Boutros-Ghali, Aldrich Ames and the
Qaddafi libel against Gorbachev.
Last week, Russian
and Western
publications devoted columns to reliving the days which rocked the world
and brought down the Soviet empire, culminating in the ouster of Soviet
President Mikhail Gorbachev exactly 20 years ago.
Lesser known is that
there was a plot hatched by KGB Chairman Vladimir Kryuchkov to depose President
Gorbachev took place in three fateful days in August from the 19th to the 21st.
It succeeded in one sense – Gorbachev was removed – but had two consequences
which the conspirators failed to predict: the collapse of the Soviet Empire and
the rise of a new star in Moscow, Boris Yeltsin.
In 1988 and 1989, the
last two years of Afghanistan War, the FBI and the CIA developed an advanced
form of the PROMIS software program to spot Soviet penetration agents in
American intelligence agencies. PROMIS was initiated in the seventies to break
into any computer in support of law enforcement, to be enhanced later for
intelligence interception. The advanced version was run only twice by different
teams. The first test, codenamed PLAY ACTOR, was run in 1988 and turned up 29
names of potential Soviet moles; the second was codenamed SKYLIGHT and, when
applied in 1989, found the total had jumped to 198 in the space of one year.
One name popped up on
both lists: Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Egyptian minister of state for foreign
affairs.
The heads of the CIA
were not surprised. They had known of the Egyptian’s links with the KGB and
made no bones about turning them to good use between mid-1988 and August 1991
for liaison missions with an FCD faction in Yasenevo
that was plotting to depose Mikhail Gorbachev. The conspiracy was led by FCD
chief, Vladimir Kryuchkov.
The mission came
about after Aldrich Ames, the CIA's Counterintelligence Branch Chief for Soviet
Operations, tipped off the new Director of Central Intelligence Robert M. Gates
in the winter of 1987 to a tentative conspiracy blowing up in Moscow.
(Ames was later
sensationally exposed as a Russian mole and is serving a life sentence. Gates
went on to become a two-term Defense Secretary.) Kryuchkov had given Ames word
of the conspiracy in order to test the water in Washington for a possible
anti-Gorbachev coup.
Gates, at 43 the
youngest director in CIA history, did not at first rate the plot’s scoring
potential very high but thought it worth keeping an eye on. Ames proposed using
Boutros-Ghali as the CIA’s go-between with the cabal. Employing an Egyptian
minister to keep the CIA’s finger on the KGB pulse was admittedly strange, but
Ames recommended Ghali for his first-rate connections in Moscow Center,
including close friendships with the KGB's lead-conspirators.
Furthermore, because
he was a foreigner, the CIA could at any time disown responsibility for his
activities.
The CIA codenamed the
Ghali mission the Alpha Program. It gained urgency when it began to look as
though the Soviet political system was careering out of control under the
pressures of Gorbachev’s rapid democratic reforms and the hopeless Afghanistan
campaign which was draining Soviet economic resources and enfeebling its army.
Ames, in obedience to
his FCD handlers, did everything to foster this impression. Suggestions were
bruited about that the Soviet Union, lacking a firm hand in the Kremlin, could
well sink into nuclear as well as economic anarchy and fall prey to irresponsible
elements.
One of the more
hair-raising rumors the plotters planted in the Western press to discredit
Gorbachev was that he had actually agreed to share up-to-date Soviet spy
satellite data with Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi to help the latter through
his frequent confrontations with the United States.
The great reformer in
the Kremlin, who worked tirelessly to promote friendly ties with the West, was
painted in the false colors of a rabid anti-American who cared nothing for his
country’s recovery and was unscrupulous enough to ally himself with the most
outrageous international pariah for self-aggrandizement.
Gates began to take
the anti-Gorbachev conspiracy more seriously when, in August 1988, its
ringleader, Kryuchkov, the KGB's First Chief Directorate chief for fourteen
years, succeeded Viktor Chebrikov as KGB director.
