Federal Reserve System

Federal Reserve System

It was a conspiracy theorists’ dream come upwards true: a grouping of wealthy bankers, supported past times academics as well as politicians, skulking off to a secluded isle to concoct a consummate transformation of the U.S. banking system. The coming together inwards Nov 1910 on Jekyll Island, Georgia, which established the pattern for the Federal Reserve System, played to long-held Populist fears of “Eastern Money Interests,” Jews, as well as large banks. When the programme was presented to Congress, it effectively increased the potency of the federal government—at least, indirectly—over the nation’s banking system.

Ever since concerns nigh “foreign interests” inwards the First as well as Second Banks of the United States, about Americans had viewed banks suspiciously. Writers such every bit William Gouge as well as politicians such every bit Thomas Hart “Old Bullion” Benton advocated a metallic element criterion of aureate as well as silvery money only. These “hard money” proponents supported Andrew Jackson’s “war” on the Bank of the US as well as distrusted all forms of newspaper money.

Although “hard money” advocates were inwards the minority inwards most states, they appealed to farmers as well as laborers who distrusted moneyed elites. After the Civil War, ironically, this same distrust evidenced itself inwards a demand for newspaper money (“Greenbackism”) and/or for coinage of silver, a seat best associated with William Jennings Bryan.


By the tardily 1800s, however, although most Americans were satisfied with the nature of the banking system, they realized that of import weaknesses existed. The banking organization was non sufficiently “elastic,” pregnant that it could non expand or contract the money provide when economical weather condition changed.

Another occupation concern for those familiar with the financial sector was that inwards several panics—1873, 1893, as well as 1907—a unmarried banker, J. P. Morgan, had stepped inwards with a consortium of bankers to rescue the system. After the 1907 panic, fifty-fifty Morgan admitted that whatever hereafter banking concern runs mightiness live beyond his powerfulness to contain.

Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 serial of commissions as well as studies past times the American Bankers Association as well as the federal authorities produced a number of recommendations, most notably the demand for a fundamental banking concern as well as nationwide interstate branch banking. (Many states did non permit intrastate branch banking, as well as interstate branch banking was viewed every bit illegal, although no limited challenges to interstate banking had occurred.)

Virtually all of these studies concluded that whatever reforms inwards the banking organization would require a powerful national banking concern capable of acting every bit a “lender of final resort” as well as tasked with providing liquidity to the banking organization every bit a whole to permit for greater “elasticity.”

An unstated, but widely held, destination of many of the reformers was also to bound or bring down the powerfulness of the New York banks, such every bit National City Bank, J. P. Morgan, as well as Kuhn, Loeb, as well as Company. Despite the fact that Morgan himself as well as most of the officers of National City were Protestants, a widely held suspicion existed inwards the rural US that the New York banks were dominated past times Jews. (The presence of Paul Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb with the Jekyll Island grouping of “conspirators” reinforced the fright of “powerful New York Jews.”)

Federal reserve building

Whether many Americans indeed feared a Jewish chemical factor inwards the “money power” or not, a pop innovation was that banks inwards New York wielded inordinate power. Thus, the reformers’ plans also involved dissimilar strategies for minimizing the influence of the New York banks.

By 1913, the US had what is termed a “dual banking” organization consisting of state-chartered banks (which could non number money), as well as national banks, chartered past times the federal government, which could number banknotes. The comptroller of the currency had potency over all national banks, piece nation authorities (bank examiners as well as such) supervised the nation banks. There was no fundamental banking concern or “lender of final resort,” or whatever national origin of credit expansion.

Following J. P. Morgan’s formation of a consortium of banks to bail out the banking organization during the panic of 1907, concerns arose over the “consolidation” of banking power, particularly inwards New York. Congressman Arsene Pujo’s House Banking as well as Currency Committee, which convened inwards 1911, investigated Morgan as well as First National’s George F. Baker, as well as concluded that New York banks controlled far to a greater extent than financial assets than they truly owned through diverse investments, interlocking directorates, as well as trust companies. New York, Pujo claimed, controlled 43 per centum of the money inwards the United States.

When the Jekyll Island coming together took place, all of these concerns played upon the reforms to which the participants agreed. The fundamental individuals who drafted the reason of the Federal Reserve Bank organization were Senator Nelson Aldrich (head of the National Monetary Commission); Henry P. Davison of J. P. Morgan; Charles D. Norton of First National Bank; Paul Warburg of Kuhn, Loeb; as well as Colonel Edward House (one of President Woodrow Wilson’s closest advisors).

Not solely was this a little group, but conspiracy-minded people could betoken to the fact that Warburg was Jewish, or that House had connections to London banks as well as that he had written a futuristic novel Philip Dru, Administrator, a story inwards which Marxist socialism triumphed. Worse, the coming together took house inwards secret. Aldrich, especially, was concerned that if a programme was non drafted inwards secret, “special interest” lobbyists would nitpick it to death.

Aldrich’s presence convinced about that John D. Rockefeller was manipulating the meeting. Morgan, according to i conspiracy view, was a “Rockefeller stooge”—an astonishing claim nigh i of the richest men inwards the world. Morgan controlled the Fed nib through Aldrich, his “floor broker inwards the Senate”.

Rockefeller as well as so used the Fed, according to this view, to “bankroll” the Bolshevik Revolution inwards Russia, manipulate stock prices through inflation, as well as force the agenda of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as well as Trilateral Commission inwards afterwards years.

There is no query with historians that the Jekyll Island coming together resulted inwards the essence of the Federal Reserve Act, introduced past times Congressman Carter Glass of Virginia, chairman of the House Committee on Banking. Far from beingness drafted inwards secrecy, the Federal Reserve Act was debated extensively as well as was subjected to much compromise earlier beingness passed overwhelmingly past times the House (298 to 60) as well as the Senate (43 to 25).

Under the act, twelve Federal Reserve District Banks were established inwards dissimilar regions across the United States. Each of these banks was a corporation owned past times the fellow member banks inwards its district, as well as piece all national banks had to live members, nation banks were non required to bring together the Federal Reserve System.

Member banks had to house six per centum of their uppercase as well as surplus inwards the district bank. One of the important factors of the human activeness was the location of the district banks: New York, of course, had one, every bit did Philadelphia as well as Boston.

But Minneapolis, Dallas, San Francisco, Chicago, Atlanta, Cleveland, as well as Richmond all had district banks, as well as the nation of Missouri—the pump of the Midwest—had ii (St. Louis as well as Kansas City). Clearly, Congress had gone out of its agency to dilute the “money power” of New York.

Any district banking concern could human activeness to halt runs past times providing emergency cash from its vaults, as well as inwards theory, if i entire district was inwards trouble, other districts would come upwards to its aid. The “elasticity” work was addressed through the Fed’s manipulation of discount rates to lend money to fellow member banks to either expand, or contract, credit.

In reality, though, New York retained its powerfulness through its overall influence, its dominant leadership, as well as its connections to corporate America. Congress intended that a Federal Reserve Board of Governors should live instituted, made upwards of v members appointed past times the president as well as confirmed past times the Senate, every bit good every bit the comptroller as well as the secretarial assistant of the Treasury.

The Banking Act of 1935 changed this past times moving key decisions to the Federal Open Market Committee, composed of 7 members of the Board of Governors as well as v of the twelve district banking concern presidents, including the New York president.

