Install

Get the latest updates as we post them — right on your browser

Today's paper. Last Updated: 05/28/2012

The Military's Role in Defeating the Coup

There is an old saying about the Soviet army: After every victory, the slackers are rewarded and the heroes are punished. This expression came to mind in connection with the 20th anniversary of the 1991 coup attempt. Analysts on television and the radio talk about the standard heroes: the Muscovites who set up blockades and threw themselves at the tanks and Boris Yeltsin, then-president of the Soviet Russian Republic, who led the movement against the coup plotters. For hard-line Communists, even the conspirators are heroes to this day because they selflessly tried to save the Soviet empire from collapse, we are told.

But there has been little praise for the Soviet officers who defied the coup plotters’ orders to shoot into crowds of civilians. Of course, their refusal was not necessarily based on moral principles. After all, there are plenty of instances when Soviet officers compliantly fulfilled their superiors’ orders to fire on civilians. Take, for example, the shooting of peaceful demonstrators in Novocherkassk in 1962, or when the Kremlin used the army to suppress nationalist movements in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and the Baltic states from 1988 to 1990.

But the killing of civilians in the Caucasus and the Baltic states in the final years of the Soviet Union fundamentally changed the relationship between the armed forces and the Communist leadership. For the first time, the Communist Party general secretary and the defense minister were afraid to admit that the army was acting on their orders. What’s more, the Communist leadership lost its most important ally when it tried to shift the blame for the civilian deaths onto the military.

The violence in Tbilisi in 1989 is a case in point. Transcaucasus Military District commander Igor Radionov carried out a Kremlin order to break up a peaceful demonstration and then ended up as the scapegoat during the subsequent backlash. Alexander Lebed, a paratrooper commander during this unrest, recalled the cowardice of the Soviet leaders in a 2001 interview with Noviye Izvestia. “Starting from 1988, I never received a single written order [to deploy troops against civilians] — only phone calls. … And then Gorbachev acted as if he had no idea how those troops and airplanes had been deployed,” he said.

During the August 1991 putsch, relations between Soviet politicians and the military reached an all-time low. To be sure, generals had no respect for Gorbachev, whom they blamed for the collapse of what had once been the most powerful army in the world. But when the order came from the putschists to use force against unarmed protesters, they drew the line. Military leaders refused to obey orders because they had no faith in the bumbling coup leaders and suspected that the army would once again be held responsible for any bloodshed — particularly since the coup plotters refused to put their orders in writing for fear of leaving a paper trail of their crimes.

It is not surprising, then, that on Aug. 19, Airborne Troops commander Pavel Grachyov, who had received direct orders from KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov to develop a military plan to transfer authority from Gorbachev to another leader, acted as if he supported both sides in the conflict. Grachyov sent a battalion to the Supreme Soviet under the command of his deputy, Alexander Lebed, and the coup plotters were informed that the paratroopers had “established control” over the parliament building. At the same time, Grachyov told Yeltsin that he had sent paratroopers to protect Russia’s leaders.

The moment of truth came on the evening of Aug. 19 when Deputy Defense Minister Vladislav Achalov ordered Grachyov to arrest Yeltsin and his inner circle. According to Grachyov, he and all his deputies refused to carry out the order, although they knew that if the putschists came out victorious the military leaders would face criminal charges of insubordination in front of a military tribunal. Grachyov then called Viktor Karpukhin, commander of the elite Alpha KGB special forces, and he also agreed not to carry out the order to arrest Yeltsin and his top advisers.

To be sure, Grachyov’s decision not to obey the putschists’ orders was not driven by any democratic convictions. He was motivated first and foremost by a desire to end up on the winning side. Once it became clear that the plotters would lose, Grachyov shifted his allegiance to Yeltsin, for whom he would serve as defense minister after the Soviet collapse.

In the end, the military’s refusal to carry out the orders of a dictatorial Communist regime was the last confirmation that the Soviet Union had indeed collapsed for good.

