Magazine | July 7, 2014, Issue

Return of the Bear

The Last Empire: The Final Days of the Soviet Union, by Serhii Plokhy (Basic, 496 pp., $32)

If location is everything in real estate, then timing is everything in book publishing. Even a few months ago, Serhii Plokhy’s revisionist history of the end of the Cold War might not have garnered much attention. Yet with Crimea annexed and eastern Ukraine starting to break away to Russia, The Last Empire may be the most timely book of the year.

Timely, however, does not mean uncontroversial, and Plokhy’s central contention is sure to engender years of debate. In a nutshell, Plokhy, a professor of Ukrainian history at Harvard, argues that the “lost arms race, economic decline, democratic resurgence, and bankruptcy of Communist ideals” were not what ultimately led to the collapse of the Soviet Union; rather, it was the “imperial foundations, multiethnic composition, and pseudofederal structure of the Soviet state” that made it so vulnerable.

At the core of it all, and what makes Plokhy’s book almost preternaturally relevant to today’s headlines, is that the fate of the Soviet Union was decided by the unwillingness of Russia and Ukraine to continue coexisting inside that pseudofederal framework. From that perspective, Vladimir Putin’s so-far-successful attempt to begin reasserting Russian control over Ukraine takes on an even more dramatic cast. Recent hyperbolic comments on the return of the Cold War suddenly seem more understandable, if not more correct.

While Plokhy deals with weighty and somewhat academic issues, such as the concepts of empire, multiethnicity, and political structure, his book really focuses solely on the period from the August 1991 coup against Mikhail Gorbachev by members of his own government to the December 25 lowering of the Soviet flag over the Kremlin. These are the five crucial months that determined the fate of the USSR and the Cold War, Plokhy argues.

During those five months, moreover, it was the actions of four men that shaped the course of history. The interactions among President George H. W. Bush, Russian leader Boris Yeltsin, Ukraine’s “shrewd” leader Leonid Kravchuk, and above all Gorbachev form the core of the narrative. No surprise, either, is it that Gorbachev comes across as almost a tragic figure: His miscalculations, arrogance, and ultimate ineptness left no place for him, says Plokhy, in the new world he unwittingly ushered in.

The Last Empire is thus a hybrid book — partly a traditional diplomatic history, making use of the much-derided “great man” approach, and partly a quasi-Marxist “impersonal forces of history” analysis. Yet Plokhy avoids being drawn further than necessary into tendentious argumentation of a metaphysical sort, and focuses instead on the drama of the months that sealed the doom of the Soviet Union.

That narrative, while it has an undeniable nostalgic appeal, will not lessen the controversy surrounding Plokhy’s attempt to quash what he calls the “inflated accounts” of America’s role in the Soviet Union’s collapse. In this, he takes aim at nearly the entire post-Soviet corpus of political science and history, the memoirs of the key players (or at least certainly the Americans), and newer treatments, such as Henry Nau’s chapter on Ronald Reagan in his Conservative Internationalism (2013).

At first glance, Plokhy’s most startling claim might be that George H. W. Bush and his advisers attempted to save Gorbachev, whom they considered “their main partner on the world stage.” Thus, to Plokhy’s critical eye, Bush’s triumphal addresses to the nation on December 25, 1991, and on January 28, 1992 (his last State of the Union address), rewrote history when proclaiming that the U.S. had “won” the Cold War and vanquished a foe that in reality it had tried to preserve.

This is obviously a subtle argument, and one that can get drowned in the torrent of narrative. Plokhy might have done better to acknowledge more fully that the key to understanding Bush’s actions was his desire to maintain global order and avoid the nightmare of accidental nuclear conflict between either Moscow and Washington or Moscow and its nuclear-armed former republics (Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan). From that perspective, there is less of a contradiction, and less ad hocery, in American actions than Plokhy initially claims.

There is little doubt that American leaders wanted to “win” the Cold War, but they also saw an opportunity to work with a potentially post-Soviet, even democratic, Russia that ideally would maintain control over the USSR’s nuclear arsenal. When that seemed likely under Gorbachev, still the West’s main adversary, Bush was willing to give qualified support in the interest of global order (if not survival). When Gorbachev was thrown under the bus by Yeltsin and Kravchuk, Washington pivoted to the new power center. Bush’s proclaiming victory was not rewriting history, but recognizing new realities brought about by the triumph of American grand strategy (perhaps the only instance in which the term can be appropriately used). Realism, not ideology, was always the hallmark of the George H. W. Bush administration — sometimes to its detriment.

#page#The other major elements in Plokhy’s revisionist history are its downplaying of the personal rivalry between Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin and its assertion that the inability of Ukraine and Russia to agree to a post-Soviet political structure was the final nail in the coffin of the USSR. This supports his thesis that multiethnic revolt and the brittleness of the quasi-federal political structure of the Soviet Union proved too much for either the men or their institutions. Yeltsin’s opportunism and stubbornness stripped Gorbachev of any opportunity to recast the Union on new grounds, but Kravchuk’s opposition to a new structure stalemated Yeltsin’s attempt to take over the center and make Russia the dominant force in a new grouping.

The Last Empire is imbued with a rather 21st-century sensibility. Plokhy’s underlying theme is that America was (and is) not all-powerful and that much of what popular opinion has attributed to the efforts of the American people and the sagacity of Washington does not reflect reality. In that sense, Plokhy’s book is very much a post-Iraq and -Afghanistan revisionist history. The somewhat confused and inconsistent policy of the senior Bush’s administration in this account foreshadows an even more misguided crusade on the part of his son’s administration.