The Federal Reserve Act was established on the supposition that the nation’s money provide would rest tied to gold, as well as so its open-market activities were e'er balanced with an oculus toward the aureate stockpiles. When the stock marketplace crashed inwards 1929, many contended that the Federal Reserve had encouraged the stock marketplace “boom” past times providing “easy credit.”

Subsequent inquiry has shown that if anything the Fed failed to expand the money provide inwards proportion to the rapid growth inwards the industrial sector, as well as that a irksome but destructive deflation had occurred. After 1930, the Federal Reserve engaged inwards a deliberate massive credit contraction that helped plunge the nation into the Great Depression, silent nether the supposition that the Great Bull Market had resulted from “loose money.”

The contraction also ensued, however, because every bit other nations left the aureate standard, as well as every bit the aureate backing of U.S. banks eroded, depositors withdrew funds at an alarming rate. President Franklin Roosevelt took the US off the aureate standard, stabilizing the banks. But his prohibition of private aureate ownership inwards 1934 was viewed every bit percentage of the conspiracy to house all financial powerfulness inwards the hands of the Federal Reserve System.

The entire aureate criterion disceptation pits a number of conspiracy theories against i another. For example, if the Bank of England sought command over the U.S. economy, it mightiness receive got attempted to weaken the economic scheme past times leaving the aureate standard. With the US left every bit the solely nation inwards the the world whose currency was silent tied to gold, U.S. aureate reserves would receive got flooded out, as well as U.S. banks would receive got collapsed—as nearly happened.

On the other hand, the solution, as well as the path taken past times Franklin Roosevelt, was to secure the banking system’s aureate asset base of operations past times prohibiting private aureate ownership, except for jewelers as well as dentists. Yet this is viewed past times other conspiracy theorists every bit bear witness of Roosevelt’s programme to centralize the economic scheme as well as brand citizens dependent on worthless newspaper money.

In fact, solely a perfectly coordinated international conspiracy, assisted past times the deliberate actions of totalitarian states that hated each other—Germany as well as the Soviet Union—could receive got mayhap manipulated such events. Not solely would the Bank of England as well as the Federal Reserve System receive got needed to operate inwards unison, but so would the Bank of France, the Reichsbank, as well as virtually every other fundamental banking concern inwards the world, all coordinating vastly dissimilar command-and-control structures, governance systems, as well as national goals.

Over these conspiracies, i tin give the sack stretch yet about other layer, namely that of “international Jewry,” which was manipulating economical developments to its ain ends, about inwards concert with, as well as about antithetical to scenarios involving the British or a Roosevelt dictatorship.

Since World War II, about receive got been convinced that the Federal Reserve’s open-market activities were designed to ensure that those presidents favored past times the Fed maintained their office, as well as those who displeased the Fed lost theirs. Despite the Fed’s supposed independent status, many struggle that it has conveniently lowered rates to back upwards the economic scheme of leaders to whom it was favorably disposed.

Yet i of the most despised presidents of modern times, Bill Clinton (whom conspiracists receive got defendant of beingness a “Trilateralist as well as Bilderberger”), witnessed multiple interest-rate hikes past times the Fed during his two-term presidency. Thus, either he had no command over the Fed, or the Fed was working inwards direct opposition to the ends of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, as well as the Bilderberger group.

In the post–World War II era, the Bretton Woods understanding pegged unusual currencies to the dollar, as well as although the dollar was legally required to live convertible into gold, it was nevertheless pegged to aureate inwards price. That organization collapsed inwards 1968 after consistent federal budget deficits made it impossible for the dollar to grip its value. After that, the world’s currencies entered a to a greater extent than competitive era inwards which they “floated,” or competed, against each other.

Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 to a greater extent than consistent criticism of the Federal Reserve is that it has virtually eliminated aureate as well as silvery coinage, supposedly inwards violation of the Constitution. With all newspaper money inwards the command of the federal government, the economic scheme would live at the mercy of either the White House or the Fed, as well as individuals would move slaves to “fiat money.” For to a greater extent than than ii decades after the Great Depression, the prohibition against asset aureate remained inwards place, but inwards the early on 1970s, the authorities in i lawsuit once again allowed individuals to purchase as well as sell aureate coins.

Although the value of Canadian Maple Leafs as well as other pop aureate coins fluctuated wildly with the cost hikes inwards stone oil emanating from OPEC, inwards the 1980s the Fed’s anti-inflation policies nearly eliminated whatever premium on gold. For the side past times side xx years, aureate hovered steadily at historically depression prices, causing consternation with those who pointed to aureate every bit a key indicator of government-generated inflation.

If anything, the Fed has consistently lost command of the banking organization as well as seen its influence over the economic scheme weakened. The appearance of electronic funds transfers as well as high-speed satellite transmissions made data on financial markets available anywhere inwards the world, instantaneously.

No authorities could shroud weaknesses inwards its monetary or financial policy for to a greater extent than than a few hours. Meanwhile, the speed of banking transactions brought the United States— as well as the world—increasingly closer to competitive money, if non inwards actual newspaper form, at to the lowest degree inwards electronic cast as well as inwards credit/debit bill of fare substitutes.

Boris Yeltsin

Boris Yeltsin

Boris Yeltsin was the first president of Russia following the collapse of the communist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Yeltsin struggled against the vestiges of the former regime and the chaos following its col lapse to introduce a stable, democratic system.

Yeltsin was born in the region of Sverdlovsk in 1931. He studied construction at the Ural Polytechnic Institute, graduating in 1955. Yeltsin served in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) from 1961 to 1990. He first became a party direktur in 1969 and continued to develop contacts within the Soviet system.

Yeltsin rose to the top of the CPSU during the 1980s through connections with General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, the de facto leader of the country, and other reformers. Gorbachev appointed Yeltsin to the Politburo. Yeltsin portrayed himself as a reformer and people’s champion despite his lavish lifestyle. His initiatives became popular.


However, Yeltsin repeatedly shuffled and fired staff members and underwent criticism by hard-line Communists. Soon Gorbachev also began to criticize Yeltsin. In 1987 Gorbachev removed Yeltsin from his high-ranking party positions. Yeltsin became a harsh critic of Gorbachev and advocated a slow pace of reform, which became a hallmark of his later policies.

This was an effort to counter Gorbachev’s favoring of a decentralization of power to create hurried reform. In response, Yeltsin was demoted. He vented in the Congress of People’s Deputies, a parliamentary body established by Gorbachev. Yeltsin’s detractors attempted to undermine his integrity, accusing him of being heavily intoxicated in public.

Growing dissatisfaction with the Soviet system made men who opposed it, such as Yeltsin, popular. In 1989 Yeltsin ascended to the Congress of People’s Deputies as delegate from the Moscow district and gained a seat on the Supreme Soviet. In 1990 Yeltsin became chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic (RSFSR).

In June 1990 the Congress of People’s Deputies of the RSFSR adopted a declaration of sovereignty. Soon after, Yeltsin resigned from the CPSU. During the 1991 democratic presidential elections, Yeltsin won 57 percent of the vote. In August 1991 hard-line Communists launched a coup against Gorbachev, who was held in the Crimea.

Yeltsin returned to his presidential office in Moscow, which was surrounded by troops, to deal with the coup. From a tank turret, Yeltsin made a rousing speech that rallied the troops to defect in the face of mass popular demonstrations. The leaders of the coup were dispersed; Yeltsin emerged a national hero.

Gorbachev returned to power with diminished authority. Throughout 1991 the Russian government continued to take over the Soviet Union government. In November, Yeltsin banned the CPSU in the RSFSR.

