• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Grishin instead of Gorbachev

Ricardolindo

Well-known member
Location
Portugal
Viktor Grishin was considered an alternative to Gorbachev to succeed Chernenko. However, in early 1985, he dragged the ill Chernenko to vote, which was considered cruel, ruining his chances. Suppose he hadn't done this and was chosen to replace Chernenko. He was a Brezhnevite. Would he have tried to use force to suppress the 1989 revolutions? Would the Soviet Union have been able to last until 1992, the year he died in our timeline?
 
Last edited:
Would he have tried to use force to suppress the 1989 revolutions?

Without the curtailing of economic support to the Eastern Bloc and the policies of Glasnost and Perestroika encouraging a mood of change it's unlikely there'll be the outbreak of protests and strikes in the late eighties to begin with. If anything Grishin, a hawk, would have made it clear that the Brezhnev Doctrine was there to stay.

Would the Soviet Union have been able to last until 1992, the year he died in our timeline?

Almost certainly, the Soviet Union was less than a week away from lasting until 1992 IOTL.
 
IMO, the USSR has a chance to limp to the 2000s if the leadership doesn't open up pandora's box sure it was poorly run but poorly ran regimes can last a long time see Zaire as a example.
 
Without the curtailing of economic support to the Eastern Bloc and the policies of Glasnost and Perestroika encouraging a mood of change it's unlikely there'll be the outbreak of protests and strikes in the late eighties to begin with. If anything Grishin, a hawk, would have made it clear that the Brezhnev Doctrine was there to stay.



Almost certainly, the Soviet Union was less than a week away from lasting until 1992 IOTL.

Could the Soviets really continue economic support to the Eastern Bloc for long? Their own economy was suffering.
 
Could the Soviets really continue economic support to the Eastern Bloc for long? Their own economy was suffering.

Their own economy could likely continue to muddle through at least until the noughties without Perestroika, this in turn would allow them to better help the Eastern Bloc weather the global debt crises. Without any effective reform this is likely to translate into a long-term decline in living standards however. This probably won't be as bad as to what actually began to happen in 1988 but noticeable and likely more pronounced in the countries which had comparatively high living standards; Czechoslovakia, the DDR and to a certain extent Hungary might end up with queues and rationing becoming part of daily life as in martial law Poland.
 
Their own economy could likely continue to muddle through at least until the noughties without Perestroika, this in turn would allow them to better help the Eastern Bloc weather the global debt crises. Without any effective reform this is likely to translate into a long-term decline in living standards however. This probably won't be as bad as to what actually began to happen in 1988 but noticeable and likely more pronounced in the countries which had comparatively high living standards; Czechoslovakia, the DDR and to a certain extent Hungary might end up with queues and rationing becoming part of daily life as in martial law Poland.

I could see a Sino-Soviet reconciliation helping to alleviate some of the issues there, but I concur with you there.
 
Back
Top