Transcript: How to Kill a Superpower: Lessons from the USSR, Episode 2

In a five-part podcast series, Yelena Biberman and Zachary Troyanovsky explore the fateful events that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Yelena Biberman:

I'm Yelena Biberman.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

And I'm Zack Troyanovsky.

Yelena Biberman:

Welcome to episode two of How to Kill a Superpower: Lessons from USSR. In this episode, we meet our heroes. We look at how history made them, and how they made history.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So let's start with the man, the former U.S. President Bill Clinton, once described as quote, "an Irish poet."

Yelena Biberman:

Okay. So what does it mean to be an Irish poet? I was trying to figure that out. I actually texted my friend who is an expert on Irish poetry. And I was like, "Okay, so what does it mean if somebody calls you an Irish poet?" She said, well, she texted back, "I don't know. Just like if you're a poet who happens to be Irish. And then so, she had no idea. And then I was like, "Well, could it be you're someone who likes to drink?" And then she texted back, "Yeah, that makes sense."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. I think we were over-analyzing it for a sec. I mean, there's maybe the implication that you drink a little bit too much, but then you're also creative, and you get work done, and then you do the work that you do pretty well. But Clinton was of course, referring to Boris Yeltsin. He had also previously described him as an artist who quote, "sees politics as a novel he's writing or a symphony that he's imposing."

Yelena Biberman:

That's very poetic of him. So Yeltsin was born into a family of farmers in a small village in the Ural Mountains. Then he went to a polytechnic institute, and then he went into the Communist Party. And really quickly advance through the ranks. One thing I wonder about, is why did he join the Communist Party in the first place? What do you think?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Well, he's contradicted himself on this question a few times in the past. There've been moments where he says that it's because he had a genuine belief in the party's values, but at other times, he says that it's because he was looking to use the party for career advancement.

Yelena Biberman:

Maybe it was both. I mean, it's interesting how it's hard sometimes to know why we do what we do, or at least to remember why we do what you do. Sometimes just hard to look back, and explain it. I remember with my grandfather who was in the Communist Party, I asked him multiple times, why did he join? What did he get out of it? The only thing he really kind of told me was, well, he's Jewish, and it was a way to protect himself, to make sure that he had a good life, and his family had a good life. And it was true.

With all the challenges, we had some perks. Like my favorite was during the May 1st parades. He would take me to the front line of the parade, I would hold a placard or balloon. And he would just carry me. And it was just, it was very nice, this memory. So anyone who wanted to have a good career in USSR to make it big there, had to join the party.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

And Yeltsin did make it big. I mean, in 1990 at the tender age of 59, he was elected president of the Russian Parliament, which was a very powerful position.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. Tender age of 59. That's so true. These days in politics in the United States, right? You look around, there's a lot of...Those who are in the most powerful positions are just quite elderly. It was this kind of it's the 70s, 80s, is pretty common. It was just so interesting. Honestly, kind of does remind me of the Soviet Union as well. Right? The sort of, what's the term? Gerontocracy. The rule of individuals who are kind of more of an...from the older generation.

So if you look at President Biden, you see Nancy Pelosi, and some other presidential candidates. We had senators. We do also see that pattern. So yeah, 59, that's pretty young in politics, right?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. And this is just another story. I just remembered about...I'm not sure how much relevance it has, but I do remember a long time ago, watching a clip of Reagan in a debate for when he was running for reelection. And he was asked the question because there was a lot of public worry about him being too old for office, which nowadays the age would not really fly.

He was asked, "How do you believe age factors in to this political race?" And he responded, "I know my opponent is young and inexperienced, but that doesn't mean he's not a valid candidate." So not to give too much credit to Reagan right there, but it was always a funny response.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. The best responses have humor in politics, I think. It just erases any logic, doesn't matter anymore. People forget what they asked in the first place. Right?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah.

