Young America's Foundation

Join Our Email List

  • New Guard Inner
  • Why the Berlin Wall Fell by Dinesh D'Souza(1)

    11/8/2011 4:47:07 PM Posted by Cheri Cerame

    Berlin Wall 2By Dinesh D'Souza

    In October 1987 Ronald Reagan stood at the Brandenburg Gate and said, “General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization…tear down this wall.”  Two years later, in what may be the most spectacular political event of our lifetimes, the Berlin Wall came tumbling down, the Soviet empire collapsed, and the world entered a new period of relative peace and prosperity.

    But how and why did the wall come tumbling down?  I want to argue that it was Reagan’s statesmanship that made possible this epochal event.  Reagan didn’t, of course, do it alone.  But without him it probably wouldn’t have happened. 

    As early as 1981, when virtually everyone considered the Soviet empire a permanent fixture of the international landscape, Reagan spoke at the University of Notre Dame where he predicted that “the West won’t contain communism; it will transcend communism.  It will dismiss it as a bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written.”  The next year Reagan told the British Parliament that freedom and democracy would “leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history.” 

    When Reagan made these forecasts the wise men in the media and academia scoffed. Today these same pundits maintain that the Soviet Union collapsed by itself due to economic failure, or that Mikhail Gorbachev was responsible.   Reagan, they insist, merely presided over an event that his policies did little to influence.

    This analysis makes no sense at all.  Sure, the Soviet Union had economic problems on account of its socialist system.   But the Soviet economy had been ailing for most of the century.  Never in history has a great empire imploded due to poor economic performance alone.  The Roman and Ottoman empires survived internal corrosion and domestic strains for generations before each was destroyed by military force. 

    Like many empires suffering from domestic strains, the Soviets during the 1970s compensated for these by pursuing an aggressive foreign policy.  Between 1974 and 1980, while the U.S. wallowed in post-Vietnam angst, 10 countries fell into the Soviet orbit: South Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, South Yemen, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, Grenada and Afghanistan.   The Soviet nuclear arsenal surpassed that of the United States, and the Soviets deployed a new generation of intermediate-range missiles targeted at Western Europe.   Far from being on the verge of collapse, the Soviet Union in 1980 seemed to be in the vanguard of history.

    It is no less problematic to attribute the Soviet collapse to Gorbachev.   He was undoubtedly a reformer and a new type of Soviet general secretary, but why did the Politburo in 1985 feel the need to turn over leadership to this man?  Certainly the communist bosses did not wish him to lead the party, and the regime, over the precipice.

    Nor did Gorbachev see this as his role.  On the contrary, he insisted throughout the second half of the 1980s that he sought to strengthen the Soviet economy in order to strengthen the Soviet military.   The Politburo supported Gorbachev’s reforms because he promised “regained confidence in the Party.”   In his 1987 book Perestroika Gorbachev presented himself as the preserver, not the destroyer, of socialism.  No one was more surprised than Gorbachev when the Soviet regime disintegrated, and when he was swept out of power.

    Reagan Tear Down This Wall SpeechThe only man who foresaw the Soviet collapse and implemented policies to bring it about was Ronald Reagan.   During his first term Reagan pursued tough anti-Soviet policies aimed at curtailing the Soviet nuclear threat and stopping Soviet advances around the world.   Calling the Soviets an “evil empire,” Reagan initiated a massive defense buildup.  He deployed Pershing and Cruise missiles in Europe.  He sent weapons and other assistance to anticommunist guerrillas fighting for self-determination in Soviet satellites like Afghanistan, Angola and Nicaragua.   He announced a new program of missile defenses that would eventually “make nuclear weapons obsolete.”

    These measures were fiercely resisted by liberal leaders, who decried Reagan’s policies as confrontational and likely to make nuclear war more likely.   Historian Barbara Tuchman spoke for many liberals when she urged that the West ingratiate itself with the Soviet Union by pursuing “the stuffed-goose option—that is, providing them with all the grain and consumer goods they need.”   If Reagan had taken this advice when it was offered in 1982, the Soviet empire would probably be around today.

