14.03.2001, Klimov I.
|
Ten years have passed since the referendum on maintaining the USSR. It was followed by the Belovezh Treaty, as a result of which the Union ceased to exist. The decade that followed radically changed the life all of people, and was a landmark of the «times of trouble.» Since then, all misfortunes, wars, crises, and the vague future have been perceived as the logical consequence of the collapse of the USSR (the public consciousness is rarely guided by the principle that `after' doesn't mean `due to'»).
What do Russians think about the events that took place ten years ago? How do they estimate them? Is the injury inflicted by the breakdown of the country still painful or not?
About 35% of those surveyed said they didn't vote in the referendum. Another 37% remembered having voted «for» keeping the USSR intact. It is worth noting that 24% didn't respond to the open-ended question (20% don't remember, and 4% were undecided). 40% don't remember the referendum results, while another 13% found it difficult to answer the question.
However, more than three-fourths of those interviewed (79%) regret the end of the USSR. Also, the vast majority believes that Russia lost as a result of this collapse. Only 17% of those who responded to the open-ended question about the positive consequences of this event provided arguments. These express basically geo-economic considerations. Russia ceased being a donor to the republics, and can now handle its own economy.
- «We don't feed useless mouths anymore. They were pulling gas and oil out of us, everything. Let them pay for it now.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
- «They are not sucking juice out of us.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «We got rid of the problems the whole nation had to carry; we won't share with others now.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «All the republics were like a burden. Russia feels better without them.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «High technology industries were left beyond Russia's borders. This is a great minus, while the rest is a great plus."
- "Whatever allied republics we used to travel to, they lived much better than Russia.»
(DFG, Moscow).
Other positive points stem from the conception that with the collapse of the USSR, totalitarian ideology vanished from Russian society, which led to the emergence of democratic freedoms and the independence of the former Soviet nations.
- «Every republic received their rights and responsibilities.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «All people could decide for themselves and improve their economy.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «People felt freer. In the USSR, there was a different ideology, the iron curtain: people were broken away from the world, we were manacled.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
However, when posed the question on the positive side of the USSR's collapse, the respondents either refused to answer or voiced extremely negative appraisals: about 60% didn't respond to the question, while another 22% see nothing positive in this event. Here are typical dialogues from the focus group sessions:
- "Moderator:: – Is there anything positive, anything that you don't regret in the collapse of the USSR?
Natasha: – No.
Marianna: – Hardly anything.
Natalia: – I don't remember.
Yelena: – Life has only worsened.
Vadim: – There are some positive sides, though. Because if we remember... I used to live for some time in Novo-Kuibyshevsk, and the products that were available here we could only buy with ration cards. The situation is better now, you can buy something at least, it's better there now than before.
Galina: – Why? Twice a year we collected money, went to Moscow and brought everything from there. Because the wages were stable, you could save money and go to Moscow, it only took one night to get there.
Vadim: – We received salaries, but could buy nothing on it ...
Marianna: – I'm fifty now, my parents worked until retirement age...» (DFG, Voronezh).
Analysis of the negative appraisals on the consequences of the Soviet Union's breakdown shows that people don't estimate the event as such, but rather ascribe it a symbolic meaning based on estimates of more particular and subjectively significant things. First, the political event of a decade ago is seen through the prism of today's everyday personal troubles and misfortunes:
- "High prices, a bad life"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "Salaries are delayed, there's no money"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "The enterprises broke down"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "No job"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "A graduate can't find a job. Everybody is trading, everyone is obsessed with ideas of how to get money"
(DFG, Moscow).
Second, the collapse of the USSR led to the destruction of a single and empirically clear set of rules for common life. The right to self-determination backfired with a splash of legal controversies. Ethnic conflicts, borders, visas, destabilization of the social and political situation in the former Soviet republics (which used to be «peaceful neighbors») is seen by Russians as increasing indefiniteness and unpredictability, and this abnormality is subjectively tied to the disappearance of the USSR. Not accidentally, in responding to the question: If a referendum were held today on unifying all the former union republics, would you be for or against it?", 72% voted for unification.
- «The republics are divided by borders now: clever Europeans remove them, while we, fools, establish them.»
(response to an open-ended question).
- «Everybody wanted to live on their own...That's why it disintegrated, I guess. Nobody ever thought how it would be. Everybody shouted: we want independence! But now Belarus wants to join us, Ukraine is also thinking it over, Moldavia doesn't want to join Romania. They don't know how to live without Russia.»
(DFG, Moscow).
- «We used to live friendly and peaceful, but what's going on now? War and blood everywhere, and unemployment.»
(DFG, Moscow).
