Khrushchev's resignation. Years of government, reasons for the resignation of Nikita Khrushchev

The post-war political life in the USSR was stable. Anything until 1991 was extremely rare. The people soon got used to the emerged state of things, its best representatives happily carried portraits of new leaders on the Red Square during the May and November demonstrations, and those that were also good, but worse, did the same with them in other cities, regional centers, villages And settlements. Overthrown or deceased party-state chiefs (except Lenin) were forgotten almost instantly, they were even stopped writing about jokes. Outstanding theoretical works were no longer studied in schools, technical schools and institutes - their place was occupied by books of new general secretaries, with approximately the same content. Some exception was NS Khrushchev - a politician who overthrew the authority of Stalin in order to take his place in the minds and souls.

A unique case

He really became an exception from all party leaders not only before, but also after himself. Khrushchev's bloodless and silent resignation, dispensed with solemn funerals and revelations, was almost instantaneous and looked like a well-prepared plot. In a sense, it was such, but, by the standards of the CPSU Charter, all moral and ethical norms were observed. Everything happened quite democratically, albeit with a completely justified admixture of centralism. An extraordinary plenum was convened, discussed the conduct of the comrade, condemned some of his shortcomings, and came to the conclusion that it was necessary to replace him at the leading post. As they wrote then in the minutes, "they listened - they decided". Of course, in the Soviet realities this incident became unique, like the Khrushchev era itself with all the miracles and crimes that occurred in it. All previous and subsequent Secretaries General were solemnly taken to the Kremlin necropolis - the place of their last rest - on gun carriage, except for Gorbachev, of course. Firstly, because Mikhail Sergeyevich is still alive, and secondly, he left his post not because of the conspiracy, but in connection with the abolition of his post as such. And thirdly, they were similar to Nikita Sergeyevich. One more unique case, but now not about it.

First try

Khrushchev's resignation, which occurred in October 1964, happened in a sense on the second attempt. Almost seven years before this fateful event for the country, three members of the Presidium of the Central Committee, named in the further "anti-Party group", namely Kaganovich, Molotov and Malenkov, initiated the process of removing the first secretary from office. If we consider that in fact there were four of them (in order to get out of the situation, another conspirator, Shepilov, was simply announced as "adjoining"), then everything also happened in accordance with the party charter. I had to use non-standard measures. The members of the Central Committee were urgently transported to Moscow from plenum from all over the country by military aircraft using high-speed MiG interceptors (training "sparks" of UTI) and bombers. The invaluable assistance was rendered by the Minister of Defense GK Zhukov (without her resignation, Khrushchev would have been held back in 1957). "Stalin's Guards" managed to neutralize: they were expelled first from the Presidium, then from the Central Committee, and in 1962, and completely expelled from the CPSU. They could have shot him, like L. P. Beria, but it did.

Prerequisites

The displacement of Khrushchev in 1964 was crowned with success not only because of the well preparedness of the action, but also because it suited almost everyone. The claims made at the October plenum, for all their party-lobbyist bias, can not be called unfair. Practically on all strategically important directions of politics and economy there was a catastrophic failure. The prosperity of the broad masses of working people worsened, bold experiments in the defense sphere led to the half-disintegration of the army and navy, the collective farms began to grow, becoming "millionaires on the contrary," prestige fell on the international arena. The reasons for Khrushchev's resignation were numerous, and it itself became inevitable. The people perceived the change of power with quiet rejoicing, the shortened officers grudgingly rubbed their hands, the artists who received the laureate badges in Stalin's times, welcomed the manifestation of party democracy. Tired of sowing corn, collective farmers from all climatic zones did not expect miracles from the new secretary general, but vaguely hoped for the best. In general, after the resignation of Khrushchev, there was no popular unrest.

Achievements of Nikita Sergeevich

For the sake of justice, we can not fail to mention the bright things that the first secretary, who was removed from the government, managed to accomplish during his years of office.

First, a number of events took place in the country, marking a departure from the gloomy authoritarian practice of the Stalin era. They were generally called a return to the Leninist principles of leadership, in fact they consisted in the scrapping of almost all the numerous monuments (except that they were in Gori), the permission to print some literature that exposed tyranny, and the separation of the party line from the personal qualities of the deceased in 1953 Leader.

Secondly, the collective farmers were finally given passports, formally qualifying them as the full-fledged citizens of the USSR. This did not mean freedom of choice of residence, but some loopholes still appeared.

