Who does not regret the collapse of the Soviet Union. Who does not regret the collapse of the USSR

The inscription on the deme, the one who does not regret the destruction of the Soviet Union, he has no heart, and the one who wants to recreate it in its previous form, he has no head, is often attributed to V.V. Putin's winged aphorisms. But on the Internet there are many people to whom this phrase is attributed. For the sake of objectivity, below is a list of “possible” authors of these words

Chingiz Abdullayev - the writer claims that he wrote this phrase in 1993. You can easily find it in his interview.

A certain Frost said this phrase to Rybkin. “He who does not regret the collapse of the Union has no heart. Anyone who wants to restore the Union today has no head” (“NEGA Agency”, Moscow; 06/24/1994).

Shumeyko V. - “And here I again remember the phrase that appeared on the election campaign in Ukraine: whoever does not regret the collapse of the SOVIET UNION, he has no heart, who thinks that it can be restored, he has no head” (“Mayak ", 07.04.95).

Lebed A. - “Those who do not regret the collapse of the USSR have no heart, but those who want to restore it have no head” (“Kievskie Vedomosti”; 01/12/1996).

Yeltsin - “We could not help but recall the words of one of our colleagues: “He has no heart who does not regret the collapse of the USSR. He has no head who dreams of restoring his literal copy” (“RIA Novosti Agency”, Moscow; 03/29/1996).

Luchinsky P.K. Chairman of the Parliament of Moldova - “That person has no heart, who does not experience the collapse of the Union, but he does not have a head, who calls for the restoration of the old Union” (“Kazakhstanskaya Pravda”; 03.04.1996).

Stroev E. - “a person who does not regret the collapse of the USSR has no heart, but a person who thinks that it is possible to return the USSR in the composition that it was - there is no head in that one” (MONITORING OF TELERADIO AIR / Politics (VPS) ; 09/04/1997).

Berezovsky B.

“The one who does not regret the collapse of the Soviet Union has no heart; the one who dreams of recreating it has no head,” (“ITAR-TASS”; 11/13/1998).

Putin V. - “he who does not regret the destruction of the SOVIET UNION, he has no heart, and he who wants to recreate it in its former form, he has no head” (RTR-Vesti, 09.02.2000)

Nazarbaev N. - “who does not regret the destruction of the USSR - he does not have a heart, and whoever tries to restore it - he does not have a head” (“Southern Ural”, Orenburg; 06/17/2000).

Kuchma L. - "Whoever does not regret the collapse of the USSR - he has no heart, who wants the restoration of the USSR - he has no head" ("Alfavit"; 27.09.2001).

Chernomyrdin V. - “Only a person who has no heart can not regret the collapse, but one who dreams of restoring the Union has no head” (“CentrAsia”; 05.12.2005).

“I unambiguously view the collapse of the Soviet Union as a catastrophe that had and is having negative consequences throughout the world. We didn’t get anything good from the breakup.”

President of Belarus A.G. Lukashenka

“Whoever does not regret the collapse of the USSR has no heart. And whoever wants to restore it to its former form has no head.”

President of Russia V.V. Putin

The collapse of the USSR - the processes of systemic disintegration that took place in the economy (national economy), social structure, public and political sphere of the Soviet Union, while, as V. Putin noted:

“I don’t think that our geopolitical opponents stood aside”

The collapse of the USSR led to the independence of 15 republics from the USSR and their emergence on the world political arena as states in which crypto-colonial regimes were established for the most part, that is, regimes under which sovereignty is formally legally preserved, while in practice there is a loss of political, economic and other state independence and the work of the country in the interests of the metropolis.

The USSR inherited most of the territory and the multinational structure of the Russian Empire. In 1917-1921. Finland, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Tuva gained independence. Some territories in the period 1939-1946. joined the USSR (Poland, the Baltic states, Tuva).

After the end of World War II, the USSR had a vast territory in Europe and Asia, with access to the seas and oceans, colossal natural resources, a developed socialist-type economy based on regional specialization and interregional political and economic ties, primarily with the “countries of the socialist camp”.

In the 70-80s, conflicts created on interethnic grounds (riots in 1972 in Kaunas, mass demonstrations in 1978 in Georgia, the December events of 1986 in Kazakhstan) were insignificant for the development of the entire Union, but showed the activation of a similar organization of that phenomenon, what is more recently called the "orange revolution". At that time, the Soviet ideology emphasized that the USSR was a friendly family of fraternal peoples, and this growing problem was not exacerbated. The USSR was headed 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, there were many among leaders and Jews, especially in the 20s and 30s). 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.

