THE COLD WAR

1. KRUSHCHEV AND
STALIN
When Stalin died in 1953 the Communists still retained their iron grip on Eastern
Europe. By 1955 a new leader, Nikita Khrushchev, had emerged in the Soviet Union.
How was Khrushchev different from Stalin?
Nikita Khrushchev
 Born 1894, the son of a coal miner.
 Fought in the Red Army during the Civil War 1922-23
 Afterwards worked for the Party in Moscow. Was awarded the Order of Lenin
for his work building the Moscow underground railway.
 In 1949 he was appointed by the Communist Party to run Soviet agriculture.
 There was a power struggle after Stalin's death as to who would succeed him.
Khrushchev had come out on top by 1955 and by 1956 he felt secure enough in
his position to attack Stalin’s reputation.
 Became Prime Minister in 1958.
 Took his country close to nuclear war with USA during the Cuban missile crisis
in 1962
 Was forced into retirement in 1964.
 Died 1971
Nikita Khrushchev was very different from Stalin. He talked of peaceful co-existence
with the West. He made plans to reduce expenditure on arms. He also said he wanted to
improve the living standards of ordinary Soviet citizens and those of eastern
Europe. He even relaxed the iron control of the Soviet Union. He closed down
Cominform. He seemed to be signaling to the countries of eastern Europe that they
would be allowed much greater independence to control their own affairs.

2. At the Communist Party International in 1956 Khrushchev made an astonishing
attack on Stalin. He dredged up the gory evidence of Stalin’s purges and denounced him
as a wicked tyrant who was an enemy of the people and kept all power to himself.
Khrushchev went on to say much worse things about Stalin and began a programme
of ‘de-Stalinisation’. Those in eastern Europe who wanted greater freedom from the
Soviet Union saw hopeful times ahead.
However, in 1955 Khrushchev created the Warsaw Pact. This was a military alliance
of the Communist countries. It was similar to the NATO. The members would defend
each other if one was attacked. The Warsaw Pact included all the Communist countries
of eastern Europe except Yugoslavia but it was dominated by the Soviet Union. One of
the Soviet Union’s aims in eastern Europe had always been to create a buffer against
attack from the west. Khrushchev continued this policy.
Khrushchev’s criticism of Stalin sent a strong signal to opposition groups in
eastern Europe that they could now press for changes. The first opposition
Khrushchev had to deal with as a leader was in Poland.
A Soviet cartoon of 1960. Krushchev is destroying the "Cold
War"

3. POLAND 1956 HUNGARY 1956
Poland 1956
In the summer of 1956 demonstrators attacked the Polish police, protesting about the
fact that the government had increased food prices but not wages. Fifty-three workers
were killed in riots in Poznan. The Polish government itself was unable to control the
demonstrators. Alarmed, Khrushchev moved troops to the Polish border.
By October 1956 Poland was becoming more stabilized. A new leader, Wladyslav
Gemlike, took charge on 10 October. Gomulka had been a popular leader of the
Communist resistance. However, he was also a nationalist. He had not seen eye to eye
with the Polish Communists, who were totally loyal to Stalin. Khrushchev
accepted Gomulka’s appointment - a popular move in Poland for the next couple of
years. There was also an agreement that the Communists would stop persecuting
members of the Catholic Church. The RedArmy withdrew to the Polish border and
left the Polish army and government to sort things out.
Hungary, October 1956
Khrushchev was soon put to the test again in Hungary in October 1956
Why was there opposition in Hungary?
Hungary was led by a hard-line Communist called Mátyás Rákosi. Hungarians hated
the restrictions which Rákosi’s Communism imposed on them. Most Hungarians felt
bitter about losing their freedom of speech. They lived in fear of the secret police. In
June a group within the Communist Party opposed Rákosi. He appealed to Moscow for
help. He wanted to arrest 400 leading opponents.

4. How did the Soviet Union respond?
Moscow would not back Rákosi . The Kremlin ordered Rákosi to be retired ‘for health
reasons’.
However, the new leader, Ernö Gerö, was no more acceptable to the Hungarian people.
Discontent came to a head with a huge student demonstration on 23 October, when
the giant statue of Stalin in Budapest was pulled down. The USSR allowed a new
government to be formed under the well-respected Imre Nagy. Soviet troops and tanks
stationed in Hungary since the war began to withdraw.
Nagy’s government began to make plans. They would hold free elections, create
impartial courts, restore farmland to private ownership. They wanted the total
withdrawal of the Soviet army from Hungary. They also planned to leave the Warsaw
Pact and declare themselves neutral in the Cold War struggle between East and West.
There was widespread optimism that the new American President Eisenhower, who had
been wartime commander of all Allied forces in western Europe, would support the new
independent Hungary.
Khrushchev at first seemedready to accept some reforms. However, he could not
accept Hungary leaving the Warsaw Pact. In November 1956 thousands of Soviet
troops and tanks moved into Budapest. However, unlike in Poland the Hungarians did
not give in. Two weeks of bitter fighting followed. Some estimates put the number
of Hungarians killed at 30, 000. However, the latest research suggests
about 3,000 Hungarians and 7- 8,000 Russians were killed. Another 200,000
Hungarians fled across the border into Austria to escape the Communist forces. Imre
Nagy and his fellow leaders were imprisoned and then executed.
The revolt began as a series of demonstrations that remained
peaceful until about 10.30 Tuesday evening (23rd). The
trouble began in front of the Budapest radio station when a
delegation that had entered it to request the broadcasting of
its sixteen points was arrested by political policemen who
were guarding the building.
The crowd demanded their release and tried to storm the
doors. At first the policemen tired to drive the demonstrators
back with tear gas. Then they opened fire.
When this correspondent arrived at midnight the radio station
had been stormed. Its lower floors had been occupied by
demonstrators. A group of students has mounted a balcony in
front of the building, and hung out Hungarian flags.
Shortly before midnight seven heavy Hungarian tanks
rumbled into the area. Some of the demonstrators fled. But