Third, in a decade, a breakthrough in housing construction was made. Millions of square meters were surrendered annually, but, despite such large-scale achievements, the apartments were still not enough. The cities began to "swell" from the former collective farmers who came to them (see the previous paragraph). Housing was cramped and uncomfortable, but the "Khrushchevs" seemed to their inhabitants at that time skyscrapers, symbolizing new, modern trends.

Fourthly, the cosmos and once again the cosmos. The first and best were all Soviet missiles. The flights of Gagarin, Titov, Tereshkova, and before them the squirrels of Squirrels, Arrows and Sprockets - all this aroused great enthusiasm. In addition, these achievements were directly related to defense. The citizens of the USSR were proud of the country in which they lived, although there were not so many reasons for it as they wanted.

There were other bright pages in the Khrushchev period, but they were not so significant. Millions of political prisoners were freed, but when they left the camps, they soon became convinced that it was better to hold their tongue even now. So more reliable.

Thaw

Today this phenomenon provokes only positive associations. It seems to our contemporaries that in those years the country rose from a long winter's sleep, like a mighty bear. The rivulets began to whine, whispering the words of truth about the horrors of Stalinism and the camps of the Gulag, the voices of the poets sounded at the monument to Pushkin, the dudes proudly shook their magnificent hairdos and started to dance rock and roll. Approximately this picture is represented by modern films shot on the topic of the fifties and sixties. Alas, things were not quite so. Even rehabilitated and liberated political prisoners remained deprived. Living space was not enough and "normal", that is, not sitting citizens.

And there was one more circumstance, important for its psychological nature. Even those who suffered from the brutality of Stalin, often remained his fans. They could not accept the rudeness manifested in the overthrow of their idol. I was walking a pun on a cult, which, of course, was, but also about the person who also took place. The hint consisted in a low estimation of the overturner and his own fault in the repressions.

Stalinists were a significant part of those dissatisfied with Khrushchev's policy, and they dismissed him as a just retribution.

Dissatisfaction of the people

In the early sixties, the economic situation of the Soviet Union began to deteriorate. There were many reasons for this. The crop failure was the result of the collective farms, which lost many millions of workers who worked in the city's construction sites and factories. The measures taken in the form of increasing taxes on trees and cattle led to very bad consequences: massive logging and "knife-dropping" of livestock.

Unbelievable and the most monstrous after years of "red terror" persecution experienced believers. The activities of Khrushchev in this direction can be described as barbarous. Repeated violent closures of temples and monasteries led to bloodshed.

The "polytechnical" reform of the school was extremely unsuccessful and illiterate. They canceled it only in 1966, and the consequences affected for a long time.

In addition, in 1957, the state terminated payment of bonds for more than three decades forcibly imposed by the workers. Today it would be called a default.

The reasons for discontent were many, including the growth of norms in production, accompanied by a decrease in prices, coupled with higher prices for food. And the patience of the people could not stand: excitement began, the most famous of which were Novocherkassk events. The workers were shot in the squares, the survivors were caught, tried and sentenced to the same extreme measure. People had a natural question: why did Khrushchev condemn the cult of Stalin's personality and what is better?

The next victim is the Armed Forces of the USSR

In the second half of the fifties the Soviet Army underwent a massive, destructive and devastating attack. No, it was not NATO troops or Americans with their hydrogen bombs that carried it out. The USSR lost 1.3 million servicemen in a completely peaceful atmosphere. Those who passed through the war, who had become professionals and who could do nothing more than serve the Motherland, the soldiers were on the street - they were reduced. The characterization of Khrushchev, given by them, could be the subject of linguistic research, but it would not be possible to publish such a censorship treatise. As for the fleet, there is a special conversation here. All large-tonnage ships providing stability of naval formations, especially battleships, were simply cut to scrap metal. Ineptly and uselessly, the strategically important bases in China and Finland were left, the troops left Austria. It is unlikely that external aggression would do as much harm as Khrushchev's "defensive" activity. Opponents of this opinion may object, say, our missiles were afraid of overseas strategists. Alas, they began to be developed even under Stalin.

By the way, he did not spare First and his savior from the "anti-Party clique". Zhukov was released from the ministerial post, removed from the Presidium of the Central Committee and sent to Odessa - to command the district.

"I concentrated in my hands ..."

