The death of the first post-Soviet and first democratically elected President of Russia, Boris Yeltsin, comes at a time when Russia is once again undergoing a fundamental transformation. In death, history’s judgment of Boris Yeltsin’s legacy is mixed. Former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, who was often at odds with Yeltsin, commented that Yeltsin was responsible for many good deeds and some serious mistakes which is fairly apropos.
What cannot be disputed is that Yeltsin came to power at a time of great upheaval in the Soviet Union and served as a guiding and instrumental force behind the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the demise of the Communist Party, the rise of independent states and the establishment of democratic process in Russia. It was Boris Yeltsin who famously climbed on a tank in 1991 and declared an attempted coup unconstitutional. Although Mikhail Gorbachev received the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1990, it was Boris Yeltsin who was responsible for most of the reforms that took place during the transformation from the Soviet Union to Russia.
Time of Reforms
Boris Yeltsin is widely credited with ushering in democracy and reforms in Russia by introducing greater freedoms in the realm of politics and political dissent, as well as journalistic freedoms. He also introduced dramatic economic changes to move towards a market economy, including the privatization of many state assets. Unfortunately with this rise of capitalism also came corruption and the rise of the oligarchs in Russia. Prosperity did not come to the masses in Russia and many people felt that they suffered economically under Yeltsin.
During the 1990s, Russia became rather chaotic with all these newfound freedoms and the rule of law suffered with crime and corruption rampant in Russian society. In addition, Yeltsin also met with failure during Russia’s military intervention in Chechnya in 1994, which became a bloody war of attrition – unpopular both inside Russia and internationally. On the international front, despite the West’s concerns with Russia’s handling of Chechnya and Russia’s issues over Western involvement with the Balkans conflict aftermath, Yeltsin was viewed as someone the West could negotiate with to move beyond the former Cold War relationship.
Yeltsin – A Contradiction
Boris Yeltsin was also a very colorful and charismatic leader, who was not afraid to institute radical changes, speak his mind, and take a hard-line stance when necessary. His bold personal style often translated into bold initiatives. Many considered him crude and coarse, but he considered himself a man of the people, upset by the perks the Communist Party bureaucrats regularly gave themselves. He genuinely wanted to improve the lives of his fellow Russians.
However, he was also quite ruthless, authorizing the hard-line tactics used in Chechnya, and the shelling of his own Parliament, which was being occupied by the hard-line opposition. He also sometimes occasionally reversed on democratic reforms. While Yeltsin was a lively personality, he was also a troubled personality. Health and drinking problems affected his ability to lead and often led to a lack of respect. By 1999, he realized his time in the spotlight was over, and became the first Russian leader to relinquish power on his own terms.
Current Impact
Prior to his departure, Yeltsin also named current Russian President Vladimir Putin as his successor, and Putin was duly elected a few months later. Ironically, Putin has spent the last seven years abrogating many of Yeltsin’s democratic and economic reforms. Where Yeltsin was wild and bold, Putin has been careful and calculating.
While Putin has seemingly eroded many political, economic, and journalistic freedoms, re-established control over many economic assets and resources, and has adopted an increasingly bellicose relationship with the West, he has also managed to instill a sense of order back to Russia, something that was missing in the Yeltsin years.
Yeltsin’s death can be seen as symbolic of the death of democratic values taking root in Russia. He was responsible for ushering in democracy in Russia, but unfortunately these ideals have not managed to be sustainable in modern Russia.