Alexander Golts is deputy editor of the online newspaper Yezhednevny Zhurnal.





This article has 2 comments on TheMoscowTimes.com and 0 comments on Facebook.

Leave a comment


Discussion
The Moscow Times welcomes your comments and invites you to discuss topics with other readers. Your comment will be posted automatically to enable a live discussion. If you aren't familiar with our comments policy, you can read it here.

If you're a registered user, you can start typing your comment below. If not, take a moment to sign up. and then return to the article.

If your comment doesn't appear, contact us by using our web form.

Comments



Giles Cattermole

There lessons in this for the current 'Arab Spring'. An army which has feelings of responsibility towards its own civilians is — ultimately — a 'weak reed' for dictators needing to maintain their power through violence. So, in Egypt and Tunisia, it was the armies' refusal to shoot civilian protesters that tipped the balance. In Bahrein [where the army is mostly foreign mercenaries], Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, Israel, Uzbekistan, Chechnya and - so far — in Syria, the army has followed orders and shot as many civilians as necessary ''to maintain security''. Memo to dictators: make sure your army is either: 1) officered by your own tribe or sect; 2) composed of foreign mercenaries; 3) regimented by the origin of the troops, and deployed far away from that origin.

AbbeyRoad

The price is, no one know how Russia´s military forces will act, in the future, after all this twists. They didn´t obey the coup-leaders, but soon we have a new anniversary in 1993, September, when they pounding the whole parliament into pieces, such things hadn´t happen in Russia, Moscow, since 1917, during the revolution (or coup), and with Yeltsin, even the Russian military, went down in smoke and flames, as the whole Soviet Union. So, what ? People of today more use their own brain, and will not be hiding behind orders. Good or bad ? Then Yeltsin´s party shaped a more obeying system, learning from Gorby´s and his own mistakes, with two chambers, and an "elected monarchy", they say, where the president is able to refuse some three(3) political primeministers, presented by the Duma, and their majority, and this change with just some 30 % of the total voters behind it, later. Didn´t Lenin say : Two steps forward, one step back ?

Report Inappropriate Comment




Comments via Facebook



Also in Opinion

There's Just One Nationality — Mathematician

Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind."

Russia's New Propaganda Minister

After Monday's announcement that historian Vladimir Medinsky was appointed the culture minister, critics quickly labeled him the new propaganda minister. Medinsky's academic ethics and historical distortions may raise serious questions, but for the Kremlin, he has three important attributes that are much more important: He is a model United Russia leader, a firm Putin loyalist and a skilled sophist.

Spinning Medvedev's Government

Were this 2008 and not 2012 — and had Dmitry Medvedev been named prime minister without having first served a full term as president — then the composition of his new government might have created a generally positive impression.

New Government Faces Old Problems

A longstanding platitude shared by both the Kremlin as well as domestic and foreign analysts is the need for Russia to diversify its economy away from energy dependence and reduce its non-oil budget deficit.

Putin's Postman Delivers Nothing at the G8

In the mid-1990s, former President Boris Yeltsin fought hard for the right to sit as equal at the same table with the leaders of the world's seven leading democracies. Using a lot of political wrangling, Moscow finally secured permanent membership in this elite club where the real heavyweights are supposed to solve the world's most pressing problems.

Russia Stays Home

Just three days before his return to the Kremlin as president, Vladimir Putin met behind closed doors at his residence in Novo-Ogaryovo, outside Moscow, with U.S. National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, who was there to transmit President Barack Obama's renewed determination to strengthen cooperation with Russia.



print


Comments

This article has 2 comments on TheMoscowTimes.com and 0 comments on Facebook.

Leave a comment


To Our Readers

The Moscow Times welcomes letters to the editor. Letters for publication should be signed and bear the signatory's address and telephone number.

Letters to the editor should be sent by fax to (7-495) 232-6529, by e-mail to oped@imedia.ru, or by post. The Moscow Times reserves the right to edit letters.



Most Read
MarketGid