Ukraine (Ukrainian) Armed Forces of Ukraine) number up to 200 thousand people. Nuclear weapons have been transported to Russia. Formed according to urgent appeal(21,600 people as of spring 2008) and under contract.

Belarus

At the time of the death of the USSR, the Belarusian Military District numbering up to 180 thousand military personnel was located on the territory of the republic. In May 1992, the district was dissolved; on January 1, 1993, all military personnel were asked to swear allegiance to the Republic of Belarus or resign.

Currently, the Armed Forces of Belarus (Belarus. Uzbek forces of the Republic of Belarus) number up to 72 thousand people, divided into army, aviation and internal troops. Nuclear weapons have been transported to Russia. Formed by conscription.

Azerbaijan

In the summer of 1992, the Ministry of Defense of Azerbaijan issued an ultimatum to a number of units and formations of the Soviet Army stationed on the territory of Azerbaijan to hand over weapons and military equipment republican authorities in pursuance of the decree of the President of Azerbaijan. As a result, by the end of 1992, Azerbaijan received enough equipment and weapons to form four motorized infantry divisions.

The formation of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan took place under the conditions of the Karabakh war. Azerbaijan was defeated.

Armenia

The formation of the national army began in January 1992. As of 2007, it consists of the Ground Forces, Air Force, Air Defense Forces, and Border Troops, and numbers up to 60 thousand people. Works closely with the army of the territory with an unsettled status of Nagorno-Karabakh (Defense Army of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, up to 20 thousand people).

Due to the fact that at the time of the collapse of the USSR there was not a single military school on the territory of Armenia, officers of the national army are trained in Russia.

Georgia

The first national armed formations existed already at the time of the collapse of the USSR (National Guard, founded on December 20, 1990, also the Mkhedrioni paramilitary forces). Units and formations of the disintegrating Soviet Army become the source of weapons for various formations. Subsequently, the formation of the Georgian army occurs in an atmosphere of sharp aggravation of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict, and armed clashes between supporters and opponents of the first president Zviad Gamsakhurdia.

As of 2007, the number of Georgian Armed Forces reached 28.5 thousand people, divided into Ground Forces, Air Force and Air Defense, Navy, and National Guard.

Kazakhstan

Initially, the government announced its intention to form a small National Guard of up to 20 thousand people, assigning the main tasks for the defense of Kazakhstan to the CSTO Armed Forces. However, already on May 7, 1992, the President of Kazakhstan issued a decree on the formation of a national army.

Currently, Kazakhstan has up to 74 thousand people. in the regular troops, and up to 34.5 thousand people. in paramilitary forces. Consists of the Ground Forces, Air Defense Forces, Navy and Republican Guard, four regional commands (Astana, West, East and South). Nuclear weapons have been transported to Russia. Formed by conscription, service period is 1 year.

Division of the Black Sea Fleet

The status of the former USSR Black Sea Fleet was settled only in 1997 with a division between Russia and Ukraine. For several years it maintained an uncertain status and served as a source of friction between the two states.

The fate of the only Soviet full-fledged aircraft carrier, Admiral of the Fleet Kuznetsov, is noteworthy: it was completed by 1989. In December 1991, due to its uncertain status, it arrived from the Black Sea and joined the Russian Northern Fleet, which remains part of it to this day. At the same time, all aircraft and pilots remained in Ukraine; re-staffing took place only in 1998.

The aircraft carrier Varyag (of the same type as the Admiral Kuznetsov), being built simultaneously with the Admiral Kuznetsov, was 85% ready at the time of the collapse of the USSR. Sold by Ukraine to China.

Nuclear-free status of Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan

As a result of the collapse of the USSR, the number of nuclear powers increased, since at the time of the signing of the Belovezh Accords the Soviet nuclear weapon was stationed on the territory of four union republics: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan.

The joint diplomatic efforts of Russia and the United States of America led to the fact that Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan renounced their status as nuclear powers and transferred to Russia all the military atomic potential found on their territory.

• On October 24, 1991, the Verkhovna Rada adopted a resolution on the nuclear-free status of Ukraine. On January 14, 1992, a trilateral agreement between Russia, the United States and Ukraine was signed. All atomic charges are dismantled and transported to Russia, strategic bombers and missile launch silos are destroyed with US money. In return, the United States and Russia provide guarantees of the independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

On December 5, 1994, a Memorandum was signed in Budapest, by which Russia, the USA and Great Britain pledged to refrain from using force, economic coercion and to convene the UN Security Council to take the necessary measures if there is a threat of aggression towards Ukraine.

• In Belarus, the nuclear-free status is enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The United States and Russia provide guarantees of independence and territorial integrity.
• During 1992-1994, Kazakhstan transferred up to 1,150 units of strategic nuclear weapons to Russia.

Status of the Baikonur Cosmodrome

With the collapse of the USSR, the largest Soviet cosmodrome, Baikonur, finds itself in a critical situation - funding collapsed, and the cosmodrome itself ended up on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Its status was regulated in 1994 with the conclusion of a long-term lease agreement with the Kazakh side.

The collapse of the USSR entails the introduction of new independent states of their citizenship, and the replacement of Soviet passports with national ones. In Russia, the replacement of Soviet passports ended only in 2004; in the unrecognized Transnistrian Moldavian Republic they remain in circulation to this day.