The leadership of the multinational state was centralized - the country was headed by the central bodies of the CPSU, which controlled the entire hierarchy of authorities. The leaders of the union republics were approved by the central leadership. The Byelorussian SSR and the Ukrainian SSR, following the results of the agreements reached at the Yalta Conference, had their representatives in the UN from the moment it was founded.

Image: pravda-tv.ru

The actual state of affairs differed from the structure described in the Constitution of the USSR, which was the result of the activities of the bureaucracy, which after the 1953 coup d'état took shape as an exploiting class.

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 party secretary 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 the respective states. However, in Soviet times, their fate depended on the central leadership.

Reasons for the collapse

Image: ppt4web.ru

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

Centrifugal nationalist tendencies, which, according to some authors, are inherent 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 dominance of one ideology, ideological blindness, a ban on communication with foreign countries, censorship, the lack of a free discussion of alternatives (especially important for the intelligentsia);

The 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;

The disproportions of the extensive economy (characteristic of the entire existence of the USSR), which resulted in a constant shortage of consumer goods, a growing technical lag in all areas of the manufacturing industry (which in an extensive economy can only be compensated for by high-cost mobilization measures, a set of such measures under the general name "Acceleration of »was adopted in 1987, but there were no longer economic opportunities to implement it);

Crisis of confidence in the economic system: in the 1960s-1970s. The main way to deal with the inevitable shortage of consumer goods in a planned economy was to rely on the mass character, simplicity and cheapness of materials, most enterprises worked in three shifts and produced similar products from low-quality materials. The quantitative plan was the only way to assess the effectiveness 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;

Monocentric decision-making (only in Moscow), which led to inefficiency and loss of time;

Defeat in the arms race, the victory of "Reaganomics" in this race;

Afghan war, cold war, ongoing financial assistance to the countries of the socialist bloc;

The development of the military-industrial complex to the detriment of other sectors of the economy ruined the budget.

Course of events

Image: rd-guild.com

Since 1985, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU M.S. Gorbachev and his supporters began the policy of perestroika, the political activity of the population increased sharply, 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.

General crisis

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

In the period 1989 - 1991, the main problem of the Soviet economy reaches its maximum - a chronic shortage of goods; practically all basic goods disappear from free sale, except for bread. Rated supply in the form of coupons is being introduced throughout the country.

Since 1991, a demographic crisis has been recorded for the first time (the excess of deaths over births).

Refusal to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries entails the massive fall of the pro-Soviet communist regimes in Eastern Europe in 1989. There is an actual collapse of the Soviet sphere of influence.

A number of interethnic conflicts flare up on the territory of the USSR.

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

In 1990, riots took place in the Fergana Valley, a feature of which is the mixing of several Central Asian nationalities (the Osh massacre). The decision to rehabilitate the peoples deported during the Great Patriotic War leads to an increase in tension in a number of regions, in particular, in the Crimea - between the returned Crimean Tatars and Russians, in the Prigorodny region of North Ossetia - between Ossetians and returned Ingush.

Against the backdrop of a 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 Central Committee of the CPSU announced the weakening of the monopoly on power, and within a few weeks the first competitive elections were held. Many seats in the parliaments of the union republics were won by liberals and nationalists.

During 1990 - 1991, the so-called "parade of sovereignties" took place, during which all the unions, including the Byelorussian SSR, whose Supreme Council on July 27, 1990 adopted the Declaration on State Sovereignty of the Byelorussian SSR, proclaiming "full state sovereignty, as the supremacy independence and completeness of the state power of the republic within its territory, the legitimacy of its laws, the independence of the republic in external relations”, adopted the Declaration of Sovereignty, which established the priority of republican laws over all-union laws. Action was taken to control local economies, including refusing to pay taxes to the Union budget. These conflicts cut off many economic ties, which further worsened the economic situation in the USSR.

1991 referendum on the preservation of the USSR

Image: s.pikabu.ru

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

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

However, although the overwhelming number of votes in the referendum were cast in favor of preserving the integrity of the USSR, the referendum itself had a strong negative psychological impact, calling into question the very idea of \u200b\u200bthe inviolability of the union.

Draft new Union Treaty

The rapid growth of the processes of disintegration is pushing the leadership of the USSR, headed by Mikhail Gorbachev, to the following actions:

Holding an all-union referendum, in which the majority of voters voted for the preservation of the USSR;

Establishment of the post of President of the USSR in connection with the prospect of the loss of power by the CPSU;

The project of creating a new Union Treaty, in which the rights of the republics were significantly expanded.

But in practice, during this period, dual power was already established in the country, and separatist tendencies in the union republics were intensified.