The CIA chief was
further impressed by the report Ames brought from Boutros-Ghali that the
plotters had won over Red Army commanders and heads of the Kremlin's
presidential guard. This piece of intelligence enhanced the Egyptian diplomat's
reputation in Langley to the degree that CIA heads set aside the PLAY ACTOR and
SKYLIGHT findings on his clandestine anti-American activities.The
Ames-Ghali undercover intrigue achieved the almost unthinkable: It manipulated
the CIA into supporting a conspiracy to restore KGB-led Communist hardliners to
power and remove a pro-democracy president.
The situation in
Moscow began to appear so volatile that CIA heads started thinking that a
reversion to the old days might be the lesser evil. Some may also have been
influenced by the question swirling round among US intelligence insiders: What
employment would remain for the CIA, if the Soviet Union crashed as a
superpower and the Agency’s arch foe, the KGB, dropped into oblivion?
In July 1991, Aldrich
Ames launched one of his artful information distortion campaigns. Suddenly, the
US media blossomed with prominent articles and cover stories presenting a
previously skeptical President George H. W. Bush as an ardent Gorbachev fan. The
idea was to put Gorbachev off guard by persuading him that US presidential
backing was solid enough to dispel any fears he might entertain about internal
conspiracies. Even if a coup were staged, he would believe himself strong
enough to turn it around and consolidate his grip on power.
On August 19, 1991,
the conspirators struck.
The putsch was led by
Kryuschkev’s KGB faction, known formally as the State
Committee on the State of Emergency. Other members were Russian Defense
Minister Dimitri Yazov, Gorbachev’s chief national security adviser Marshal
Sergei Akhromeyev, the head of the Kremlin
Presidential Guard Lt Gen. Yuri Plehanov, and deputy
KGB chief Vladimir Grushko.
In the three days
“that shook the world”, the coup leaders claimed to have controlled the
government in Moscow. Gorbachev, who was absent on holiday at his Crimean
summer home in Foros, was placed under arrest for
those three days and the presidential briefcase containing secret Soviet
missile launch codes was taken from him.
On the night of
August 23, US armed forces were placed on a worldwide nuclear alert which White
House spokesmen then played down as a “pre-alert.”
What the coup leaders
failed to take into account was rogue action by an unpredictable party: Boris
Yeltsin, newly elected on July 10 as President of the Russian republic. He took
his life in his hands when he recklessly clambered atop a tank to rally the
crowds against the coup.
The popular response
to his grandstand gesture was enthusiastic. The people continued to cheer him
on when he barricaded himself and his followers in the Russian Parliament
building and called a general strike. Yeltsin’s theatrical performance caught
the conspirators unawares. They were completely floored by the surge of
fist-brandishing protesters through the streets of Moscow and Leningrad,
spearheaded by young people furiously opposed to the restoration of the ncient regime.
On August 21, after
the army stood idly by for three days without touching the demonstrators or
Boris Yeltsin, the coup leaders called it a day.
KGB Chief Kryuchkov
was dismissed with thirteen other conspirators, eleven protesting vociferously
that Gorbachev had known about the putsch. This he strenuously denied. A
Communist Party deputy, Dimitry Stepanov, testified that Gorbachev had said
before flying off on holiday. “Don’t worry. Everything is alright. We are
imposing a state of emergency.”
After a while, all
the plotters were released, though never prosecuted or tried for treason.
The Soviet empire was
history, but Yeltsin put the brakes on rapprochement with the West, the
historical process which his predecessor Gorbachev had set in train.
Revealing the last days of the Soviet Union
The West has praised
Gorbachev for not forcefully resisting the demise of the Soviet Union. In
reality, it remains unclear to this day whether the Kremlin leader did not in
fact sanction military actions against Georgians, Azerbaijanis and Lithuanians,
who had rebelled against the central government in Moscow between 1989 and
1991. When Soviet troops violently quelled the demonstrations, 20 people were
killed in Georgia, 143 in Azerbaijan and 14 in Lithuania, not to mention the
wars and unrest in Nagorno-Karabakh, Trans-Dniester and Central Asia.