Russian citizenship (at that time - citizenship of the RSFSR) was introduced by the Law “On Citizenship of the Russian Federation” of November 28, 1991, which came into force upon publication on February 6, 1992. In accordance with it, citizenship of the Russian Federation was granted to all citizens of the USSR, permanently residing on the territory of the RSFSR on the day the law came into force, if within a year after that they do not declare their renunciation of citizenship. On December 9, 1992, the RSFSR government issued Decree No. 950 “On temporary documents certifying citizenship of the Russian Federation.” In accordance with these regulations, the population was issued with inserts in Soviet passports about Russian citizenship.

Came into force in 2002 new law“On Citizenship of the Russian Federation”, establishing citizenship in accordance with these inserts. In 2004, as noted above, Soviet passports were being replaced with Russian ones.

Establishment of a visa regime

Of the republics of the former USSR, Russia, as of 2007, maintains a visa-free regime with the following:

• Armenia,
• Azerbaijan (stay up to 90 days),
• Belarus,
• Kazakhstan,
• Kyrgyzstan (stay up to 90 days),
• Moldova (stay up to 90 days),
• Tajikistan (with Uzbek visa),
• Uzbekistan (with Tajik visa),
• Ukraine (stay up to 90 days).

Thus, a visa regime exists with the former Soviet Baltic republics (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), as well as Georgia and Turkmenistan.

Status of Kaliningrad

With the collapse of the USSR, the territory of the Kaliningrad region, which was included in the USSR after World War II and was administratively part of the RSFSR in 1991, also became part of the modern Russian Federation. At the same time, it was cut off from other regions of the Russian Federation by Lithuanian and Belarusian territory.

In the early 2000s, in connection with the planned entry of Lithuania into the European Union, and then into the Schengen zone, the status of transit land connections between Kaliningrad and the rest of the Russian Federation began to cause certain friction between the authorities of the Russian Federation and the European Union.

Status of Crimea

On October 29, 1948, Sevastopol became a city of republican subordination within the RSFSR (belonging or not belonging to the Crimean region was not specified by law). The Crimean region was transferred in 1954 by USSR law from the RSFSR to Soviet Ukraine, as part of the celebration of the 300th anniversary of the Pereyaslav Rada (“reunification of Russia and Ukraine”). As a result of the collapse of the USSR, independent Ukraine included a region where the majority of the population is ethnic Russian (58.5%), traditionally pro-Russian sentiments are strong, and the Russian Black Sea Fleet is located. In addition, the main city of the Black Sea Fleet - Sevastopol - is a significant patriotic symbol for Russia.

During the collapse of the USSR, Crimea held a referendum on February 12, 1991 and became the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic within Ukraine; the Declaration of Sovereignty of Crimea was adopted on September 4, 1991; the Constitution of Crimea was adopted on May 6, 1992.

Attempts by Crimea to secede from Ukraine were thwarted, and in 1992 the Autonomous Republic of Crimea was established.

As a result of the collapse of the USSR, uncertainty arose about the borders between the former Soviet republics. The process of border delimitation lasted until the 2000s. The delimitation of the Russian-Kazakh border was carried out only in 2005. By the time of joining the European Union, the Estonian-Latvian border was virtually destroyed.

As of December 2007, the border between a number of newly independent states was not delimited.

The absence of a delimited border between Russia and Ukraine in the Kerch Strait led to a conflict over the island of Tuzla. Disagreements over borders led to territorial claims by Estonia and Latvia against Russia. However, some time ago the Border Treaty between Russia and Latvia was signed and came into force in 2007, resolving all the painful issues.

Compensation claims from the Russian Federation

In addition to territorial claims, Estonia and Latvia, which gained independence as a result of the collapse of the USSR, put forward demands for multimillion-dollar compensation to the Russian Federation, as the legal successor of the USSR, for their inclusion in the USSR in 1940. After the Border Treaty between Russia and Latvia came into force in 2007, painful territorial issues between these countries were resolved.

The collapse of the USSR from a legal point of view

Legislation of the USSR

Article 72 of the 1977 USSR Constitution determined:

The procedure for the implementation of this right, enshrined in law, was not observed (see above), but was legitimized mainly by the internal legislation of the states that left the USSR, as well as subsequent events, for example, their international legal recognition by the world community - all 15 former Soviet republics are recognized by the world community as independent states and are represented in the UN. Until December 1993, the Constitution of the USSR was in force on the territory of Russia in accordance with Article 4 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation - Russia (RSFSR), despite numerous amendments made to it that excluded mention of the USSR.

International law

Russia declared itself the successor of the USSR, which was recognized by almost all other states. The remaining post-Soviet states (with the exception of the Baltic states) became the legal successors of the USSR (in particular, the USSR's obligations under international treaties) and the corresponding union republics. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia declared themselves successors to the respective states that existed in 1918-1940. Georgia declared itself the successor of the Republic of Georgia 1918-1921. Moldova is not a successor to the MSSR, since a law was passed in which the decree on the creation of the MSSR was called illegal, which is perceived by many as a legal justification for the PMR’s claims to independence. Azerbaijan declared itself a successor to the ADR, while maintaining some agreements and treaties adopted by the Azerbaijan SSR. Within the UN framework, all 15 states are considered successors of the corresponding union republics, and therefore the territorial claims of these countries to each other are not recognized (including the pre-existing claims of Latvia and Estonia to Russia) and independence is not recognized state entities, which were not among the union republics (including Abkhazia, which had such a status, but lost it).

