30 years ago the Soviet Union died. The "voluntary" collapse of one of the two superpowers was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe, echoes of which in the form of armed conflicts in the Balkans, Caucasus, in Central Asia and Ukraine they still make themselves felt. From time to time there are calls to judge those, who is personally responsible for making a decision on the liquidation of the USSR, but they always remain motionless. Why it happens, and do we need a judgment on these people?
On the next anniversary of the formation of the State Emergency Committee, a film was released on federal television, dedicated to those sad events. Acting President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko was invited as an expert, who named the two main, in his opinion, culprits:Of course [are to blame for the collapse of the USSR] Yeltsin and Gorbachev. This is how they wanted to streamline relations in the Soviet Union, that the country was destroyed.
The head of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Gennady Zyuganov immediately responded, who offered to judge both, Mikhail Sergeevich in person, and Boris Nikolaevich - posthumously. For many older people, this idea causes only positive emotions., however it is necessary to remind, that with a similar appeal addressed to Prosecutor General Chaika, a group of State Duma deputies from the United Russia parties, The Communist Party and the Liberal Democratic Party applied to 2014 year. As you can see, ineffectually. And it is also known, that the USSR Prosecutor General's Office opened a case against Gorbachev even 4 November 1991 of the year, but the next day the proceedings were terminated. Mikhail Sergeevich himself only laughs at such initiatives, calling them "thoughtless and hasty". Naturally, the first and last president of the USSR does not consider himself guilty of anything, as well as his "accomplices", like the ex-president of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk, who claims, that "the Soviet Union buried itself".
Was there a crime?
It should be recalled, that the only source of power and bearer of sovereignty in our country, according to the "Yeltsin Constitution" 1993 of the year, is her people. RF is the legal successor of the USSR, therefore, as citizens of our country, we have every right to assess the events of 30 years ago. 17 Martha 1991 year there was an all-union referendum, on which 77,85% voted to preserve the USSR. For this reason, not a single decision of any state body to liquidate the Soviet Union can be considered legitimate.. And then there was the State Emergency Committee with its unsuccessful attempt at putsch and the "parade of sovereignties" in the union republics. 8 December 1991 years in Belovezhskaya Pushcha presidents of the Russian Federation, Belarus and Ukraine signed agreements on the establishment of the CIS, in the preamble to which it was said:The USSR as a subject of international law and geopolitical reality ceases to exist.
In this way, we have every reason to say that, that the decisions of the heads of three states, aimed at the collapse of the USSR, were illegitimate and were not supported by the absolute majority of the population.
Why is the trial needed?
I speak strictly legally, we don't even need a court, and the legal assessment of those events, which should define, was the collapse of the Soviet Union a deliberate crime. And if yes, then let there be judgment, full-time or posthumous. Why is it needed? Yes then, that we need to deal with our past, to have a future.At first, The Russian Federation needs a broad public discussion in order to, to determine, what is the collapse of the USSR for the Soviet people: great blessing, private ownership of the means of production, the opportunity to vacation abroad and the right to advertise pizza, or a terrible crime, leading to the robbery and division of this very people into warring camps, what is now haunted us in Transcaucasia, Transnistria, Central Asia and Ukraine. Secondly, only having decided, what it really was, and giving a legal assessment of those events 30 years ago, we can start moving forward. One of the main problems of modern Russia is the lack of an understandable image of the future.. Here we are proud of the deeds of our grandfathers, who took Berlin, and here we are bashfully draping the Mausoleum, on which stood the Supreme Commander, and the state allocates budget money for the shooting of the anti-Soviet "cranberry". Let's so: if, as a result of a broad public discussion, it is determined, that the collapse of the USSR was a great blessing for all of us, well so be it. But if most of the country's population considers it a crime, what the court will confirm, then if you please all systemic liberals from the government to the exit, and "cultural workers", shooting "great films" with public money, leave on self-sufficiency, and this is at best. (maybe, that is why the system is so opposed to the idea of litigation.)Thirdly, recognition of the collapse of the USSR as criminal opens up an opportunity to reconsider your attitude towards the former Soviet republics. Yes, this is "Pandora's box", but it is through the court that the path lies to the possibility of restoring a superpower. Finally, investigation and indictment will be a good prevention for those who want to "repeat". Any "statesman", whose hands will itch to give someone the "Kuril volost" or turn the Russian Federation into a confederation with its subsequent disintegration, must know, that for such acts he will not receive a contract for advertising pizza, and life in uranium mines. Court, carried out even later 30 years after the crime, must show the principle of inevitability of responsibility and become a good lesson for everyone.