MOSCOW, May 5 – RIA Novosti. On the eve of the government's resignation Special attention political scientists focused on the figure of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Experts are unanimous that in the current international situation, as well as from a professional point of view, replacing Lavrov is inappropriate, and the only reason for leaving can only be his own desire.
Experts will not speculate about possible successors, however, according to some, the Foreign Ministry could be headed by a person with experience as a permanent representative to the UN or a diplomat involved in relations with the United States. An “unexpected” candidacy cannot be ruled out, believes one of the political scientists interviewed by RIA Novosti.
The inauguration of the Russian President, after which the government will resign, will take place on May 7. The appointment of a prime minister and the formation of a new cabinet of ministers are expected in the near future. Lavrov has headed the foreign policy department for 14 years.
Rumors of fatigue
As experts note, “stubs” that the 68-year-old minister is “tired” and “asking to resign” have been appearing in the information field for a long time. The former diplomat, who wished to remain anonymous, did not rule out that Lavrov could indeed be tired of his busy work schedule. “It may well be, because it’s horse work. Not to mention the fact that he himself sits until eleven every day, redoes papers himself, writes himself. Then there are flights - time zones, ten hours back and forth,” said agency interlocutor.
“Hillary Clinton, for example, when she was Secretary of State, aged before our eyes. For a woman, this is unbearable work. And although he is an athlete by nature, it is very difficult even for him,” the ex-diplomat added.
However, back in March, the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Maria Zakharova, called publications about the possible resignation of the minister “fake.” Assumptions that “Lavrov has been talking about his desire to leave his post for several years, explaining this by fatigue,” but “at Putin’s request, he finalized presidential elections“, according to Zakharova, look like “some kind of planted misinformation.”
Lavrov himself, speaking on September 1 at MGIMO, said that he was “very comfortable and pleased to work with President Putin.” Then the minister emphasized that he sees “a whole series of problems that need to be solved on the foreign policy front.” Lavrov called the most important thing in his life that the Foreign Ministry is actively involved in this.
No replacement needed
“Usually foreign ministers are changed when foreign policy is changed. But I don’t see any signs that this foreign policy will change after the inauguration,” the head of the Center for International Security of the National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations named after E.M. told RIA Novosti. Primakov RAS Alexey Arbatov.
The head of the Foreign Ministry could theoretically be replaced if there was a new president or parliament, he believes.
The head of the Center for Political Analysis, Pavel Danilin, emphasized that Lavrov enjoys the constant respect of the president, and a replacement is possible only if the minister himself wants to leave this post. "This is the person who holds the post of Foreign Minister for the longest time in new Russia, and he demonstrated quite high efficiency in his post,” the expert noted.
Lavrov has every reason to expect that in the new government he will continue to hold this position, says Leonid Polyakov, head of the department of general political science at the Higher School of Economics.
“In any case, he has shown himself to be a completely effective minister in many situations, a landmark minister. In all main areas of foreign policy, he represents our country quite adequately, defending national interests firmly and professionally. Therefore, it seems to me that the very idea of replacing the minister in this post in principle, it would not be very clear,” the political scientist noted.
“I believe that from a professional point of view, Sergei Viktorovich is a major, talented diplomat, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of our country, whom we can be proud of. Today I do not see an equivalent to him among the foreign ministers of other countries,” the former deputy told RIA Novosti UN Secretary General, Chairman of the Russian Public Council for International Cooperation and Public Diplomacy Sergei Ordzhonikidze.
In his opinion, “there is no need to change the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the current situation.” “Unless Sergei Viktorovich himself wants to leave,” he added.
Possible successors
Speaking about who could theoretically head the Foreign Ministry, Ordzhonikidze recalled that Lavrov was the permanent representative to the United Nations. “And the UN deals with all the main issues that exist in the world. Any permanent representative to the UN has a greater knowledge of the main international problems than, say, a deputy minister who deals with bilateral issues. The deputy minister knows his direction well, and that’s all - with the possible exception of directions of the United States, because we have relations with the States that cover the entire range of international problems,” Ordzhonikidze said.
As Danilin noted, famous people usually apply for the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs, most often career diplomats. “Usually these are people who are connected in one way or another with the representation of Russian interests in the United States. There Lavrov was Russia’s representative to the UN. These are quite often people who occupy positions associated with America,” he explained.