5. the leading tank displayed the national flag. Its crew cheered
the demonstrators, a number of them mounted to shake hands
with the soldiers…It was obvious that the army was refusing
to make cause with the political police. An hour later several
insurgents were observed with Tommy guns in their hands.
They said that they had obtained them from the soldiers.
Meanwhile, the crowd was beginning to grow more violent.
At 1.30 a.m. the crowd stormed the plant of the principal
communist newspaper…others stormed a Soviet bookstore.
John MacCormac, New York Times, 27 October
24 October:
(4.30 a. m.) Dear Listeners, we wish you good morning!
Listen please, to our morning broadcast.
Fascists reactionary elements have started an armed attack
against our public buildings and have also attacked our
police. In the interest of restoring order, and until further
notice is given, we announce that it is forbidden to hold any
meetings, rallies and parades.
(6.30 a. m.) The suppression of looting counter-revolutionary
groups is still under way
(9 a. m.) Attention! Attention!
The dastardly armed attack of counter-revolutionary gangs
during the night has created an extremely serious situation.
The bandits have broken into factories and public buildings
and have murdered many civilians.
Radio Kossuth
The Government was unprepared for these attacks and has
therefore applied for help to the Soviet formations stationed
in Hungary under the terms of the Warsaw Treaty.

6. Tanks in the streets of Budapest in 1956
A Russian tank has been captured by the Hungarians

7. Protesters have wrecked a statue of Stalin
The Hungarian resistance was crushed in two weeks. The Western powers protested to
the USSR but sent no help; they were too pre-occupied with the Suez crisis in the
Middle East.
Khrushchev put János Kádar in place as a leader. He cautiously introduced some of the
reforms being demanded by the Hungarian people. However, he did not waver on the
central issue - membership of the Warsaw Pact.
WHY WAS THERE
OPPOSITION IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA?
HOW DID THE SOVIET UNION
RESPOND?
Twelve years after the brutal suppression of the Hungarians, Czechoslovakia posed a
similar challenge to Soviet domination of eastern Europe. Khrushchev had been ousted
from leadership in the USSR. A new leader Leonid Brezhnev had replaced him.

8. Why was there opposition in Czechoslovakia?
In the 1960s a new mood developed in Czechoslovakia. People examined what had
been happening in 20 years of Communist control and they did not like what they saw.
In 1967 the old Stalinist leader was forced to resign. Alexander Dubcek became the
leader of the Czech Communist Party. He proposed a policy of ‘Socialism with a
human face’ which meant less censorship, more freedom of speech and a reduction in
the activities of the secret police. Dubcek was a committed Communist, but he believed
that Communism did not have to be as restrictive as it had been before he came to
power. Dubcek had learned the lessons of the Hungarian uprising and reassured
Brezhnev that Czechoslovakia had no plans to pull out of the Warsaw Pact or Comecon.
The - such as writers and university lecturers - who felt that the Communists had failed
to lead the country forward. Censorship was eased which alloweCzech opposition was
led by intellectuals d then to launch attacks on the Communist leadership, pointing out
how corrupt and useless they were. Communist government ministers were ‘grilled’ on
live television and radio about how they were running the country and about events
before 1968. This period became known as ‘The Prague Spring’ because of all the new
ideas that seemed to be appearing everywhere.
How did the Soviet Union respond?
The Soviet Union was very suspicious of the changes taking place in Czechoslovakia.
Czechoslovakia was one of the most important countries in the alliance. It was centrally
placed, and had the strongest industry. The Soviets were worried that the new ideas in
Czechoslovakia might spread to other countries in eastern Europe.
They tried various methods of response. To start with they tried to slow Dubcek down.
They argued with him. Soviet, Polish and East German troops performed very public
training exercises right on the Czech border. They thought about imposing economic
sanctions - for example cancelling wheat exports to Czechoslovakia - but didn’t because
they thought that the Czechs would ask for help from the West.
In July they had a summit conference with the Czechs. They agreed some specific
measures including that a Social Democratic Party would be made illegal, and Dubcek

9. promised these measures would be in place by the end of August. Two days later a
conference of all the other Warsaw Pact countries produced a vague declaration simply
calling on Czechoslovakia to maintain political stability.
Then 17 days later on 20 August 1968, to the stunned amazement of the Czechs and
the outside world, Soviet tanks moved into Czechoslovakia.
There was little violent resistance although many Czechs refused to cooperate with the
Soviet troops. Dubcek was removed from power. His experiment in Communism with a
human face had not failed, it had simply proved unacceptable to the other Communist
countries.

