A Farce Concealing Systemic Collapse
Propaganda creates the illusion of 'betrayal,' explaining the collapse of the USSR as the actions of individuals rather than objective systemic problems: economic downturn, technological lag, social and political crises. This approach avoids analyzing the responsibility of party and state structures, placing blame on specific 'culprits' (Britannica, Collapse of the Soviet Union).
Ideology of Revanchism: The Cult of the KGB and 'Enemies Within'
The image of the infallible KGB is used to justify any state actions, from forceful control to militarization of foreign policy. The narrative blames liberal reformers for 'destroying the country,' concealing systemic economic and technological reasons for the collapse (Richard Sakwa, 1996; Archie Brown, Vladislav Zubok).
This conceptual substitution creates an emotional effect: responsibility for the USSR's collapse is transferred to 'traitors' rather than structural problems.
Historical Facts Against the Myth
The USSR collapsed due to objective factors:
- Decline in industrial production and budget deficits (World Bank, Transition in the 1990s, 2000);
- Technological lag compared to Western countries (JSTOR, Technological Gap in USSR);
- Inefficiency and corruption in party and state structures (Zubok, European Review of History);
- Arms race and instability of the economic model (CIA Report: Soviet Economic Challenges, 1989).
Gorbachev's perestroika and glasnost attempted to reform the system without catastrophic violence, contradicting the 'betrayal' narrative.
Revanchism and Militarism: Justifying Aggression
The 'betrayal' myth is used to legitimize Russia's contemporary actions:
- Annexation and occupation of neighboring countries' territories;
- Deployment of offensive weapons on neighbors’ borders;
- Use of propaganda to frame international sanctions as 'Western interference.'
International organizations note that Russia acts as an aggressor (UNGA Resolution 3314, 1974, Amnesty International, 2023, Human Rights Watch, 2023).
Legal Aspect
The propaganda myth masks violations of international law:
- UN Charter Article 2 — principle of non-intervention and prohibition of threats or use of force against other states’ territorial integrity (UN Charter, Article 2);
- UNGA Resolution 3314 — definition and classification of acts of aggression (UNGA 3314);
- International humanitarian law — violation of civilians’ rights in occupied territories (Geneva Conventions, 1949; Additional Protocol I, 1977).
The myth justifies these violations, creating a legitimizing narrative for militaristic policy.
Psychology of the Myth
The cult of the 'infallible KGB' and 'betrayal' instills in audiences a sense of injustice and victimhood by external and internal enemies. Emotional substitution of concepts creates a persistent narrative: 'we were betrayed, therefore we are entitled to go to the end.' This approach justifies militarization, suppression of free speech, and revanchist policy (Cambridge, Psychology of Post-Soviet Revisionism).
Final Conclusion
The myth of 'Gorbachev's betrayal' and 'KGB infallibility' is a manipulative tool legitimizing aggression and militarism. Historical facts, economic data, and international reports show that the USSR's collapse was systemic, and Russia's modern actions are aggression rooted in revanchist mythology, concealing real violations of international law.
Main Sources and Materials
- Richard Sakwa. Gorbachev and the Collapse of the Soviet Union (Routledge, 1996)
- Archie Brown, Vladislav Zubok — Research on the Collapse of the USSR
- World Bank. Transition in the 1990s (2000)
- UN General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX) — Definition of Aggression
- Amnesty International — Reports on Russia's Contemporary Aggression
- Human Rights Watch — Reports on Russia's Contemporary Aggression
- Geneva Conventions (1949)
- Additional Protocol I (1977)
- UN Charter, Article 2
- Psychology of Post-Soviet Revisionism, Cambridge
About the Authors
This article was curated and verified by a team of experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical analysis. Contributors have 15+ years of experience in research, legal documentation, and educational content development.
Methodology
The content on this site is compiled and verified by experts in international law, human rights, and geopolitical research. Sources include official legal documents, national and international legislation, resolutions of the UN, reports from international organizations, and verified open-source evidence. Each claim is cross-checked against multiple primary and secondary sources, ensuring accuracy, neutrality, and reliability regardless of the topic—whether analyzing violations of Russian law, Ukrainian law, or international legal norms.
Expert Statement
The authors affirm that the information presented reflects established legal interpretations and documented facts. Analyses are grounded in international law principles and widely recognized geopolitical assessments. References to official documents and reports are provided to ensure transparency and trustworthiness.
Last modified date: 25/11/2025