At the same time, indecisive and inconsistent actions of the central leadership of the country were noted. So, in early April 1990, the Law “On Strengthening Responsibility for Encroachments on National Equality of Citizens and Violent Violation of the Unity of the Territory of the USSR” was adopted, which established criminal liability for public calls for the violent overthrow or change of the Soviet social and state system. But almost simultaneously with this, the Law “On the Procedure for Resolving Issues Related to the Secession of a Union Republic from the USSR” was adopted, which regulated the procedure and procedure for secession from the USSR through a referendum. A legal way to secede from the Union was opened.

The actions of the then leadership of the RSFSR, headed by Boris Yeltsin, also played a negative role in the collapse of the Soviet Union.

GKChP and its consequences

Image: yahooeu.ru

A number of state and party leaders, under the slogans of maintaining the unity of the country and in order to restore strict party-state control over all spheres of life, attempted a coup d'état (GKChP, also known as the "August putsch" on August 19, 1991).

The defeat of the coup 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 putsch, the authorities of almost all the union republics declared their independence one after another. In the Byelorussian SSR, already on August 25, 1991, the previously adopted Declaration of Independence was given the status of a constitutional law, and on September 19, the BSSR was renamed the "Republic of Belarus".

A referendum was held 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 kind of 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 (USG) as a confederation with its capital in Minsk. The signing was scheduled for December 9, 1991.

The signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords and the creation of the CIS

Image: img-fotki.yandex.ru

However, on December 8, 1991, the heads of the Republic of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, as founding states of the USSR, who signed the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR, signed the Agreement, which stated the termination of the existence of the USSR as a “subject of international law and geopolitical reality” and announced the creation Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

marginal notes

Here are the statements on this matter by one of the direct "gravediggers" of the Soviet Union, a signatory of the "Belovezhskaya Accord", former Chairman of the Supreme Council of Belarus S. Shushkevich in November 2016 at a meeting at the headquarters of the Atlantic Council in Washington, where a significant for the United States, the date is the 25th anniversary of the collapse of the Soviet Union

I am proud of my participation in the signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords, which formalized the disintegration of the USSR that actually took place by the end of 1991.
It was a nuclear force that threatened the whole world with missiles. And whoever says that she had reasons to exist must not only be a philosopher, but a philosopher with a sense of heroism.
Even though the collapse of the Soviet Union brought hope for liberalization, few post-Soviet countries have emerged as true democracies.

The anti-Belarusian president ruined everything that was achieved in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, but sooner or later Belarus will become a normal civilized state.

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, 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 the absence of real power in the coordinating supranational bodies. Membership in this organization was rejected by the Baltic republics, as well as 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

Image: politikus.ru

The authorities of the USSR as a subject of international law ceased to exist on December 25-26, 1991.

On December 25, President of the USSR M. S. Gorbachev announced the termination of his activities as President of the USSR "for reasons of principle", signed a decree resigning as the Supreme Commander of the Soviet Armed Forces and transferred control of strategic nuclear weapons to President of Russia B. Yeltsin.

On December 26, the session of the upper chamber of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which retained the quorum - the Council of the Republics, adopted Declaration No. 142-N on the termination of the existence of the USSR.

During the same period, Russia declared itself the successor of the USSR membership (and not the assignee, as is often erroneously stated) in international institutions, assumed the debts and assets of the USSR, and declared itself the owner of all the property of the USSR abroad. According to data provided by the Russian Federation, at the end of 1991 the liabilities of the former Soviet Union were estimated at $93.7 billion, and the assets - at $110.1 billion.

Consequences in the short term

Transformations in Belarus

After the collapse of the USSR, Belarus was a parliamentary republic. The first Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Belarus was Stanislav Shushkevich.

In 1992, the Belarusian ruble was introduced, and the formation of its own armed forces began.

In 1994, the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus was adopted, and the first presidential elections took place. Alexander Lukashenko was elected president, and the republic was transformed from parliamentary to parliamentary-presidential.

In 1995, a referendum was held in the country, as a result of which the Russian language received the status of a state language on a par with Belarusian.

In 1997, Belarus completed the removal of 72 SS-25 intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads from its territory and received the status of a nuclear-free state.

Interethnic conflicts

In the last years of the existence of the USSR, a number of interethnic conflicts flared up on its territory. After its collapse, most of them immediately entered the phase of armed clashes:

Karabakh conflict - the war of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh for independence from Azerbaijan;

Georgian-Abkhazian conflict - conflict between Georgia and Abkhazia;

Georgian-South Ossetian conflict - the conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia;

Ossetian-Ingush conflict - clashes between Ossetians and Ingush in the Prigorodny district;

Civil war in Tajikistan - inter-clan civil war in Tajikistan;

The 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 those killed 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.