Expert assessments

There are different points of view on the legal aspects of the collapse of the USSR. There is a point of view that the USSR formally still exists, since its dissolution was carried out in violation of legal norms and ignoring the popular opinion expressed in the referendum. This point of view has been repeatedly challenged by supporters of the opinion that it is pointless to demand compliance with formal rules from such significant geopolitical changes.

Russia

• No. 156-II GD “On deepening the integration of the peoples united in the USSR and the repeal of the Resolution of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of December 12, 1991 “On the denunciation of the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR””;
• No. 157-II GD “On the legal force for the Russian Federation - Russia of the results of the USSR referendum on March 17, 1991 on the issue of preserving the USSR.”

The first of the Resolutions invalidated the corresponding Resolution of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of December 12, 1991 and established “that legislative and other regulatory legal acts arising from the Resolution of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of December 12, 1991 “On the denunciation of the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR” will be adjusted as fraternal peoples move along the path of ever deeper integration and unity.”
The second of the Resolutions of the State Duma denounced the Belovezhskaya Accords; The resolution read, in part:

1. Confirm for the Russian Federation - Russia the legal force of the results of the USSR referendum on the issue of preserving the USSR, held on the territory of the RSFSR on March 17, 1991. 2. To note that the officials of the RSFSR, who prepared, signed and ratified the decision to terminate the existence of the USSR, grossly violated the will of the peoples of Russia to preserve the USSR, expressed at the USSR referendum on March 17, 1991, as well as the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, which proclaimed the desire of the peoples of Russia to create a democratic rule of law state as part of the renewed USSR. 3. Confirm that the Agreement on the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States of December 8, 1991, signed by the President of the RSFSR B. N. Yeltsin and the State Secretary of the RSFSR G. E. Burbulis and not approved by the Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR - the highest body of state power of the RSFSR, did not have and has no legal force insofar as it relates to the termination of the existence of the USSR.

On March 19, 1996, the Federation Council sent Appeal No. 95-SF to the lower house, in which it called on the State Duma to “return to the consideration of the mentioned acts and once again carefully analyze possible consequences their adoption,” referring to the negative reaction of “a number of state and public figures of the member states of the Commonwealth of Independent States” caused by the adoption of these documents.

In a response address to members of the Federation Council, adopted by the Resolution State Duma dated April 10, 1996 No. 225-II GD, the lower house actually disavowed its position expressed in the Resolutions of March 15, 1996, indicating:

… 2. The Resolutions adopted by the State Duma are primarily of a political nature, they assess the situation that has developed after the collapse of the Soviet Union, responding to the aspirations and hopes of the fraternal peoples, their desire to live in a single democratic state governed by the rule of law. Moreover, it was the Resolutions of the State Duma that contributed to the conclusion of a quadrilateral Agreement between the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Kyrgyz Republic on deepening integration in the economic and humanitarian fields... 3. The Treaty on the Formation of the USSR of 1922, which the Supreme Council of the RSFSR “denounced” on December 12, 1991, did not exist as an independent legal document. The original version of this Treaty was subjected to radical revision and, in a revised form, was included in the 1924 Constitution of the USSR. In 1936, a new Constitution of the USSR was adopted, with the entry into force of which the Constitution of the USSR of 1924, including the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR of 1922, ceased to be in force. In addition, by the Resolution of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR of December 12, 1991, an international treaty of the Russian Federation was denounced, which, in accordance with the norms of international law codified by the Vienna Convention on the Law of International Treaties of 1969, was not subject to denunciation at all. 4. The Resolutions adopted on March 15, 1996 by the State Duma in no way affect the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, much less other member states of the Commonwealth of Independent States. In accordance with the Constitution of the USSR of 1977, the Russian Federation, like other union republics, was a sovereign state. This excludes all kinds of unlawful allegations that with the adoption by the State Duma of the Resolutions of March 15, 1996, the Russian Federation “ceases” to exist as an independent sovereign state. Statehood does not depend on any treaties or regulations. Historically, it is created by the will of peoples. 5. Resolutions of the State Duma do not and cannot liquidate the Commonwealth of Independent States, which in the current conditions is actually a really existing institution and which must be used as much as possible to deepen integration processes...

Thus, the denunciation did not entail any practical consequences.

Ukraine

During the inauguration of the first president of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk, Mykola Plaviuk (the last president of the UPR in exile) presented Kravchuk with the state regalia of the UPR and a letter where he and Kravchuk agreed that independent Ukraine, proclaimed on August 24, 1991, is the legal successor of the Ukrainian People's Republic.

Ratings

Assessments of the collapse of the USSR are ambiguous. The USSR's Cold War opponents perceived the collapse of the USSR as a victory. In this regard, in the United States, for example, one can often hear disappointment in victory: the “Russians” who lost the war are still a nuclear power, defend national interests, interfere in foreign policy disputes, and so on. “A loser hasn't lost... a loser doesn't think he's a loser... and hasn't behaved like a loser since 1991,” former commander of the US Strategic Nuclear Forces General Eugene Habiger said in an interview featured on the network's "Doomsday Rehearsal" CNN.

On April 25, 2005, Russian President V. Putin, in his message to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, stated:

A similar opinion was expressed in 2008 by the President of Belarus A.G. Lukashenko:

The first President of Russia B. N. Yeltsin in 2006 emphasized the inevitability of the collapse of the USSR and noted that, along with the negative ones, one should not forget about its positive aspects:

A similar opinion was repeatedly expressed by the former Chairman of the Supreme Council of Belarus S.S. Shushkevich, who noted that he was proud of his participation in the signing of the Belovezhskaya Agreements, which formalized the collapse of the USSR that actually took place by the end of 1991.