Meanwhile, Arbatov suggested that Lavrov’s successor could be “some person we don’t think about.” “It’s not Vladimir Putin’s style to make an expected, predictable decision. Therefore, I think it will be some unexpected person,” the political scientist noted.
When asked whether Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov or Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, who also oversees relations with the United States, could become the new Minister of Foreign Affairs, he replied: “I don’t know. They also have a chance to take this post. But Judging by the kind of personnel decisions Putin has made in the past - and I don’t think he has changed very much recently as a politician and as a person - rather, one must assume that he will be faithful to his way of making such decisions and appoint someone something we can’t even think about right now.”
The expert believes that theoretically this could be a person not from the Foreign Ministry structure, “although the president believes in the bureaucratic system, in the state machine.” “In this sense, a person from a military or near-military environment is appointed as the Minister of Defense, and a person from a foreign policy or near-foreign policy environment is appointed as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, respectively. But this is impossible to predict,” Arbatov concluded.
No matter who comes to replace Lavrov, Russia's foreign policy will not change, he added.
New position for Lavrov
Some political scientists do not rule out that if Lavrov leaves his post as head of the Foreign Ministry, he may be offered other positions. For example, according to Danilin, Lavrov could “get a representative seat in the Security Council.”
Polyakov believes that Lavrov may be offered positions “at some similar or more high level- for example, in the rank of deputy prime minister of the government."
Recently, while discussing politics, a good friend of mine attacked me like an angry panther: “What? You wrote Lavrov as non-Russian?? He’s Russian - his last name ends with “ov”!”
But the fact is that, starting from the emergence of a state called the Russian Federation on December 25, 1991, and until now, we have not had not a single Russian foreign minister.
First Minister of Foreign Affairs Russian Federation from 1990 to 1996 there was Andrey Vladimirovich Kozyrev. There is no information about his parents on Wikipedia, but it is mentioned that since 2001 he has been one of the members of the presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress. And on the website jewage.org he is listed as one of the famous Jews.
Andrei Vladimirovich Kozyrev, first Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (photo from here).
Let's not argue with Jewish sites and organizations. They probably know who belongs and who doesn’t.
For some reason, there is a popular opinion among ordinary citizens that if you are a Jew, you must be smart. But here’s what the site compromat.ru writes about Kozyrev
It was precisely this task that the unfortunate minister Andrei Kozyrev failed to cope with, who during his lifetime turned into a “walking joke” and amazed with his servility, amateurism and intellectual squalor. After five years of activity of “dear Andrei” in the Foreign Ministry’s field, his owner gradually ceased to be taken seriously and to show due “signs of attention” at the international level. ()
Kozyrev’s fate after his resignation is quite typical for non-Russians. Having milked Mother Russia and earned themselves capital and a decent pension, they move abroad.
Currently lives with his family in Miami, USA, criticizes political system in Russia and the activities of President Putin ()
On January 9, 1996, Kozyrev was replaced by Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov, who served as Minister of Foreign Affairs until September 11, 1998.
Evgeny Maksimovich Primakov, second Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (photo from here).
“I grew up in Tbilisi, I love this city, this country very much. It’s very hard for me that I can’t afford to get on a plane, fly there for a day and return. And, alas, I won’t be able to while I’m a minister. When I leave this post, I will definitely make such forays." E. M. Primakov ()
Until now, there has been no reliable information about the nationality of Primakov’s mother. Various sources wrote that she lived in Tbilisi, where she worked as an obstetrician-gynecologist. Any reasonable person understands that a doctor in general, and even more so a lucrative profession like a gynecologist, is a place of increased concentration of Jews, but such an argument, of course, cannot be considered proof. However, literally a month ago, on January 25, 2016, Primakov’s book “Meetings at Crossroads” went on sale.
“There is a romantic story connected with my maternal grandmother, a Jewish woman. Having a wayward character, she, against the will of my great-grandfather, the owner of the mill, married a simple worker, who was also Russian, hence the name Primakov.” Primakov E. M., Meetings at crossroads, ISBN: 978-5-227-05787-7 ()
So, the maternal grandmother is Jewish, which makes Primakov’s mother a half-Jew (if, of course, we believe Primakov that the grandmother married a Russian).
Now to my father. Primakov writes that his last name was Nemchenko and that “he and his mother diverged.” However, the site compromat.ru gives a different version.
