margetts. scandal. find out what's really happening to the global economy in these kinds of reports on our. seven thirty pm in moscow these iraqi headlines dozens of new civilian deaths reported in syria as the arab league gears up to monitor the implementation of a peace plan but hundreds of mercenaries from abroad are allegedly fighting for regime change there the u.n. estimates more than five thousand civilians killed in syria since march by the regime claims its fighting an armed insurgency funded from abroad. shifting to the east of pakistan with an eye to the future of forging fresh ties with china as its u.s. relationship falters from one crisis to the next with the strains heightened by the covert u.s. raid that killed bin laden and last month's drone attack that left twenty four

pakistani soldiers dead. son celebrate a few commiserate it's the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the soviet union where opinion is still split on whether breaking up the country was the best choice for its people at end of the cold war and pave the way for a young democracy bugs part of his series of bloody regional conflicts and economic downturn and sticking with that topic coming up peter lavelle in his cross talk guest take a look at the causes of the soviet union's demise and what lessons it has for today's world powers. and.

lo and welcome to cross talk i'm peter all about twenty years ago a world historic event happened the soviet union came to an end and with it the conclusion of the cold war what is the soviet union's lasting legacy was it inevitable the u.s.s.r. would collapse and is the world a better place today. and. started . to cross thought the end of the soviet union i'm joined by geoffrey roberts here in the studio he is a historian and professor at the university college cork ireland his upcoming book is stalin's general the life of the go to you cough in new york across the steven cohen he's a professor of russian studies and history at new york university he's also author of soviet fates and lost alternatives from stalin ism to the new cold war and in washington we have richard cricket he is professor emeritus at the university of mary washington he's also author of the afghanistan question and the reset in u.s. russian relations all right gentlemen this is crosstalk that means you can jump in

anytime you want but first let's have a look at the last days of the u.s.s.r. . a number of dates are associated with the breakup of the u.s.s.r. but the events that formally ended the existence of the world's largest socialist state fall in the twenty fifth and the twenty sixth of december it is on these dates that the soviet union's first and last president mikhail gorbachev announced his resignation and the supreme council officially recognized the u.s. decides dissolution the end of the soviet union had devastating says. konami effects set of ethnic conflict and to this day stirs debate over whether it could have been averted or carried out at lesser costs yes it was in one go but there would have been no legal way to do it. people are traumatic for a lot of people not only in russia there was lots of turmoil of this sort would have occurred in a war. today many see the process of disintegration as spending over a much longer period of time and involving

a range of factors including corruption detrimental reliance on energy resources stagnating khana me and the disillusionment with the socialist ideology. there are several events that constitute the breakup was in my view the most harmful go to the framework of god exists or was dealt in the course of those political and economic reforms then there was the oldest coup and then the final blow came from the young crowd joke and trio the meeting between the three leaders of russia ukraine and belarus on december eighth brought the famous bella vision accords and established the commonwealth of independent states but by that time signs of breakdown were already ubiquitous the most amazing was one thousand nine hundred ninety or in one thousand nine hundred one the u.s.s.r. had accumulated a set of serious problems there were attempts to repair the system which started after one thousand nine hundred five and failed to one another just imagine driving a car and trying to fix the engine and the wheels while it's moving twenty years on

progress in positive change have certainly benefited some and the new russia but clearly not all according to recent opinion poll by the levada center more than fifty percent of russians say they regret the break up and think it could have been prevented. stephen cohen i want to go to you first in and new york you know it's i've been over the last two weeks or so i've been interviewing a number of people the principles that were involved in the dissolution of the soviet union and i find really quite remarkable the different points of view here so i'm going to ask you a very simple question what is the most important event that led to the dissolution of the soviet union because over the last ten days like i said i've come across so many different answers. the most important event is clearer gorbachev's introduction of democratizing reforms in the late one nine hundred eighty s. if that had not happened the soviet union would still exist today ok so jeffrey here in the studio reform collapse the soviet union. i'm not so sure about i think the important as far as to collapse the soviet union was deal was coup or the

attempted coup which we can go because of position and strength and since power gave us in the opportunity to precipitate the breakup i don't think global political from is necessarily. a how to late to the breakup of the soviet i think those reforms necessarily or very likely to lead to the end of the soviet common system but don't think that society has to break up with somebody so richard where do you come in on that ok because i mean to this day in in the new russia there is an argument in who is responsible for the breakup of the soviet union was it boris yeltsin looking for power at any cost and he chose the russian federation or got a bunch of it and got a bunch of fending off a a political rival and that was. well i think the two are interconnected and i would also make a point that perhaps is a minority point of view and the nationalities question was also played