In October 2009, in an interview with the editor-in-chief of Radio Liberty Lyudmila Telen, the first and only president of the USSR M. S. Gorbachev admitted his responsibility for the collapse of the USSR:

According to the sixth wave of regular international population surveys within the framework of the Eurasian Monitor program, 52% of respondents in Belarus, 68% in Russia and 59% in Ukraine regret the collapse of the Soviet Union; 36%, 24% and 30% of respondents, respectively, do not regret; 12%, 8% and 11% found it difficult to answer this question.

Criticism of the collapse of the USSR

Some parties and organizations refused to recognize the Soviet Union as collapsed (for example, the Bolshevik Platform in the CPSU). According to some of them, the USSR should be considered a socialist country occupied by Western imperialist powers with the help of new methods of warfare, which drove the Soviet people into information and psychological shock. For example, O. S. Shenin has been heading the communist party Soviet Union. Sazhi Umalatova presents orders and medals on behalf of the Presidium of the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. Rhetoric about betrayal “from above” and calls for the liberation of the country from economic and political occupation are used for political purposes by Colonel Kvachkov, who received an unexpectedly high rating in the elections to the State Duma in 2005.

Critics consider the USSR occupation to be temporary and note that “The Soviet Union continues to exist de jure, in the status of a temporarily occupied country; The Constitution of the USSR of 1977 continues to be in force de jure, the legal personality of the USSR in the international arena remains.”.

The criticism is justified by numerous violations of the Constitution of the USSR, the Constitutions of the Union republics and the current legislation, which, according to critics, accompanied the collapse of the Soviet Union. Those who do not agree to recognize the USSR as disintegrated elect and support Soviets in the cities and Republics of the Soviet Union, still electing their representatives to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.

Supporters of the Soviet Union consider their important political achievement to be the ability to retain a Soviet passport while accepting Russian citizenship.

Ideology of an occupied country and imminent liberation Soviet people from the “Americans” is reflected in modern creativity. For example, it can be clearly seen in the songs of Alexander Kharchikov and Vis Vitalis.

Before examining the question of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR, it is necessary to provide brief information about this powerful state.
USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) is a communist superstate founded by the great leader V.I. Lenin in 1922 year and existed until 1991 of the year. This state occupied the territories of Eastern Europe and parts of Northern, Eastern and Central Asia.
The process of the collapse of the USSR is a historically determined process of decentralization in the economic, social, public and political sphere of the USSR. The result of this process is the complete collapse of the USSR as a state. The complete collapse of the USSR occurred 26 December 1991 of the year; the country was divided into fifteen independent states - former Soviet republics.
Now that we have received brief information about the USSR and now imagine what kind of state it is, we can move on to the question of the reasons for the collapse of the USSR.

The main reasons for the collapse of the Soviet Union
There has been a debate among historians for a long time about the reasons for the collapse of the USSR; among them there is still no single point of view, just as there is no point of view about the possible preservation of this state. However, most historians and analysts agree with the following reasons for the collapse of the USSR:
1. Lack of professional young bureaucrats and the so-called Funeral Era. In the last years of the Soviet Union, most officials were elderly - the average 75 years. But the state needed new personnel capable of seeing the future, and not just looking back at the past. When officials began to die, a political crisis ripened in the country due to the lack of experienced personnel.
2. Revival movements national economy and culture. The Soviet Union was a multinational state, and in recent decades each republic wanted to develop independently, outside the Soviet Union.
3. Deep internal conflicts. In the eighties, an acute series of national conflicts occurred: the Karabakh conflict (1987-1988), the Transnistrian conflict (1989), the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict (began in the eighties and continues to this day), the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict (late eighties). These conflicts finally destroyed the faith and national unity of the Soviet people.
4. Acute shortage of consumer goods. In the eighties, this problem became especially acute; people were forced to stand in line for hours and even days for products such as bread, salt, sugar, cereals and other goods necessary for life. This undermined people's faith in the power of the Soviet economy.
5. Inequality in the economic development of the republics of the USSR. Some republics were significantly inferior to a number of others in economic terms. For example, less developed republics experienced an acute shortage of goods, since, for example, in Moscow this situation was not so acute.
6. An unsuccessful attempt to reform the Soviet state and the entire Soviet system. This unsuccessful attempt led to complete stagnation in the economy. Subsequently, this led not only to stagnation, but also to the complete collapse of the economy. And then it was destroyed and politic system, unable to cope with the pressing problems of the state.
7. Decline in the quality of manufactured consumer goods. The shortage of consumer goods began in the sixties. Then the Soviet leadership took the next step - it cut the quality of these goods in order to increase the quantity of these goods. As a result, the goods were no longer competitive, for example, in relation to foreign goods. Realizing this, people stopped believing in the Soviet economy and increasingly paid attention to the Western economy.
8. The lag in the standard of living of the Soviet people compared to the Western standard of living. This problem has shown itself to be especially acute in the crisis of major consumer goods and, of course, the crisis of appliances, including home appliances. Televisions, refrigerators - these products were practically never produced and people were forced for a long time to use old models that were almost out of date. This caused already growing discontent among the population.
9. Closing the country. Due to the Cold War, people were practically unable to leave the country; they could even be declared enemies of the state, that is, spies. Those who used foreign technology, wore foreign clothes, read books by foreign authors, and listened to foreign music were severely punished.
10. Denial of problems in Soviet society. Following the ideals of communist society, there have never been murders, prostitution, robberies, alcoholism, or drug addiction in the USSR. For a long time, the state completely concealed these facts, despite their existence. And then, at one moment, it abruptly acknowledged their existence. Faith in communism was again destroyed.
11. Disclosure of classified materials. The majority of people in Soviet society knew nothing about such terrible events as the Holodomor, Stalin's mass repressions, numerical executions, etc. Having learned about this, people realized what horror the communist regime brought.
12. Man-made disasters. In the last years of the existence of the USSR, a greater number of serious man-made disasters occurred: plane crashes (due to outdated aviation), the collapse of the large passenger ship "Admiral Nakhimov" (about 430 people), disaster near Ufa (the biggest railway accident in the USSR, more than 500 Human). But the worst thing is the Chernobyl accident 1986 year, the number of victims of which is impossible to count, and this is not to mention the harm to the world ecosystem. The biggest problem was that the Soviet leadership hid these facts.
13. Subversive activities of the USA and NATO countries. NATO countries, and especially the USA, sent their agents to the USSR, who pointed out the problems of the Union, severely criticized them and reported on the advantages inherent in Western countries. Through their actions, foreign agents split Soviet society from within.
These were the key reasons for the collapse of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics - the state that occupied 1 the entire land area of ​​our planet. Such a number, especially incredibly acute problems, could not be resolved by any successful bill. Of course, during his tenure as president, Gorbachev still tried to reform Soviet society, but it was impossible to solve such a number of problems, especially in such a situation - the USSR simply did not have the funds for such a number of cardinal reforms. The collapse of the USSR was an irreversible process, and historians who have not yet found at least one theoretical way to preserve the integrity of the state are direct confirmation of this.
The official announcement of the collapse of the USSR was announced 26 December 1991 of the year. Before that, 25 December, the President of the USSR, Gorbachev, resigned.
The collapse of the Union marked the end of the war between the United States and NATO against the USSR and its allies. The Cold War thus ended with the complete victory of capitalist states over communist countries.