Zhenya Primakov was brought to the city of Tbilisi in November 1929. That is, a few days after birth. At that time Tbilisi was still called Tiflis.
What made the mother of the newborn, Anna Yakovlevna, hastily leave Kyiv and move with the baby from Tiflis? Who was Zhenya's father and why wasn't he next to his son? Whose surname did the boy receive - his mother's or his father's?
Primakov's pedigree is a sealed secret. From the published autobiography of Yevgeny Maksimovich, one can only learn that his father died when he was three months old, and that he was raised by a single mother who worked as a doctor in the clinic of a spinning and knitting mill.
...
The real father of Zhenya Primakov was not the man who died in 1929, but the literary critic Irakli Andronikov, who lived until the eighties. He did not recognize his son, but did not abandon him to the mercy of fate; he helped Zhenya’s mother settle in Tiflis, where, immediately after moving from Kyiv, she was given two rooms in former house tsarist general. Irakli Luarsabovich’s participation in the fate of his son did not end there. ()
The biography of the real (according to compromat.ru) pope, Irakli Luarsabovich Andronnikov, is easy to follow.
[Irakli Luarsabovich Andronikov] was born on September 28, 1908 in St. Petersburg, where at that time he was studying at the university at the Faculty of Law, his father was the future successful metropolitan lawyer Luarsab Nikolaevich Andronikashvili, who came from a famous noble family in Georgia. In 1917, the Provisional Government even appointed the father of young Irakli as secretary of the criminal department of the Senate. [...] Irakli Andronikov’s mother, Ekaterina Yakovlevna Gurevich, came from a famous Jewish family ()
That is, Primakov’s father is half Jew, half Georgian. I would like to draw the reader’s attention to how non-Russians like to change their non-Russian surnames, adding typically Russian ending"ov". But at the same time they often leave their national names. There was Andronikashvili, but he changed his last name to Andronikov and immediately became Russian for the average person. But the Georgian name Irakli remained. And dad’s name, Luarsaba, is more difficult to change in documents. This Georgian could officially become at least Ivan Petrov, but nevertheless Ivan Luarsabovich Petrov, which a person with a developed national instinct will immediately tell “be careful, Luarsab’s child cannot be Russian!”
In general, in determining nationality, searching and analyzing facts is sometimes not necessary - just looking at photographs of the subject is enough. In the photo below we see a typical non-Russian family.
Family of non-Russians. (left) Evgeny Maksimovich Primakov with his wife Laura Vasilyevna Kharadze and children. (right) E. M. Primakov with his son Sasha. (photo from here).
Judging by the photographs of young Yevgeny Maksimovich, you begin to doubt that there was even one Russian in this man’s ancestry. It was not for nothing that at the Institute of Oriental Studies, where he studied, he had the nickname “Chinese”.
On September 11, 1998, Primakov was replaced as Russian Foreign Minister by Igor Sergeevich Ivanov.
Igor Sergeevich Ivanov, third Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (photo from here).
He received his Russian surname from his father, information about whom could not be found on the Internet (and as we already know, surnames can be deceiving). But the origin of the mother is well known.
Mother - Elena (Eliko) Sagirashvili - a traffic police officer, a native of the Georgian village of Akhmeta, located in the Pankisi Gorge. ()
Igor Ivanov’s mother is Elena Davydovna Sagirashvili, originally from the city of Tianeti, north of Tbilisi. ()
In general, the fact that Mr. Ivanov is non-Russian can be clearly seen from his photograph, without any biography.
We wrote above that Ivanov replaced Primakov. In fact, all the years while Primakov was minister, Ivanov was his first deputy. Having become prime minister, Primakov recommended Ivanov for the post of head of the Foreign Ministry. For those who do not understand, one non-Russian with Georgian roots gave the position to another non-Russian with Georgian roots.
Sergei Viktorovich Lavrov, fourth Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (photo from here).
Here you have a Russian name, a Russian patronymic and a “Russian” surname ending in “ov”. When I look at this face, it is obvious to me without any evidence that in front of me is at least a semi-khach. But for those who want facts...
At a meeting with students at the Russian-Armenian Slavic University, one of the students asked Sergei Lavrov if his Armenian roots help him in his work. To which Mr. Lavrov, whose father is an Armenian from Tbilisi, replied: “My roots are actually Georgian - my father is from Tbilisi, but my blood is really Armenian” ()
I have not yet found information on Mother Lavrova. Apparently we have to wait until he, like Primakov, starts writing memoirs.