a very large role in this if the soviets had crushed a little in an independence movement on bloody sunday january thirteenth thousand nine hundred ninety one they would have prevented a series of advanced and eventually led to the collapse of the soviet union the oh i was in and delirious and i after listening the events of their independence day i saw many people from many of the republics there and they were watching what was going to happen a little when you were lithuanians going to get away with this and what they did in effect is they encourage lots of people including russian nationalists to challenge the power elite in moscow ok you know you stephen is very interesting i mean we come across countless in the number of times of the the rivalry between yeltsin and got a bunch of but ultimately was it was nationalism really one of the driving forces or did reform allow nationalists to to express themselves more because at the end

of the day you know we the soviet union interestingly enough created these solid. sovereignties of them but within the soviet union the republics and that created in itself a new form of local nationalism so the success of the soviet union again was one of its failures. peter because we've known each other so long and because i like you i tried to be very brief in my first answer let me add a word to the syria this. everybody's an awfully good really good. the serious the story and begins with cause and effect yes nationalism played a role yes the economy played a role yes all sorts of things played a role but those factors would not have come into play at play if gorbachev had not opened the door by democratizing the soviet political system that's why i gave that answer to your question that that was the precipitating factor let me make one

other quick point it's very hard especially in the united states to discuss the end of the soviet union because it's laden with myth first the soviet union did not collapse everybody using that word but it didn't collapse it was dismantled fair and that's a very different process there now secondly there is the view there is a view in the united states and maybe elsewhere that there was no alternative to what happened twenty years ago in december eighth when yeltsin in the others went secretly clandestinely to a hidden hunting lodge in bello reuss and sign the documents there were many alternatives many alternatives and thirdly the myth it's already been mentioned that the end of the soviet union was peaceful and avoided yugoslav like scenario it wasn't peaceful hundreds of thousands if not millions of people have been killed or displaced or brutalized as a direct result of the end of the soviet union and that process is not over so if we can have a little reality we can have a little analysis and fair enough richard if i go to you real quick here i mean

fair enough i agree with what we just heard dismantling the soviet union and i agree with that but again i want to go back to an issue this is not what good of a child wanted to do ok that wasn't his goal. well you know i think the case that stephen makes just as a whole lot of good you could not change their system within the system those existed it was doomed to failure and it's fortunate that. in the final analysis the number of people that were killed were relatively small in number. i don't think it could have been avoided i just think these basic system was rotten and it was going to collapse that's the bottom line and that's what happened and that's the important thing what did happen it collapsed ok and i'm going to characterize the writing of ways all right i do get some crosstalk here jeffrey go ahead props i can come in the group was a relatively peaceful breakup

a lot of other self. rather than directly as a result or as part of the process of regular bug i grew stephen i don't see why the soviet union. needed to collapse i think it's quite possible given a different set of political circumstances different choices by this that some kind of multinational soviet union type state could survive now i think it wouldn't have been a communist or or a socialist state it would be very very different been the soviet system but i see no reason that all. gorbachev could have actually succeeded in the least one of these goals which was to to keep the soviet union to together it will be on the different letters let me make let me make an observation here this is when we talk about these things of course they are very complex subjects in there so you can say very much in terms of these sound bites that were shooting at each other but the reality is that the soviet elite came to two conclusions one is they did not have

a solution to their societies problems and two they no longer had the right to rule and the people in history so for protests they were relatively small number but i would venture to say that a large percentage of those people were their kids and they weren't prepared to kill their kids fortunately steven already coming out of that because what are the other alternatives ok mr alternatives what was missing it. well what was missed as the as someone has said is the possibility of preserving the soviet union on a voluntary basis which would have meant considerably fewer republics but let's introduce some facts into the analysis again in one thousand nine hundred one there were secessionists nationalist movements only in the three small baltic republics georgia and possibly western ukraine if you take all that territory all those

people all those resources it was five percent of the soviet total there was plenty to work with it would have taken a long time it probably would have been a confederated state would it have lasted we don't know but that was the alternative nine republics prior to the pollution signed a draft of a new union treaty. excepting just that one other thing and it's very important for me because i rebel against it in the united states the word doomed and pre-determined simply is not part of my a storable thinking it will longs to the realm of theology you believe it even let me jump in here we're going to go to a break i'll let you finish when we come back from a break ok after a short break we'll continue our discussion on the collapse of the u.s.s.r. state.