In December, Yeltsin met with the presidents of Ukraine and Belarus to discuss the Soviet Union’s dissolution and its replacement with a voluntary Commonwealth of Independent States. On December 24 the Russian federation took the Soviet Union’s place in the United Nations. The next day, Gorbachev declared that the Soviet Union would cease to exist.

Despite the Soviet system’s collapse, its vestiges remained. The Supreme Soviet contained many opposed to Yeltsin’s policies, and local elites collaborated with criminal organizations. Yeltsin bypassed the Supreme Soviet and deliberated policy with his own inner circle.

Throughout 1992 Yeltsin attempted to implement economic reforms by decree and declined to hold new elections. In January, Yeltsin removed state control over the prices of most goods, thereby reintroducing a capitalist system and stabilizing currency. The administrative elite of the Soviet kurun retained control of factories, shops, offices, and farms.

Consequently they retarded implementation of Yeltsin’s reforms. Lobbyist groups pressured Yeltsin, who granted a concession continuing governmental subsidies and guarantees that the denationalization of companies would not hinder directors’ and workers’ immediate interests.

To appease his detractors, Yeltsin appointed their candidates to some key positions. In the face of skyrocketing inflation Yeltsin fired his premier and replaced him with Viktor Chernomyrdin, who introduced limits on profit rates for several goods.

Popular disenchantment with Yeltsin increased, and the country descended into crisis. Many farmers went unpaid for deliveries to state purchasing agents, and industrial production declined. Crime continued to grow. Several Russian republics rebelled. Yeltsin reasserted central authority, enacting a no-tolerance policy toward separatist movements to maintain the Russian state’s integrity during the implementation of reforms.

Yeltsin maneuvered around cabinet members appointed to appease the opposition. He had inherited a constitution enabling the Congress of People’s Deputies to intervene in any organ’s jurisdiction. Former Communist elites in positions of power were concerned with securing their dominance and engaged in a power struggle with Yeltsin.

In April 1993 Congress unsuccessfully attempted Yeltsin’s impeachment. In response, Yeltsin held a national referendum concerning popular trust in his socioeconomic policies. The results encouraged Yeltsin, who dissolved the Russian parliament in September.

Some of Yeltsin’s detractors barricaded themselves in the parliament building; Yeltsin ordered the seizure of the building and their forced removal and arrest. Yeltsin briefly declared a state of emergency. In December new elections were held under limited censorship, and Yeltsin initiated a new constitution increasing presidential authority.

Yeltsin reappointed his favored cabinet and quickly implemented reforms. He continued to position his supporters as provincial governors. Russia’s inability to establish a stable multiparty system gave Yeltsin freedom to maneuver.

In late 1993 remaining price controls were lifted, and privatization continued. By 1994, however, Yeltsin realized that economic reform was happening too fast, and conditions were improving unevenly throughout the country.

Yeltsin’s politics verged on opportunism. Following the nationalists’ success in the 1993 elections, Yeltsin pursued nationalist policies. Following the Communists’ success in 1995, Yeltsin adopted Communist policies. In December 1994 Yeltsin ordered Russian troops into the breakaway republic of Ichkeria.

His military campaigns were unsuccessful and unpopular, damaging his political reputation and his image as protector of Russia’s integrity. In 1995 Yeltsin suffered a heart attack. In 1996 he narrowly won the presidency in the face of a Communist resurgence resulting from disillusionment with democracy.

Yeltsin became increasingly unstable, and his alcohol consumption mounted. He resumed his economic reforms and reduced the budget deficit. However, Yeltsin did little to curb the corrupt practices carried out by his administration.

That same year Yeltsin announced Russia’s default on its debts; financial markets panicked; and Russia’s currency collapsed. In 1999 Yeltsin again fired his entire cabinet. His approval rating plummeting, Yeltsin resigned as president in favor of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.

World Bank

Founded at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in July 1944 by representatives of 44 governments, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), commonly known as the World Bank, was conceived as a mechanism through which financial resources could be funneled to Europe to aid in the rebuilding effort in the aftermath of World War II.

Initially based solely in Washington, D.C. (where its world headquarters remains), and from its founding to the present day dominated by the United States, the World Bank played a key role in the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union: at first in western Europe, and then through its loans to nation-states in Asia, Africa, and Latin America (the so-called Third World), considered by the United States key sites in the struggle against international communism.

From the 1950s the World Bank broadened its mandate to encompass economic development and poverty issues in Third World countries through its International Finance Corporation (IFC), its International Development Association (ADA), its International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), and its Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), which together with the IBRD compose the World Bank Group.


In 2007 the World Bank Group had 185 member states, with close coordination between the activities of its five entities and some 40 percent of its staff based outside the United States. Its governing structure consists of a board of governors, with a representative from each member state; a board of executive directors; and a president.

In the decades following its foundation, the World Bank underwent a number of broad shifts, from funding postwar reconstruction to large development projects in Third World countries to its current focus on the alleviation of poverty and sustainable development. Scholarly interpretations of the World Bank’s role in world affairs vary widely.

Neoclassical and neoliberal economists and social scientists tend to interpret the World Bank in positive terms, as a force for progressive social change. In contrast, many left-leaning social scientists tend to view it as serving the interests of multinational corporations and facilitating the foreign policy goals of the world’s advanced industrial countries, particularly the United States.

The bank itself acknowledges many of its past mistakes, particularly its support for massive "white elephant" projects in Africa and Latin America that lined the pockets of corrupt politicians and business owners while doing little to alleviate poverty or advance genuine economic development.

Such projects included the Kariba Dam in Zambia and Zimbabwe (Southern Rhodesia) in the 1950s, which displaced and impoverished thousands of Tonga people; the Singrauli thermal coal mining projects in India (financed from the mid-1970s to the early 1990s and accused of causing massive environmental damage and human misery); and the Yacyreta Dam in Paraguay and Argentina (financed in the 1980s and early 1990s and denounced as an environmental catastrophe and a "monument to corruption").

Despite divergent interpretations, all observers agree that the World Bank and the closely affiliated International Monetary Fund, also founded at Bretton Woods in 1944, have been among the most important international financial entities of the postwar era.

Vietnam War

Vietnam War

The Vietnam War was America’s longest war. In total, the conflict in Vietnam lasted from 1946 to 1975. The official dates of U.S. involvement were 1964–73. The Vietnam War was extremely costly and destructive and had a profound effect on both the soldiers who fought it and the civilians who lived through it. The Tonkin Gulf Resolution was signed by Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964 and gave him the power to wage war in Vietnam.

Throughout the 1940s and into the 1950s, the Vietminh under Ho Chi Minh were fighting the French colonial presence in Vietnam. By 1954 the United States was paying 80 percent of the cost of France’s war against the Vietminh. In July 1954 the French and the Vietminh signed an armistice in Geneva, which divided Vietnam at the 17th parallel.

Ho Chi Minh controlled the north, and Vietnam-wide elections were to be held in 1956. The United States did not sign the agreement, and plans were put in place to stop Ho Chi Minh’s plans to conquer all of Vietnam. President Dwight Eisenhower was afraid that if Vietnam fell to communism, the rest of Southeast Asia would follow.


Not wanting Vietnam to be under the control of a communist leader, the United States pushed aside the French puppet leader and replaced him with Ngo Dinh Diem, a Vietnamese nationalist. Many were confident that Diem could rally Vietnam against communism. The United States increased aid to South Vietnam, and the first U.S. advisers arrived there in early 1955. These decisions laid the groundwork for the Vietnam War.