Yelena Biberman:

And I think Yeltsin kind of had that personality, where he would take a question, just take it somewhere where it was just fun, and you didn't care anymore what you asked him, what the answer was even. Just enjoying him. Gorbachev wasn't like that I remember. And sort of the way that my family, and people around me perceived him sort of a typical politician, who just said what he assumed people wanted to hear. He talked for a long time, was very verbose, and quote, "said really nothing" according to people around me, so.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So nowadays Gorbachev is famous for two things. For Glasnost that is, government transparency, and Perestroika, which is the economic and political restructuring away from central planning. He was very outspoken about the problems facing Soviet society, and believed that it was necessary to some extent, to break with the past.

He recognized that part of the problem, was that the ruling elite was to quote historian, David Marples, "Distance from the general population, other than on national holidays, and ceremonies." But Yeltsin didn't see all of this as enough. He publicly criticized Gorbachev many times. And then suddenly, he resigned from the Communist Party.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. Almost suddenly he tried resigning before, but then Gorbachev talked him out of it. It looked really bad for the entire political establishment. But yeah, Yeltsin is obviously somebody who is capable of making really big moves, and taking big risks. Right? He grabbed life by the horns.

He was also extremely popular among more than the Russians. There was an opinion poll conducted by Moscow newspaper in 1990. And it found that he was popular among 84% of Russian people. It's like really high number. It made him the most trusted politician in the entire Soviet Union. And there's obviously no way he was not going to take advantage of that.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

I mean, he was an extraordinary man. Most people try to avoid conflict or crisis. Yeltsin leaned into it. He thrived in it. Economists Anders Aslund, once described Yeltsin as quote, "A man who could take any crisis, but to not stand ordinary times."

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. The image of Yeltsin standing defiantly on a tank, after communist hardliners tried to take back the Soviet Union in August, 1991, is iconic. I remember seeing the tanks on television, and being really freaked out. I went to the bathroom, lock myself in and then tried to figure out what to do. Are we going to have a war? Would it be a Civil War? World War?

I remember sort of images of World War II, all the movies I watched as a child sort of, and just did not want that to repeat. And so, again, kind of helpless I decided hey, why not try praying to God, which is kind of a radical, crazy idea for me at the time, because I had no idea what that meant. I grew up in the atheist society. Religion was something that was considered really outdated.

To me, it was like mothballs. Something really old women did because they were just, they didn't know any better. And suddenly, there I was on my knees, and trying to figure out what does it mean to pray? I remember I must've somewhere seen people kind of crossing their chest, making sort of a sign. And I'm like, okay, I'll try that. And I was desperate, but I'll never forget that moment. How I just...That seemed to me as the only answer. But then the coup failed. This attempt failed and Yeltsin emerged as a hero, and as a face of democracy,

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeltsin's rise to power, including this sort of end into the August coup with him standing on top of the tank, a lot of it was tied to who he was as a person. When I spoke with Yeltsin's biographer, Timothy Colton, about some of the decisions Yeltsin made at the time, Colton told me that once Yeltsin had decided to do something, he would set about doing it immediately. He was an extremely driven man.

So let's turn now to a little bit of a discussion, and an examination of other members of our troika. Ukrainian leader, Leonid Kravchuk, and his Belarusian counterpart, Stanislau Shushkevich.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. Let's talk about them. So like Yeltsin, Kravchuk was born to a peasant family in a small village. He rose through the ranks of Communist Party through Agitprop, which was the propaganda department.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So it's safe to assume he knew what he was doing when it came to influencing, and manipulating people.

Yelena Biberman:

I guess. He's was an interesting character. He once described himself as quote, "A man who refuses to take an umbrella, because he hopes to slip between the rain drops."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

This quote has always been very fascinating to me for two reasons. The first being that, he described himself in this way, which I think is one of the most absurd ways I've ever heard someone described themselves. But also, because I don't quite understand what it means. And the more I try to dissect it, the more I realize it didn't really mean anything to anyone.

And funnily enough, Kravchuk was once described in a very similar way, as a man who during the Ukrainian election cycle, right before or alongside the referendum, meant most things to most people. He was a career politician who was very good at painting an image that was just vague enough, but just passionate enough, to enthrall citizens, and voters.