    Reagan’s military buildup and his missile defense program threatened the Soviets with an arms race they could ill afford.  The Reagan doctrine of aid to anticommunist guerrillas halted Soviet advances in the Third World: between 1980 and 1985 not an inch of real estate fell into Moscow’s hands and one small country, Grenada, reverted into the democratic camp.   Thanks to Stinger missiles supplied by the United States, Afghanistan rapidly became what the Soviets themselves would later call a “bleeding wound.” 

    Clearly the Politburo saw that the momentum in the cold war had dramatically shifted.  After 1985, the Soviets seem to have decided on a new course.   It was Reagan, in other words, who was responsible for thwarting Soviet gains and introducing a loss of nerve that contributed to the elevation of Gorbachev to power.   Gorbachev’s policies were responses to circumstances created not by him but by Reagan.   No wonder that Ilya Zaslavsky, who served in the Congress of People’s Deputies, said later that the true originator of glasnost and perestroika was not Gorbachev but Reagan.

    Reagan immediately recognized Gorbachev as a new breed of Soviet leader.  He supported Gorbachev’s reforms and arms control initiatives during his second term, when many conservatives criticized him for being naïve and credulous.  William F. Buckley, Jr. warned that Reagan’s new stance was “on the order of changing our entire position toward Adolf Hitler.”  Columnist George Will mourned that Reagan had “accelerated the moral disarmament of the West by elevating wishful thinking to the status of political philosophy.”

    These criticisms missed the larger current of events that Reagan alone appears to have understood.   In attempting to reform communism, Gorbachev was destroying the system.   Reagan encouraged him every step of the way; as Gorbachev himself joked, Reagan induce him to take the Soviet Union to the edge of the abyss and then take “one step forward.”

    The tears of joy with which millions greeted the collapse of the Soviet empire proved that Reagan was entirely justified in calling it an “evil empire.”   Even some of who were previously skeptical of Reagan were compelled to admit that they had been wrong and Reagan’s approach had been thoroughly vindicated.   Reflecting on Reagan’s complex strategy of initial toughness toward the Soviet Union—in the face of denunciation from liberals—and later support for Gorbachev—in the face of criticism from conservatives—Henry Kissinger called it “the most stunning diplomatic achievement of the modern era.”

    Margaret Thatcher composed Reagan’s epitaph when she said that “he won the cold war without firing a shot.”   That’s how history will remember him.  On the anniversary of the Berlin Wall’s collapse, we should do Reagan the honor of recognizing his prescient leadership that helped to produce that marvelous event.

     Dinesh D’Souza is the author of several bestselling books. His latest, The Roots of Obama's Rage was released in September 2010. He is a frequent speaker on college campuses for Young America’s Foundation.

     