I will not bore the reader with a discussion of how it happened that in the Russian state the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs has been occupied by various Jews, Armenians and Georgians for at least 15 years (we will talk about the ministers of the Soviet period separately). Just remember that if you are Russian, then you and your children will have a very hard time fighting for their place in the sun. Non-Russians, who have occupied places in prestigious universities and high official positions, will not simply give them up, which means that any Russian will have to be several times better in order to win the competition.
Leonid Mikhailovich Mlechin
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministers of Foreign Affairs. Russian foreign policy. From Lenin and Trotsky to Putin and Medvedev
Preface
Sergei Viktorovich Lavrov is only the fourteenth Minister of Foreign Affairs since October 1917. For comparison: there have been more than twenty ministers of internal affairs and heads of state security over these decades.
Among the minister-diplomats were three academicians (Evgeny Primakov, Vyacheslav Molotov and Andrei Vyshinsky) and one corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences (Dmitry Shepilov). There were brilliantly educated people and those who did not know at all foreign languages and before his appointment as minister, he had almost never been abroad. Two of them held office twice - Vyacheslav Molotov and Eduard Shevardnadze. The shortest ministers were Boris Pankin - less than three months, Leon Trotsky - five months and Dmitry Shepilov - eight and a half months. Andrei Gromyko has lived the longest - twenty-eight years.
Three were excluded from the history of diplomacy for a long time: Trotsky, Vyshinsky and Shepilov. The fourth - Molotov - was crossed out of history by some with curses, while others were triumphantly returned.
Sir Henry Wotton, a British poet and diplomat, wrote on the flyleaf of a book in 1604 his widely accepted definition of a diplomat: “A good man sent abroad to tell lies for his country.” This definition turns the diplomat into just a performer.
All ministers insist that the development of foreign policy is the prerogative of the first person, that they only carry out the will of the Secretary General or the President. But this is deceit. The personality of the minister has a decisive influence on policy formation. Molotov brought dogmatism and stubbornness to politics that Stalin did not have. Shevardnadze went further than Gorbachev in partnership with the West. Under the same president, Yeltsin, Kozyrev tried to make Russia an ally of the West, but Primakov abandoned this line.
Eduard Shevardnadze ceased to be a minister because the state itself - the Soviet Union - disappeared. Dmitry Shepilov resigned from the post of minister for promotion - secretary of the Central Committee. Andrei Gromyko briefly occupied the high but powerless position of chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR. Yevgeny Primakov, to the applause of the State Duma, moved from the post of minister directly to the chair of the head of government. Molotov made the opposite journey: he moved from the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Eleven of the fourteen ministers were subjected to harsh criticism: some while still in office, others after resignation or even after death. Some of them are cursed as monsters and demons to this day. The exception is Evgeny Primakov. As a minister, he gained even more supporters and admirers.
Of the fourteen people's commissars and ministers, eight were dismissed or resigned due to dissatisfaction with their work. The owners of the Department of Internal Affairs suffered a more terrible fate - six were shot, two committed suicide; Five of the Lubyanka leaders were shot, others went to prison or fell into disgrace. God has had mercy on foreign ministers. For some reason, Stalin did not destroy even Maxim Litvinov, whose life hung by a thread.
Today life has become simpler. Igor Ivanov, who resigned from the post of minister (obviously not of his own free will), remains a prominent figure. But in a certain sense, you can sympathize with all the characters in this book.
The famous historian Evgeny Viktorovich Tarle once visited the no less famous lawyer Anatoly Fedorovich Koni. Kony complained about his old age. Tarle said:
Why, Anatoly Fedorovich, it’s a sin for you to complain. Vaughn Briand is older than you, and still hunts tigers.
Aristide Briand was the Prime Minister of France and Minister of Foreign Affairs in the 19th century.
Yes,” Kony answered melancholy, “he feels good.” Brian hunts tigers, and here the tigers hunt us.
The reader will quickly see that this book is dedicated not only to people's commissars and foreign ministers, foreign policy and diplomacy. This is another look at the history of our country from 1917 to the present day...
Part one
FOREIGN POLICY AND REVOLUTION
LEO DAVIDOVITCH TROTSKY: “REVOLUTION DOES NOT NEED DIPLOMACY”
On one October Sunday in 1923, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council of the Republic, People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, Politburo member Lev Davidovich Trotsky went hunting, got his feet wet and caught a cold.