Discuss

The reason for the collapse of the USSR is stupid, mediocre, sick leaders with all external prizes
signs of degeneration and degradation: gray-haired, bald, blind, toothless, burry, cross-armed, drunk
tsits, etc. Their genetic imperfection resulted in blood and millions of lives. This
It was excusable: there was no way to calculate a person’s intelligence and health.
Now, for 20 years now, I have been proposing to instantly determine the intelligence and health of managers.
lei, identify geniuses and put them in leadership positions, right up to the president. Reveal the soul
crayfish with poor health and remove from posts. After all, they are not capable of anything and are busy
only by theft, they put Russia on the brink of destruction. Democracy imposed on Russia is a tsar-
The existence of an imperfect, bad majority brings us only bad things. Brilliant, healthy, ku-
Worthy leaders will protect Russia and restore order. There is no alternative to this.

There is only one reason - Marxism was a pseudo-science.
Everything else is just consequences.

The reasons for the collapse of the USSR are listed correctly, except for one of the most important ones, obviously the author sees it, but is embarrassed to talk about it. And the reason is banally simple. The CPSU Party numbered 25 million people in its ranks. Well, what kind of party is this? The Leninist party (guard) numbered no more than 100 people and was welded together ideologically quite tightly; it was already under Stalin that confusion and vacillation began. And a party of 25 million is wildly absurd. I really wanted to outdo Lenin, and most importantly, the first person wanted to be beyond criticism. After all, even at all kinds of party conferences they voted unanimously according to the “APPROVES” type. What the deputies of these conferences approved and did not realize, but about the remaining 24.5 million party members, they had no idea what problems were being discussed there. As a result, as soon as things got bad, the defenders in There was no such party, not only with arms in hand, but also with the verb to raise the people to defend the party ideals. They approved the collapse of both the party and the country as quietly as they had previously approved any law. Both Khrushchev and Brezhnev simply competed in numbers new party members. Quantity, but not quality, from the plow, from the machine, from the counter is not important, as long as there is quantity. And under Lenin, the communists died with weapons in their hands, but defended the unknown that the young and very small party of communists brought them ". There is a difference. Big. Those in the 18-20s of the last century managed, but our generation in the 80-90s of the same century lost this battle. But were we able to defend in these years, and even today, our country, as in 41 The question is debatable and not as simple as it seems.... It is quite possible that not. Chechnya showed what the new Russian government is. But this is Chechnya, which did not have modern weapons and the Army, and that was very bad. I very much doubt that our Army today will be able to really do anything against the combined forces of the United States and NATO. Of course, as Putin says, the return fire will be adequate, but the trouble is that most likely before this answer we will all already be a load of 200