The collapse of the USSR in terms of law

The procedure for exercising the right to freely secede from the USSR by each union republic, enshrined in Article 72 of the Constitution of the USSR of 1977, was not observed, however, it was legitimized mainly by the internal legislation of the states that seceded from the USSR, as well as subsequent events, for example, their international legal recognition with sides of the world community - all 15 former Soviet republics are recognized by the world community as independent states and are represented in the UN.

Russia declared itself the successor of the USSR, which was recognized by almost all other states. Belarus, like most of the post-Soviet states (with the exception of the Baltic republics, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Moldova) also became the successor of the USSR in relation to the obligations of the Soviet Union under international treaties.

Ratings

Estimates of the collapse of the USSR are ambiguous. The opponents of the USSR in the Cold War perceived the collapse of the USSR as their victory.

President of Belarus A.G. Lukashenka assessed the collapse of the Union as follows:

“The collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, primarily due to the destruction of the existing system of the bipolar world. Many hoped that the end of the Cold War would be a relief from large military spending, and the freed up resources would be directed to solving global problems - food, energy, environmental and others. But these expectations were not justified. The Cold War has been replaced by an even fiercer struggle for energy resources. In fact, a new redistribution of the world has begun. Any means are used, up to the occupation of independent states.

President of Russia V.V. Putin, in a message to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, expressed a similar opinion:

“First of all, it must be recognized that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. For the Russian people, it has become a real drama. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and compatriots ended up outside Russian territory. The epidemic of disintegration has also spread to Russia itself.”

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, one should not forget about its positive aspects:

“But still, one should not forget that in recent years in the USSR people lived very hard. Both materially and spiritually,” he added. - Everyone now somehow forgot what empty counters are. They forgot what it is like to be afraid to express their own thoughts that run counter to the "general line of the party." And we must never forget it.”

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 data of international polls of the population within the framework of the Eurasian Monitor program in 2006, 52% of the polled residents of Belarus regretted the collapse of the Soviet Union, 68% - of Russia and 59% - of Ukraine; did not regret, respectively, 36%, 24% and 30% of respondents; 12%, 8% and 11% found it difficult to answer this question.

In October 2016 (no survey was conducted in Belarus) to the question:

“Do you personally regret or do not regret that the Soviet Union collapsed?”:

Yes, I'm sorry answered - in Russia 63%, in Armenia - 56%, in Ukraine - 32%, in Moldova - 50%, in Kazakhstan - 38% of respondents,

I do not regret, respectively - 23%, 31%, 49%, 36% and 46% of respondents, and 14%, 14%, 20%, 14% and 16% found it difficult to answer.

Thus, we can conclude that the attitude towards the collapse of the USSR in different CIS countries is very different and significantly depends on the current integration moods of citizens.

Thus, in Russia, according to many studies, tendencies towards reintegration dominate, so the attitude towards the collapse of the USSR is mostly negative (the majority of respondents recorded regret and confidence that the collapse could have been avoided).

On the contrary, in Ukraine the integration vector is directed away from Russia and the post-Soviet space, and the collapse of the USSR is perceived there without regret and as inevitable.

In Moldova and Armenia, the attitude towards the USSR is ambiguous, which corresponds to the current largely "bivector", autonomist or indefinite state of integration orientations of the population of these countries.

In Kazakhstan, with all the skepticism about the USSR, there is a positive attitude towards the “new integration”.

In Belarus, where, according to the Eurasia Expert analytical portal, 60 percent of citizens have a positive attitude towards integration processes within the framework of the EAEU, and only 5% (!) - negatively, the attitude of a significant part of the population towards the collapse of the Soviet Union is negative.

Conclusion

The failed "putsch" of the State Committee for the State of Emergency and the completion of perestroika meant not only the end of socialist reformism in the USSR, and in its integral part - the Belarusian SSR, but also the victory of those political forces that saw the change in the model of social development as the country's only way out of a protracted crisis. It was a conscious choice not only of the authorities, but also of the majority of society.

The “revolution from above” led to the formation in Belarus, as well as throughout the post-Soviet space, of a labor market, goods, housing, and a stock market. However, these changes were only the beginning of the transitional period of the economy.

In the course of political transformations, the Soviet system of power organization was dismantled. Instead, the formation of a political system based on the separation of powers began.

The collapse of the USSR radically changed the geostrategic position in the world. The unified security and defense system of the country was destroyed. NATO has come close to the borders of the CIS countries. At the same time, the former Soviet republics, having overcome their former isolation from Western countries, found themselves, as never before, integrated into many international structures.

At the same time, the collapse of the USSR does not mean at all that the idea of a just and morally strong society and state, which the Soviet Union, albeit with mistakes, put into practice, has been refuted. Yes, a certain version of the implementation is destroyed, but not the idea itself. And the latest events in the post-Soviet space, and in the world, connected with the integration processes, only confirm this.