Yelena Biberman:

Well, that's a useful skill. I guess that's kind of different from Yeltsin who always talks about himself as emotional. Somebody who just can't help himself, whatever he's doing. Stanislau Shushkevich which was different. He was not a career politician. He had a doctorate in physics, and mathematics, and authored textbooks. So he obviously would not be the one to misjudge the velocity of raindrops so to speak, whatever that means.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So I remember when you first approached me about this project, all you mentioned...You hadn't told me the topic, you wanted to keep it a secret for a bit.

Yelena Biberman:

I remember that.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

But you had told me that before the project, you had interviewed Shushkevich. And so, I was very curious. I started doing some research on Shushkevich. And the first thing that came up, was the fact that in the '60s, he had taught Lee Harvey Oswald Russian.

Yelena Biberman:

Geez, yeah.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

And so, I knew that this was some sort of big secret of a project. So for a couple of weeks there, I was pretty sure that we were about to look into the assassination of Kennedy, and that this was going to be a pretty important podcasts. Not that it...Obviously, we're talking about him for a topic, but I was like panicked for a second. I was like, "Is this why it's a secret?"

But yeah. So in the '60s, Shushkevich was working at a radio design factory in Minsk. And his boss at the time, approached him and asked him to teach Russian to Lee Harvey Oswald, the man who assassinated John F. Kennedy.

Yelena Biberman:

Allegedly.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Allegedly. But in an interview, Shushkevich described Oswald as, "A very careful person, who did not blend into Soviet Society very well at all, because he would always be in very good shape, always all in its place." Shushkevich wasn't allowed to ask about Oswald's personal life, and so, he didn't learn much about it.

But here's something really interesting. To this day, he doesn't believe that Oswald killed Kennedy. As he put it in an interview, "I don't believe that he shot anybody. I cannot believe that it was this person with whom I had these short, and private lessons."

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. So when I interviewed and talked to Stanislau Shushkevich, it obviously was one of the most surreal moments in my life, because he was president of the country, which my family and I fled as refugees. And there I was on my cell phone, talking to him on his cell phone. He referring to me as vy, which is plural "you" as an adult. When I was in Belarus, I was a child. So I kind of have this mentality being referred to as ty, which is singular. And there he was taking me seriously, and talking to me and being really nice.

So I just, that was a really interesting moment. But then another interesting moment came after I hung up. So that was the one morning. I called him in the morning where I decided not to check the news. The news just has not been very good lately. And I decided to have a mental break from it. Make the phone call, and then see what's happening in the world.

Well, what was happening in the world, was that Belarus was having the biggest protest in the country's history maybe. I don't know since the independence. And Shushkevich is in the middle of all of that. So I was really holding him up on the phone, trying to ask him to relive what happened in 1991, while another major historical situation was unfolding in front of him. And he was just like, "Okay, well..." Just again, being really nice about it. I was so embarrassed later. Yeah, yeah. But it's kind of crazy to imagine Shushkevich and Oswald sitting together, conjugating verbs. Russian is a really difficult language.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. I mean, can you imagine how shocked Shuchkevich must have been, when he heard that his former student was accused of killing Kennedy?

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. That must've been shocking. But imagine Oswald. If somebody told him that his teacher would one day dissolve the Soviet Union, that would be shocking as well.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. And sometimes after hearing the story, I wish that I could have been in the room to see how these lessons played out between these two massively important historical figures. But then I remember all of the Russian lessons that I've had throughout my lifetime. And I realized that the majority of it, would probably be just tedious grammar.

Yelena Biberman:

So, what has it been like for you to learn Russian?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Learn Russian. Well, I've tried a few times. It was actually my first language that I learned before English. And then I blame my brother actually for the fact that I've forgotten it, because he maintained most of his Russian after he went to preschool, because it was the language he spoke at home. But by the time I went to preschool, my brother was coming home from school, and speaking English to me.

So he's maintained it much better than I have. But I tried again towards the end of elementary school. And I just couldn't couldn't deal with the lessons. They were incredibly tedious, and then boring to me.

Yelena Biberman:

Did you take classes or your parents...