Taking into account respect for science that studies various phenomena, it is necessary (according to Descartes) to determine the fact that happened in the USSR. Those. come to a unified definition of what happened to the First Socialist State on Earth. If readers agree with this, then the fact of collapse is a PHENOMENON that has never occurred before in world history. But since this fact is a PHENOMENON, then the question about the CAUSES and essence of this phenomenon should be answered on the basis of SCIENTIFICALLY conducted research. DO YOU AGREE? If “Yes,” then the results of such studies should be published and these publications should provide scientific justification for certain results. Such results in science are called SCIENTIFIC RESULTS. Therefore, no statements can be accepted as causes of destruction if these reasons are SIMPLY named, but do not have SCIENTIFICALLY based research results. In other words, the reasons identified by the participants are not reasons, but hypotheses that are SCIENTIFICALLY unfounded. At the same time, it is quite CLEAR to all citizens without exception that the USSR was destroyed as a result of Perestroika, as the course of the leadership of the USSR to replace the socialist system (an economic system with public ownership of the means of production) with a capitalist (market) system, in which the means of production should become private property. The question arises: “How did the leadership of the USSR come to the conclusion about the need to abandon socialism and build capitalism?” It is possible that Gorbachev and his comrades, including Ryzhkov N.I. , came to this conclusion independently through discussion at meetings of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee or the Council of Ministers of the USSR. Unfortunately, this does not correspond to the facts preceding Perestroika. As it was found out based on the analysis of those available and published in the media, economic scientists were advised to ORGANIZE Perestroika based on their thoughts about the state of the USSR economy. And this is set out in the articles of M.S. Gorbachev, who pointed out that before carrying out Perestroika, the leadership of the USSR for many years instructed SCIENCE (represented by academicians of the USSR Academy of Sciences and institutes) to understand the shortcomings of the USSR economy and propose measures to the government to eliminate these shortcomings. And science, since 1981, has taken an active part in identifying the reasons for the decline in the efficiency of the Soviet economic organism and developing measures to eliminate these reasons. At the same time, scientists of the USSR, as workers of SCIENCE, BEGAN to fulfill this order of the government in good faith, i.e. began to study the state of the economy. But to eliminate MISTAKES, scientists repeatedly gathered at various forums, including a SEMINAR on economics, held in 1983 at the Institute of Economics, as evidenced by historical documents. At this seminar, Doctor of Economics, specialist in accounting on collective farms, including issues of calculating salaries for collective farmers, academician T.I. Zaslavskaya formulated the CONCLUSION: ““deterioration in economic indicators is taking place in most industries and regions.... Consequently, this phenomenon is based on a more general reason. In our opinion (Emphasis - TOV) it lies in the lag of the system of industrial relations and the mechanism reflecting it government controlled economy on the level of development of production forces, more specifically, on the inability of this system to ensure the full and sufficiently effective use of the labor and intellectual potential of society."
Please note that the conclusion about the inability of the system (and in the USSR this is an economic system based on NATIONAL ownership of the means of production) by Academician T.I. Zaslavskaya confirms NOT WITH SCIENTIFIC JUSTIFICATIONS, but replaces scientific substantiations with the words “in our opinion.” However, as you know, the WORDS “in our opinion” -0 do not justify a scientifically verified conclusion. Those. conclusion T.I. Zaslavskaya is not SCIENTIFIC result.
But for Gorbachev and his comrades, THIS conclusion was a SCIENTIFIC result that had to be trusted, since the author of the conclusion (note, not scientifically substantiated, which the government should not have and could not figure out) was an ACADEMICIAN, supported in 1983. the entire scientific corps of economists of the USSR.
Subsequently, this conclusion was supported by the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences named after Lenin. (VASKHNIL).
Thus, the destruction of the USSR was a consequence of Perestroika to replace the socialist (communist) system with the capitalist system (the equivalent is the MARKET). SCIENTISTS advised to organize perestroika.
It remains to identify what, in fact, was the essence of the reasons for the deterioration of the economic development of the USSR in the field of food production. This is very important, because it is still believed that agriculture was not effective in the USSR. And this must be admitted - in the USSR by the eighties, efficiency began to decline sharply on collective and state farms. These enterprises actually became less and less profitable from year to year.
New research has made it possible to establish the reasons for the decline in the efficiency of collective and state farms. Such causation, as scientifically JUSTIFIED, was the fact of a decrease in the natural soil fertility of the fields in these enterprises. But if soil fertility decreases, then with the same costs of labor, fertilizers, mechanisms and machines, the yield decreases. And this means nothing more than a decrease in the EFFICIENCY of agricultural production.
Now it is quite clear that the REDUCTION OF SOIL FERTILITY is not equivalent to the statement of scientists - economists that SOCIALISM (namely collective and state farms) cannot effectively organize production. Those. the reason for the destruction of the USSR is not the possibilities of socialism, but the reason, unsolved by scientists, for the decline in natural soil fertility, as the PRIMARY MEANS OF PRODUCTION IN AGRICULTURE,
Therefore, the decrease in the efficiency of the economy in the USSR is not the reason for the destruction of the USSR, but is a consequence of the decrease in soil fertility of agricultural fields.
So we now need to answer the question: “Has the reason for the decline in soil fertility in the USSR been identified?”
Yes, such a reason was established in 1999. It is scientifically substantiated that the decrease in soil fertility was a consequence of the use of mineral fertilizers in agriculture, which is a mistake and a violation of the natural law of the cycle organic matter.
The reason for the destruction of the USSR was the advice of scientists to build capitalism in the USSR instead of socialism. But this advice was a MISTAKE, since it was not socialism that led to the inefficiency of the USSR economy.
The inefficiency of the economy was caused by farming based on the erroneous recommendations of agricultural sciences on the use of chemical fertilizers, which led to a catastrophic decrease in the natural soil fertility of agricultural land.

Currently, there is no common point of view among historians on the reasons for the collapse of the USSR and on the possibility of preventing it.