Ho Chi Minh was frustrated that Vietnam was not yet independent and unified, so in 1957 the Vietminh in South Vietnam began to revolt against the Diem regime. In May 1959 communist North Vietnam came to the aid of the revolutionaries in the south. As a result, the United States increased its aid to South Vietnam.

In South Vietnam conditions deteriorated rapidly. Diem’s regime never gained popular support. In 1960 anti-Diem communists and Buddhists created the National Liberation Front, with the Vietcong as its military wing, and began operations against Diem’s forces.

A young soldier being sent to vietnam

The United States had pledged in the 1954 South East Asia Treaty Organization pact to defend South Vietnam against external aggression, and President John F. Kennedy lived up to that obligation.

To Kennedy and other politicians, Vietnam was another cold war battlefield. Signs of weakness would lead the Soviet Union to believe that the United States was weak and vulnerable. As such, South Vietnam also became a testing facility for counter-insurgency units.

The U.S. Green Berets advised the South Vietnamese army, and civilians provided medical and technical aid and economic and political reforms, all in an effort to "win the hearts and minds" of the Vietnamese.

There was a general consensus in Kennedy’s administration about the consequences of losing Vietnam to communism; there were others who feared the worst. Undersecretary of State George Ball told Kennedy that within five years there would be 300,000 U.S. soldiers in Vietnam. However, Ball was incorrect: within five years nearly 400,000 soldiers were in Vietnam.

Female soldier, Vietnam war

Even with his advisers calling for escalation, Kennedy proceeded cautiously. By the middle of 1962 he had increased the number of military advisers from 700 to 12,000. He added another 5,000 in 1963.

As the number of casualties increased, the prospects of withdrawing became increasingly difficult. In the face of so many problems, Kennedy gave the order to overthrow Diem. On November 1, South Vietnamese military officials, with the assistance of the U.S. embassy in Saigon, arrested Diem and his brother.

While in custody, both were assassinated. However, the plan backfired. A number of inexperienced military officers took command in South Vietnam with little support and were unable to govern effectively. The country sank deeper into trouble and the role of the United States increased.

After President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963, the issue of Vietnam fell to President Lyndon B. Johnson; Johnson was deeply troubled over Vietnam and had been for some time. During the rest of the months leading up to the November 1964 election, Johnson tried all he could to keep the issue of Vietnam in the background, fearing it would hurt his chances of being elected.

In many of his conversations with Robert McNamara, secretary of defense, Johnson discussed doing all he could to keep the public thinking that he had made no simpulan decisions on Vietnam.

Some advisers were trying to give Johnson suggestions for getting out of Vietnam and still saving face; meanwhile, the Joint Chiefs of Staff were advising him that preventing the loss of South Vietnam was of overriding importance to the United States.

Treating the wounded soldier

Robert McNamara visited Saigon. He reported to Johnson that conditions had worsened there since General Khanh took over power in January 1964. Many officials there favored increased pressure on North Vietnam, including air strikes. McNamara, aware of Johnson’s wish to be ambiguous to the public regarding his stance, offered to take a lot of the heat.

Johnson, knowing the conditions in Vietnam, understood that in order to achieve the ambitious conditions set out in McNamara’s policy statement, an escalation of military power in the country would have to be undertaken.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed in Congress on August 7, 1964. It provided the legal authority for Johnson to escalate the Vietnam War. On August 2 North Vietnamese gunboats had attacked the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin. On August 4 the Maddox and another vessel, the USS Turner Joy, reported being under attack.

Many doubts exist about whether or not the second attack actually took place, but the Johnson administration used it as a pretext for retaliation. Johnson ordered the first U.S. air strikes against North Vietnam. The resolution was passed 88-2.

Johnson won the 1964 presidential election by a landslide. In addition to his domestic agenda, the Great Society, Vietnam was the largest issue he dealt with. Still relying on trusted advisers like Richard Russell, even though he would not take his advice, Johnson had countless discussions about Vietnam.

Johnson’s rationalization was what he considered a treaty commitment inherited from Eisenhower and Kennedy. No matter what Johnson said to him, Russell stuck to his conviction that Vietnam was not the place to invest U.S. blood and treasure. Johnson told Everett Dirksen, Senate minority leader, that communist propaganda, his advice from Eisenhower, and the domino theory informed his policies with regard to Vietnam.

Major Escalation

US Air Force First Lieutenant being held captive by a young North Vietnamese girl,
Vietnam War, 1967

After July 1965 the war escalated into a major international conflict. The North Vietnamese army numbered in the thousands, and they supported an estimated National Liberation Front force of 80,000. From 6,000 U.S. troops in Vietnam in July 1965, the number increased to over 536,000 by 1968, with an additional 800,000 South Vietnamese troops.

Both sides played to their own strengths. The United States had great wealth, modern weapons, and a highly trained military force under the command of General William Westmoreland. Using bombing raids and search-and-destroy missions, it sought to force the opponent to surrender.

The National Liberation Front and the North Vietnamese army, under the exceptional direction of Vo Nguyen Giap, used a different strategy altogether. They were lightly armed and knew the area. They relied on the guerrilla warfare tactics of stealth and mobility. Giap wanted to wear down the United States and its allies by harassment missions.

Between 1965 and 1967 the United States did untold amounts of damage to Vietnam. Bombing increased from 63,000 tons in 1965 to over 226,000 tons in 1967. The U.S. military strategy failed to produce clear results. The war dragged on, and opposition to the conflict in the United States intensified.

Countless protests took place in cities and on college campuses. Troops who returned home were often treated poorly, quite the opposite of the heroes’ welcome experienced by returning veterans of World War II.

The Tet Offensive of 1968 brought a new phase of the war. In late 1967 the North Vietnamese launched operations in remote areas to draw U.S. forces away from cities. On January 31, 1968, the National Liberation Front launched massive attacks on the unsecured urban areas.

F-4 bomb run Vietnam....help is on the way.

They led strikes on 36 provincial capitals, 5 major cities in the south, and 64 district capitals. They also attacked the U.S. embassy in Saigon and captured Hue for a period. Although the Tet Offensive failed overall, it had a profound psychological effect on the people of the United States.

Protests increased, and murmurs that the war was unwinnable became much more audible. As a result of developments in Vietnam and widespread unrest across the country, Lyndon Johnson announced that he would not seek reelection in 1968.

After the Tet Offensive, ensuing peace talks failed to produce any agreement. The dilema of Vietnam fell to the fourth U.S. president involved in the Vietnam conflict, Richard Nixon.

In 1969 he expanded the war into neighboring Cambodia, a move that he kept from the press, further increasing the gap in the people’s trust in the government when he went public about the decision in 1970. The domestic backlash led to a new wave of protests, during which four students died at Kent State University in Ohio, and two more at Jackson State University in Mississippi.

Photo by Art Greenspon/AP - Vietnam War. April 1968

Nixon’s involvement in Vietnam was marked by increased domestic opposition. After the Cambodian affair, Congress repealed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. The trial of Lieutenant William Calley, commander of a unit that murdered 500 South Vietnamese civilians at My Lai, raised fundamental susila questions about the war.

Finally, the Pentagon Papers were published in 1971, which deepened public distrust in the government. Polls showed that more than 70 percent of Americans felt that the United States had erred when it sent troops into Vietnam. During 1972–73 the U.S. phase of the war ended.

