# Could the Soviet Union have survived if Gorbachev wasn't in charge? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2024, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178 "2024-09-12T19:09:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2024, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178/41 "2024-09-26T20:37:08Z")
> [@Irishman](#): > > That Gorbachev, or someone like him, was inevitable, that the Party relinquishing control of the Warsaw Pact countries was inevitable at this time? I wouldn’t say that, and it certainly wasn’t obvious at the time that the Soviet Union was verging on economic collapse; even the most pessimistic of economic intelligence analysts didn’t think the Soviet Union would fail before the turn of the 21st Century. In retrospect and with post-collapse insights into the late Soviet Era economy, it is kind of shocking that they managed to keep the USSR running (and it was heavily dependent upon East Bloc imports for manufactured goods and numerous technologies). But while Gorbachev was front and center of what became the fall of the Soviet Union, he was far from unique; there was a cadre of younger CPSU up-and-commers who realized that the planned economy system was a failure; that the endemic corruption, formalized by an unwillingness to accept reports that didn’t meet production quotes, was untenable; and that the failure of the Soviet Union to expand its population and grow its international influence numbered its days as a superpower in all ways save for its nuclear supremacy. But regardless of who was in charge, the explosion and broad radiation release of Chernobyl Reactor #4 with the ineffectual attempt at a cover up, the tragic and unnecessary losses from the invasion of Afghanistan, and the increased agitation by the younger generations in Warsaw Pact nations chafing against their own aging autocratic leadership and their forced patronage to the USSR meant that something was going to happen. I will say that with Gorbachev in charge, the odds of getting into a conflict that escalated into global nuclear exchange were substantially reduced. Things could have gone far, far worse, especially if there were a political schism within the ideological ranks of the CPSU in which a demagogue gained plenary control over the Soviet nuclear arsenal and decided to use it to preserve the Warsaw Pact and warn away Western nations from interfering in Soviet relations with Cuba or the handful of other supporting nations outside of the Warsaw Pact. > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Considering many think Russia under Putin is the Soviet Union except in name, Id say the answer for the OP is yes if the right guy were in the job. I think what Putin really wants is to resurrect Imperial Russia with himself as the the Tsar of Muscovy, creating a new dynasty in which Russia would realize its destiny as the “World Island” and Moscow the “Third Rome”. He has said with apparent sincerity that a world without Russia is not a world worth living in, and despite genuine estimates that the Russian nuclear arsenal and delivery systems may be far less reliable than they once were, it is still sufficient that even a small fraction of weapons could spell global catastrophe. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![BayLeaves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/c67d28/32.png) [@BayLeaves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BayLeaves)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2024, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178/42 "2024-09-26T21:08:40Z")
I dislike and distrust abrupt political changes, especially in Russia. The Russians have created some of the greatest literature and symphonic music in the world. Unfortunately, they lurch from one tyranny to another. I think Gorbachev was vastly superior to Putin, and Alexander Kerensky was vastly superior to Vladimir Lenin. Gorbachev and Kerensky deserved better opportunities. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2024, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178/43 "2024-09-26T21:09:29Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > and despite genuine estimates that the Russian nuclear arsenal and delivery systems may be far less reliable than they once were, it is still sufficient that even a small fraction of weapons could spell global catastrophe. Quite. If some dark day Russia goes apeshit and attacks the West with nukes, I suspect the West’s overwhelming (and rather more reliable) response will constitute the lion’s share of the total megatonnage and concomitant ecological damage. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2024, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178/44 "2024-09-30T05:01:26Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > (even their military industry is basically 1950s technology and they are suffering from a lack of viable workforce). Picking nits: not even 1950s. I understand that most of the skilled machining labor basically disappeared in Russia during the 1990s, and they now rely on computer numerical control machine tools, mostly from Japan, Taiwan, and Europe. Cite: PDF link here: [https://www.rhodus.com/](https://www.rhodus.com/) Also, while Chernobyl was undoubtedly important in convincing non-octogenarian Russians of the need for reform, I understand [the 1988 Armenian earthquake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Armenian_earthquake) was also a major influence. Apropos nothing, Gorbachev’s liberalization came after the collapse in oil prices. Before that, he was as authoritarian as his predecessors. > **[Thread by @kamilkazani on Thread Reader App](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1566082893973274629.html)** > > @kamilkazani: Now we associate Gorbachev with Perestroika, which in its turn is interpreted as nice Gorbachev being nice. In reality, in the beginning of his rule Gorbachev continued Andropov's Neo-Stalinist policie...… > Early Gorbachev = suppress the private sector + pursue a statist industrialisation project with the focus on complex machinery and IT at the cost of the mass suffering. They knew very well that consumption standards gonna drop and planned for it Also: > PS When discussing Soviet/Russian policies we tend to focus on irrelevant crap, like which ruler is “liberal”/“democratic” (no one). But the oil prices are a much more important factor behind Kremlin’s policy. > Expensive oil → Aggressive > Cheap oil → Docile > Now it’s expensive ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2024, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178/45 "2024-09-30T13:09:25Z")
Thank you! Love the article. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/could-the-soviet-union-have-survived-if-gorbachev-wasnt-in-charge/1007178.md?page=2)