Possible reasons include the following::

• subversive activities of Western countries led by the United States and their agents of influence, which were integral part"Cold War";
• the incompetence of the union leadership, the selfish desire of the leaders of the union republics to get rid of the control of the central authorities and use Gorbachev's democratic reforms to destroy the foundations of the state and society;
• monocentrism of decision-making (only in Moscow, the so-called “union center”), which led to inefficiency and loss of time in decision-making and dissatisfaction with regional authorities;
• centrifugal nationalist tendencies, which, according to some authors, are inherent in every multinational country and manifest themselves in the form of interethnic contradictions and the desire of individual peoples to independently develop their culture and economy;
• disproportions in the extensive economy (characteristic of the entire existence of the USSR), the consequence of which was a constant shortage of consumer goods, a growing technical gap in all spheres of the manufacturing industry (which can be compensated for in an extensive economy only by high-cost mobilization measures, a set of such measures under the general name “Acceleration "was adopted in 1987, but there was no longer any economic opportunity to implement it);
• unsuccessful attempts to reform the Soviet system, which led to stagnation and then the collapse of the economy, which led to the collapse of the political system);
• crisis of confidence in the economic system: in the 1960-1970s, the main way to combat the inevitable shortage of consumer goods in a planned economy was to rely on mass production, simplicity and cheapness of materials; most enterprises worked in three shifts, producing similar products from low-quality materials . The quantitative plan was the only way to evaluate the efficiency of enterprises, quality control was minimized. The result of this was a decline in the quality of consumer goods produced in the USSR. The crisis of confidence in the quality of goods became a crisis of confidence in the entire economic system as a whole;
• The decline in world oil prices initiated by the American government, which shook the economy of the USSR.
• growing dissatisfaction of the population associated with periodic food shortages (especially during the era of stagnation and Perestroika) and other essential and durable goods (refrigerators, televisions, toilet paper, etc.), prohibitions and restrictions (on the size of a garden plot, etc. .d.); a constant lag in living standards compared to developed Western countries and unsuccessful attempts to “catch up” with it;
• The Afghan War, the Cold War, incessant financial assistance to the countries of the socialist camp, and the development of the military-industrial complex to the detriment of other areas of the economy ruined the budget.
• a number of man-made disasters (plane crashes, the Chernobyl accident, the crash of the Admiral Nakhimov, gas explosions, etc.) and the concealment of information about them;

Politician and scientist Ruslan Khasbulatov linked the attempt to create a new Union Treaty with the collapse of the USSR:

The greatest danger arose when the idea of ​​concluding a new Union Treaty appeared. The idea is completely disastrous. The first Union Treaty, which united the Russian Federation, Ukraine, and Transcaucasia, was concluded in 1922. It served as the basis for the first Soviet Constitution in 1924. In 1936, the second, and in 1977, the third Constitution was adopted. And the Union Treaty was completely dissolved in them; only historians remembered it. And suddenly it appears again. With his appearance, he questioned all previous constitutions, as if recognizing the USSR as illegitimate. From that moment on, disintegration began to gain momentum.

— This is how the Soviet Union was broken. (conversation with Ruslan Khasbulatov)

The possibility of the collapse of the USSR was considered in Western political science (Hélène d’Encausse, “The Divided Empire,” 1978) and the journalism of Soviet dissidents (Andrei Amalrik, “Will the Soviet Union Exist Until 1984?”, 1969). A.D. Sakharov saw a solution in the renewal of the Union and developed the Draft Constitution of the Union of Soviet Republics of Europe and Asia.

Consequences

Everything changed on December 8, 1991, after the statement of three (President of the RSFSR - B. Yeltsin, President of Ukraine - L. Kravchuk, Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Belarus - S. Shushkevich) the formation of independent states took place. The Commonwealth of Independent Countries was formed.

This is how an event occurred that can be compared to a natural disaster, but which was much more tragic in its consequences. On December 9, 1991, we woke up in another country and not many people still know what kind of country it is.

Cracks occurred not only across the earth, but also through the destinies of the nation and peoples; each seceding country had to survive alone, and Russia too.

Since the Soviet Union lived and developed as a single organism, the separated parts took with them vital organs for the country. The Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) received the most modern ports, a nuclear power plant, and many high-tech industries. Ukraine separated, along with Sevastopol. The centuries-old economic ties that united the coal, industrial, metallurgical, transport and food systems were broken.

Traditional holiday destinations in Crimea and Transcaucasia (Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan) remained abroad. The pride of the Soviet Union - the Baikonur cosmodrome - began to belong to Kazakhstan. Cotton plantations and deposits of strategic raw materials in Central Asia (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan) gained “independence,” but at the same time, all the country’s borders were wide open.

The decay is like this great power could not pass unnoticed by the population. As a result of the signing of the Belovezhskaya agreements, all existing ties between the union republics were severed. First of all, the severance of these ties affected the lives of people in post-Soviet space. National relations sharply deteriorated, which led to interethnic clashes in almost all union republics.

There was also an increasing aggravation of the social consequences of the political and economic crisis; there was a sharp increase in nationalism, discrimination against the Russian-speaking population and the Russian language in the republics of the former Soviet Union.

All these consequences of the collapse of the USSR plunged millions of people into despair and led to a sharp differentiation of society into poor and rich, and an unprecedented increase in the flow of refugees.

The loss of the “human capital” accumulated over the decades of the Soviet power, grown by generations of a new layer of intelligentsia and scientists.