Again, these processes are not simple, complex, and sometimes contradictory, but the vector set by the USSR, aimed at the process of rapprochement between the states of Europe and Asia on the path of mutual cooperation in the political and economic field on the basis of a coordinated interstate policy and economy, in the interests of the peoples inhabiting them, is chosen correctly, and the integration processes are gradually gaining momentum. And the Republic of Belarus, being a founding member of the UN, the CIS, the CSTO, the Union State and the EAEU, occupies a worthy place in this process.

If you are interested in this information - click " I like",

Muscovites have probably already noticed the beginning of the election campaign of the candidate for mayor of the capital and the current mayor Sergei Sobyanin. Agitation for Sobyanin sounds from every iron. More and more sites are connected to the campaign. In addition to the media, YouTube bloggers have joined the work, Russian celebrities in their Instagram profiles also do not get tired of praising the activities of the current mayor. With so many generous sponsors, Sergei Semenovich can let go, as they say, in a big way.

Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, who is running for mayor on September 9, has already spent 60.5 million rubles on the campaign. Among the sponsors are non-profit organizations and foundations associated with United Russia and with partners of major businessmen, such as Alisher Usmanov. According to the data, Sobyanin's budget is currently several times larger compared to his competitors Mikhail Degtyarev (LDPR), Vadim Kumin (KPRF), Ilya Sviridov (Fair Russia) and Mikhail Balakin (Union of Citizens). Experts point out that "not a single serious player" who could defeat Sobyanin was allowed to vote, so the incumbent mayor's rivals are not in the mood to spend large sums on the campaign.

From June 22 to July 31, the electoral fund of the current head of Moscow, Sergei Sobyanin (participates in the elections as an independent candidate), received 113.7 million rubles. As follows from the data of the Moscow City Electoral Committee, this is 81% of the total funds in the funds of all candidates. Sobyanin has already managed to spend 60.5 million rubles on campaigning.

183 thousand rubles were donated to the Sobyanin fund by a certain citizen, whose name is not specified in the Moscow City Electoral Committee. The rest of the funds for his campaign were donated by various non-profit organizations. 14 of them transferred 7.5 million rubles to the fund of the current head of Moscow. Let's call these organizations.

Among the sponsors of Sergei Sobyanin was ANO "Industrial Development Monitoring Center", which, according to the official website, organizes professional internships for students, develops a set of measures to stimulate labor productivity and support local manufacturers. The center is headed by the ex-head of Delovaya Rossiya Ilya Semin.

Also, 7.5 million rubles were transferred to the Sobyanin fund by the organization "Center for Assistance in the Implementation of Socio-Economic Programs". According to SPARK, it is engaged in the rental and leasing of cars and light vehicles. The head of TsSRSEP is Vasily Osipov, who also runs the civil university of United Russia.

Another sponsor - Moscow City Fund for Support of Regional Cooperation and Development. It belongs to Alexander Gridnevsky (head of the public fund for supporting the United Russia party), Yuri Karabasov (together with Alisher Usmanov owns LLC Intellectual Resources) and the Interregional Public Fund for Support of United Russia, which also in turn sponsored Sobyanin's election fund.

NPO “Mitakom Social Responsibility Development Fund”, according to the SPARK database, is a Cossack community included in the All-Russian register. The NPO is owned by well-known journalist Mikhail Taratuta.

All-Russian public organization of motor sports "Russian Automobile Federation" (RAF). From 2015 to 2017, the RAF regularly won contracts for various types of organizational work at the Formula 1 in Sochi, having received 155 million rubles from the Department of Property Relations of the Krasnodar Territory in two years. It should be noted that the RAF is headed by Viktor Kiryanov, who is a member of the board of directors of Federal Freight Company JSC, 100% owned by Russian Railways JSC.

Union of Capital Printers. The owner of this union, according to SPARK, is JSC Moscow Textbooks (24.5% owned by the Moscow Property Management Committee), as well as two of its subsidiaries: CJSC Moscow House of Books and JSC Moscow Packing Center. The beneficiary of the "Moscow textbooks" is businessman Semyon Linovich, who is the "main supplier of textbooks" under the ex-mayor of Moscow, Yuri Luzhkov. Linovich and Luzhkov at one time even wrote a joint book, Folk Artistic Crafts of Russia. Linovich's daughters, Evgenia and Irina, are well-known socialites of the Moscow party, co-owners of the Masterpeace clothing brand. The Linovich sisters are friends with many singers and actors who campaign on their Instagram profiles for candidate Sergei Sobyanin.

Fund "National projects XXI century". The main activity of the fund is the publication of books, SPARK says. Interestingly, this fund, through one company, belongs to the Federation of Trade Unions of the Sverdlovsk Region. This federation, we note, is headed by a member of the United Russia party, State Duma deputy Andrei Vetluzhskikh.

