Between Yeltsin and Ligachev

Abstract

Gorbachev’s historical address and his book on perestroika do not verify the view then accepted, in which Gorbachev was fighting resolutely and continuously against the forces of stagnation and Stalinism. A bitter confrontation was erupting, but the issues of principle were not so clear. The advocates of reform, not at all sure of the specifics of what they wanted, were opening up a complex struggle in periodicals such as Moscow News, Ogonyok, and Argumenty i fakty, suggesting a many-sided critique of Soviet reality and Stalinist history carried out in Gorbachev’s name. On the other side, the coalition that had prevented Gorbachev’s personnel changes at the Politburo and Central Committee meetings of January 1987 seemed only to be sure that they did not want to defend the old order. But they could not decide to what degree they would be willing to endure press criticism under the rubric of glasnost. Or, another way of putting it: they did not mind changing things, even drastically, as long as they were permitted to keep their positions of influence; they did not want reform to be used against them. Gorbachev stood between these two phalanxes in the fall of 1987, manoeuvring toward the more traditional positions that seemed strong since the July plenum, even at the risk of disappointing his more ardent followers. But he had no interest in real reconciliation.

No nation acquires the power of judgment unless it can pass judgment on itself. But this great privilege it can only attain at a very late stage.

Goethe