Many have not
forgotten the tragedy that unfolded in the Georgian capital Tbilisi on the
night of April 8-9, 1989, when Russian soldiers used sharpened spades and
poison gas to break up a protest march in the city.
Gorbachev claims that
he was not made aware of the incident until six hours later. He had not given
the military or the intelligence service clear signals to exercise restraint in
the smoldering conflict, even though he knew how fragile the relationship was
between Russians and Georgians. He also did not call anyone to account later
on. Even today, he still says that it was "a huge mystery" as to who
gave the orders to use violence in Tbilisi.
But when Gorbachev
met with Hans-Jochen Vogel, the then-floor leader of Germany's center-left
Social Democratic Party (SPD), on April 11, two days after the bloody
suppression of the protests, he sought to justify the hardliners'
approach. He later had the following passage deleted from the published version
of the Russian minutes of the conversation with Vogel:
You have heard about
the events in Georgia. Notorious enemies of the Soviet Union had gathered
there. They abused the democratic process, shouted provocative slogans and even
called for the deployment of NATO troops to the republic. We had to take a firm
approach in dealing with these adventurers and defending perestroika -- our
revolution.
The "notorious
enemies of the Soviet Union" were in fact peaceful civilians. Of the 20
Georgians killed in Tbilisi, 17 were women.
A remark made at a
politburo meeting on Oct. 4, 1989, in which Gorbachev learned that 3,000
demonstrators had been killed on Tiananmen Square in Beijing that June, shows
that he was prepared for resistance to his reform plans and was not necessarily
ruling out the need for violent action. Gorbachev said:
We must be realists.
They have to defend themselves, and so do we. 3,000 people, so what?
Although the minutes
of the meeting were later published, this passage was missing.
‘We Will Only Intervene if There Is Bloodshed’
In 1990 and 1991,
Gorbachev could assume that very few leading politicians in the West would
question his role in the bloody conflicts with the Soviet republics vying for
their independence. In those weeks, the only concern of Americans and Western
Europeans alike was if the Soviets would really withdraw from Eastern Europe.
As a result, they allowed Gorbachev to blatantly lie to them, such as when
Moscow tried to stop the Baltic independence movement at the last minute.
In January 1991,
under pressure from the intelligence service and the military, Gorbachev
apparently agreed to what was already a futile venture: proclaiming
presidential rule in Lithuania under Moscow’s control. As was once the case in
Budapest and Prague, “workers” loyal to the Soviet Union were to ask Moscow to
send troops to their aid, which is precisely what transpired. On Jan. 13,
special Soviet army and state security units advanced in tanks to the building
housing the state television headquarters in Vilnius, where they stormed the
station and killed 14 people.
In a telephone
conversation with then-US President George Bush two days earlier, Gorbachev had
flatly denied that Moscow would intervene in Vilnius:
Bush: I’m worried about your internal problems. As an
outsider, all I can say is this: If you manage to avoid the use of force, it
will benefit your relations with us, and not just with us.
Gorbachev: We will only intervene if there is bloodshed or if
there is unrest that not only threatens our constitution, but also human lives.
I am now under tremendous pressure to introduce presidential control in
Lithuania . I am still holding back, and only in the case of a very serious
threat will I take tough measures.
Helmut Kohl, the
German chancellor who, in the name of his government, had consistently
campaigned for the right of self-determination by national populations,
declined to make any criticism of Gorbachev. When the two leaders spoke by
telephone five days after the bloody events in Vilnius, he only mentioned the
Soviet military action in passing:
Gorbachev: Now everyone is beginning to ask: Is Gorbachev
abandoning his course? Is the new Gorbachev finished, and has he moved to the
right? I can say in all honesty: We will not change our policy.
Kohl: As a politician, I understand that there are moments
when evasive maneuvers are unavoidable if one hopes to achieve certain
political goals.