Foundation "National Center for Monitoring Scientific and Technical Revolution". This fund belongs to the regional public organization "Assistance and Development of IT Industry Specialists", which twice tried to obtain contracts from the government of the Moscow Region in 2018 to study the effectiveness of the information policy of the authorities of the Moscow Region and collect information on the communication strategy of the government of the Moscow Region.

Health Foundation, which is co-owned, among other things, by the National Association of TB Physicians. And this association, in turn, belongs to the three largest state research centers in the field of tuberculosis, pulmonology and infectious diseases in Novosibirsk, St. Petersburg and Moscow.

Fund for Support and Development of Public Initiatives. The co-owner of the fund is the Union of Pensioners of Russia, which is headed by Valery Ryazansky, a member of the Federation Council.

The Moscow city regional branch of the United Russia party, the Fund for Supporting People's Projects and Civic Initiatives, and the Fund for Supporting Future Generations also transferred 7.5 million rubles each to the Sobyanin fund.

In addition to the listed organizations, 3.5 million rubles were donated to the election campaign of Sergei Sobyanin by the Moscow branch of the party "Motherland", which is headed by Moscow City Duma deputy Andrey Shibaev, and Russian Party of Pensioners».

As for the other four candidates for the post of mayor of Moscow - Mikhail Balakin, Mikhail Degtyarev, Vadim Kumir and Ilya Sviridov - not a single individual has donated more than 20 thousand rubles to their election funds, not a single legal entity has donated more than 25 thousand rubles . The electoral fund of Mikhail Balakin contains 460 thousand rubles (425 thousand rubles were spent), in the fund of Mikhal Degtyarev - 9.8 million rubles (9.3 million rubles were spent), the communist Vadim Kumin received 15.3 million rubles in the electoral fund (11.7 million rubles spent), Ilya Sviridov has 569 thousand rubles in the fund's account (550 thousand have already been spent).

A source close to the presidential administration, in a conversation with a Znak.com journalist, noted that “initially, no one showed any ambitions” in the Moscow mayoral elections. In his opinion, the low financial activity of Balakin, Degtyarev, Kumin and Sviridov is “one of the symptoms of the problem that people do not believe at all and do not want to seriously compete with Sobyanin, they solve their problems in these elections, not related to the electorate.”

Political scientist Andrei Kolyadin is sure that the low financial activity of candidates for the post of Moscow mayor Mikhail Balakin, Mikhail Degtyarev, Vadim Kumin and Ilya Sviridov is due to the fact that "none of them have any chance to win", because they were not allowed to participate in these elections. "no serious player". “Therefore, it is logical that no person in their right mind would give money to an ineffective campaign with zero results,” Kolyadin added.

“Whoever does not regret the collapse of the USSR has no heart. And whoever wants to restore it to its former form has no head.”

President of Russia V.V. Putin

“I unambiguously view the collapse of the Soviet Union as a catastrophe that had and is having negative consequences throughout the world. We didn’t get anything good from the breakup.”

President of Belarus A.G. Lukashenka

The collapse of the USSR is the processes of systemic disintegration that took place in the economy (national economy), social structure, public and political sphere of the Soviet Union, while, as V. Putin noted:

"I don't think our geopolitical adversaries stood aside."

In the 1970s and 1980s, conflicts created on ethnic grounds (riots in 1972 in Kaunas, mass demonstrations in 1978 in Georgia, the December events of 1986 in Kazakhstan) were insignificant for the development of the entire Union, but showed the activation of a similar organization of that phenomenon, what is more recently called the "orange revolution". At that time, the Soviet ideology emphasized that the USSR was a friendly family of fraternal peoples, and this growing problem was not exacerbated. The USSR was headed 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, there were many among leaders and Jews, especially in the 20s and 30s). 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.

The actual state of affairs differed from the structure described in the Constitution of the USSR, which was the result of the activities of the bureaucracy (after the coup d'état of 1953), which took shape as an exploiting class.

REASONS FOR DECAY

centrifugal nationalistic tendencies inherent, according to some authors, to 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, persecution of dissidents by the KGB, forced collectivism);

the dominance of one ideology, ideological blindness, a ban on communication with foreign countries, censorship, the lack of a 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), which resulted in a constant shortage of consumer goods, a growing technical lag in all areas of the manufacturing industry (which in an extensive economy can only be compensated for by high-cost mobilization measures, a set of such measures under the general name "Acceleration »was adopted in 1987, but there were no longer economic opportunities to implement it);

crisis of confidence in the economic system: in the 1960s-1970s. The main way to deal with the inevitable shortage of consumer goods in a planned economy was to rely on the mass character, simplicity and cheapness of materials, most enterprises worked in three shifts and produced similar products from low-quality materials. The quantitative plan was the only way to assess the effectiveness 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 (the economic reform of 1965);

the decline in world oil prices, which shook the economy of the USSR;

monocentric decision-making (only in Moscow), which led to inefficiency and loss of time;

defeat in the arms race, the victory of "Reaganomics" in this race;

Afghan war, cold war, ongoing financial assistance to the countries of the socialist bloc;

the development of the military-industrial complex to the detriment of other sectors of the economy ruined the budget.

