Forty years ago tomorrow, on March 11, 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev ascended to lead the Soviet Union, beginning a five-and-a-half-year tenure that would transform his country and the world.
Just eleven months earlier, the Soviet leadership had passed over the energetic, 54-year-old Gorbachev, a regional official with a reputation for challenging the common wisdom and thinking outside of the box, to install a frail septuagenarian who would not live out his first year in office. But reality soon compelled the ossified Kremlin elite to turn to the dynamic politician who, together with a new generation of younger officials, immediately began a root-and-branch transformation of the Soviet system, economic, political, and societal.
In just a few years, Gorbachev oversaw profound economic reform (perestroika), political democratization, and foreign policy “new thinking” that touched all corners of the USSR, all Soviet bloc countries, and all continents. Few leaders in our time—or any era—have had such a consequential impact on global politics in such a short time.
But does the “Gorbachev phenomenon” have relevance today, in a world that is vastly changed, changed in no small measure due to Gorbachev’s own actions?
The answer is yes.
The Gorbachev Phenomenon
The 1985-91 Gorbachev period saw the USSR engulfed in dramatic struggle as forces of profound change confronted powerful resistant forces that many then believed would never change. Important features of Soviet authoritarian power gave way, an openness emerged unseen in Soviet history, and these profound changes spilled over into allied Soviet states, even impacting adversaries such as the United States.
However, domestic resistance to Gorbachev’s efforts was strong, and an attempted coup in August 1991 ultimately ended Gorbachev’s rule. By January 1992, the Soviet Union was no more.
Much had changed due to Gorbachev’s efforts, but much remained. Serious questions confront us. Did Gorbachev have the right vision, policies, and resolve to move Russia and other Soviet republics out of their Marxist-Leninist reality? Or had the USSR’s last leader taken on too much? Was his vision to reform the Soviet Union flawed, were his efforts ultimately only “half measures,” and had he been shown to lack the strength to bully elites and society into making needed changes?
Many contrasting judgments about Gorbachev and his legacy, both positive and negative, and from inside and outside Russia, have been offered since Gorbachev’s fall. But today, after two generations—where a generation equals 20 years, hence 40 years—we can more fully appreciate what Gorbachev’s efforts to change his country and the world yielded. We can see that Gorbachev’s vision and actions profoundly changed both Russia and the world.
The fast-paced challenge of today’s world puts distance between us and the Gorbachev phenomenon, with his 20th-century legacy receding as the 21st century advances. What insights should we draw?
Inflection Point
Today, as over the past forty years, Russians and Americans hold diametrically opposed assessments of Gorbachev’s legacy. Russians emphasize the ruin of their country’s economy and the Soviet collapse, while Americans emphasize the opening of the Soviet society and political democratization. Where Russians see managerial weakness, Americans see political vision.
Where Russians see caution, Americans see principled decision-making. Gorbachev’s actions led to instability and anarchy, worsened by Gorbachev’s successor, Boris Yeltsin, which Russians refer to as a “Time of Troubles.” Russians acknowledge Gorbachev as among Russia’s most consequential leaders, but they overwhelmingly judge him as their country’s worst leader in modern history. In contrast, no Russian leader is as respected – and liked – by Americans as is Gorbachev. After leaving office, Gorbachev stood as a respected statesman worldwide while isolated and ignored at home.
But Gorbachevian “new thinking” about international security and the conduct of post-Cold War global life profoundly affected the international system, extending beyond Russia to encompass the US and West, China, and the Global South. Gorbachev moved beyond his own country’s traditional thinking to cast aside ideology in the crafting of foreign policy. He challenged the common wisdom around the Cold War East-West struggle.
He set out a more sophisticated definition of national security for all states. Gorbachev understood that both East and West confronted common environmental and security challenges and that a more substantial global institutional-legal structure would enable all states to tackle their interconnected problems. By his words and deeds, Gorbachev showed that taking risks, challenging old shibboleths, engaging long-time adversaries, and pushing new ideas could yield constructive results. Gorbachev fell from power for his efforts, and in his own country, he fell from grace. Gorbachev continued to share ideas for the rest of his life in books, presentations, and even teaching. His 2022 death garnered only passing attention and a modest funeral.
We are better positioned today, forty years after Gorbachev came on the scene, to seriously assess just what the Gorbachev phenomenon wrought. Gorbachev accomplished much at home and abroad; the USSR was forever changed, with Russia transformed and a new global security architecture emerged. Observers can debate what Russia’s domestic transformation yielded. Russians and most in the Global South offer positive assessments of the contemporary Russian economy, policy, and society.
We in the US are more measured and even critical. However, few hanker back to the “good old days” of Soviet power, and most observers still see the potential for future advancement in Russia. Meanwhile, the contemporary international system confronts many perplexing problems. There is a more common understanding of the problems we face, and there is far more engagement among states, including adversaries.
Are Gorbachev and his legacy relevant today? They are. But the Gorbachev phenomenon is multifaceted and complicated. Looking back, we should use common sense and adopt a dispassionate stance, not be overwhelmed by a single development, but take in the complexity of Gorbachev and his time. There are individuals whose actions profoundly affect our human experience. Mikhail Gorbachev was one such individual, and the impact of his actions continues to be felt.
About the Author: John P. Willerton
John P. (Pat) Willerton is a professor of political science at the University of Arizona whose professional interests focus on comparative politics, with attention to Russia and other FSU (Former Soviet Union) countries. He earned his Ph.D. at the University of Michigan, began his career at Michigan State University, and joined the University of Arizona in 1988. His research and teaching interests are primarily concentrated on Russian elite politics, the Russian federal executive, semi-presidentialism in Russia and France, and Russia’s relations with the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and FSU countries. He is the author of a scholarly book and 50 articles and chapters. He regularly teaches the large lecture general education “Politics of Happiness” course, upper-division courses on Russian domestic politics, Russian foreign policy, and comparative political elites (with emphasis on Russia, France, Iran, and the US). His graduate course offerings regularly include a comparative politics proseminar and an occasional advanced seminar on Russian and FSU politics.