Gorbachev: Helmut, I am familiar with your assessment of the
situation, and I greatly respect it. Goodbye.
But Gorbachev lost
his last shred of credibility with his own people during those days. “He is on
the side of those who committed murder in Vilnius,” a bitterly disappointed
Anatoly Chernyaev, his closest confidant, wrote in
his diary. He dictated to his secretary a long letter to Gorbachev that reads
like a settling of accounts:
Mikhail Sergeyevich!
Your speech in the
Supreme Soviet (about the events in Vilnius) signaled the end. It was not an
appearance by a great statesman. It was a confused, babbling speech. You are
unwilling to say what you really intend to do. And you apparently don’t know
what the people think about you – outside in the streets, in the shops and in
the trolleybuses. All they talk about is “Gorbachev and his clique.” You
claimed that you wanted to change the world, and now you are destroying this
work with your own hands.
The secretary took
down the letter, but then she accused Chernyaev of
betraying Gorbachev. The letter disappeared into a safe instead of being sent.
‘Kohl Is Not the
Greatest Intellectual’
Former German Chancellor
Helmut Kohl figures particularly prominently in the Gorbachev documents. He was
greatly indebted to the Russian leader at the time, because Gorbachev had
declined not to deploy tanks in East Berlin to stop the collapse of East
Germany in the fall of 1989. He also did not stand in the way of reunification
the following year. In fact, to the consternation of many comrades in his own
ranks, Gorbachev didn’t even oppose a reunited Germany joining NATO.
Kohl was able to
repay the favor in 1991, which was precisely what Gorbachev expected of him.
During this phase, Kohl was, in many respects, Gorbachev’s last hope.
The Soviet leader had
apparently forgotten that he had viewed the German chancellor as a mediocre
provincial politician for years. On Nov. 1, 1989, when he received Egon Krenz –
the successor to East German leader Erich Honecker and East Germany’s last communist
leader – at the Kremlin, he said to Krenz:
It seems that Kohl is
not the greatest intellectual, but he enjoys a certain amount of popularity in
his country, especially among ordinary citizens.
The message seems to
have been: This isn’t someone you need to worry about. Gorbachev himself had
ignored Kohl for years. He had viewed him as a mouthpiece of the Americans and,
for a long time, had deliberately steered clear of West Germany during his trips
to Europe.
The minutes of the
meeting between Krenz and Gorbachev were later published in Moscow, and were
recently also made accessible to the public in Germany. However, the passage
relating to Kohl is missing in the Russian version. Gorbachev was so
embarrassed about it that he had it deleted.
Breaking the Ice with 'Helmut'
In the summer of
1990, after both men had negotiated the details of German reunification, his
relationship with Kohl changed. The ice was finally broken when Gorbachev and
his wife Raisa traveled to Germany in November, visiting the Kohls at their
house in Oggersheim in western Germany and touring
the nearby Speyer Cathedral with them. They even dined at Kohl's favorite
restaurant, the Deidesheimer Hof. The two men
switched to first-name terms on that occasion -- the breakthrough in their
relationship.
Gorbachev needed the
influential German chancellor, now that the situation was becoming dicey at
home. There were shortages of everything in the shops -- meat, butter, powdered
milk -- and his popularity was sinking.
In those months,
Gorbachev reached for the phone more and more often to discuss the situation
with his "friend Helmut," who had suddenly become his political
adviser. The two men used a special telephone line, and hardly any of these
conversations between Moscow and Bonn would later appear in Gorbachev's books.
Kohl, in his memoirs, also mentions them only in passing.
This hesitation
becomes clear to anyone who reads the transcripts, most of which were prepared
by translators who also had to report to the KGB. The conversations were filled
with Gorbachev's complaints, the cries for help of a drowning man -- words that
the once-proud Soviet leader did his utmost to sweep under the rug two decades
later.