A peace agreement was signed in Paris on January 27, 1973. It allowed for the extraction of U.S. military forces from Vietnam and the return of U.S. prisoners of war but did not address the fundamental issues over which the war had been fought.

North Vietnam was allowed to leave 150,000 troops in the south, and the future of South Vietnam was not directly and clearly spelled out. Fighting broke out between the north and the south, and the U.S. Congress drastically cut military and economic aid to South Vietnam.

When Richard Nixon resigned because of the Watergate scandal, the Vietnam War issue was passed to its fifth president, Gerald Ford. Congress rejected his request for $722 million in aid for South Vietnam, agreeing to only $300 million in emergency aid to extract the remaining U.S. personnel from the south. The climax of this came on May 1, 1975, with a harrowing rooftop helicopter evacuation.

Those who never return

The total cost of the war was extensive. South Vietnamese military casualties exceeded 350,000, and estimates of North Vietnamese losses range between 500,000 and 1 million. Civilian deaths cannot be accurately counted but ran into the millions. More than 58,000 U.S. troops were killed, and over 300,000 were injured. The total financial cost of the war exceeded $167 billion.

Many of Johnson’s Great Society reforms were cut back because of the increased military expenditures. Veterans returning home experienced long-lasting effects, which ranged from flashbacks to posttraumatic stress disorder to the effects of exposure to chemicals. Furthermore, the war saw no tangible results. Once the United States evacuated Saigon, the North overran the city, and Vietnam was united under communist rule.

Ukraine

Ukraine

Since 1991, Ukraine has been an independent state, the sovereignty of which is now recognized by all the countries of the world. Ukraine is one of the biggest European states (603,700 square kilometers). Ukraine has common borders with seven countries (Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Moldova, Russia, and Byelorussia), and the Black and Azov Seas are on its southern border.

Ukraine consists of 24 regions (oblast) and the Crimea Autonomous Republic. The capital of Ukraine is Kiev. A Pan-Ukrainian population census in 2001 found the total number of inhabitants at 48,416,000. The majority are city inhabitants, and 32 percent live in the countryside.

Over 100 ethnicities and nationalities are represented in contemporary Ukraine. Among them are Ukrainians, Russians, Belorussians, Moldavians, Crimean Tatars, and Bulgarians. Most of the population of Ukraine belongs to the Orthodox Christian Church.


Striving for national and state independence was a key issue in Ukraine in the 20th century. This aspiration, partly realized during the hard days of 1917–20, remained potent political motivation for Ukrainians living all over the world. The democracy brought by Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika inspired ethnic minorities in the Soviet Union to activate national liberation movements.

Revision of the Ukrainian nation historical past, promoted by representatives of the Ukrainian Helsinki Group of human rights activists; a rise in national identity supported and developed by artists, poets, writers, and scientists; and the people’s movement known as "meeting democracy" had created the necessary background for historical action. On July 16, 1990, the Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of Ukraine, first among the republics of the former Soviet Union, adopted a declaration of state sovereignty of Ukraine.

Ukraine map

The next step was a coup that took place in the Soviet Union on August 19–21, 1994, and that resulted in the pronouncement of the Act of State Independence of Ukraine by Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Soon afterward the first elections were held for president of independent Ukraine (Leonid Kravchuk won and was president from 1991 to 1994), combined with an all Ukrainian referendum for endorsement of the independence of Ukraine.

Since that time a series of measures aimed at the organization of bodies and institutions necessary for an independent Ukraine have been undertaken. Some acts were compromises with the Russian Federation; because of the deep economic integration of both countries, it was hard to become separated at once.

Issues included the state border between Ukraine and Russia in the Azov Sea; the presence of the Russian navy in Sevastopol in Crimea and the status of that city; and the persoalan of the frontier with Romania around Zmeinyi Island. Some others still remain only partially solved.

On December 7–8, 1991, the presidents of Russia, Ukraine, and Belorussia signed a document denouncing the union treaty of 1922, according to which the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had been organized. A treaty establishing a Commonwealth of Independent States was signed instead. Since that time, Ukraine has been free to conduct its internal policy.

During 1991–94 a series of democratic reforms were instituted in Ukraine, among which the most important were beginning a constitutional process, the improvement of the multiparty system, the formulation of basic principles of foreign policy and international cooperation, the formulation of a military doctrine, introduction of economic reforms, the elaboration of an ethnic policy, and the creation of relationships with the different churches represented in Ukraine.

The presidential and parliamentary elections of 1994 opened a new phase in the political development of Ukraine. The keystone of the political history of Ukraine at that time was the adoption of a new constitution (June 28, 1996), a long and hard process that repeatedly caused political and parliamentary criss.

It was the beginning of parliamentary and presidential opposition, which led to growing tension during Kuchma’s presidency in relation to the composition of parliament factions and their representation.

The presidential elections of 2004 and the following Orange Revolution opened a new masa in the political history of Ukraine, characterized by general democratization and liberalization of the political process.

Ukrainians dissatisfied with officially announced results of the runoff election between presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovich and leader of the opposition Viktor Yuschenko demonstrated in the principal square of Kiev—the Maidan (Square) of Independence—and for several weeks people from various cities, towns, and villages in Ukraine marched for democracy, for their political rights, and for the possibility to make their political choices freely.

Orange Revolution

Orange Revolution

Representatives of different political parties and movements united their efforts in this process, and the Orange Revolution ended in a victory for democracy in Ukraine. A coalition government, with the participation of all "orange" parties and movements, was formed, with Julia Timoshenko as the first woman prime minister in the history of Ukraine.

In local administrations, thousands of former functionaries of different levels have been replaced by "orange" democrats. New priorities in foreign policy, a tendency toward integration with the European Union (EU) and cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and reorientation of trade relationships have been elaborated.

Nevertheless, as early as the beginning of September 2005, Julia Timoshenko’s government was dismissed, and it became clear that there were serious discrepancies among Orange Revolution leaders and representatives of different orange parties.

Political reform that implies the transition of Ukraine from presidential to parliamentary republic was adopted by the parliament and became a point of serious discussion among "orange" revolutionaries, social democrats, representatives of the Party of Regions, and communists. The ideals of democracy and freedom still remain the essence of the Viktor Yuschenko presidency, as was shown by the first free parliamentary election in March 2006.

Viktor Yuschenko

Shortly after its independence, Ukraine faced problems during the transitional period of economic development from planned socialism to free-market forms. The destruction of traditional Soviet resources, marketing, and energetic and macroeconomic networks, along with the extreme difficulty of creating new ones in the European community, and the urgent need for modernization of basic equipment and production techniques, negatively influenced the general state and the prospects of further development of the economy of Ukraine. A so-called shadow economy sprang up and grew rapidly with substantial support from the highest administration of Ukraine, which appeared to be corrupt.

Inflation, accompanied by a decrease in purchasing power, indicated that the standard of living of Ukrainians decreased to a crucial level, creating a need for the state administration to finance a series of social programs. Pension reform, changes in support for families with low income, support for veterans of World War II, and many other social actions were undertaken.

Broad-scale raising of salaries, stipends, and pensions began in 2004 under the government headed by Viktor Yanukovich on the eve of presidential elections. The new president of Ukraine, Viktor Yuschenko, and his ministries consequently instituted a series of social programs aimed at improving the standard of living.

A series of economic reforms, including the introduction of new currency, privatization in agriculture and industry, promotion of national producers and national product exportation, searches for new investments and new sources of power supply abroad, and cooperation with the World Bank, gradually contributed to a general slow growth of the Ukrainian economy after 2000.