10. Dubcek always expressed loyalty to Communism and the Warsaw Pact but Brezhnev
was very worried that the new ideas coming out of Czechoslovakia would spread. He
was under pressure from the leaders of other Communist countries in eastern Europe,
particularly Ulbricht in East Germany. These leaders feared that their own people
would demand the same freedom which Dubcek had allowed in Czechoslovakia.
Indeed, in 1968 Albania resigned from the Warsaw Pact because it thought that the
Soviet Union itself had become too liberal since Stalin died. Brezhnev made no attempt
to force Albania back into the Pact because he did not consider it an important country.
The Czechoslovakia episode gave rise to the Brezhnev Doctrine. The essentials of
Communism were defined as a) a one-party system; and b) to remain a member of
the Warsaw Pact.
Unlike Nagy in Hungary, Dubcek was not executed. But he was gradually down-graded.
First he was sent to be ambassador to Turkey, then expelled from the Communist Party
altogether. Photographs showing him as a leader were ‘censored’.
Before the invasion Czechoslovakia’s mood had been one of optimism. After it was
despair. A country which had been pro-Soviet now became resentful of the Soviet
connection. Ideas which could have reformed Communism were silenced. Twenty years
later, Gorbachev, the leader of the USSR, questioned the invasion, and was himself
spreading the ideas of the Prague Spring which the Soviet Union had crushed.
THE SITUATION IN BERLIN
WHY WAS THE BERLIN WALL
BUILT?
The situation in Berlin
In 1958, perhaps encouraged by the USSR’s apparent lead in some areas of the nuclear
arms race, Khrushchev announced that the USSR no longer recognized the rights

11. of the western powers in West Berlin. When the Americans made it clear that they
would resist any attempt to push them out, Khrushchev did not press the point.
In 1960 it was Khrushchev’s turn to feel aggrieved when an American U-2 spy
plane was shot down over a thousand miles inside Russia. President Eisenhower
declined to apologize, defending America’s right to make reconnaissance flights,
and the affair ruined the summit conference which was about to begin in Paris.
In 1961 Khrushchev again suggested, this time to the new American President John
F. Kennedy, that the west should withdraw from Berlin. The communists were
embarrassed at the large number of refugees escaping from East Germany into West
Berlin—these averaged about 200,000 a year, and totalled over 3 million since
1945.
When Kennedy refused, the Berlin Wall was erected (August 1961), a 28-mile-long
monstrosity across the entire city, effectively blocking the escape route.
Families were divided, Berliners were unable to go to work, chaos and confusion
followed. Border guards kept a constant check on any one trying to cross the wall. They
had orders to shoot people trying to defect. Hundreds were killed over the next three
decades.
The wall not only divided Berlin. Over the following years it became a symbol of
division – the division of Germany, the division of Europe, the division of
Communist East and democratic West. The Communists presented the wall as
being a protective shell around East Berlin. The West presented it as a prison wall.

12. Why was the Berlin Wall built?
You have already seen how important Berlin was as a battle ground of the Cold War.
In 1961 it also became the focus of the Soviet Union´s latest attempt to maintain control
of its east European satellites.
The crushing of the Hungarian uprising had confirmed for many people in eastern
Europe that it was impossible to fight the communists. For many it seemed the only way
of escaping the repression was to leave the country altogether. Some wished to leave
eastern Europe for political reasons - they hated the Communists – while many more
wished to live for economic reasons. As standards of living in Eastern Europe fell
further and further behind the West, the attraction of going to live in a capitalist state
was very great.
The contrast was particularly in the divided city of Berlin. Living standards were
tolerable in the East, but just a few hundred meters away in West Berlin, East Germans
could see one of the prize exhibits of capitalist West Germany – shops full of goods,
great freedom, great wealth and great variety. It had been deliberately made so by the
Western powers. They had poured massive investment in to Berlin. East Germans could
also watch West German television.
In the 1950’s East Germans were still able to travel freely into West Berlin. From there
they could travel on into West Germany. Those who were defecting were very often
highly skilled workers or well-qualified managers. The Communist government could
not afford to lose this high quality people. More importantly from Khrushchev’s point
of view, the sight of thousands of Germans fleeing Communist rule for a better life
under capitalism undermined Communism in East Germany and Communism
generally.

13. REASONS FOR
THE THAW
HOW DID THE
THAW SHOW ITSELF?
A PARTIAL
THAW
Reasons for the Thaw
1 The death of Stalin

14. The death of Stalin was probably the starting point of the thaw, because it brought to the
forefront new Russian leaders— Malenkov, Bulganin and Khrushchev—who wanted to
improve relations with the USA. Their reasons were possibly connected with the fact
that by August 1953 the Russians as well as the Americans had developed a hydrogen
bomb; the two sides were now so finely balanced that international tensions had to be
relaxed if nuclear war was to be avoided.
Nikita Khrushchev explained the new policy in a famous speech (February 1956) in
which he criticized Stalin and said that ‘peaceful co-existence’ with the west was not
only possible but essential: ‘there are only two ways—either peaceful co-existence or
the most destructive war in history. There is no third way.’ This did not mean that
Khrushchev had given up the idea of a communist-dominated world; this would still
come, but it would be achieved when the Western powers recognized the superiority of
the Soviet economic system, not when they were defeated in war. In the same way, he
hoped to win neutral states over to communism by lavish economic aid.
2 McCarthy discredited
Anti-communist feelings in the USA, which had been stirred up by Senator Joseph
McCarthy, began to moderate when McCarthy was discredited in 1954. It had gradually
become clear that McCarthy himself was something of a fanatic, and when he began to
accuse leading generals of having communist sympathies, he had gone too far. The
Senate condemned him by a large majority and he foolishly attacked the new
Republican President Eisenhower for supporting the Senate. Soon afterwards
Eisenhower announced that the American people wanted to be friendly with the Soviet
people.
How did the Thaw show itself?
1 The first signs
 The signing of the peace agreement at Panmunjon ended the Korean War (July
1953)
 And the end of the war in Indo-China in 1954 were the first signs.
2 The Russians made important concessions in 1955
 They agreed to give up their military bases in Finland.