At the time, however,
he wanted Kohl to encourage the West to rescue the Soviet Union. He wanted the
chancellor to portray the impending collapse as a catastrophe that could send
the entire world into turmoil. Or course, he also hoped for support in his fight
against his toughest rival, Boris Yeltsin.
The two men spoke by
telephone once again on the evening of Feb. 20, 1991. Kohl had called
Gorbachev, after Yeltsin, in a television address on the previous day, had
called upon Gorbachev to resign from his post at the Kremlin. Gorbachev never
published this conversation, either, because it reveals the extent to which he
had underestimated his rival and incorrectly assessed the situation:
Kohl: Hello, Mikhail. Did you resign, as Yeltsin is
demanding?
Gorbachev: I think he senses that he is losing authority and
becoming more and more isolated. His appearance yesterday was an act of
desperation or a stupid mistake. Yeltsin is a destroyer by nature. He has
nothing constructive left to offer. He is exploiting the current difficult
situation and trying to unleash a political fight.
Kohl: That will benefit you.
Gorbachev: At today's meeting of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR
, someone said that such methods were undignified for a man of his rank. He
will probably have to retract his words. The president of Kazakhstan and the
chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukraine have already distanced themselves
from him.
Kohl: That's advantageous to you. I sense that you feel
better now. I'm pleased about that.
Less than four months
later, more than 45 million voters elected the supposedly beleaguered Yeltsin
to be the first president of the Russian Federation, the largest Soviet
republic. This marked the beginning of a dual leadership that heralded the end
of the Soviet realm. In a telephone conversation on April 30, Kohl assured the
Kremlin leader:
Kohl: I am doing everything I can to garner support for
you here in Western Europe. I'll do the same in Washington , where I'm going in
two weeks. You should realize that some people here are expressing grim
opinions about your situation.
Gorbachev: Yes, I'm aware of that.
Kohl: To summarize, this is roughly what is being said:
Yes, Gorbachev is a strong politician, but he will be unable to achieve the
things he had planned. In this situation, it is extremely important to create a
different environment psychologically. That's why I need authentic information
from you, Mikhail. You have to tell me what the situation is really like.
Gorbachev: You know, Helmut, there are many people among our
American friends who are whispering things about "Gorbachev's
situation." They're saying, for example: Look, Gorbachev supports
preserving the union, while Yeltsin might grant the Baltic states and other
republics their independence. Yeltsin supports private ownership, while
Gorbachev favors a mixed economy. Yeltsin will be more preoccupied with
domestic issues and therefore won't get in the way of the Americans in various
parts of the world. These are not credible recommendations. Bush and his
secretary of state, (James) Baker, are still holding their ground, but they are
coming under growing pressure. Of course, I also have to overcome these
difficulties.
Kohl: You can rely on me, Mikhail. I will make this
sufficiently clear to the Western European and American leaders.
On July 5, when
Yeltsin was already the de-facto president of Russia, waiting only for his inauguration,
Kohl met with Gorbachev at the summer residence of the Ukrainian Communist
Party in Mezhgorye. At that moment, neither of the
two leaders could know that, half a year later, Ukraine would already be an
independent country.
As they were being
driven from the Kiev airport to Mezhgorye, Kohl
reviewed the worst-case scenario:
Kohl: I've thought about it: What would happen if
Gorbachev would suddenly leave and Yeltsin would take his place? I have to say
that the mere thought of it horrified me. Of course the country cannot be left
to such a man.
Gorbachev: We certainly agree on that point.
Kohl: What will you do, Mikhail, when the Baltic states
finally leave the union?
Gorbachev: They can do that, of course. It's difficult to
change their ideas about sovereignty. They refuse to engage in any reasonable
argumentation. If they truly want to withdraw, there is only one way to do it
-- the constitutional approach. But they are terrified of taking the normal
constitutional path.
Kohl: You really won't keep them in the union by force. On
the other hand, it must be clear to the Baltic states that there is no option
other than the one prescribed by the constitution. And the West's verbal
support for them changes nothing in this regard.