    • Readers' Comments

    • With all respect I don't believe it was Reagan at all that brought about the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ludwig von Mises the premier free market economist foresaw that socialism would not work because it was not economically feasible. The reforms hasten its collapse because the only thing that kept the Soveits in tact was fear, and the reforms removed fear. The economy at the time of the Soviet Union was most likely the size of Minnesota. Reagan didn't do it, the soviets did it to themselves in 1918 when they adopted an economic philosophy that can't work.
      Posted by David on 11/08/2011
    • It's good to see someone thinking it thrguoh.
      Posted by Carli on 04/24/2013
    • When I was there in 1977 the official rate was $1=.58pThe steert rate was $1=35pSoviet brands were horrible when available. Shopping in a soviet store ranged from difficult to hell. You couldn't use dollars in a ordinary store of course. tourists who traded dollars for rubles and tried shopping came back from the experienced pissed. And of course the clerks who did the money changing cheated like crazy.When you came into the country, you were obliged to declare all the dollars you came in with, all the dollars you left with and you had to keep receipts of all the dollars you traded. Discrepancies got fined at the border.since 1988 there have been two hyperinflations. The ruble today is officially the ruble of 1977 with six zeros chopped off.
      Posted by Luis on 04/25/2013
    • vgLfeN , [url=http://fcdouciiqgvj.com/]fcdouciiqgvj[/url], [link=http://keipejaelwdt.com/]keipejaelwdt[/link], http://uiagppfphawu.com/
      Posted by gdquizizon on 04/26/2013
    • What i think is great over-there(Russia i mean) now,is the way they marry good old fashion way(Seen on pcieurts on this blog),and i hope,the crowd can enjoy all products moving in,without losing their cool way to solve problems their way!amen.
      Posted by Onie on 04/27/2013
    • v7nAvQ <a href="http://vbaqpnlxlvfa.com/">vbaqpnlxlvfa</a>
      Posted by eiiipdhyyhu on 04/28/2013
    • A very nice memoir, Jennifer, and a<a href="http://egdirz.com"> whrtoy</a> one as well! Those of us with longer memories can recall even more of the Cold War. When the USSR was surprising us with rapid progress in nuclear weapons, courtesy of efficient spies, the fear and paranoia was palpable, and my own memories of the Cuban Missile Crisis are especially sharp. In 1962 I was in Pearl Harbor on my first submarine tour as a young officer. We worked all night loading supplies and warshot torpedoes for a 90-day war patrol. I think it was a first for everyone else aboard as well as it turned out we didn't have storage room for all the canned goods and were walking on top of cartons of them in the corridors! Fortunately things cooled off and we didn't have to patrol that way, but there were some tight pucker strings around there for awhile.Jim
      Posted by Juan on 07/07/2013
    • why, it's not photoshop.• all brain<a href="http://uwnzustmf.com"> prctuies</a> are wrom stantard school anatomy class,• same about half-prepared rat..• pack of boxes is simple machboxes clued together and marked to store resistors..there is nothing to photoshop. actually, such pack of photos could be made at any ex-soviet abandoned school (well, you'll have to bring there caviar can from any local market and find a rare old-fasioned xylitol-based chocolate box).
      Posted by Geraldo on 07/07/2013
    • gUmkvx I value the blog.Much thanks again. Really Great.
      Posted by 716265 on 09/13/2013
    • 5cvhFT I am so grateful for your blog article. Fantastic.
      Posted by 3779 on 09/24/2013
    • fFMhMc I am so grateful for your blog.Thanks Again. Will read on...
      Posted by 8626 on 10/15/2013
    • PC71B0 Say, you got a nice post.Thanks Again.
      Posted by 447393 on 11/18/2013
    • QVEBB8 Wow, great blog post.Much thanks again. Really Cool.
      Posted by 81711 on 12/15/2013
    • bH9caO I loved your article. Really Cool.
      Posted by 6013 on 01/08/2014
    • ofRJY1 Very good blog article.Thanks Again. Fantastic.
      Posted by 24365 on 01/15/2014
    • c7NiIM Wow, great article. Really Great.
      Posted by 5062 on 01/17/2014
    • G7wr8u Thank you ever so for you article post. Awesome.
      Posted by 1218 on 02/28/2014
    • g8dK6U I really like and appreciate your blog. Want more.
      Posted by 244610 on 03/22/2014
    • SeDubW Looking forward to reading more. Great blog post.Really thank you! Awesome.
      Posted by 5748 on 04/01/2014
    • VW1Cbv A round of applause for your blog article.Really thank you! Great.
      Posted by 81507 on 04/20/2014
    • Wow, great blog. Will read on...
      Posted by salons in canada on 05/06/2014
    • I truly appreciate this blog.Really looking forward to read more. Keep writing.
      Posted by canadian salons on 05/06/2014
    • RIIMng I really like and appreciate your article. Really Cool.
      Posted by 7468 on 05/12/2014
    • qKJFle Thanks so much for the post.Thanks Again. Really Cool.
      Posted by 196508 on 06/04/2014
    • 3hR0W0 Hey, thanks for the post.Really looking forward to read more.
      Posted by 4054 on 06/17/2014
    • Mu7A68 Really informative post.Really thank you! Keep writing.
      Posted by 367482 on 07/03/2014
    Leave a comment
    Name
    Email
    Comment
Copyright 2013 Young America's Foundation | 110 Elden Street, Herndon, VA 20170 | Ph. 1.800.USA.1776 | Fax 703.318.9122
www.yaf.org | www.reaganranch.org | www.nationaljournalismcenter.org