15.  They lifted their veto on the admission of sixteen new member states to the UN.
 The quarrel with Yugoslavia was healed when Khrushchev paid a visit to Tito.
 The Cominform was abandoned, suggesting more freedom for the satellite
states.
3 The signing of the Austrian State Treaty (May 1955)
This was most important. At the end of the war in 1945 Austria was divided into four
zones of occupation, with the capital, Vienna, in the Russian zone. Unlike Germany, she
was allowed her own government because she was viewed not as a defeated enemy but
as a sate liberated from the Nazis. The Austrian government had only limited powers,
and the problem was similar to the one in Germany: whereas the three Western
occupying powers organized the recovery of their zones, the Russians insisted on
squeezing reparations, mainly in the form of food supplies, from theirs. No permanent
settlement seemed likely, but early in 1955 the Russians were persuaded, mainly by the
Austrian government, to be more co-operative. They were also afraid of a merger
between West Germany and western Austria.
As a result of the agreement:
 All occupying troops were withdrawn
 Austria became independent with her 1937 frontiers
 She was not to unite with Germany
 Her armed forces were strictly limited
 She was to remain neutral in any disputes between east and west. This meant
that she could not join either NATO or the European Economic Community
 One point that Austrians were unhappy about was the loss of the German-
speaking area of the South Tyrol which Italy was allowed to keep
A Partial Thaw
Khrushchev’s policy was a curious mixture which western leaders often found difficult
to understand. While making the conciliatory moves described above, he was quick to
respond to anything which seemed to be a threat to the east, and he had no intention of
relaxing Russia’s grip on the satellite states. The Hungarians discovered this to their
cost in 1956 when a rising in Budapest against the communist government was
ruthlessly crushed by Russian tanks. Sometimes he seemed to be prepared to see how
far he could push the Americans before they stood up to him:

16.  The Warsaw Pact (1955) was signed between Russia and her satellite states
shortly after West Germany was admitted to NATO. The Pact was a mutual
defense agreement which the west took as a gesture against West Germany’s
membership of NATO.
 The Russians continued to build up their nuclear armaments.
 The situation in Berlin caused more tension (see below)
 Most provocative of all was when Khrushchev installed Soviet missiles in Cuba,
less than a hundred miles from the American coast (1962).
The situation in Berlin
In 1958, perhaps encouraged by the USSR’s apparent lead in some areas of the nuclear
arms race, Khrushchev announced that the USSR no longer recognized the rights of the
western powers in West Berlin. When the Americans made it clear that they would
resist any attempt to push them out, Khrushchev did not press the point.
In 1960 it was Khrushchev’s turn to feel aggrieved when an American U-2 spy plane
was shot down over a thousand miles inside Russia. President Eisenhower declined to
apologize, defending America’s right to make reconaissance flights, and the affair
ruined the summit conference which was about to begin in Paris.
In 1961 Khrushchev again suggested, this time to the new American President John F.
Kennedy, that the west should withdraw from Berlin. The communists were
embarrassed at the large number of refugees escaping from East Germany into West
Berlin—these averaged about 200,000 a year and totalled over 3 million since 1945.
WHY WAS
SOLIDARITY A
THREAT
WHY DID
THE POLISH
GOVERNMENT
AGREE TO ITS
DEMANDS?
LECH
WALESA
WHY DID
THE POLISH
CLAMP DOWN
ON SOLIDARITY?

17. Why was Solidarity a threat to Soviet control?
Though the years of communism control of Poland there were regular protests in both
Hungary and Czechoslovakia they tended to be about wages or food prices. In 1956, then
again in 1970, such protests earned Polish workers increased wages, reduced prices or
both. In these protests they did not try to get rid of the government or challenge the Soviet
Union. They simply wanted to improve their standard living. The workers were keenly
aware that they would lagged behind workers in the West. The government for their part
seemed aware that they would only survive if they could satisfy the Poles’ demands for
consumer goods.
Through the 1970s polish industry performed well. Most Poles were becoming better off
and were finding it easier to buy what they wanted. In a survey in 1975 two thirds of Poles
said that the supply of poultry, bread and dairy products was good or very good. Even
more importantly, 60 per cent expected their standard of living ti rise still further in future
years. They were generally optimistic and seemed happy with the kind of communist state
that had developed in Poland.
But in the late 1970s the Polish economy hit a crisis. 1976 was a bad year. 1979 was awful
– the worst year for Polish industry since Communism was introduced. The government
seemed to have no new ideas about how to solve Poland’s problem – just more
propaganda. Workers patience was sorely tried by the government’s propaganda, telling
them how well Poland was when it clearly wasn’t.
As in most Communist countries there were official trade unions, but many workers found
them ineffective and in the late 1970s Polish workers were involved in setting up a small,
independent trade unions. In the summer of 1980 strikes broke out all over the country.
Over the next few ears Poland went though a severe crisis.
July 1980 Government announces increases in the price of meat.
Strikes follow.
August 1980 Workers at the Gdansk shipyard, led by Lech Walesa, put
forward 21 demands to the government including free
trade unions and the right to strike. They also start a free
trade union called Solidarity
30 August 1980 The government agrees all 21 of Solidarity’s demands.
September 1980 Solidarity members grow to 3.5 million.