The creation of a new macroeconomic network, tending toward integration with the European Union (EU) and the World Trade Organization (WTO), is the principal strategic goal proclaimed by President Yuschenko.

The organization of an independent state of Ukraine led to a new animo in the development of the ideology and culture of the country, connected with the formation of the ideas of national unity and ethnic and national self-identification.

The process of national memory revival, studies of the cultural and historical past of the Ukrainian nation, rediscovering cultural heritage, the revival of the folk culture of national minorities, and the establishment of fruitful connections with the Ukrainian diaspora are key aspects of the cultural development of Ukraine in the new millenium.

One of the sharpest debates in the context of cultural development is the discussion of an official language of Ukraine. It was demonstrated in the presidential election of 2004 and the parliamentary election of 2006 that a strong Russian-speaking opposition still exists in Ukraine.

The activation of religious life in independent Ukraine after the dismantling of a totalitarian ideology brought a series of conflicts, first of all among representatives of different branches of Orthodox Christianity. As stated by the constitution of Ukraine, the nonobligatory character of any religion creates the background necessary for religious pluralism and freedom of people’s consciousness.

Third World/Global South

The term Third World applies to those nations in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere that mostly secured independence from the imperial powers after World War II. In the cold war construct the First World, dominated by the United States, also included Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan.

These nations were wealthy, highly industrialized, urban, largely secular, democratic, and had capitalist economies. The Second World consisted of the Soviet bloc, dominated by the Soviet Union.

These nations were industrialized but not as wealthy as the First World; they were secular, authoritarian, and had socialist economics. The Third World nations, consisting of two-thirds of the world’s population, were poor, rural, and agrarian, with traditional societies.


After the breakup of the Soviet bloc and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the terms no longer applied and because most of the nations of the Third World were south of the equator the term Global South came to be used as a collective label for these nations.

The gap between rich and poor nations grew in the 20th century. As the Indian prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru commented, "The poor have to run fast just to keep up". Third World countries were caught in a cycle of poverty, with low incomes and low production. After independence many became dictatorships and attempted to improve their economies, usually unsuccessfully, by adopting socialist systems on the Soviet state capitalist model.

Economists often referred to the poor developing nations as low-GDP (low Gross Domestic Product) countries, meaning they produced little in the way of goods and services. Countries in the Global South adopted a wide variety of methods to break out of the cycle of poverty.

In China Mao Zedong led a socialist revolution and mobilized the masses, but only with privatization after his death did the Chinese economy begin to take off. India, the world’s most populous democracy, adopted a capitalist approach; India also successfully applied the technology of the Green Revolution, the use of hybrid seeds to increase agricultural productivity.

At the beginning of the 20th century, India suffered major famines but by the end of the century it was exporting foodstuffs. India and many other poor nations also invested heavily in education. In Southeast Asia educated workers became the backbone of industrialization and the development of high-tech firms.

Other nations built huge development projects, such as the Aswan Dam in Egypt and the Three Gorges Dam in China. Following Western advice in the 1950s and 1960s, many Third World nations concentrated on industrialization, to the detriment of the agricultural sector. That, along with ecological changes, droughts along wide bands of Africa, civil wars, political corruption, and instability, contributed to large famines and mass starvation in many African nations.

In the Middle East oil-producing nations joined a cartel, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), to gain increased revenues from their major resource. They then used the new revenues to build modern infrastructures. Kuwait was able to provide a complete welfare system from cradle to grave for its small population.

Other countries, such as the "little dragons" in Southeast Asia (Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore), attracted foreign businesses and industries. Many nations in South America and Africa also borrowed vast amounts of money from private and public Western banks, such as the World Bank, to bring much-needed capital into their countries.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also provided assistance in welfare, food, education, and healthcare. Brazil used foreign loans to create new industries and provide jobs, but it, along with many other countries, became ensnared in a web of indebtedness that was impossible to repay.

By the 1990s rich nations promised but often failed to deliver increased foreign aid and to forgive or restructure the debts of these nations, especially the poorest in Africa. Other nations had some modest successes in adopting appropriate technology to establish small, inexpensive grassroots projects.

Population growth also contributed to economic problems. In Kenya the population doubled every 18 years and in Egypt every 26 years, compared to every 92 in the United States. By 2000 the world’s population had exceeded 6 billion, from 1 billion in 1800. It was expected to reach 9 billion by 2054.

In poor countries high infant mortality contributed to the desire to have many children in hopes that at least some would survive to adulthood and be able to care for their parents, especially their mothers, in their old age. To limit its population China adopted a draconian one-child policy and strictly enforced it through its totalitarian system.

India adopted numerous approaches in attempts to limit population growth; these were often accepted by urban elites, but peasants continued to value large families. In societies where women had low status, having children, especially boys, brought status and the hope of some security.

The educational status of many improved, and literacy rates improved, although in many countries boys enjoyed higher rates of education than girls. While programs to empower women were often successful, they were also resisted by traditional and religious leaders.

Women’s work continued to be undervalued and underpaid. Child labor was yet another problem. Globalization and privatization in the late 20th century actually caused some nations to become poorer as prices for agricultural goods and raw materials dropped.

In some Global South nations, such as India, a few people became millionaires, but most remained desperately poor. In the 1990s, incomes in 54 nations actually declined, and in Zimbabwe life expectancy fell from 56 to 331, compared to over 80 in the United States and Japan. Disease, especially AIDS, contributed to further economic and social problems, particularly in many southern African countries.

At the 2000 Millennium Summit, world leaders agreed to institute programs aimed at cutting in half the number of people living on under $1 a day and at halving the number of people suffering from hunger by 2015. Five years later the commitments of the donor nations, especially the United States, had fallen short of the promises made, and it remained uncertain whether the goals would be met.

Margaret baroness Thatcher of Kesteven

Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s first woman prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party, helped reverse the economic decline of her country. Even her enemies grudgingly respected the strong-willed "iron lady". She rejected the "consensus" politics that had characterized Britain since World War II in favor of polarizing "conviction" politics.

During her 10 years as the head of the British government, she created a successful free-market economy, but at a high price: deindustrialization of many old factory towns and, for several years, massive unemployment. Strongly nationalistic, Thatcher fought for Britain within and sometimes against the European Union.

She was lucky that the main body of the Labour Party moved to the left and Labour moderates broke away to form their own party; she defeated her divided opponents at general elections without ever winning over a majority of the voters. She also was lucky to have the opportunity to fight a short, successful, and very popular war with distant Argentina, whose brutal military dictatorship had seized a sparsely populated and almost unknown British colony, the Falkland Islands.

Labour eventually accepted her basic policies. She succeeded in changing the language of political discourse. Except for those from a few stubborn socialists, proposals for the nationalization of major industries disappeared from the debate over public policy.


In part because Thatcher was personally abrasive, she was controversial in her own Conservative Party. It was a rebellion among her nominal supporters that ended her political career. According to rumor, moreover, she did not get along with the other important woman in the British government, Queen Elizabeth II.

Intelligence and hard work, not family connections, explain Thatcher’s rise to power. Her principles owed much to the middle-class values of her upbringing. Thatcher was born Margaret Hilda Roberts on October 13, 1925, in Grantham, a small town in eastern England. Her father was a grocer, and the family lived over his shop. Active in civic affairs, her father served for many years on the city council and at one point held the title of mayor.