- «The Ukrainians have become very nationalistic. They don't recognize Russians, don't want to speak with them. They have a great conceit of themselves. The people don't want to join. They are best of all. The Baltic states, they are the best nations. They have an exaggerated opinion of themselves.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
- «The people have become more alien after the disintegration. Belarussians and Ukrainians hate Russians, feel hostile to them, especially after the breakdown. They were more welded before. I see it at my dacha: they hate us. Yet they come over here to earn money and work illegally, everybody knows it. So I regret there's no friendship.»
(DFG, Moscow).
- «We were the citizens of a great and friendly country. It was exaggerated to some extent, but such was the ideology. Only in the Baltic republics did we feel uncomfortable. But in the other republics, everything was alright. We had access to the south, we could relax in Central Asia, in Bayram-Ali. All is cut-off now.»
(DFG, Moscow).
The third and very unpleasant thing stemming from the disintegration of the USSR is a sense of «national defeat.» The country lost a strange war of status, world prestige, and varying cultural models. However, recognition of the defeat didn't happen immediately; it happened later when former enemies and present «friends and allies» suddenly lost interest and disregarded the whole they once respected. Russians had to bitterly agree with the truth, «if they are afraid of you, then they respect you.»
- «America won, and those who envied our country.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
- "The country's power is no longer frightening"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "What did they do with a great and powerful country? It became a defective nation"
(response to an open-ended question).
- "Everybody used to be scared of the USSR, but now we are scared."
(response to an open-ended question).
- "Yes, we ourselves are to blame for the defeat. When the Warsaw Pact broke down, they should have done it gradually, gaining profit from it. We left Germany in a rush, having left everything behind. We are to blame ourselves."
(DFG, Voronezh).
- «The country broke down. And we have to pay back the debts for everyone: Moldavia, Ukraine. Not only Russia, but also the other republics took loans. But they won't pay them back.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
Most Russians are sure of the restoration of the union. The focus group participants said this idea can exist as an ideal, but for its implementation, a whole number of problems must be resolved in legal, economic, taxation, social and national spheres. Ignorance of these problems would only worsen the situation in Russia.
In the minds of the «unadapted pessimists» (Adaptation is a group identified by responses to the questions: "Will you be able to increase your living stan-dards in the next year or two, live better than today?" and "Did you find your place in today's life?" optimists - those who responded positively to the 1st question; adapted pessimists - those who responded positively only to the 2nd , negatively or "hard to answer" to the first question; unadapted pessimists - the rest, except those who found it difficult to answer both questions.), the revival of the USSR is associated either with the «good old days,» or with the idea that it would create better economic opportunities for development. On the other hand, the «optimists» (those who consider themselves to be more or less adapted to the new life conditions) don't believe that unification is possible (A funny sense game: "The optimists don't believe the restoration of the USSR" or "The optimists are hopeful this is impossible." At least, both points are present in the argumentation of one's own positions.). Unification, they believe, is possible only after numerous problems are resolved.
Question: Is the restoration of the USSR possible or impossible today?
| |
All respondents |
Adaptation |
|
optimists |
adapted pessimists |
unadapted pessimists |
|
Possible |
30 |
24 |
34 |
32 |
|
Impossible |
58 |
68 |
55 |
52 |
|
Hard to answer |
12 |
7 |
12 |
16 |
|
- "
Vladimir: – We'll unite everyone. The bigger the family is, the stronger the union. Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Belarus. There are many Russians in Kazakhstan, and the little Kazakhs, they don't influence the voting results. A single economic system could be established there, and this is what matters, first of all. If market-protecting laws were passed there, it would do us much good.
Tanya: – «Here is industry, there are raw-materials. For example, supply pipes or whatever.»
Yulya – Ukraine. It is a highly industrialized country.
Anya: – It depends on the country. What does Russia need? That everything should start working.
Oleg: – And the army would be much stronger.
Anya: – Re-unification with Belarus would be a good thing. There were many defense industries. Minsk's plants supplied our army" (DFG, Moscow).
- «Everything has gone too far. A new generation has been born. The older generation is dying. The new generation came in with its own ideology. They were told that the union with Russia was not a good thing. The old people felt more or less good about Russia, there were ties, but the young people know nothing. It's irrevocable.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
- «If we help them, we'll have to feed them. They shouldn't be a burden to us, they must live on their own. And there should be make-work activities.»
(DFG, Moscow).
- «It's not as simple as that. You have to be an economist. We don't develop our economy, we're waiting for supplies, for someone to help us. But we should work ourselves. And they seek foreign sources, to join someone.»
(DFG, Voronezh).
|
|