18. October 1980 Solidarity membership is 7 millions. Solidarity officially
recognised by the government
January 1981 Membership of Solidarity reaches its peak at 9.4 million –
more than a third of all workers in Poland. If you exclude
farmers, 60 per cent of the Polish workforces are
members.
February 1981 General Jaruzelski, leader o the arm, is made head of the
Communist Party ad prime Minister of Poland.
March 1981 After negotiations with Jaruzelski, Walesa calls off a
strike at Byfgoszc. Many Solidarity members are unhappy
about this. They see it as giving in to the government.
May 1981 ‘Rural Solidarity’ is set up as a farmers union.
September 1981 Lech Welesa elected chairman of Solidarity. The
Solidarity Congress produced an ‘open letter’ to workers
of Eastern Europe.
November 1981 Negotiations between Walesa and Jaruzelski to form a
government of ‘National Understanding’ break down.
December 1981 Worried about an increasing chaos Poland Brezhnev
ordered the Red army to carry out ‘training manoeuvres’
on the Polish border; Jaruzelski introduced martial law
(ruled by the army). He puts Welesa and almost 10,000
other Solidarity leaders in prison. He suspends Solidarity.
The workers were unprepared and there was little
resistence. At the mines in Silesia workers astsged a long
sit in, but it ended in tradgedy when the army opened fire.
During December 150,00 Soliaritry memeberes were
taken into custody for ‘preventative and cautionary talks’.
It is any wonder that people are in despair? They must begin
queuing outside the butcher’s early in the morning and they
may still find there is no meat to buy.
We wanted to achieve a free trade union movement which
will allow workers to manage the economy through joint
control with the government
Lech Welesa, leader of Solidarity, speaking in 1980
Thousands of people were dragged from their beds and
ferried through freezing night to prison and concentration

19. camps, while tanks patrolled the snow-covered streets and
storm troopers were deployed in trouble spots.
Communications were cut and a ‘State of War’ declared.
Adam Zamoyski describes the events of December 1981
in The Polish Way, 1987.
Why did the Polish government agree to Solidarity’s demands in 1980?
In the light of all you know about the communist rule of eastern Europe you might be
surprised that the government gave in to solidarity in 1980. There are many reasons for
this.
 The union was the strongest in those industries, which were the most important to
the government. It was strong in shipbuilding and heavy industry – and the
membership was particularly high among the skilled workers and foremen in
those industries. Half of all journalists and film makers also joined.
 In the early stages the union was not seen by its members as an alternative to the
party. More than one million members (30 per cent) of the communist party.
People joined solidarity simply because they thought it would “make things
better” in Poland. In one survey of members in 1981 almost 40 per cent gave this
as they’re reason for joining solidarity, whereas only 5 per cent said that they
joined because solidarity had a better program than the government.
 Lech Walesa was very careful in his negotiations with the government to tread
carefully and not to threaten the Soviet Union. He tried to avoid provoking a
dispute which might bring in the Soviet Union.
 The union was immensely popular. Lech Walesa was a kind of folk hero, and the
government which he lead was seen as a very trustworthy. In a survey in
1981 solidarity was regarded as being as trustworthy as even the catholic church
– which was immensely powerful and popular in Poland. Ninety – five percent of
poles said they trusted solidarity.
 Finally the Soviet Union tolerated events in Poland only because I could not do
anything else. Solidarity had gained support in the west in a way that neither of
the Hungarians or Czech rising had. Walesa was regularly interviewed and
photographed for the western media. Solidarity logos were brought in their

20. million as posters, postcards, even car stickers throughout the capitalist world.
The scale of the movement and the charismatic appeal of Lech Walesa ensured
that he Soviet Union treated the polish crisis cautiously.
Profile: Lech Walesa
 Born in 1943. His father was a farmer.
 Like many of his fellow pupils at school he went to work in the shipyards at
Gdanska. He became an electrician.
 In 1970 he led shipyard workers who joined the strike against price rises.
 In 1976 he was sacked from the shipyard for making malicious statements about
the organization and working climate.
 In 1978 he helped organize a union at another works. Dismissed officially because
of the recession, unofficially because of pressure from above.
 In 1979 he worked for Eltromontage. He was said to be the best automotive
electrician in the business. He was sacked.
 Lead strikes in Gdanska shipyard in the summer of 1980.
 With others he set up solidarity in August 1980 and because its leader soon after.
 He was a committed catholic and earned massive support among the polish people
and overseas
 He was imprisoned by the polish government in 1982.
 In prison he became a symbol of eastern Europe’s struggle against communist
repression. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983.
 In 1989 he became the leader of Poland’s first non-communist government since
the Second World War.