Zachary Troyanovsky:

I had a tutor, but it didn't work out. And then my Russian learning for a couple of years, was basically hinged on, whenever my grandparents would come to visit, they would insist on teaching me a few words, which is great. I got to learn a little bit, but it never really stuck. Actually until I came here to Skidmore, and I took a year and a half of Russian here. And I'm not going to say it all stuck, but now I can pretty confidently read Cyrillic, which is a skill I haven't had since I was maybe six years old. So it's small victory.

Yelena Biberman:

Let's go back to the three heroes. So how did Yeltsin, Kravchuk, and Shushkevich end up dissolving the Soviet Union? How is it that they found themselves in this hunting lodge, not killing a single wild animal, but ending the life of a country?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Well, I mean, not just any country, one of the worlds and histories two most powerful countries.

Yelena Biberman:

A country in which they built their illustrious careers from humble beginnings. A country that was meant to empower the powerless like them, to make those who had been quote "nothing" into quote "everything."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

In the last of his trilogy of memoirs, Yeltsin wrote, "Much of what occurred, depended on my actions. Right or wrong?" But in the end, history is not written by individuals. There're general and sometimes cryptic patterns in the lives of nations.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. This reminds me of Karl Marx's famous observation. Quote, "Men make their own history, but they did not make it as they please. They did not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already. Given and transmitted from the past."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Also this raises the question, did Yeltsin, Kravchuk, and Shushkevich decide to come to Belavezha? Or were they brought there by force more powerful than them outside their knowledge and control?

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. So we mentioned Russian grammar before. So passive voice is something that Russian language is kind of famous for. It's how we talk about generally about things that have happened, without identifying who or what caused them to happen. It's common in many languages. In English, there's only one way to structure this kind of sentence. For example, Bob was driven to the concert. So we don't know who drove him, but we presume someone obviously. Someone who was probably really nice.

But in Russian, there're multiple complicated ways to make passive voice sentences. And I think this reflects sort of this recognition, that things are sometimes outside of our control. They happen to us, and they make us do what we otherwise would not do. Like pay taxes or maybe even commit a crime.

So this is one of the big themes, in Fyodor Dostoevsky's book, Crime and Punishment. His main character was a student who had a lot of potential, but not enough money to sustain himself, so that he really have a choice. Right? Well, I don't want to spoil the book though.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

But this is a classic problem. I do remember learning about it in your intro class. It's called the Structure Agency Problem.

Yelena Biberman:

Yep. So this problem is fundamental in how we understand the world, and ourselves. It's timeless, and obviously universal. So let me show you another one of my favorites. It's from another famous Russian novel. In one piece, Leo Tolstoy explores the question of why Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812. So obviously, that was a big mistake. In hindsight, it kind of seems like a ridiculous thing to have done.

But remember Tolstoy was not just a writer. He was also an officer with experience fighting the Crimean War. And he was really appalled by what he witnessed. Right? He saw that war was hell. Still, he argues that Napoleon quote, "Could not help himself." And neither could anyone else who participated in those events. Quote he says, "Of all the countless people who participated in this war, they act all in just the same way. As a result of their personal qualities, habits, conditions, and names.

They feared boasted, rejoiced, resented, reasoned. Supposing that they knew what they were doing, and they were doing it for themselves. And yet there were all involuntary instruments of history, and performed work hidden from them, but comprehensible to us" End of quote. And but here's this part which I find the most striking. Quote, "Such as the inevitable fate of all men of action. And the higher they stand in the human hierarchy, the less free they are."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So Tolstoy would say that Yeltsin, Kravchuk, and Shushkevich weren't acting freely. He would say that they thought they were, but they weren't. Or maybe because they read Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, they knew how little power they actually had over their fate. History was going to happen, whether they liked it or not.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. The structure made them do it. Right? Because I tell my students, well, maybe that's too deterministic though. So let's try to figure it out. Let's dissect the whole thing. Right? Did they make history or that history make them? What were the historical or structural factors that brought them to Belavezha?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Well, like any structure or structure agency problem conversation, it depends how far you want to go back. So you can go as far back as the Big Bang, that certainly made everything possible. But there's also this old Russian joke dating back to 1825, that a bald leader will always be succeeded by one with hair, and vice versa. So Gorbachev was famously bald. So you can say that it was inevitable. Yeltsin, a man with a full head of hair, would succeed him.