COURSE OF EVENTS

Since 1985, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU M.S. Gorbachev and his supporters began the policy of perestroika, the political activity of the population increased sharply, mass movements and organizations, including radical and nationalist ones, were formed. Attempts to reform the Soviet system led to a deepening crisis in the country.

General crisis

In the period 1989-1991, the main problem of the Soviet economy reaches its maximum - a chronic commodity shortage; practically all basic goods disappear from free sale, except for bread. Rated supply in the form of coupons is being introduced throughout the country.

Since 1991, a demographic crisis has been recorded for the first time (the excess of deaths over births).

A number of interethnic conflicts flare up on the territory of the USSR.

Against the backdrop of a 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"

During 1990-1991, the so-called "parade of sovereignties" took place, during which all the union republics, including the Byelorussian SSR, whose Supreme Council on July 27, 1990 adopted the Declaration on State Sovereignty of the Byelorussian SSR, proclaiming "full state sovereignty, as supremacy, independence and completeness of the state power of the republic within the boundaries of its territory, the legitimacy of its laws, the independence of the republic in external relations. They adopted the Declaration of Sovereignty, which established the priority of republican laws over all-Union ones. Action was taken to control local economies, including refusing to pay taxes to the Union budget. These conflicts cut off many economic ties, which further worsened the economic situation in the USSR.

1991 referendum on the preservation of the USSR

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

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

Draft new Union Treaty

The rapid growth of the processes of disintegration is pushing the leadership of the USSR, headed by Mikhail Gorbachev, to the following actions:

Holding an all-union referendum, in which the majority of voters voted for the preservation of the USSR;

Establishment of the post of President of the USSR in connection with the prospect of the loss of power by the CPSU;

The project of creating a new Union Treaty, in which the rights of the republics were significantly expanded.

But in practice, during this period, dual power was already established in the country, separatist tendencies intensified in the Union republics.

At the same time, indecisive and inconsistent actions of the central leadership of the country were noted. So, in early April 1990, the Law “On Strengthening Responsibility for Encroachments on the National Equality of Citizens and Violent Violation of the Unity of the Territory of the USSR” was adopted, which established criminal liability for public calls for the violent overthrow or change of the Soviet social and state system. But almost simultaneously with this, the Law “On the Procedure for Resolving Issues Related to the Secession of a Union Republic from the USSR” was adopted, which regulated the procedure and procedure for secession from the USSR through a referendum. A legal way to secede from the Union was opened.

The actions of the then leadership of the RSFSR, headed by Boris Yeltsin, also played a negative role in the collapse of the Soviet Union.

GKChP and its consequences

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

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

The signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords and the creation of the CIS

However December 8, 1991 the heads of the Republic of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, as founding states of the USSR, who signed the Treaty on the Formation of the USSR, signed the Agreement, which stated the termination of the existence of the USSR as a "subject of international law and geopolitical reality" and announced the creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS ).

marginal notes
Here are the statements on this matter by one of the direct "gravediggers" of the Soviet Union, a signatory of the "Belovezhskaya Accord", former Chairman of the Supreme Council of Belarus S. Shushkevich in November 2016 at a meeting at the headquarters of the Atlantic Council in Washington, where a significant for the United States, the date is the 25th anniversary of the collapse of the Soviet Union:

“I am proud of my participation in the signing of the Belovezhskaya Accords, which formalized the disintegration of the USSR that actually took place by the end of 1991.
It was a nuclear force that threatened the whole world with missiles. And whoever says that she had reasons to exist must not only be a philosopher, but a philosopher with a sense of heroism.
Even though the collapse of the Soviet Union brought hope for liberalization, few post-Soviet countries have emerged as true democracies.
The anti-Belarusian president ruined everything that was achieved in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, but sooner or later Belarus will become a normal civilized state.”

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.

On December 26, the session of the upper house of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, which retained the quorum - the Council of the Republics, adopted Declaration No. 142-N on the termination of the existence of the USSR.

During the same period, Russia declared itself the successor of the USSR membership (and not the assignee, as is often erroneously stated) in international institutions, assumed the debts and assets of the USSR, and declared itself the owner of all the property of the USSR abroad. According to data provided by the Russian Federation, at the end of 1991, the liabilities of the former Soviet Union were estimated at $93.7 billion, and the assets at $110.1 billion.