21. Why did the Polish clamp down on Solidarity December 1981?
There were a number of factors, which caused the government to change policy towards
Solidarity.
There were increasing signs that Solidarity was acting as a political party. The government
had been sent secret tapes of a Solidarity meeting at which leaders talked of Solidarity setting
up a new provisional government – without the Communist Party. This formed a direct
challenge to the soviet plan for Eastern Europe. Brezhnev was not prepared to have a
Communist Party within the Soviet bloc to by an independent union.
Poland was sinking into chaos. Meat and fish supply was down by 25 per cent. Almost all
Poles felt the impact of food shortages. Rationing was introduced in April 1981. National
income had fallen by 13 percent each year, industrial production by 11 per cent and foreign
trade by 20 per cent. Wages has increased by less than inflation. Unemployment was rising.
Strikes were continuing long after the Solidarity leadership had ordered them to stop.
Solidarity itself was also tumbling into chaos. There were many different factions. Some felt
that the only way to make progress was to push the Communists harder until they cracked
under the pressure. Against the advice and better judgment of Walesa, they passed a motion
at their October 1981 congress to ‘issue a statement of sympathy and support for all the
downtrodden people of the Soviet bloc to all the nations of the Soviet Union’. It proclaimed
that the Poles were fighting ‘For Your freedom and Ours’. Walesa was well aware how

22. dangerous a course this was, but by then the different factions in Solidarity were threatening
to pull the organization apart and Walesa was no longer able or willing to dedicate them.
The Aftermath
Over the next 12 months Jaruzelski tried to normalize the situation. In place of Solidarity he
pressurized people to join the Patriotic Movement for National Regeneration – if they did not
they might lose their jobs!
From early 1983 he had began releasing jailed Solidarity leaders. However, the friends of
Solidarity in other countries were not impressed. The released Solidarity leaders were
harassed. Some were murdered. Others were hounded from their jobs. In 1983 Jaruzelski even
started a campaign against the Catholic Church. A number of priests were beaten up by the
army and some murdered. After the détente of the 1970s the USA was once again becoming
suspicious of the Soviet Union. The USA and other Western nations imposed trade sanctions
to Poland. Economic chaos followed. The currency was devalued twice. Inflation hit 70
percent.
Despite being outlawed, Solidarity was once reasserting its influence. It was operating almost
openly. It threatened to call a nationwide strike against price rises in 1986 and the government
backed down. Officials from foreign government visited Lech Walesa almost as if he was the
leader of a government-in-waiting and consulted him on whether to ease sanctions against
Poland.
But in 1986 the focus of international attention was drawn away from Solidarity onto a new
threat to Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. This time it came within the Soviet Union
itself – it was Mikhail Gorbachev, the new supreme leader of the Soviet Union.

23. ACTIVITY
WHY DID
HE TRY TO
CHANGE THE
USSR?
PROFILE
WHY DID THE
SOVIET
CONTROL COLLAPSE?
Activity
Sources are all from letters sent to Mikhail Gorbachev in the late 1980s. From the
letters alone, work out as much as you can about Gorbachev.

24.  What kind of person was Gorbachev?
 What changes did he introduce to the Soviet Union?
 What was his policy on eastern Europe?
 What was his attitude to nuclear disarmament?
 What did he think about environmental issues?
 What did he think about human rights?
SOURCE 1
Dear Mr. Gorbachev
I hope you are feeling well after your journey to
Rome to meet Our Leader, Pope John Paul II, with your
lovely lady, Raisa. It was indeed a historical and memorable
occasion. I want to thank you for all you have done. It is
marvelous that…the people in Eastern Europe have been
granted freedom. It is unbelievable how fast all these
wonderful things are happening. We were delighted when
the news reached our ears that the people in Russia now
have the freedom to practice their faith.
Rosalee (aged 4), John (aged 9),
Mary-Lucia Furlong (aged 11), Therese
(Aged 12), Patricia (aged 15), Patrick
(Aged 16) and Majella Furlong (aged 13),
Enniscorthy, Co.Wexford, Ireland, December 1989.
SOURCE 2
My dear Mikhail Gorbaciov
…This is the first time in my life I have ever written
to a politician…You wonder why I am writing to you? It’s
hard to explain. I’m writing to remind you that someone
said fairy tales never come true. You, Mikhail Gorbaciov,
have shown this to be false. I have to tell you this, for love
of the truth. You are the most beautiful fairy tale come true.
All my life I have been observing your wonderful country,
and loving it. I love its history, its culture, its magnificence.
For me, Mother Russia had only one defect.
The only thing that was lacking was you, Mikhail
Gorbaciov! You, the new man…You have broken barriers,