After attending local state schools Margaret Roberts studied chemistry at Somerville College, a women’s college that was part of Oxford University. Already politically minded, she was elected president of Oxford’s student Conservative organization in 1946, the year after Labour had crushed her party in the general election that followed the defeat of Nazi Germany.

After university she worked for several years as a research chemist. In addition, she stood for Parliament, always for seats that were hopeless for her party. During her political campaigns she met Dennis Thatcher, a wealthy businessman, whom she married in 1951. She left her first career as a research chemist to study law.

In 1953 she gave birth to twins, Carol and Mark. Thatcher was in her mid-30s when in 1959 she was elected to the House of Commons for the safe Conservative seat of Finchley in north London. Two years later she was appointed to a bau kencur position in the Harold Macmillan government as parliamentary secretary at the ministry of pensions and national service.

Thatcher’s first cabinet office came in the Edward Heath government. In 1970 she was appointed minister for education. As part of broader cuts in spending she eliminated free milk for school-children. The Labour Party attacked her as the heartless "Thatcher, the milk snatcher".

Heath’s failure to stand up to the trade unions successfully and his defeat in two 1974 general elections cost him the support of many Conservatives. Despite his weakness, his principal colleagues were reluctant to challenge him. Thatcher, a midlevel figure in the Conservative Party with limited ministerial experience, dared in 1975.

After the first ballot Heath withdrew, and on the second ballot Thatcher was elected leader of the Conservative Party. Four years later, the Conservatives won the general election, and Thatcher became prime minister. She also led her party to victory in the next two general elections.

Her policies during her more than a decade as prime minister came to be called "Thatcherism". She acknowledged that many of her ideas came from an older Conservative politician, Sir Keith Joseph. He argued that Britain needed to revive its entrepreneurial spirit.

Thatcher became prime minister during a two-sided economic crisis: a depression accompanied by rising prices. She made her first priority fighting double-digit inflation. She cut government spending, with higher education suffering particularly hard.

She increased interest rates and sales taxes and eventually income taxes too. Manufacturing shrank, and several million workers lost their jobs. It took years for this bitter medicine to cure runaway inflation, but it did. Some members of Thatcher’s own party thought that the human cost of her policies was unacceptable.

Convinced that the welfare state had ruined Britain, Thatcher wanted to encourage individualism and discourage reliance on the state. Consequently, she made it easy for tenants in council houses (public housing) to buy their homes. Pressured by an increase in rent, hundreds of thousands did. As property owners, they were more inclined to vote Conservative.

Committed to competition and capitalism, Thatcher regarded the nationalized industries as a dead weight handicapping the British economy. In the early 1980s she sold off minor parts of the state’s array of industries, such as the railroad hotels, but it was not until the mid-1980s that privatization became dramatic. At this time Thatcher sold the telephone system, the gas industry, the principal automobile and truck manufacturers, the steel industry, and water companies.

Thatcher worried that the power of Britain’s militant trade unions crippled the economy. She decided to tame them. In 1984 Parliament enacted legislation that required a majority vote by secret ballot for a legal strike. In the same year, the leader of the coal miners challenged the management of one of the last nationalized industries. He hoped to block the closing of unprofitable mines.

He used outside militants to intimidate working miners. These tactics offended public opinion. Worried about their own jobs, few other unions supported the miners. After nearly a year, the strike collapsed. As a result of competition from oil and natural gas, the coal mining industry soon shrank to almost nothing.

Priding herself on her decisiveness and rarely conciliatory toward opponents, Thatcher did not care how many people she alienated. She rejected compromise as weakness. Victory over Argentina in the Falklands War was perhaps her only success that nearly everybody applauded.

She refused any compromise when members of the Irish Republican Army, imprisoned in Ulster, started a hunger strike to be recognized as political prisoners. Ten IRA men died of starvation. Labour controlled many local councils, including that of greater London.

Thatcher considered their spending profligate, and so she had Parliament abolish the troublesome councils. She regarded the European Community without enthusiasm. Protective of British sovereignty, she was suspicious of the animo toward economic and political centralization within the European Union.

In contrast to her ambivalence toward Europe, she was a staunch ally of the United States. She was particularly close to President Ronald Reagan. Although they were much alike in their economic and foreign policies and their insistence upon law and order, Thatcher did not share Reagan’s concern for budpekerti issues in politics.

She voted to decriminalize homosexuality and to legalize abortion. Thatcher’s relationship with the United States was, in part, the result of political realism. The world’s most powerful nation was a useful ally. Her realism also showed in her conciliatory relationship toward Mikhail Gorbachev, the last ruler of the Soviet Union.

She recognized the importance of the reforms that he advocated in changing the nature of communism in his powerful country and the flexibility that he showed outside the Soviet Union. Unlike Reagan, she was not so entranced with Gorbachev as to propose mutual nuclear disarmament, but she did think the Soviet leader was somebody with whom she could "do business".

In her last years as prime minister Thatcher blundered politically, which gave an opening to her numerous enemies within the Conservative Party. In her biggest mistake, she proposed a reform of local government finance widely denounced as an unfair poll tax. Except for the well-off, nearly all households would pay more than they had in the past.

Perhaps because she was preparing for war against Iraq in alliance with the United States, Thatcher paid insufficient attention to the political situation at home. She also erred by making provocatively anti–European Union remarks that caused her foreign secretary to resign. One of her old enemies, a former defense secretary, challenged Thatcher for the party leadership in late 1990.

When she failed to win on the first ballot, she withdrew and threw her support to one of her loyalists, John Major. After Major became Conservative Party leader and prime minister, Thatcher quickly alienated her one-time favorite. Calling herself a "good back-seat driver", she interfered too much, undermining the new prime minister’s authority.

In retirement Thatcher took a nonhereditary peerage (baroness Thatcher of Kesteven) that made her a member of the House of Lords. She also wrote her memoirs. She outraged public opinion by visiting the former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet while he was under house arrest in Britain. Most people believed that he was guilty of torturing and murdering opponents in his home country.

By the first years of the 21st century, Thatcher’s physical and mental health began to fail. She rarely made public appearances and no longer gave speeches. Her husband died in 2003, and her children sometimes proved to be an embarrassment.

Her son, Mark, became involved in an abortive coup against an African government. Her daughter, Carol, appeared on a widely viewed and undignified "reality" television program. According to her, Thatcher suffered from a form of dementia that destroyed her short-term memory.

Dissolution of the Soviet Union

In 1989 eastern European countries of the Warsaw Pact, which had been beholden to the Soviet Union since the end of World War II, had their communist governments replaced with noncommunist governments. For the first time in over 30 years the borders between eastern and western Europe were opened.

The following year the Congress of People’s Deputies changed the Soviet constitution and removed the Communist Party’s monopoly from the constitution by allowing multiple parties. In March the Baltic States held elections and their national independence parties gained majorities in each of the republics. At this time Lithuania decided to declare its independence from the Soviet Union, the first republic to do so.

In June 1990 Russia declared its right to rule itself separate from the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. During the remainder of the summer the other republics also declared their right to self-rule. Mikhail Gorbachev tried to find a way to salvage the Soviet Union.


His efforts were to be put to a vote in August 1991, but hard-line communists launched an unsuccessful coup in Moscow. The failed coup brought the Communist Party down, and none of the republics was interested in trying to save the Soviet Union. On Christmas Day 1991 Gorbachev resigned, ending the Soviet Union.

Throughout 1989 Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria, which had been under Soviet control since the end of World War II, established democratic governments and cut their ties with the Soviet Union.