Yelena Biberman:

Well, you got it. Yeah that's right. But yeah, that's a good one. But okay. So let's look at the more proximate factors that might've caused the Belavezha to happen.

Shushkevich:

Я хотел решить частный вопрос, маленький, очень маленький, и для этого пригласил президента Ельцина в Беловежскую пущу. Пригласил на охоту, потому-что он охотник, он любил охоту. Я говорю, приезжайте к нам, Вы увидите, как это хорошо.

Yelena Biberman:

Here Shushkevich is saying that, he invited Yeltsin to Belavezha because he had just a small question for him.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

In Shushkevich's mind, winter was coming, and as Napoleon learned firsthand, it can be brutal. Belarus needed Russia to supply oil and gas, so that millions of people wouldn't freeze. Shushkevich always recalls organizing the meeting with a very specific and limited goal in mind, "to help our government save the people from the very cold winter that was coming." And he also wanted the oil and gas for free or as he put it, in the old Soviet style.

Yelena Biberman:

So had it not been for this coming winter, and Belarus is desperately needing Russia's energy, he would not have organized the meeting in the first place. The three leaders would not have met at the Viskuli Hunting Lodge on December 8th, 1991. And they would not have dissolved the Soviet Union. Right? Okay. So what about Kravchuk? What brought him to Belavezha?

Kravchuk:

[In Ukrainian 00:22:21].

Yelena Biberman:

Kravchuk is saying here, that sometimes big events happen, and they can be quite unpredictable.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So six days before the meeting at Belavezha, there's an election in Ukraine. Kravchuk is elected president, and a referendum shows that 90% of Ukrainians expressed support for Ukraine declaring independence from the USSR.

Yelena Biberman:

Wow.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So Ukrainian nationalism was really strong at the time and played a big role in this outcome.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. Interestingly, this was not the case for Belarus. Most people were not mobilized by this sort of feeling of national Belarusian identity. It was mostly inflation, and empty shelves, which I remember very clearly. Everything was expensive, but it was also not available. I remember those days, everything, the bread at least was cheap and plenty so that was accessible. Everything else, butter, salt, toilet paper, you had to stand in line for, for hours. If you were lucky enough to even find the line.

So there's a Soviet joke that captures this mood. A man standing in line says, "I had enough. Save my place. I'm going to shoot Gorbachev." Two hours later, he returns. "Did you get him?" a woman asked? "No, that line was even longer than this one."

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Growing up, my parents would always try to tell me about the situation with long lines, and empty shelves, and try to explain what it was like. And recently, while they were telling the story about it, my grandfather interrupted them and said, "Don't bother. You couldn't possibly explain something like that to someone who lives here." And I understand that. I think it makes a lot of sense.

I do think I got a small peek, what it might be like this past, not this past spring, two springs ago, in the wake of the first COVID lockdown, when for 50 miles around the place that I was staying, there was no toilet paper available. In fact, the people that I was living with, we found a Chinese distribution website, that was selling a Polish brand of toilet paper. And we ordered, it came six months later.

Yelena Biberman:

So when toilet paper became scarce because of the pandemic, and the conditions, people kind of asked me, "Oh, this might be really scary for you because you already lived through it. Right?" And actually it wasn't. I feel like I've always been ready for it. I just knew this was going to happen to me again, because I've seen it before, and I knew it was going to happen again. And I was ready. So stocked up, bought industrial size toilet paper from Amazon. So back to Gorbachev and the joke I told about the man who just—

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. Well, it sounds like he was quite unpopular at the time.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. And the entire system was unpopular. And that's definitely another big structural factor that influenced Yeltsin quite directly.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. And so, the event that sort of best exemplified this, this was the August coup that you mentioned earlier. In fact, Shushkevich often says that this August coup, was what caused the Soviet Union to fall apart. The beginning of the end, if you will.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. It may have been falling apart, but it was still standing.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. And this made Yeltsin extraordinarily popular, and powerful. And also, full of ideas about where Russia should be heading economically, and politically. In fact, when I talked to Yeltsin's biographer, Timothy Colton about this, he mentioned that at the time, Yeltsin would have been most easily mobilized on economic issues. He was trying to craft economic policy, where Russia was the primary unit, rather than the Soviet Union. But standing in between him and this vision, was Gorbachev and the Soviet State.