« “I fell ill,” he wrote in his autobiographical book. - After the influenza, some kind of cryptogenic temperature appeared. Doctors forbade me to get out of bed. So I lay there the rest of the fall and winter. This means that I missed the 1923 debate against « Trotskyism» . You can foresee revolution and war, but you cannot foresee the consequences of the autumn duck hunt».
The disease really turned out to be fatal. Trotsky went on the hunt that ended so sadly for him in the role of the second man in the country, whose popularity was comparable to Lenin’s. When he recovers in a few months, he will discover that he has become a persecuted oppositionist, deprived of power and surrounded by irreconcilable enemies. And all this, according to Trotsky, happened because an unknown illness unsettled him.
Doctors prescribed bed rest for the chairman of the Revolutionary Military Council, and he was diligently treated. While the party apparatus was being raised to fight against « Trotskyism» Lev Davidovich was in a sanatorium near Moscow and, preoccupied with his illness, had little understanding of the changes taking place in the country. Well, really, what can you demand from a person who has been tormented? heat, who is forced to limit his communication to the circle of Kremlin doctors?
It is not difficult, however, to notice the striking contrast between Trotsky and Lenin: already terminally ill, Vladimir Ilyich, despite the strictest prohibitions of doctors, tried to participate in political life country and influence it. Trotsky, having fallen ill, decisively withdraws from all affairs, reflects, remembers, writes. Lenin is eager to get down to business. Trotsky willingly accepts doctors' recommendations: rest and treatment.
The Bolshevik leaders, compensating for the difficulties and inconveniences of their former life, quickly mastered the advantages of their new position. They were treated abroad, mainly in Germany, went to sanatoriums, and went on long vacations. And they did not argue when doctors, who keenly sensed the moods of their high-ranking patients, prescribed them to rest in comfortable conditions.
On July 2, 1985, Eduard Shevardnadze took office as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR. The “dilettante” decided to recall some of the minister’s Soviet colleagues.
Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov (party pseudonym, real name - Scriabin) was born on February 25 (March 9), 1890 in the settlement of Kukarka, Kukarsky district, Vyatka province (now the city of Sovetsk, Kirov region) in the family of Mikhail Prokhorovich Scriabin, clerk of the trading house of the merchant Yakov Nebogatikov.
V. M. Molotov spent his childhood years in Vyatka and Nolinsk. In 1902-1908 he studied at the 1st Kazan Real School. In the wake of the events of 1905, he joined the revolutionary movement, and in 1906 he joined the RSDLP. In April 1909, he was first arrested and exiled to the Vologda province.
After serving his exile, in 1911 V. M. Molotov came to St. Petersburg, passed the exams for a real school as an external student and entered the economics department of the Polytechnic Institute. From 1912, he collaborated with the Bolshevik newspaper Zvezda, then became secretary of the editorial board of the newspaper Pravda, and a member of the St. Petersburg Committee of the RSDLP. During the preparation of the publication of Pravda, I met I.V. Stalin.
After the arrest of the RSDLP faction in the IV State Duma in 1914, he hid under the name Molotov. Since the autumn of 1914, he worked in Moscow to recreate the party organization destroyed by the secret police. In 1915, V. M. Molotov was arrested and exiled to the Irkutsk province for three years. In 1916 he escaped from exile and lived illegally.
V. M. Molotov met the February Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd. He was a delegate to the VII (April) All-Russian Conference of the RSDLP (b) (April 24-29, 1917), a delegate to the VI Congress of the RSDLP (b) from the Petrograd organization. He was a member of the Russian Bureau of the Central Committee of the RSDLP (b), the Executive Committee of the Petrograd Council and the Military Revolutionary Committee, which led the overthrow of the Provisional Government in October 1917.
After the establishment of Soviet power, V. M. Molotov was in leading party work. In 1919, he was chairman of the Nizhny Novgorod provincial executive committee, and later became secretary of the Donetsk provincial committee of the RCP (b). In 1920 he was elected secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine.
In 1921-1930, V. M. Molotov served as Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. Since 1921, he was a candidate member of the Politburo of the Party Central Committee, and in 1926 he became a member of the Politburo. He actively participated in the fight against the internal party opposition and became one of the close associates of I.V. Stalin.
