The full extent of the problems caused by Gorbachev’s version of glasnost would not become evident until 1987. The basis for these problems, however, occurred in the moves Gorbachev made as early as the fall of 1985. In short, Gorbachev began to encourage intellectuals and the media to criticize the Party and Party history, while simultaneously diminishing the role and authority of the Party over the media. Indeed, he did not simply diminish the Party’s oversight of the media, he actually turned the media over to people who were hostile to the CPSU and socialism. While some moves toward the relaxation of censorship and a more relaxed approach to publications and culture were overdue and would have been widely supported in the Party, it nonetheless was a transition that demanded a delicate handling if it were not to lead to instability. Like so much else, Gorbachev’s approach to glasnost was rash and reckless and would ultimately prove to be extremely foolhardy and destructive not only for the Party and but also the whole society.
In his memoirs, Gorbachev disingenuously claimed, “Glasnost broke out of the limits that we had initially tried to frame and became a process that was beyond anybody’s control.”291 This is not accurate. By word and deed, Gorbachev himself fostered the very excesses about which he acted helpless. He was enamored with the media and intellectuals, sought their help and approval, met with them frequently, relied on them to build him a base of support outside the Party, incited them to criticize the Party and Party history, and then refused to exercise any restraint whatsoever. At the Twenty-seventh Party Congress, Gorbachev opened the door to criticism without limits. “It is time for literary and art criticism to shake off complacency and servility…and to remember that criticism is a social duty.”292 The next month, Gorbachev and Ligachev met with representatives of the mass media, and Gorbachev said that “the main enemy is bureaucratism, and the press must castigate it without backing off.”293 A truly anomalous situation thus emerged. The General Secretary, who was the leader of the Party and who had the power to reform the Party and government, was inciting attacks from the outside on those very entities, as if he were a mere bystander, not ultimately responsible for them.
This was certainly a major revision of Communist practice. At the very least, it implied that the traditional way of dealing with Party and government weaknesses through collective criticism and self-criticism lacked the force to revitalize the Party. Gorbachev turned to outside criticism as a first rather than last resort. No evidence existed of Gorbachev trying and failing to undertake criticism of the Party, or of his encountering any notable opposition. Yet, in June 1986, Gorbachev told a group of writers that they must function as the “loyal opposition.” It was as if the Soviet leader was invoking an old-fashioned, idealized image of the role of the media in liberal democracy—this time as a guide to socialist reform. “We have no opposition [party],” Gorbachev said. “How then are we going to control ourselves? Only through criticism and self-criticism; but most importantly through glasnost.”294 Even more consequential than these words were Gorbachev’s deeds. While instigating an opposition, Gorbachev systematically reduced the Party’s control of the mass media and placed it in the hands of anti-socialists.
Two bodies exercised control of the mass media. The Central Committee’s Department of Agitation and Propaganda (Agitprop) that dated from 1920, had ultimate authority over editors and the press. Glavlit, a body created in 1922, exercised censorship and approval over every publication and broadcast. In 1985, Gorbachev named Alexander Yakovlev the head of Agitprop.295 In this position and as one of Gorbachev’s closest advisors, Yakovlev would wield the most powerful and pernicious influence of anyone on the entire reform process.
Born in 1923, Yakovlev joined the Communist Party while serving in the navy during World War II. After the war, he attended a pedagogical institute and then became a full-time worker for the Party in Yaroslavl.296 Yakovlev attended the Central Committee’s Academy of Social Sciences from 1956 to 1960 and spent the academic year 1958-59 as a graduate student at Columbia University in New York. After graduation, Yakovlev worked for the Propaganda Department of the Central Committee, and by the mid-1960s had become the head of the radio and television section. In 1965 he became first deputy director of the Propaganda Department, a position he held until 1973, when a revealing episode led to his removal.297
During the so-called intellectual thaw that occurred under Khrushchev, Russian nationalism grew in popularity particularly in literary circles, a development that under Brezhnev caused a debate within the Party, in which Yakovlev played a prominent part. In 1973, Yakovlev upbraided a Party journal for not being more critical of Russian nationalism. Yakovlev claimed to be upholding Marxism against the danger posed by nationalism, but in actuality, his rigid rejection of national appeals sounded more like Bukharin than Lenin. Moreover, Yakovlev’s argument betrayed a pronounced attraction to the West. He argued that Russian nationalism fostered hostility to the West, while he held that Russian development could not be separate from the West.298
Meanwhile, Yakovlev’s views alienated the Brezhnev leadership and resulted in his transfer abroad. He requested a posting to an English-speaking country and was granted the post of ambassador to Canada. Yakovlev served in this capacity for ten years, which would give him more experience in the West than any other Politburo official.299 In 1983, Gorbachev visited Canada and spent a week with Yakovlev. Within a month of this trip, Gorbachev helped get Yakovlev appointed director of the prestigious Institute for International Relations and the World Economy (IMEMO) in Moscow.
Thereafter, Yakovlev’s rise was meteoric. In 1984, Yakovlev became a corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences. In 1985 Gorbachev appointed him head of the Central Committee’s Department of Propaganda (Agitprop). The next year, Gorbachev promoted him to Secretary for Propaganda. By then Yakovlev not only exercised authority over the media and cultural affairs, but also enjoyed great influence in foreign policy.300
As head of Agitprop, Yakovlev worked on several fronts to bring about a total transformation in leading personnel and procedures. He urged the creative unions of writers and filmmakers to adopt a liberal approach to culture, and he pushed some partisans of Gorbachev into leadership positions. For example, at the December 1985 meeting of the Russian Republican Writers’ Union, Yakovlev encouraged the poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko to call for a loosening of restrictions on the publication of banned works. In April 1986, at the Congress of the Film Makers Union, Yakovlev personally nominated an ally, Elem Klimov, as First Secretary, and Klimov was elected. Yakovlev also successfully supported the election of Kiril Lavrov as head of the Theater Workers’ Union. (Yakovlev’s similar attempt to name the head of the Russian Writers’ Union failed.)301 Yakovlev also undoubtedly helped effectuate a major change in Glavlit. Some time in late 1985 or early 1986, without any apparent discussion in the Politburo, Glavlit relinquished its traditional oversight of publications, and this power fell to the editors of publishing houses and journals.302 As editors gained new authority over the content of publications, Yakovlev began appointing new editors of major newspapers and journals and new cultural officials who were partisans of fast and far-reaching changes and critics or opponents of the Party. These included the editors of Novy Mir (the leading literary monthly), Znamya (a journal), Ogonyok (a mass circulation weekly), Moskovskie Novosti (a newspaper), Sovetskaya Kultura (a newspaper), and Voprosy Literaturny. He made Yury Voronov head of the Central Committee’s Department of Culture and Vasily Zakharov Minister of Culture.303 Yuri Afanasyev, soon a partisan of Boris Yeltsin, became head of the Moscow State Historical Archives. These men soon took leading roles in criticizing Stalin and the Party and pushing the most rapid and extreme reform measures.