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. But Gorbachev just like one of those stories, quote, "Involuntary instruments of history." in that, he called the summit where Shushkevich, and Yeltsin met and talked about, a meeting in Belavezha. Can you tell that story?

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Yeah. It's a great one. Gorbachev was getting desperate. Baltic states had already declared independence. There was this upcoming Ukrainian referendum. And it seemed as if the majority of the union was pretty displeased with the state of things. So he calls this meeting at the state council building, with a bunch of Soviet leaders so that he can present his revised Union treaty.

The leaders all gather, they all sit down at the table, he walks into the room, he presents this treaty, and it's dismissed outright. I don't think very few of the leaders in the room, were for it. And Gorbachev was surprised by this. I think he had expected it to be more of a conversation, an actual process. He didn't expect to be dismissed so outright. So he got very angry, and he stormed out of the room.

The leaders sat there for a while, kind of unsure as to what to do when the person who called you all to the state council, storms out of the room. But eventually, they decided we should go find him, so that we can continue this meeting and go home. So they split into pairs, and they searched the large hallways of the state council building for Gorbachev.

 And it just so happens that Yeltsin, and Shushkevich were paired together. And while they were searching to build in for Gorbachev, Shushkevich extended this invite to Yeltsin to meet him in Belavezha to discuss oil and gas trade agreements.

Yelena Biberman:

Wow. Wow. So again, another big structural factor. Right? That without this experience, without Gorbachev arranging for this meeting, and then kind of coincidentally Shushkevich, and Yeltsin being paired up together, allowed them to talk to each other, set up this meeting.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

So I do have to say, as we discuss this and we bring in this narrative of history driving them to this moment, I wonder if us saying, that powerful people have little choice in their actions because of the historical forces weighing down them in a way that doesn't necessarily happen to ordinary people, aren't we stripping them of any responsibility? Aren't we letting powerful people off the hook a little bit too much?

Yelena Biberman:

Yeah. That's a really good point. I mean, ultimately the decision to dissolve the Soviet Union, belonged to them. Right? And also just the decision to even join politics, to hold public office, to have power, that was their personal decision. They decided to have the kind of job where, what they decide, affected millions of people.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

Billions, if you count the rest of the world, and future generations. I've often struggled to come up with a satisfying answer, as to why Shushkevich was the first to stand, and agree with the proposal to dissolve the USSR. While his friendship, and respect for Yeltsin could serve as motivation, even Yeltsin himself wasn't as quick.

I feel like in most analysis of 20th century political conflicts, and even modern day political conflicts, we as researchers, often find ourselves picking apart the ways in which politicians, and individuals weaponize ideology in these political games, and power struggles.

And in another interview, when prompted about what ran through his head, the night the men at Belavezha agreed to dissolve the USSR, Shushkevich recalled the Soviet myth, that Lenin in response to the question, why are you rioting when you are facing a wall? Allegedly said, it is a wall, but a rotten one. One single jab, and it will collapse.

So when I think of the moment that Shushkevich stood to agree with the proposal to dissolve the USSR, I find very few plausible explanations aside from the notion that he genuinely believed it was the right thing to do.

Yelena Biberman:

I guess sometimes that happens too. I cannot help but be reminded of the Raskolnikov, the student from Dostoyevksy's Crime and Punishment. He did something he could never take back. He thought, at least for that moment, that his actions would make the world a better, more fair place. Maybe he was not a bad person or a good person. He was just like a human being. Right? But even he ultimately, came to recognize that despite any potential justifications, he had to be held accountable for his actions. He wanted to be held accountable for them.

Zachary Troyanovsky:

This podcast was made possible by the generous support of the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University. And the John B. Moore Documentary Studies collaborative at Skidmore College. A special thanks to Adam Tinkle, Jesse O'Connell, Alexandra Vacroux, and Cris Martin.

How to Kill a Superpower: Lessons from the USSR