BOOK REVIEW: STEPHEN COHEN’S “SOVIET FATES AND LOST ALTERNATIVES” by Alan L. Chrisman (Apr. 2014)
After writing my recent review of Masha Gessen’s books on “PUSSY RIOT” and Putin, I saw Stephen Cohen, a well-respected Professor of Russian Studies at NYU and Princeton on CNN.
He was being interviewed along with Carl Bernstein, Watergate reporter and author of books on Hillary Clinton, etc. What struck me about that conversation concerning Russia and the Ukraine (I majored in International Relations in university and still keep up with it), was how much they disagreed.
It intrigued me what Prof. Cohen had said, so I got his book, “Soviet Fates (From StalinismToThe New Cold War)”. And although he wrote it in 2009, he predicted what seems to be happening currently in Ukraine.
Bernstein reflected what is the mainstream of political thought on how to deal with Russia and Putin. But Cohen goes back and examines how these policies evolved. I was always a bit confused how the transition from Gorbachev to Yeltsin to Putin occurred. Gorbachev instituted perestroika and glasnost ,from ’85-’89, staggering attempts from within to try and free up things both in and outside the Soviet Union , even working with conservative, Ronnie Reagan, to try and end the Cold War and slow down the Arms Race. Much, ironically, as another conservative, Nixon, had done with China. But Yeltsin had replaced him by ’91. Then there was the infamous right wing coup attempt to take over the government in Aug. ’91 (this event particularly interested me because my Russian friend, Yury Pelushonok, told me he was to have hosted the 1st. Beatles show broadcast across Russia that very day,and was stopped, but it was later re-instated). Yeltsin survived the attempt and consolidated his power. And he became the “darling” of the West, with Gorbachev being overshadowed. But, Cohen, maintains that Yeltsin was not quite the reformer he was portrayed. And soon the elites not only started dismantling the Communist Party but the whole Soviet Union, making sure they got the spoils themselves, with the rise of the capitalist oligarchs (which again the West embraced). Bill Clinton and Yeltsin became “buddies”. Then the two liberals proceed to ignore the agreements reached before( for example, Gorbachev had agreed to the Berlin Wall coming down in’89, and in exchange, NATO was not to encroach on Russia’s borders). But soon Clinton had intervened in Bosnia and NATO had positioned missiles in Poland. And the two Bush administrations continued these same policies. The “shock therapy “approach and economic chaos of Yeltsin and his cronies led to the almost overnight falling apart of the Soviet Union. Meanwhile the West gloated over Russia’s and Communism’s failures.
And when the Orange Revolution started in former Soviet republics like Georgia in 2003, they tried to get them to move toward the West and NATO.
Professor Cohen argues that when Putin took over after Yeltsin, he became portrayed as the worst evil yet. But Cohen maintains that Putin is probably just reacting to these threats on his borders in regions with a long-standing history and ethnic connections to Russia, as almost any Russian leader would. Much as Kennedy did when Khrushchev placed missiles in Cuba in the 60’s. Putin feels the West has lied to him and it’s not just his KGB background; there are likely even more right wing operators watching. Another Cold War could be just as dangerous.
Cohen raises a whole different perspective on what is happening in the Ukraine these days. Interestingly, Bill Clinton, said recently, that on everything he had discussed with Putin privately, Putin had kept his word. This is despite Hillary’s faux pas, when she compared Putin to Hitler. So is Putin the schoolyard bully that Gessen describes in her book on Pussy Riot or the evil empire restorer that most the Western politicians and media make him out to be? And it appears that the Obama administration is still stuck in that policy. We shall soon see.
After writing my recent review of Masha Gessen’s books on “PUSSY RIOT” and Putin, I saw Stephen Cohen, a well-respected Professor of Russian Studies at NYU and Princeton on CNN.
He was being interviewed along with Carl Bernstein, Watergate reporter and author of books on Hillary Clinton, etc. What struck me about that conversation concerning Russia and the Ukraine (I majored in International Relations in university and still keep up with it), was how much they disagreed.
It intrigued me what Prof. Cohen had said, so I got his book, “Soviet Fates (From StalinismToThe New Cold War)”. And although he wrote it in 2009, he predicted what seems to be happening currently in Ukraine.
Bernstein reflected what is the mainstream of political thought on how to deal with Russia and Putin. But Cohen goes back and examines how these policies evolved. I was always a bit confused how the transition from Gorbachev to Yeltsin to Putin occurred. Gorbachev instituted perestroika and glasnost ,from ’85-’89, staggering attempts from within to try and free up things both in and outside the Soviet Union , even working with conservative, Ronnie Reagan, to try and end the Cold War and slow down the Arms Race. Much, ironically, as another conservative, Nixon, had done with China. But Yeltsin had replaced him by ’91. Then there was the infamous right wing coup attempt to take over the government in Aug. ’91 (this event particularly interested me because my Russian friend, Yury Pelushonok, told me he was to have hosted the 1st. Beatles show broadcast across Russia that very day,and was stopped, but it was later re-instated). Yeltsin survived the attempt and consolidated his power. And he became the “darling” of the West, with Gorbachev being overshadowed. But, Cohen, maintains that Yeltsin was not quite the reformer he was portrayed. And soon the elites not only started dismantling the Communist Party but the whole Soviet Union, making sure they got the spoils themselves, with the rise of the capitalist oligarchs (which again the West embraced). Bill Clinton and Yeltsin became “buddies”. Then the two liberals proceed to ignore the agreements reached before( for example, Gorbachev had agreed to the Berlin Wall coming down in’89, and in exchange, NATO was not to encroach on Russia’s borders). But soon Clinton had intervened in Bosnia and NATO had positioned missiles in Poland. And the two Bush administrations continued these same policies. The “shock therapy “approach and economic chaos of Yeltsin and his cronies led to the almost overnight falling apart of the Soviet Union. Meanwhile the West gloated over Russia’s and Communism’s failures.
And when the Orange Revolution started in former Soviet republics like Georgia in 2003, they tried to get them to move toward the West and NATO.
Professor Cohen argues that when Putin took over after Yeltsin, he became portrayed as the worst evil yet. But Cohen maintains that Putin is probably just reacting to these threats on his borders in regions with a long-standing history and ethnic connections to Russia, as almost any Russian leader would. Much as Kennedy did when Khrushchev placed missiles in Cuba in the 60’s. Putin feels the West has lied to him and it’s not just his KGB background; there are likely even more right wing operators watching. Another Cold War could be just as dangerous.
Cohen raises a whole different perspective on what is happening in the Ukraine these days. Interestingly, Bill Clinton, said recently, that on everything he had discussed with Putin privately, Putin had kept his word. This is despite Hillary’s faux pas, when she compared Putin to Hitler. So is Putin the schoolyard bully that Gessen describes in her book on Pussy Riot or the evil empire restorer that most the Western politicians and media make him out to be? And it appears that the Obama administration is still stuck in that policy. We shall soon see.
RSS Feed