Gorbachev's Lecture at Oxford University, 1997, Natasha Assa

From MemoryArchive

Who: Natasha Assa
What: Gorbachev's Lecture at Oxford University
When: 1997
Where: Oxford, UK

My civic awakening began in 1985-86 when it became clear that the new leadership of the Communist Party would take a different stance to domestic and foreign policy. Gorbachev came to power after several of his predecessors died in office. I remember as an undergraduate of Moscow State University we were required to attend those funerals. Brezhnev (1982), Andropov (1984), Chernenko (1985).

For hours we stood in line of mourners awaiting to see the corpse smothered in flowers and funeral drapery. All died of natural causes after having taken office in old age and in ill health. Chernenko almost from the start was presented before the cameras as someone risen (by doctors) from the deathbed and barely able to hold up in public. Andropov died of some terminal disease that we were not allowed to know but which certainly plagued him when he assumed high office. Brezhnev of course died after 18 years in office as a General Secretary of the Communist Party. Already in 1979 he revealed to French President Valery Giscard D'Estenne that his ill health did not permit full involvement in state affairs, but that his comrades insisted for him to stay. All of this of course created an impression that the leadership of the country was symbolically "sick" and "dying" of the very system they presumed to uphold.

The decline of planned economy resulting in shortages of the war-time variety indicated that things were really going to get grim before too long. Thus Andropov was vehemently calling for "tightening the belts" and "hunting down" those who could afford not to work, etc. etc. A dark cloud was gathering before the storm.

And yet suddenly in April of 1985 when Gorbachev came to power, things began to change for the better. Not that goods started to re-appear in stores - no, that would not happen for several years yet - but the sense of an impending gloom suddenly vanished. Our professors were increasingly outspoken about the state of the economy in the country and how the laws of supply and demand could be brought into "equilibrium" by monetary and employment policies. The notion of supply and demand resonated with us deeply - it was something totally different from the "expropriation of labour" that we grew accustomed to when talking about Marxian capitalism. We began to read new articles indicating that our economy was out of sink with demand - over-producing in one area and under-producing in another.

Before long we heard that the country is now on a course to "perestroika" and "glasnost", that we did not quite understand at once but that began to show in the changes around us. The first thing that everybody noticed was a flood of previously classified information about Stalin and Lenin. Memoirs of the former party leaders were published to try to re-capture an alternative course of Russia's socialist development. Almost all agreed that rapid industrialization was attained at the cost of agriculture and that more money should be spent to recover the depressed areas of Russian countryside. Going "country" was all very well and good, but it was soon discovered that we were desperately behind western industry and that we could never catch up with the west unless much more money was spent on industrial innovation and investment.

Then the next thing we heard was that of course innovation requires free intellectual labour and that a new system of civic and political liberties should be created. As a first step to this system Gorbachev renounced Soviet support of oppressive regimes in Eastern Europe and other parts of the world. This had opened floodgates from the Soviet Block and the news of breakaway countries began to reach the headlines. Inside Russia prices began to sore, apparently attempting to "balance" the unyielding demand and supply. Russian armies, millions of them, began to come home to an economy in complete disarray. My family, typical Soviet intelligentsia that never saw a dime besides their paycheck, began to look for opportunities to travel abroad and sell whatever they could for hard currency.

The younger generation, also turned away from the traditional "school-college-job-for-life" pattern to the more adventurous "let's go to Turkey or China and bring some glitzy stuff home". Before long the Soviet Union was dead and Gorbachev resigned as its first President. Russia's pride in its economy and foreign policy was also dead. For me, perestrioka resulted in one cherished opportunity: I could go to study abroad and then immigrate. In 1997 I was in London studying for my PhD when I attended Gorbachev's lecture in Oxford. Next to me was sitting the editor of Gorbachev's mega-selling memoirs and he asked me candidly whether I liked Gorbachev. Equally candidly I said "No" and in a flash forfeited an opportunity to be invited to dinner with the great man.

He could not fathom my response - here I was sitting pretty in Oxford pursuing a PhD, a situation completely inconceivable for me only ten years ago. The man who made it possible was on stage ranting on about how he wanted change and how he achieved it. I listened and empathized with his notions that "something HAD to be done, something HAD to be changed, that it was no longer possible to live the way we lived." I could not agree more thus far. But I was ill at ease when the audience rose in a storm of applause as though single-handedly he brought prosperity and happiness to our much-suffered country. Gorbachev may have been "cute" with all his high notions and good intentions, but he was not special. Russia though is not "cute", but it is special and it will deal with its problems without him.