Steve LeVine covers foreign affairs for BusinessWeek. He previously was correspondent for Central Asia and the Caucasus for The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times for 11 years. His first book, The Oil and the Glory, a history of the former Soviet Union through the lens of oil, was published in October 2007. Putin’s Labyrinth, his new book, profiles Russia through the lives and deaths of six Russians. It was released this week.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



A Blog on Russia, Central Asia and
the Caucasus

Thursday, December 13, 2007

What if Russia's Communists Had Won in the 1990s?

I'm re-reading David Hoffman's "The Oligarchs," which is a riveting reminder of how, a little over a decade ago, the West was in a lather over the possibility that Russia's Communist Party could upend Boris Yeltsin. And if it did, privatization would be reversed, democracy would go out the window, and Russia would become more nationalist.

There must be a huge qualitative difference with how events in Russia have turned out, but I'm strained to define it.

This is important not as an ideological point, but in terms of the compromises made along the way to Vladimir Putin's rise to power in 1999.

When I've been to Moscow the last several months tracking the trajectory of events -- how we got from the Soviet collapse to Putinism -- experts there are fairly well agreed that the seeds were planted years ago.

Some say Russia lost its way back in 1993, when Yeltsin used tanks and Alpha troops to crush a revolt by hard-line rightists. Others say it was 1996, when the nation's independent journalists and billionaire oligarchs joined forces with articles, news broadcasts and cash that secured Yeltsin's re-election.

Whichever event was pivotal, here's their point: With these acts, Russia's ostensible democrats lost the moral high ground, showing their willingness to use any means to keep power, and thus legitimizing the same methods by others.

There are numerous examples of countries balking at the result of democracy: Algeria in 1992, when the military government canceled elections as it became clear that Islamists were going to win big; and Palestine two years ago, when the West rejected the triumph of Hamas.

The question being: Is the taint on democracy worth an intervention that may or may not alter the eventual outcome?

Photo: pingnews.com
Rights: Creative Commons

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

posted by Steve at

4 Comments:

Anonymous fh said...

Interesting that this and associated questions seem to be surfacing all over the place just now. Something to do with the succession issue, I guess, with observers thinking back to that amazing Yeltsin TV appearance when he introduced his successor. And here we are, another December, and another successor. Sort of, maybe.

If you're asking whether Yeltsin and his bunch were correct to do everything possible, regardless of the law, to block the Communists -- I think no, they weren't. One of the products was the current power elite's realization that they needed to keep the media under tight control.

When any ruling elite feels justified in doing whatever it can get away with, it is justifying the same for its successors.

But here's another what-if question: What if the Yeltsin regime had had the benefit of today's high oil prices? Would we be today looking back at the 1990s' chaos? (And, yes, I realize the same hypothetical might be asked about the Gorbachev period. Maybe the USSR would not have collapsed.)

December 13, 2007 4:07 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Hi FH. Glad to have you back. I'm among those who think that it's precisely low oil prices -- and not Ronald Reagan -- who brought down the Soviet Union. So, yes, if Gorbachev had high oil he might still be general secretary.

The same if oil had gone through the roof with Yeltsin naturally.

I hope the point is not missed regarding the impact down the road of today's 'anything goes' policy elsewhere in the world.

Best Steve

December 13, 2007 4:18 PM  
Anonymous Hans said...

In 1991 the Russians resolutely rejected Communism. In 1996 the Communists stood a solid chance to win the elections. What had happened?

December 14, 2007 6:52 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

Welcome Hans. What happened was economic collapse, currency devaluation, and widespread impoverishment. Russians lost their taste for what accompanied the post-Soviet freedoms, and welcomed the stability they saw in the past. Putin is riding that sentiment and, helped by $90 oil, he's able to argue that more centralized political and economic control is warranted.

Thanks for the comment and best, Steve

December 14, 2007 9:29 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home