Neither the German
nor the Russian would later publicize this conversation, because Kohl's view of
Yeltsin was as devastating as Gorbachev's. What the chancellor also preferred
not to see in print was the fact that he drew a clear distinction between his
public support for the principle of self-determination and his actual position.
Kohl did not truly support the Baltic Soviet republics withdrawing from the
union, and he demanded that such decisions be approved by the parliament in
Moscow -- which, by then, was already wishful thinking.
Kohl: Only a donkey can assume that the destruction of the
union benefits anyone. The collapse of the Soviet Union would be a catastrophe
for everyone. Anyone who supports this is jeopardizing peace. Not everyone
understands me on this issue. But you can assume that I will not change my
opinion in this regard… Gorbachev's reform course must be consistently
supported. If Yeltsin comes to us, I will tell him the same thing. I will tell
him that he doesn't stand a chance if he doesn't cooperate with you. The Americans
have told him the same thing.
Gorbachev: No, they are practically encouraging him. In their
eyes, he is a reformer.
Kohl: If Yeltsin comes to Germany, it will be a working
visit. My most important goal is that you don't attack each other.
Gorbachev: Perhaps it would be a good idea not to invite him on
behalf of the chancellor? Someone else should invite him, and the chancellor
could then join the meeting as if by accident.
Kohl: Good.
Gorbachev's goal of spoiling
Yeltsin's chances of further advancement and getting Kohl on board, if
possible, is understandable from a human standpoint. Politically, however, it
was absurd.
It seems even more
absurd that Gorbachev still wanted to be perceived as the leader of a world
power, even as he was forced to beg for assistance behind the scenes.
'We Need Money for
Current Expenses'
Two weeks later, he
traveled to London to attend, for the first time, a summit of the seven leading
industrialized nations, and to request that his country be admitted to this
club of economic heavyweights. Kohl had paved the way to London for Gorbachev,
over the objections of the Americans and Japanese. In reality, however, he
traveled to London to beg for at least $30 billion to rescue the ailing Soviet
Union and its president.
Many of the reports
written in those weeks -- none of which Gorbachev would later publish --
indicate that he must have perceived the situation as demeaning.
At the meeting in
Kiev, he berated a man in Kohl's entourage who would become one of his key
contacts in the coming weeks: Horst Köhler, the later German president, who was
then a state secretary at the German Finance Ministry and Kohl's "sherpa"
(personal representative) at the G-7 summit.
When Köhler called
upon the Soviets to submit to the rules of the International Monetary Fund, the
Kremlin leader snapped: "The USSR isn't Costa Rica. The direction that
history now takes will depend on how you configure your relations to us."
As for the idea of a
Marshall Plan for the Soviet Union, Gorbachev described it as a "return to
the old arrogance, according to which the Soviet economic train cannot be
pulled up the mountain without the capitalist locomotive."
In reality, this
locomotive was the Soviets' only remaining option. Their confidence in Kohl
during those weeks was unlimited. In fact, they were practically euphoric,
believing that things would improve for the Soviets in the slipstream of the
powerful chancellor. In Kiev, Gorbachev adviser Chernyaev
noted:
The new friendship
with the Germans has been given yet another large scoop of cement. If all goes
well with the Soviet-German factor, it will determine the fate of both Europe
and global politics.
On the flight back to
Moscow, Gorbachev said:
Kohl ... will do
everything to help us rise up again and become a modern superpower. Well, he is
very anxious about Ukraine (Kohl also met with the Ukrainian leadership in
Kiev). But for him it's no longer Hitler's Lebensraum.
By early September,
about three weeks after the August coup, the financial situation in the USSR
was so precarious that Gorbachev took then German Foreign Minister
Hans-Dietrich Genscher aside while Genscher was visiting Moscow and, abandoning any sense of
pride, said:
Gorbachev: We need money for current expenses, so that we can
continue to live and maintain imports while the negotiations on the
restructuring of our short-term debts are underway. I plan to discuss this with
Kohl on the phone today.