Yes, it is this phrase from the Leninist political testament that is quite applicable to the fighter with the Stalinist cult. In 1958 NS Khrushchev became chairman of the Council of Ministers, he alone lacked party power alone. The methods of leadership, positioned as "Leninist", in fact did not allow the possibility of voicing opinions that did not coincide with the general line. And the source of it was the mouth of the first secretary. For all its authoritarianism, JV Stalin often listened to objections, especially if they came from people who knew their business. Even in the most tragic years, the "tyrant" could change the decision if it was proven wrong. Khrushchev always expressed his position first and took every objection as a personal insult. In addition, in the best communist traditions, he considered himself a person who knows everything from technology to art. Everyone knows the case in the Manege, when the avant-garde artists became victims of attacks of the "head of the party", who had become infuriated. In the country there were trials on the affairs of disgraced writers, sculptors reproached with spent bronze, which "missiles are not enough." By the way, about them. About how Khrushchev was a specialist in the field of rocketry, his proposal to VA Sudts, the creator of the Dvina (S-75) SAM system, eloquently speaks of his proposal to shove a complex ... Well, in general, away. The case was in 1963 in Kubinka, on the test site.

Khrushchev the diplomat

Everyone knows about how Khrushchev knocked his boot on the podium, even today's schoolchildren have at least something, but heard about it. Equally popular is the phrase about Kuzkin's mother, which the Soviet leader intended to show to the entire capitalist world, which caused difficulties for translators. These two quotes are best known, although there were a lot of them from the direct and open Nikita Sergeyevich. But the main thing is not words, but deeds. Despite the formidability of statements, the USSR scored few real strategic victories. The adventurous dispatch of missiles to Cuba was uncovered, and a conflict began that nearly killed all of humanity. Intervention in Hungary caused indignation even among the allies of the USSR. Support for the "progressive" regimes in Africa, Latin America and Asia was extremely expensive for the poor Soviet budget and aimed not at achieving any useful goals for the country, but for causing the greatest harm to Western countries. The initiator of these schemes was most often Khrushchev himself. A politician differs from a statesman in that he thinks only of short-term interests. This is exactly the way Crimea was presented to Ukraine, although no one could have imagined that this decision would entail international consequences.

The mechanism of the coup

So what was Khrushchev? A table in two columns, on the right of which his useful deeds were indicated, and in the left column - harmful ones, would distinguish two features of his character. So on the tombstone, created in a twist of fate by Ergan Neizvestny, who is cursed by him, black and white colors are combined. But this is all the lyrics, but in reality Khrushchev's displacement occurred primarily because of dissatisfaction with the party nomenclature. Neither the people, nor the army, nor ordinary members of the CPSU, no one asked, everything was decided behind the scenes and, of course, in an atmosphere of secrecy.

The head of state quietly rested in Sochi, arrogantly neglecting the received warnings about the plot. When he was summoned to Moscow, he still hoped in vain to rectify the situation. Support, however, was not. The State Security Committee, headed by AN Shelepin, took the side of the conspirators, the army displayed utter neutrality (the generals and marshals apparently did not forget the reforms and reductions). And there was no one else to count on. Khrushchev's resignation was carried out in a bureaucratic way and without tragic events.

Leonid Brezhnev, 58, a member of the Presidium, headed and carried out this "palace coup". Undoubtedly, it was a bold act: in case of failure, the consequences for the participants in the conspiracy could be the most deplorable. Brezhnev and Khrushchev were friendly, but in a special way, in a party way. The relations between Nikita Sergeevich and Lavrenty Pavlovich were just as warm. And to Stalin, a personal pensioner of Union status was very respectful at the time. In the autumn of 1964, Khrushchev's era was over.

Reaction

In the West, at first, they took a very cautious approach to the change of the main Kremlin inhabitant. Politicians, premiers and presidents already imagined the ghost of "Uncle Joe" in a paramilitary jacket with his pipe fixed. Khrushchev's resignation could mean the re-Stalinization of both the domestic and foreign policies of the USSR. This, however, did not happen. Leonid Ilyich turned out to be quite a friendly leader, a supporter of peaceful coexistence of the two systems, which, generally speaking, was perceived by orthodox communists as reincarnation. The attitude toward Stalin at one time greatly worsened relations with Chinese comrades. However, even their most critical characterization of Khrushchev as a revisionist did not lead to an armed conflict, while under Brezhnev it still arose (on the Damansky Peninsula). Czechoslovak events demonstrated a certain continuity in the defense of the gains of socialism and caused associations with Hungary in 1956, although not completely identical. The war in Afghanistan, which began even later in 1979, confirmed the worst fears about the nature of world communism.

The reasons for Khrushchev's resignation consisted mainly not in the desire to change the vector of development, but in the desire of the party elite to preserve and expand its preferences.

The very disgraced secretary spent the rest of his time in sad thoughts, dictating to the tape recorder memoirs, in which he tried to justify his actions, and sometimes even repent of them. For him, the dismissal ended relatively well.