CONSEQUENCES IN THE SHORT TERM

Transformations in Belarus

After the collapse of the USSR, Belarus was a parliamentary republic. The first Chairman of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Belarus was Stanislav Shushkevich.

- In 1992, the Belarusian ruble was introduced, the formation of our own armed forces began.

— In 1994, the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus was adopted, and the first presidential elections took place. Alexander Lukashenko was elected president, and the republic was transformed from parliamentary to parliamentary-presidential.

- In 1995, a referendum was held in the country, as a result of which the Russian language received the status of a state language on a par with Belarusian.

- In 1997, Belarus completed the removal of 72 SS-25 intercontinental missiles with nuclear warheads from its territory and received the status of a nuclear-free state.

Interethnic conflicts

In the last years of the existence of the USSR, a number of interethnic conflicts flared up on its territory. After its collapse, most of them immediately entered the phase of armed clashes:

the Karabakh conflict - the war of the Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh for independence from Azerbaijan;

Georgian-Abkhazian conflict - the conflict between Georgia and Abkhazia;

Georgian-South Ossetian conflict - the conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia;

Ossetian-Ingush conflict - clashes between Ossetians and Ingush in the Prigorodny district;

Civil war in Tajikistan - inter-clan civil war in Tajikistan;

The First Chechen War - the struggle of Russian federal forces with separatists in Chechnya;

conflict in Transnistria - the struggle of the Moldovan authorities with separatists in Transnistria.

The collapse of the USSR in terms of law

ASSESSMENTS

Estimates of the collapse of the USSR are ambiguous. The opponents of the USSR in the Cold War perceived the collapse of the USSR as their victory.

President of Belarus A.G. Lukashenka assessed the collapse of the Union as follows:

“The collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, primarily due to the destruction of the existing system of the bipolar world. Many hoped that the end of the Cold War would be a relief from large military spending, and the freed up resources would be directed to solving global problems - food, energy, environmental and others. But these expectations were not justified. The Cold War has been replaced by an even fiercer struggle for energy resources. In fact, a new redistribution of the world has begun. Any means are used, up to the occupation of independent states.

President of Russia V.V. Putin, in a message to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, expressed a similar opinion:

“First of all, it must be recognized that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century. For the Russian people, it has become a real drama. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens and compatriots ended up outside Russian territory. The epidemic of disintegration has also spread to Russia itself.”

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, one should not forget about its positive aspects:

“But still, one should not forget that in recent years in the USSR people lived very hard. Both materially and spiritually,” he added. - Everyone now somehow forgot what empty shelves are. They forgot what it is like to be afraid to express their own thoughts that run counter to the "general line of the party." And we must never forget it.”

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

According to international surveys of the population within the framework of the Eurasian Monitor program in 2006, 52% of the polled residents of Belarus, 68% of Russia and 59% of Ukraine regretted the collapse of the Soviet Union; did not regret, respectively, 36%, 24% and 30% of respondents; 12%, 8% and 11% found it difficult to answer this question.

In October 2016 (no survey was conducted in Belarus) to the question:

“Do you personally regret or do not regret that the Soviet Union collapsed?”:

yes sorry answered— in Russia 63%, in Armenia — 56%, in Ukraine — 32%, in Moldova — 50%, in Kazakhstan — 38% of respondents,

I do not regret, respectively - 23%, 31%, 49%, 36% and 46% of respondents, and 14%, 14%, 20%, 14% and 16% found it difficult to answer.

Thus, we can conclude that the attitude towards the collapse of the USSR in different CIS countries is very different and significantly depends on the current integration moods of citizens.

On the contrary, in Ukraine the integration vector is directed away from Russia and the post-Soviet space, and the collapse of the USSR is perceived there without regret and as inevitable.

In Kazakhstan, with all the skepticism about the USSR, there is a positive attitude towards the “new integration”.

In Belarus, where, according to the Eurasia Expert analytical portal, 60 percent of citizens have a positive attitude towards integration processes within the EAEU, and only 5% (!) Have a negative attitude, the attitude of a significant part of the population towards the collapse of the Soviet Union is negative.

CONCLUSION

The failed “putsch” of the State Committee for the State of Emergency and the completion of perestroika meant not only the end of socialist reformism in the USSR, and in its integral part, the Byelorussian SSR, but also the victory of those political forces that saw the change in the model of social development as the country’s only way out of a protracted crisis. It was a conscious choice not only of the authorities, but also of the majority of society.

In the course of political transformations, the Soviet system of power organization was dismantled. Instead, the formation of a political system based on the separation of powers began.

Youth Analytical Group