This belief Plokhy makes explicit at the end of his epilogue, tracing the neoconservatives’ triumph inside the George W. Bush administration to the rewriting of history at the end of the Cold War. From that perspective, it is no surprise that the more cautious and traditionally realist among the advisers of George H. W. Bush come across the better.

How much of a role did the U.S. play in the fall of the USSR? Here one might question Plokhy’s methodology, and the scope of his book. In choosing such a limited, though fascinating, time frame, he perforce excises nearly all Cold War history from his account. The five months he concentrates on may indeed have been crucial to the fate of the USSR — but then, so were the decades leading up to them, which undermined Moscow’s strength and ability to control its sprawling empire. A large part of those decades was consumed with direct competition with the United States; and, without question, Ronald Reagan’s forceful challenging of Soviet interests in Central America, his military buildup and technological challenge, and the American support for the Afghan mujahedeen sapped Soviet energy.

Some strategic failures were of course brought about by Moscow acting alone: for example, the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan. The very fact of Mikhail Gorbachev’s coming to power in 1985 was a result of failed Soviet policies and of an ossified leadership. But the system may well have lumbered along for more years — if it had not already been bleeding to death from the post-1945 global competition the Soviets had launched.

For all its strengths, The Last Empire seems almost made for TV — a perfect miniseries centering on the dramatic collapse of a worldwide threat to liberty and security. With appealing dramatis personae, it tells a compelling story well. Like all miniseries, it must sacrifice context for immediacy. Plokhy strives to keep the big picture in the plot and to acknowledge the influence of all that led up to those five crucial months. Yet even if we accept that Washington in the autumn and winter of 1991 was often led by events and did not lead them, its successful multigenerational strategy brought about the endgame whereby unique leaders could choose a once unthinkably peaceful ending to one of history’s great struggles.

– Mr. Auslin is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

In This Issue

Articles

Politics & Policy

Paying Their Way

In the wake of House majority leader Eric Cantor’s political defenestration at the hands of GOP primary voters, we’ve been told comprehensive immigration reform is dead. Before it rises from ...

Features

Books, Arts & Manners

Politics & Policy

Protecting The Republic

This is a serious book about a serious subject: the abuse of constitutional authority by President Obama and whether he merits impeachment for it. Some, undoubtedly, will try to dismiss ...
Politics & Policy

Murphy’s Law

Anything that can go wrong will go wrong: So goes Murphy’s Law. And so demonstrates another Murphy, Lafayette College professor Bruce Allen Murphy, in his new biography of Supreme Court ...
Politics & Policy

Into the Past

Ida, a small black-and-white masterpiece currently getting its American release, is set in Poland in the 1960s, and it feels as if it could have been filmed in the ’60s ...

Sections

Politics & Policy

Letters

Pollard’s Punishment I have been reading National Review since I was a teenager and mostly respect and admire your writers and appreciate your professionalism. However, the short paragraph about Jonathan Pollard ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ Funny, the IRS never seems to lose track of us. ‐ Almost as stunning as the defeat of House majority leader Eric Cantor are the lengths some people have gone ...
The Long View

Begin GChat 0754

ITDept: Hi, this is the IT department at the IRS. Thank you for using GChat for your support session. How can we help you? LLerner: This is Lois Lerner. Wondering about ...
Politics & Policy

Poetry

MY WRECK Somewhere Hopkins refers to his great long Ode as my wreck, as possessive as a salvager Tossing sand dunes for rubble the day after. And somewhere a critic says Hopkins thought Volpone a ...

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

Obstruction Confusions

In his Lawfare critique of one of my several columns about the purported obstruction case against President Trump, Gabriel Schoenfeld loses me — as I suspect he will lose others — when he says of himself, “I do not think I am Trump-deranged.” Gabe graciously expresses fondness for me, and the feeling is ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Students’ Anti-Gun Views

Are children innocents or are they leaders? Are teenagers fully autonomous decision-makers, or are they lumps of mental clay, still being molded by unfolding brain development? The Left seems to have a particularly hard time deciding these days. Take, for example, the high-school students from Parkland, ... Read More
PC Culture

Kill Chic

We live in a society in which gratuitous violence is the trademark of video games, movies, and popular music. Kill this, shoot that in repugnant detail becomes a race to the visual and spoken bottom. We have gone from Sam Peckinpah’s realistic portrayal of violent death to a gory ritual of metal ripping ... Read More
Elections

Romney Is a Misfit for America

Mitt’s back. The former governor of Massachusetts and occasional native son of Michigan has a new persona: Mr. Utah. He’s going to bring Utah conservatism to the whole Republican party and to the country at large. Wholesome, efficient, industrious, faithful. “Utah has a lot to teach the politicians in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

What the Second Amendment Means Today

The horrifying school massacre in Parkland, Fla., has prompted another national debate about guns. Unfortunately, it seems that these conversations are never terribly constructive — they are too often dominated by screeching extremists on both sides of the aisle and armchair pundits who offer sweeping opinions ... Read More
U.S.

Fire the FBI Chief

American government is supposed to look and sound like George Washington. What it actually looks and sounds like is Henry Hill from Goodfellas: bad suit, hand out, intoning the eternal mantra: “F*** you, pay me.” American government mostly works by interposition, standing between us, the free people at ... Read More
Film & TV

Black Panther’s Circle of Hype

The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) first infantilizes its audience, then banalizes it, and, finally, controls it through marketing. This commercial strategy, geared toward adolescents of all ages, resembles the Democratic party’s political manipulation of black Americans, targeting that audience through its ... Read More