case paintings on display for. years. the only time i get. wealthy british science. is not on the title. margetts weiner scandal. find out what's really happening to the global

economy is a report on r.t. . and. welcome back to rostock i'm peter lavelle to my joy talking about the end of the u.s.s.r. . anything. ok jeffrey i'd like to go to you here in the studio i really i like a lot what do want to stephen is saying here about alternatives because everyone says it was it was in ever have all but i mean if the soviet union were to have survived it would have been a communist soviet union it would have been something very different and once you have forces a nationalist forces unleashed you think the russians really wanted to have the rest of the baggage because to this day i mean the russians feel that you know the

other the republics were were a burden to them i mean at least economically speaking and because of the lack of any kind of nationality policy in this country today and there's even kind of a you know get keep them out out of tude so i mean it's evolved a lot in twenty years yeah i'm not i mean broadly agree with what stephen says that might be because i've spent the last couple days studying his his book there's one thing missing for me i feel and i think that peter alluded to and that's the whole role dimension of of russia. nationalism it seems to me to get the nationalities question was absolutely central to the break up that this month's minute the u.s.s.r. bochy to keep force and it was always russian nationalism was. yeltsin's russia's challenge the soviet union there was a hole that was a double just one event of the whole globe process for nine hundred ninety nine one in the sense of it you can see the dismantlement of the u.s.s.r. . as a kind of an expression of russian nationalism as an assertion of russian national

attention now the question i asked myself is yeah i agree with stephen that there was a feasible norm coleman is still turn that if soviet union maybe even them a global leadership but ultimately if survive to challenge of russian nationals the mafia has to be a question about ok i can see when you're being asked a question go ahead. well i think it's a terrific question and i think putin is trying to give us the answer today with his proposal for a eurasian union now notice what's changed in the last twenty years you're absolutely right peter and the others mentioned this that in one thousand nine hundred ninety one the russian leadership held led by yeltsin felt burdened by the economic subsidies it was giving the central asia and the other republics to day the putin leadership thinks that it needs those markets it needs that reintegration with central asia with bella ruse and with ukraine but putin is promising there won't be the political control that was represented by the soviet union so we will

see how this eurasian idea of putin which i think he's going to make part of his presidential campaign again twenty years after the fact how it plays out in these republics you know things change and remember what happened in one nine hundred ninety s. very interesting both the anti communist yeltsin and the rule and the communist party sees no new russian nationalism to use against gorbachev the communist party demanded its own russian communist party which. had not existed and you don't since seized on this russian parliament and its sovereignty issues so you have a potential movement against gorbachev both claiming to represent you know i want to know that in reality they don't represent nationalism ok richard you want to jump in there go ahead well i mean talking about the situation today i mean the russian foreign ministry just issued. an outrageous statement that once again that the baltic countries voluntarily joined the soviet union and that conjures up the

image of a right wing coup in the soviet you in russia today and that's a possibility that could have happened in russia back in one nine hundred ninety one and it's very very disturbing because it doesn't make any sense the baltic countries are like they're like. canaries and the mind ok the toxic. threats that are made from moscow visa v. these small states they don't have a great do a great deal of clout but they have a lot of friends in the west and it's not in russia is vital self interest to demonize them that way and i don't understand that and that's the thing that's scary that we all want to see russian democracy survive and we know what i mean we are many russians i think in terms of the baltic republics the russian and we're talking about the collapse of the twenty years ago not today but i mean there's a lot of ethnic russians in the baltic republics and there are a lot of their rights are being denied there as being members of the european

countries being part of the european union here but i think i'd change a good many who actually was one of the soviet union jeffrey so i mean if if the soviet union had continued on i mean would because the c.i.s. stephen was on this program we get on the c.i.s. i mean it really isn't turning into an alternative ok because not everyone has interlocking interests here so i mean that alternative of staying together probably wouldn't have worked out either i think it's a mushroom. the political will of political choice and also the particular circumstances ok the so soviet union collapsed those broken up twenty years ago. i wouldn't put it beyond the pounds possibly there could be some kind of reunification or some kind of union. involving russia and neighboring countries particularly if if there's some dramatic events in europe if the eurozone collapses if the you collapses i think in that kind of those kind of conditions then political perspectives on the some kind of multinational union on the territory of