Seeing these events, the Baltic countries started to voice their desire to be free of the Soviet Union also. The Baltic countries had been absorbed by the Soviet Union as part of a treaty (the Nazi-Soviet Pact) it had made with Nazi Germany in 1939.

Gorbachev did not care how a republic had come to be part of the Soviet Union; in his view none of the republics should be allowed to leave the Soviet Union. Seeing the events in eastern Europe only encouraged the Baltic republics. Attempts to buy off the republics with token freedoms only encouraged them to continue to push for separation from the Soviet Union.

Following the Baltic republics’ lead was the Moldavian Republic. Originally part of Romania, Moldavia was given to the Soviet Union as part of the Nazi-Soviet Pact. Independence movements also appeared in the Trans-Caucasian region of the Soviet Union, made up of the republics of Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan.

In Armenia and Azerbaijan, the growth in nationalistic parties also led to a dispute between them over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. In Georgia, the massacre of female protesters in the capital of Tbilisi in April 1989 only fueled the desire to be free of the Soviet Union.

In early February 1990, the Communist Party’s Central Committee met to consider a draft anjuran to allow multiple parties. The congress also created the office of the president of the Soviet Union and elected Gorbachev to the office.

After the congress, in April, Gorbachev announced the Law of Secession, which laid out the process that the republics would have to follow in order to gain their independence. The process was long and drawn out.

Lithuanian president: Vytautas Landsbergis

One of the first uses of the law was to pressure Lithuania to do as the Soviet government said or face the consequences. Lithuanian president Vytautas Landsbergis refused, saying that a foreign power had no right to make decisions about how his country should be run. On April 18, the Soviet government started an economic blockade of Lithuania.

The Soviets lifted the blockade on June 29 when the Lithuanian parliament suspended the independence decree. Latvia (May 4) and Estonia (May 8) followed Lithuania’s lead, and even though Gorbachev outlawed their decrees, they did not suffer the blockade as Lithuania did.

The Baltic republics were not the only ones moving toward independence. In Russia, the Russian Supreme Soviet elected Boris Yeltsin as chairman on May 29. Running against 13 other candidates, Yeltsin introduced a platform that pushed for Russian sovereignty in the Soviet Union, making Russian law take precedent over Soviet law; provided for multiparty democracy; and declared that Russia should conduct its own foreign policy with all other countries, including other republics of the Soviet Union. The actual declaration came on June 12, 1990, at which time Russia also declared its right to control the natural resources of its country. Other republics followed suit.

Through the end of 1990 Lithuania continued to try to work out a deal with the Soviet government, but the Soviets continued to stall. Therefore, on January 2, 1991, Landsbergis withdrew the suspension of the independence decree. In response to this action, paramilitary police in Vilnius (the capital of Lithuania) and Riga (the capital of Latvia) seized various buildings.

Then on January 7 the Soviet Ministry of Defense ordered troops into all three of the Baltic States as well as Moldavia, Georgia, and the Ukraine. The Soviet military continued to occupy buildings belonging to the Lithuanian government, and on January 13 it attacked the capital’s television center and in the process killed 14 people and wounded over 200.

At about the same time, Gorbachev was telling the Soviet government that force would not be used against the people of Lithuania. These contradictory actions and talk hurt Gorbachev, who claimed not to have had any advanced knowledge of what the military was going to do.

A few days later, on January 20, violence broke out in Latvia when Soviet paramilitary police stormed a government building in Latvia and killed two local police officers. The Baltic republics gained support from Russia when Yeltsin signed a document recognizing the independence of the Baltic States on behalf of Russia, which was exerting its right to conduct its own foreign policy separate from that of the Soviet Union.

Although the Baltic republics had started out leading the move toward independence from the Soviet Union, Russia now began to take a more prominent role. In January 1991 Gorbachev issued a decree that the Soviet army was to patrol the streets of the larger cities in the Soviet Union to help stop crime and control protests; Russia objected.

When Yeltsin attacked Gorbachev during a television interview, Yeltsin found himself under attack by various groups. Although Gorbachev’s actions might be decidedly anti-independence for the republics, he still had the support of many of the people in the Soviet Union and Western countries.

On March 17, 1991, the idea of maintaining a union of the republics was put to a vote of the people of the Soviet Union. The vote passed, although six of the republics (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Armenia, Georgia, and Moldavia) did not participate in the referendum since they claimed that they were not part of the Soviet Union.

Yeltsin claimed that the referendum was nothing more then an attempt by Gorbachev to generate support for his leadership. Gorbachev then called a conference and invited Yeltsin and the presidents of eight other republics to talk about a anjuran for a new Union Treaty and new Union Constitution. Gorbachev and the other presidents signed a declaration supporting the drafting of a new treaty and constitution.

May saw more changes as the republics continued to move away from the Soviet Union. On May 5 the Russian branch of the KGB separated itself from the Soviet Union’s institution. Moldavia changed its official name to the Moldavian Republic, dropping the words Soviet and Socialist. Then on May 26 Georgia had its first-ever direct presidential election.

The Coup

Coup to remove Gorbachev from power (1)

Gorbachev and Yeltsin continued to work out the details of the new Union Treaty. The treaty would keep the Soviet Union alive, but would limit the areas over which it could exercise control and make participation in the union voluntary. Before the treaty was enacted, a group of hard-line communists launched a coup to remove Gorbachev from power. The coup lasted for only three days.

The committee in charge of the coup announced a state of emergency and placed Gorbachev under house arrest, cutting off his ability to communicate with the outside world. They then tried to get him to sign a decree declaring a state of emergency, but he refused. With Gorbachev’s refusal to cooperate, the coup started to come unraveled.

The plotters had planned to arrest Yeltsin also, but missed their chance. Instead, Yeltsin went to the Russian Parliament building and appealed to the citizens of Moscow to ignore the unlawful coup. The military was unwilling to move against the civilians, and the coup ended on August 21.

Gorbachev returned to Moscow. Because of the coup, Yeltsin became the satria of the hour, and his popularity grew rapidly. Unfortunately for Gorbachev, his popularity plummeted and accelerated the decline of the Soviet Union. Yeltsin forced Gorbachev to return control of the natural resources and enterprises on Russian territory back to Russia from the Soviet Union.

Coup to remove Gorbachev from power (2)

December saw the Soviet Union brought to an end. On December 1 the Ukraine held a referendum to allow the people to vote in support of or against the declaration of independence from the Soviet Union. The referendum passed by a wide margin.

Then the leaders of Russia, the Ukraine, and Belarus met to determine the future of the Soviet Union and their republics. On December 8 they announced the end of the Soviet Union and the creation of a Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Membership in the CIS was open to all former members of the Soviet Union and any other state interested in joining.

On December 12 Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan joined the CIS. More meetings were held on December 21, and Moldavia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia joined. During this meeting the republics agreed to abolish the position of president of the Soviet Union.

Gorbachev still held the position, but on December 25, he announced his resignation. With Gorbachev’s resignation the remaining members of the Soviet Parliament had the Soviet flag removed from the Kremlin, and at midnight on December 31, 1991, the Soviet Union ceased to exist.

Post Soviet Union states: Armenia(1), Azerbaijan(2), Belarus(3), Estonia(4),
Georgia(5), Kazakhstan(6), Kyrgyzstan(7), Latvia(8), Lithuania(9), Moldova(10),
Russia(11), Tajikistan(12), Turkmenistan(13), Ukraine(14), Uzbekistan(15)