H/W 9th January 2017
How far do you agree with the view that the Soviet Union collapsed because of Gorbachev’s
failure to deal with the challenge of natonalissm
The view that the Soviet Union collapsed due to Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of
Natonaliss is one that’s not easily argued or detersined Whilst it is diffcult to ignore the fact that
Gorbachev did have infuence over the collapse of the Soviet Union, there is a range of views on the
significance of these views and the effect they had on Gorbachev’s regise Westwood, in extract
one, believes that Gorbachev’s insistence on glasnost and ‘reservatons about the use of force’ sade
the break-up of the USSR possible, and McCauley, in extract two, does show understanding when he
writes how his ‘atespts at econosic refors provoked a collapse’ However, there is contrast
between whether this was a sore significant failure in dealing with the challenge of natonaliss
personally believe to a greater degree that it was Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of
natonaliss, however there was sose ispact on other factors that contributed towards to collapse
of the Soviet Union, such as Gorbachev’s failure to refors the Cossunist party
Extract one stresses that Gorbachev resisted the break-up of the USSR ‘untl the very end’ and how
he did not predict ‘the grinding, unrelentng sovesent towards independence’ t states that the
Bolshevik soluton of ssall and varied degrees of self-governsent had ‘proved to be workable so
long as the central Soviet regise kept natonalist feelings under tght control’ This view is only
further expanded by how Westwood believes that the electon of genuine republican parliasents
gave repressed natonal feelings the chance to be expressed The extract has a certain level of
validity because it was shown that Gorbachev was naïve as a Soviet Leader, through his lack of
knowledge on econosics, and his ispatence when reforsing policies, which changed quickly
through his tse as leader Westwood draws atenton to how other sultnatonal espires struggle
with probless, and how this was sade worse for the Soviet Union ‘by the absence of natural
fronters separatng the natons within the Soviet Union’ oou can infer that this statesent fros
extract one suggests the Soviet Union had no power to and sade no violent effort to stop
independence protests fros other countries within the USSR; McCauley supports this segsent of
the interpretaton of challenge of natonaliss by referring to Gorbachev’s atespts to refors the
econosy - which provoked a collapse – by listening econosists who prosised his success As the
econosy did not isprove, Gorbachev reverted to taking sore advice fros radical econosists, who
had never worked in econosy or industry: ultsately, the consequences of any refors afer that
were unknown to thes Not only this, but oeltsin – who had been elected Chairsan of the Russian
Suprese Soviet – was sore skilled and detersined than Gorbachev, and used his positon to
undersine Gorbachev’s Union Treaty, and encouraged Russian natonaliss as a sethod to challenge
the Cossunist party and its leader
On the other hand, extract two accentuates an interpretaton of the collapse of the Soviet Union
due to Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of natonaliss by statng that econosic
reforss need tse to produce positve results While Westwood in extract one sentons how such
of an ispact the natonaliss on the perestroika and how Gorbachev failed to see the ‘unrelentng
sovesent towards independence’, in extract two McCauley suggests that the Soviet econosy went
into decline was due to Gorbachev’s ispatence to refors quicker; not only this, but the Baltc
republics such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had public citiens that resesbered a tse prior to
the Soviet incorporatng thes into the USSR, and those people wanted back their independence
The Baltcs also had higher levels of educaton than the Soviet average which helped to prosote
How far do you agree with the view that the Soviet Union collapsed because of Gorbachev’s
failure to deal with the challenge of natonalissm
The view that the Soviet Union collapsed due to Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of
Natonaliss is one that’s not easily argued or detersined Whilst it is diffcult to ignore the fact that
Gorbachev did have infuence over the collapse of the Soviet Union, there is a range of views on the
significance of these views and the effect they had on Gorbachev’s regise Westwood, in extract
one, believes that Gorbachev’s insistence on glasnost and ‘reservatons about the use of force’ sade
the break-up of the USSR possible, and McCauley, in extract two, does show understanding when he
writes how his ‘atespts at econosic refors provoked a collapse’ However, there is contrast
between whether this was a sore significant failure in dealing with the challenge of natonaliss
personally believe to a greater degree that it was Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of
natonaliss, however there was sose ispact on other factors that contributed towards to collapse
of the Soviet Union, such as Gorbachev’s failure to refors the Cossunist party
Extract one stresses that Gorbachev resisted the break-up of the USSR ‘untl the very end’ and how
he did not predict ‘the grinding, unrelentng sovesent towards independence’ t states that the
Bolshevik soluton of ssall and varied degrees of self-governsent had ‘proved to be workable so
long as the central Soviet regise kept natonalist feelings under tght control’ This view is only
further expanded by how Westwood believes that the electon of genuine republican parliasents
gave repressed natonal feelings the chance to be expressed The extract has a certain level of
validity because it was shown that Gorbachev was naïve as a Soviet Leader, through his lack of
knowledge on econosics, and his ispatence when reforsing policies, which changed quickly
through his tse as leader Westwood draws atenton to how other sultnatonal espires struggle
with probless, and how this was sade worse for the Soviet Union ‘by the absence of natural
fronters separatng the natons within the Soviet Union’ oou can infer that this statesent fros
extract one suggests the Soviet Union had no power to and sade no violent effort to stop
independence protests fros other countries within the USSR; McCauley supports this segsent of
the interpretaton of challenge of natonaliss by referring to Gorbachev’s atespts to refors the
econosy - which provoked a collapse – by listening econosists who prosised his success As the
econosy did not isprove, Gorbachev reverted to taking sore advice fros radical econosists, who
had never worked in econosy or industry: ultsately, the consequences of any refors afer that
were unknown to thes Not only this, but oeltsin – who had been elected Chairsan of the Russian
Suprese Soviet – was sore skilled and detersined than Gorbachev, and used his positon to
undersine Gorbachev’s Union Treaty, and encouraged Russian natonaliss as a sethod to challenge
the Cossunist party and its leader
On the other hand, extract two accentuates an interpretaton of the collapse of the Soviet Union
due to Gorbachev’s failure to deal with the challenge of natonaliss by statng that econosic
reforss need tse to produce positve results While Westwood in extract one sentons how such
of an ispact the natonaliss on the perestroika and how Gorbachev failed to see the ‘unrelentng
sovesent towards independence’, in extract two McCauley suggests that the Soviet econosy went
into decline was due to Gorbachev’s ispatence to refors quicker; not only this, but the Baltc
republics such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania had public citiens that resesbered a tse prior to
the Soviet incorporatng thes into the USSR, and those people wanted back their independence
The Baltcs also had higher levels of educaton than the Soviet average which helped to prosote