Genscher: I don't know if you should address such a delicate
matter on the telephone. I can send the chancellor an encrypted telegram right
away, so that only he can read it.
Gorbachev: We need two
billion dollars. Perhaps you advance half a billion from the payments we are to
receive from you in October, and we'll take another half out of our reserves.
We hope to obtain the second billion in the Middle East . I have sent (the
deputy head of the KGB) Primakov there with this mission.
Genscher: I don't have the authority to respond to that. But I
will convey everything to the chancellor right away.
Kohl sent Köhler to
Moscow. Gorbachev, who was already predicting horrific scenarios in light of
the hesitant support from the West, met with Köhler on Sept. 12.
Gorbachev: What is happening with the assistance for the USSR ?
We are negotiating, weighing the options and doing the calculations. This is
simply inexcusable. It's reminiscent of the Weimar Republic in Germany . While
the democrats argued with each other, Hitler came to power without any
particular effort. Foreign countries owe us about $86 billion, which is roughly
the sum we need now. I hope you will draw the necessary conclusions from what I
have said.
Köhler: The chancellor has authorized me to inform you that
we have approved the first request, namely to provide a billion deutschmarks.
As far as the request for the second billion is concerned, we have no choice
but to involve our partners in the European Union and the G-7. The search for
options is complicated by the rather steep financial expectations on your side.
Gorbachev: Couldn't you find a way to provide loans at more
favorable terms? Perhaps even interest-free loans?
Köhler: That's very difficult. I will try to convince my
partners (in the G-7) that your country is still creditworthy. To that end,
however, I need details on your foreign debt and the possibilities of selling
your gold reserves.
Gorbachev: The harvest figures are not good. I spoke with
(Kazakh President Nursultan) Nazarbayev just before your arrival. He told me
that the harvest in the area of newly reclaimed land is worse than even the
most modest estimates had predicted.
Köhler: According to American agencies, the harvest in your
country will amount to 190 million tons of grain this year, compared with 230
million last year. A massive difference.
Gorbachev: It would be nice if we could bring in 180 million
tons… During the Gulf War (following Saddam's invasion of Kuwait), everyone got
together and collected huge sums of money to support the effort, close to $100
billion. But when it comes to supporting this historic process in a huge
country, one that everything in the world depends on, we start to haggle.
Köhler: The Americans won that war without investing a
single dollar of their own.
Gorbachev: And what about all the things the Soviet Union has
done for the world? Who is tallying up those figures? How much have our
perestroika and our new way of thinking saved? Hundreds of billions of dollars
for the rest of the world!
Köhler: There is no time to lose. It's a matter of weeks,
even days. One of the miscalculations in your perestroika was to underestimate
the economic side of this issue.
But the plan to pump
billions into Moscow with German help, and save Gorbachev that way, did not
succeed. When the Ukrainians affirmed their declaration of independence with a
referendum on Dec. 1, 1991 and elected their own president, the die had been cast.
Seven days later, Russia, Ukraine and Belarus formed the Commonwealth of
Independent States, which eight non-Slavic republics then joined.
The Soviet Union was
being liquidated. Germany was celebrating Christmas when Gorbachev resigned as
president on Dec. 25 and the Soviet Union came to a peaceful end. He sent a
letter to Bonn on the same day:
Dear Helmut!
Although the events
did not go the way I felt would have been correct and the most advantageous, I
have not lost hope that the effort I began six years ago will eventually be
concluded successfully, and that Russia and the other countries that are now part
of a new community will transform themselves into modern and democratic
countries.
With all our hearts,
Raisa and I wish Hannelore (Kohl) and your entire family health, prosperity and
happiness.
Your Mikhail
In this letter,
Gorbachev is fully the statesman once again. That explains why the letter was
among the few papers from the fateful year of 1991 that the failed reformer
would later publish.
For updates click homepage here