I felt these very consequences myself...When the consumer boom covered our country. The counters were bursting with goods brought from the west. But people simply did not have the money to buy anything and the opportunity to earn it... Crime dominated the country...

Dollars (waste paper) poured into the economy; in return, oil and gas and other natural resources flowed out of the country like a river...

And huge loans for the state, which drove it into poverty for many years to come, without giving a chance for restoration and development.

In the second half of the 80s. National contradictions in the country are intensifying, separatist sentiments are growing. Local leaders and elites strive for independence in order to manage economic resources and financial flows themselves. Against the backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating economic situation, protest arises in the form of national movements. Gradually this results in a struggle against the Center, which was identified with Russia. “Popular Fronts” arose in a number of republics (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Armenia, Georgia). During 1989-1990 The Baltic, and after them other republics of the USSR, including the RSFSR, adopted declarations of national sovereignty. The national question has become an instrument of struggle for power.

With the growth of opposition to the union structures, a crisis of communist ideology began. The CPSU increasingly lost the functions of the mechanism that held the union of republics together. During 1989-1990 The Communist Parties of the Baltic republics left the CPSU. In 1990, the Communist Party of the RSFSR was created. In 1988-1990 party resolutions “On interethnic relations”, “On the foundations of economic relations USSR, Union and Autonomous Republics”, “On the procedure for resolving issues related to the withdrawal of a Union Republic from the USSR”. At the same time, the union leadership tried to maintain power through force (events in April 1989 in Tbilisi, January 1990 in Baku, January 1991 in Vilnius and Riga).

By mid-1990, the actual disintegration of the USSR was evident.

The Constitution was not in force in a large part of the country. The President of the USSR increasingly lost power and was no longer the only president in the country, since there were 15 more presidents and heads of republics. The CPSU lost its leadership role. In conditions of an unstable situation and strengthening centrifugal forces, one of the most important tasks was the reform of the USSR and the conclusion of a new union treaty between the republics.

On the initiative of Gorbachev, on March 17, 1991, a referendum was held in the USSR, during which the majority (76.4%) spoke in favor of maintaining the union state in an updated form. In April 1991, the leaders of 9 republics (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan), under the chairmanship of Gorbachev, in the Novo-Ogarevo estate near Moscow, decided to develop a new Union Treaty, according to which the rights of the republics were significantly increased , and the Center turned from a manager into a coordinating one.

August 1991 events The signing of the new Union Treaty was scheduled for August 20. The day before, on August 19, in order to disrupt the conclusion of the Treaty and restore the power of the Center and the CPSU, the conservative wing of the USSR leadership - G. Yanaev (Vice President), V. Pavlov (Prime Minister), Marshal D. Yazov (Minister of Defense), V. Kryuchkov (chairman of the KGB), B. Pugo (minister of internal affairs) announced the creation of the State Committee for the State of Emergency (GKChP) and tried to remove Gorbachev from power through a conspiracy (August 19-21, 1991) However, the putsch was strongly rejected by wide circles the public and the firm position of the Russian leadership led by Yeltsin led to the defeat of the putschists. On August 21, the putschists were arrested. These events were later called by some historians the August Revolution of 1991.

On August 23, 1991, Yeltsin signed a decree suspending the activities of the CPSU in Russia. Gorbachev resigned from the post of General Secretary of the Party Central Committee, which effectively marked the end of the CPSU. The Union Cabinet of Ministers was also dissolved, and in September the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR and the Supreme Soviet of the USSR were dissolved. After the suppression of the coup to secede from the

The USSR was declared by 3 Baltic republics. Other republics also passed laws proclaiming sovereignty, which made them virtually independent of Moscow. Real power in the republics was concentrated in the hands of national leaders.

The collapse of the USSR and its consequences. On December 8, 1991, at the Belarusian meeting of the leaders of three sovereign republics - Russia (B. Yeltsin), Ukraine (L. Kravchuk) and Belarus (S. Shushkevich) - it was announced that the USSR would cease to exist and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) would be formed. This decision had no legal force, however, in the conditions of the collapse of the union statehood, no effective measures were taken to prevent the collapse of the USSR. On December 21, in Almaty, the leaders of the former Soviet republics supported the Belovezhskaya Agreement. December 25 President of the USSR M.S. Gorbachev resigned. January 1, 1992 Russia took the place of the USSR in the UN.

Reasons for the collapse of the USSR. Historically, the USSR repeated the fate of multinational empires, which naturally came to their collapse. The collapse of the USSR was the result of a complex of reasons: accumulating national problems and contradictions; failures of economic reforms during the perestroika period; the crisis of communist ideology and the weakening of the role of the CPSU with the subsequent liquidation of its monopoly, which formed the basis of the USSR; the movement for national self-determination of the republics, which began during perestroika, the desire of new national elites for power and financial and economic resources. A certain role in the destruction of the USSR was played by a subjective factor: Gorbachev’s mistakes, his inconsistency in carrying out reforms, the desire of the new Russian leadership, led by Yeltsin, to seize full power.

The consequences of the collapse of the USSR were extremely difficult for the peoples of the former Soviet republics. Political and economic ties between the republics were disrupted. Interethnic relations worsened, which led to conflicts in many regions of the former USSR (between Azerbaijan and Armenia; Georgia and South Ossetia, later Abkhazia, Ingushetia and North Ossetia, etc.). The problem of refugees has arisen. The situation of the Russian-speaking population in the national republics has sharply worsened.