25. crossed mountains, burled down taboos with the force of a
mythical giant. Nothing could stop you!
Flora Pinto d’Albavilla Capaldo, Naples, Italy, 6 October
1988
SOURCE 3
Dear Mr. Gorbachev
… I have been deeply moved by the events that have
taken place in this country since 9 November 1989…
Dear Mr. Gorbachev, I would like to express my
deeply felt thanks for this, for, in the final analysis, it was
you, with your policy of perestroika who set the heavy stone
of politics in motion.
You can have no idea how many people in Germany
revere you and consider you to be one of the greatest
politicians of the present age. On that day when the people
of East Berlin and of East Germany were able to come to us
freely, thousands of people shouted out your name ‘Gorbi,
Gorbi, Gorbi…’
The people fell into each other’s arms and wept for
joy, because at last they were free after forty-five years of
suppression and authoritarian rule under a communist
Stalinist system. This dreadful wall and border, which was
now being opened up and carried away stone by stone, cost
many people their life, and was a source of bitter suffering
for many families.
Roman von Kalckreuth, Berlin, West Germany, 14
February 1990.
SOURCE 4
Dear Gorbaciov and Reagan
We are nine-year-old Italian children, pupils at the
Pero elementary school in the province of Milan.
We saw on television and read in the papers about
your meeting, during which you came to an important
decision: to begin to destroy a small part of your nuclear
weapons. We want you to know that we all heaved a sigh of

26. relief, because we think that all the weapons are dangerous,
useless, damaging and producers of violence, death, fear
and destruction and that their only purpose is to do evil.
We want you to know that we are happy about your
initiative, but we also want to tell you that is not enough.
For there to be true peace all arms must be destroyed.
Children from Pero (Milan), Italy, 16 December 1987
SOURCE 5
RespectedSir
I, a citizen of India, very heartily congratulate you
on the giant step you have initiated towards a more human
and presidential form of government.
I have already read a lot about glasnost and other
policies you have been introducing from time to time in
your country…
Your sincerity, straightforwardness, foresight,
capabilities, fearless nature, an eye for minute details will
set a shining example for centuries to come and you will go
down in the golden annals of history. You are a shining star
on the horizon. The sapling which you have sown will
become a tree for others to climb
Naren R Bhuta, Bombay, India,
SOURCE 6
1 July 1988
Dear General Secretary Gorbachev
I followed the vents of the recent Soviet-American
summit with a mixture of uneasy feelings. My one clear
feeling was admiration of you – of your intellectual energy,
personal strength, and dignity.
Hearing our President’s well-intended but often
condescending lectures to the Soviet Union’s people and
political leadership, I was embarrassed for my country…

27. Your term of office, General Secretary Gorbachev,
has been marked by a straightforward commitment to
address the world we really live in, and to improve it. I
admire your combination of pragmatism and idealism,
which permits you to work for progress while dealing
practically with the regressive elements present in any large
political system…
It seems to me that you face internal obstacles
greater than any American leader does, but perhaps the
Soviet system has provided more groundwork for
perestroika than is clear to Americans.
The ‘tightrope’ that you yourself are walking,
balanced between certain difficult traditions of your society
on one side and Western pressures on the other side, seems
a great and exhausting challenge. But I ask you to remain
strong and to remember that you are not walking it for
yourself alone.
David Bittinger, Wisconsin, USA, 6 June 1988
SOURCE 7
Dear Mr. Gorbachev
May I offer a few comments on your speech of 2
November, in which you reviewed the history of the Soviet
Union? Naturally, I found the discourse of very great
interest, and hope that I have understood its significance…
May I suggest that in your recasting of the view of
Soviet History, there are at least two important things which
would make that effort more credible for those people
outside the Soviet Union who have some understanding of
that history. One would be to more frankly admit the
monstrosity of the tyranny of Stalin – for example, the fact
that he killed more communists that anyone else in history.
The other would be to give recognition to Leon Trotsky as
the person who organized the Red Army and led it to
victory in the 1928-21 Civil War.
Professor Robert Alexander, Rutgers
University, New Brunswick, New Jersey,
USA, 5 November 1987.

28. SOURCE 8
Dear Mr Gorbachev
I would like to express my appreciation for your
efforts to promote peace and understanding between our
two countries. As a token of that appreciation, I am
enclosing a copy of my book, The Human Rights
Movement, which seeks to promote dialogue between the
US and the USSR on human rights…
I agree with you that each country needs to learn
more about each other’s concept of human rights- that is we
need a lot more listening and a lot less confrontation. This is
the basic argument of my book.
Warren Holleman, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston,
Texas, USA, 16 June 1988.
SOURCE 9
Sr D Mijail Gorbachov
… When I see you on television, your face shining
with justice, good nature, firmness and good intentions, I
see… that you are giving the whole world a masterly lesson
on how to eliminate the horrors of war.
All human being love peace, although I do perhaps
more strongly, because at the end of the Spanish Civil War,
my father, mother and brother were sentenced to death by
Military Court for having socialist ideas. My mother and
brother’s sentences were commuted, but my father’s was
not and he was shot.
I am asking you, with all respect and feeling, to
continue along that path and struggle for peace and justice
for the whole world.
(Name withheld), Madrid, Spain, 28 April 1988.