former soviet union the peer to peer very differently you know stephen if they can go back to you i mean early in one thousand ninety one there was a referendum to keep the soviet union together but by the after the august coup things had changed so much i mean is that tell us about the pace of change because i mean i was in the course of months you know there's a people change their mind ok i mean we when we picked that particular look at places like the baltic republics which goes even way back before that to back up and even into in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight but then there was staring in ukraine i mean it was that was the coup itself the catalyst is finally you know close the shop. where you're certainly right on the first point those of us who were living in moscow at that time were saying to each other gee a week's change seems like a decade of change they were moving so fast and the and the rules of the political game were changing yeltsin his decision to move gorbachev out of the kremlin to

occupy the kremlin so to speak was an absolutely overwhelming factor in all this but remember one other thing which is kind of interesting what happened in one nine hundred ninety one. when against what was the objective process and economic thinking in the west that large areas in markets should in a great what happened in one thousand nine hundred one as you blew apart the largest common market in the world you divorce. suppliers and consumers and the result was the economic catastrophe that came over not only russia but all the former soviet republics most of them in the one nine hundred ninety s. now you're seeing a rethinking of that ironically at the very moment that the european community may be falling apart which reminds us i should marches to its own drummer richard you want to jump in there go right there yeah i want to respond to what's. possible alternative to what happened and that would be that russia turned inward for god

all of the external countries that it was involved in because they don't have an attachment to russia in other words build russia and that's what putin has to do today he has to stop demonizing foreign countries and focus on russia's problems russia is a big country is has talented people it is contributing and we need to see that you know richard i should point out to my viewers here is that when the soviet union was ended it was the these central asian republics that lamented it the most because they like the subsidies that they got from moscow so i mean demonizing countries i mean russia has its own foreign policy don't deem a country for having its own foreign policy in defending its own interests jeffrey we're getting close to the end it could be getting close to the end of the program stephen you want to jump in there. well i just wanted to remind everybody that the three we probably that dissolve the soviet union were the three slavic republics. russia belo roofs and ukraine and kazakhstan is about a third or

a half i'm not sure which slavic now remember solzhenitsyn's famous idea that a slavic union should replace the soviet union there was something very nationalist about this but non russians shouldn't be in the union and so if we think about alternatives that idea was floated around and do have and manske and one nine hundred ninety one that there would be a slaughter at the slavic people would unite the problem is the problem is economics dictate integration and the resources being held in central asia for example are exceedingly important ok jeffrey you want to reply i just want to completely disagree with richard he seems to be saying what we need is more russian nationalism more russian isolation be an absolute disaster for russia and for the world what we need is more russian and. we need multination ism and internationals and we don't need more nationalism richard you want to reply to that well i'm just

saying that was a possible alternative i'm not saying that would be uncertain i think it horowitz it was a poor alternative in nine hundred ninety one and it's an even worse alternative to the ok stephen i want to ask you is there is the world a better place with the end of the soviet union. we're not allowed to discuss that in the united states premier i'm sorry let me put it here like this actually mosco last night. last night preparing an article on writing i tried to make a list of international pluses and minuses that ensued from the end of the soviet union and all i do is i asked my readers a question if the if a reforming soviet union a democratizing soviet state had continued to exist would there have been in the last twenty years and i give this question to you. less international terrorism less fanatical nationalism less ideological zealotry less global deregulation less nuclear proliferation except exactly except and as i think about it i hard to

him i find it hard to imagine a way to say that there would not have been less jeffrey when you think about it it was a plus and it was a plus for the really really good richard it was a plus it was a plus no question about it and it was a plus for the russian people and it was a reply plus for people who lived under the autocracies for years russia is a rich country but they had a reason to kill a system that just cannot work and now these people have a second chance and we wish them well ok run the differing of you the last word in the program good luck because it's too early to sell. i forgot as of this moment i grieve with stephen there's a lot of the sons against the breakup of the soviet the one forgets i personally i regret. to fight off the soviet union as a multinational state but that's because i wanted to nationalise a multinational as. those kind of countries which bring together people different people different nations together which attempt it's gratian and separate

a common identity as the whole kind of pluralistic mix that's my my ideals so to that extent i think that the breakup of the soviet union i was about the same time i have to decide my father what i don't think that the fight in the old days all for terry and company system was about halfway up is a good thing off think it was it was good to democracy i think this all right out of time here ok we'll have to let history judge many thanks to my guests today in washington in new york and here in the studio and thanks to our viewers for watching us here i can see you next time and remember. if you.

witnesses. to history in the making of. testimony. ten stories that shapes two thousand and eleven on our t.v. .