29. Why did Gorbachev try to change the Soviet Union?
Gorbachev became leader of the Soviet Union in 1985. It was in crisis. Its economy was
very weak. It was spending far too much money on the arms race. It was locked into a
costly and unwinnable war in Afghanistan. There had been almost no new thinking
about how to run the soviet economy since the days of Stalin. Each leader had followed
the same policies and had ignored the warning signals that things were going wrong.
Gorbachev was different. He was very concerned about the attitude of Soviet people to
work. The soviet system protected them against economic problems. It guaranteed them
a job and a home – but it also gave them no incentive to work harder or better. Work
standards were slipping. In the days of Stalin people had worked out loyalty or fear, but
they had worked hard. Those days were far gone and were replaced by cynicism. Soviet
citiziens had no loyalty to the government said, but even worse they did not care.
Gorbachev had a particularly worry about alcoholism which was reaching epidemic
proportions in the USSR. Life expectancy of Soviet men had actually declined from 67
in 1964 to 62 in 1980 largely as a result of chronic alcoholism. He brought in advisers
who told him that alcoholism was one reason for the decline in Soviet industry.
Gorbachev was worried that Soviet goods didn’t seem to work properly. He complained
that while Soviet scientists could send a pin-point accurate space probe to investigate a
comet, Soviet refrigerators were shoddy. The standards of building work in the USSR
had declined.
He knew that to solve these problems Communists slogans were not enough. Some
cherished party policies had failed. The economy was begin run by remote bureaucrats
on a trial and error basis. What the Soviet Union needed was a rethink.
He had to be cautious because he faced great opposition from hard-liners in his own
government but gradually he declared his policies.
The two key ideas were glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring). He called
for open debate on government policy and honesty in facing up the problems.
In 1987 his perestroika programme allowed market forces to be introduced into the
Soviet economy. For the first time in 60 years it was no longer illegal to buy and sell for
profit.
He began to cut spending on defence. After almost 50 years on a constant war footing
the Red Army began to shrink. The arms race was an enormous drain on the Soviet
economy at a time when it was in trouble anyway. Gorbachev was realistic enough to
recognise that his country could never hope to outspend the USA on nuclear weapons.

30. He took the initiative. He announced cuts in weapon spending. Two years later the USA
and the USSR signed a treaty to remove most of their missiles from Europe.
Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev
At the same time, Gorbachev brought a new attitude to the USSR’s relations with the
wider world. He withdrew Russian troops from Afghanistan. It had became the USSR’s
Vietnam, draining away Russian lives and resources. He also announced a new policy
on eastern Europe.
SOURCE
The time is a rip for abandoning views on foreign policy,
which are influences by an imperial standpoint. Neither the
Soviet Union nor the USA is able to force its will on others. It
is possible to suppress, compel, bribe, brake or blast, but not
only for a certain period. From the point of view of long-term
big time politics, no one would be able to subordinate others.
That is why only one thing – relations of equality – remains.
All of us must realize this…
This also obliges us to respect one another and everybody.
Gorbachev
speaking
in 1987

31. Profile
Mikhail Gorbachev
 Born in 1931. One grandfather was a kulak – a landowning peasant – who had
been sent to a prison camp by Stalin because he resisted Stalin’s policy of
collectivisation. The other grandfather was a loyal Communist Party member.
 His elder brother was killed in the Second World War.
 Studied law at Moscow University in the 1950’s. Became a persuasive speaker.
 Worked as a local Communist Party official in his home area. By 1978 he was a
member of the Central Committee of the Party and in charge of agriculture.
 In 1980 he joined the Politburo.
 He was a close friend of Andropov, who became Soviet leader in 1983. He
shared many of Andropov’s ideas about reforming the USSR. When Andropov
was leader he was effectively second in command.
 In 1985 he became leader of the USSR.
 In October 1990 he was awarded the Nobel Peace Price.
Why did Soviet control of eastern Europe collapse?

32. Gorbachev was popular but this policies were not successful – or not in the way he
intended. After two years of perestroika it was clear that the economy could not be
modernized as quickly as people wanted.
There are three kind of person in the Soviet Union:
The optimists – they believe in what Gorbachev says;
The pessimists – they are learning English and planning to
emigrate;
The realists – they are taking rifles lessons and getting ready
for civil war.
There are two ways of resolving the crisis of the Soviet
economy:
The realistic way – aliens from outer space will land and
straighten out the mess.
The fantastic way – the Soviet people will sort it out for
themselves.
Two jokes circulating in Russia 1989.
By 1989 it seemed that Gorbachev himself had no real idea of which way to go. Was it
wise, Soviet people asked, to entrust the aircraft (the Soviet state) to a pilot (Gorbachev)
who did no know where he was going and didn’t have any charts? Of course there was
no one else who did have charts – the Soviet Union was entering uncharted territory.
What was clear that it could not turn back. Gorbachev’s reforms had created a demand
for freedom across all the Communist world.
In eastern Europe the leaders of the Communist parties looked on in confusion. Twenty
years earlier the soviets had sent tanks into Czechoslovakia to crush the development of
the very ideas that Gorbachev was now proposing.
In march 1989 Gorbachev made it clear to the Communists leaders in eastern Europe
that they would no longer be propped up by the Red Army and that they would have to
listen to their people. The following months saw an extraordinary turn-around, as you
can see from source 49, which lead to the collapse of the Communism in eastern
Europe.

33. The collapse of Communism in Easter Europe
For most west Europeans now alive, the world has always
ended at the Eat Germany border and the Wall; beyond lay
darkness… The opening of the frontiers declares that the
world has no edge any more. Europe is becoming once more
round and whole.
The Independent, November 1989
Two years after the events in eastern Europe, the USSR itself collapsed, the tide of

34. change swept Gorbachev himself from power in 1992. The former Communist countries
of eastern Europe began discussing entry into the Europe Union