In 1930-1941, V. M. Molotov headed the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, and at the same time, since May 1939, he was the People's Commissar of Foreign Affairs of the USSR. An entire era in Soviet foreign policy is associated with his name. V. M. Molotov’s signature is on the non-aggression treaty with Nazi Germany dated August 23, 1939 (the so-called “Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact”), assessments of which were and remain ambiguous.
It fell to V. M. Molotov to inform the Soviet people about the attack of Nazi Germany on the USSR on June 22, 1941. The words he said then: “Our cause is just. The enemy will be defeated. Victory will be ours,” went down in the history of the Great Patriotic War 1941−1945.
It was Molotov who informed the Soviet people about the attack of Nazi Germany
During the war years, V. M. Molotov served as First Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR, Deputy Chairman State Committee defense of the USSR. In 1943 he was awarded the title of Hero of Socialist Labor. V. M. Molotov took an active part in organizing and holding the Tehran (1943), Crimean (1945) and Potsdam (1945) conferences of the heads of government of the three allied powers - the USSR, the USA and Great Britain, at which the main parameters of the post-war structure of Europe were determined.
V. M. Molotov remained as head of the NKID (from 1946 - the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs) until 1949, and again headed the ministry in 1953-1957. From 1941 to 1957, he simultaneously held the position of First Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars (since 1946, the Council of Ministers) of the USSR.
At the June plenum of the CPSU Central Committee in 1957, V. M. Molotov spoke out against N. S. Khrushchev, joining his opponents, who were condemned as an “anti-party group.” Together with its other members, he was removed from the leadership of the party and removed from all government posts.
In 1957-1960, V. M. Molotov was the USSR Ambassador to the Mongolian People's Republic, and in 1960-1962 he headed the Soviet representative office at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. In 1962 he was recalled from Vienna and expelled from the CPSU. By order of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs of September 12, 1963, V. M. Molotov was released from work in the ministry due to his retirement.
In 1984, with the sanction of K.U. Chernenko, V.M. Molotov was reinstated in the CPSU while maintaining his party experience.
V. M. Molotov died in Moscow on November 8, 1986 and was buried at the Novodevichy cemetery.
Andrei Yanuaryevich Vyshinsky, a descendant of an old Polish noble family, a former Menshevik, who signed the order for the arrest of Lenin, it would seem, was doomed to fall into the millstones of the system. Surprisingly, instead, he himself came to power, holding the positions of: Prosecutor of the USSR, Prosecutor of the RSFSR, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rector of Moscow State University.
He owed this largely to his personal qualities, because even his opponents often note his deep education and outstanding oratorical abilities. It is for this reason that Vyshinsky’s lectures and court speeches have always attracted the attention of not only the professional legal community, but also the entire population. His performance was also noted. Already as Minister of Foreign Affairs, he worked from 11 a.m. until 4-5 a.m. the next day.
This is what contributed to his contribution to legal science. At one time, his works on criminology, criminal procedure, theory of state and law, and international law were considered classics. Even now, the concept of sectoral division of the legal system developed by A. Ya. Vyshinsky lies at the foundation of modern Russian jurisprudence.
As Minister, Vyshinsky worked from 11 a.m. until 4-5 a.m. the next day
But nevertheless, A. Ya. Vyshinsky went down in history as the “chief Soviet prosecutor” at the trials of the 1930s. For this reason, his name is almost always associated with the period of the Great Terror. The “Moscow trials” undoubtedly did not comply with the principles of a fair trial. Based on circumstantial evidence, the innocent were sentenced to death or long prison terms.
He was also characterized as an “inquisitor” by the extrajudicial form of sentencing in which he participated—the so-called “two,” officially the Commission of the NKVD of the USSR and the Prosecutor of the USSR. The defendants in this case were deprived of even a formal trial.
However, let me quote Vyshinsky himself: “It would be a big mistake to see the prosecutor’s office’s accusatory work as its main content. The main task of the prosecutor’s office is to be a guide and guardian of the rule of law.”
As Prosecutor of the USSR, his main task was the reform of the prosecutorial and investigative apparatus. The following problems had to be overcome: low education of prosecutors and investigators, staff shortages, bureaucracy, and negligence. As a result, it was formed unique system supervision over compliance with the law, which the prosecutor's office remains at the present time.
The direction of Vyshinsky’s actions was even of a human rights nature, as far as this was possible in the conditions of totalitarian reality. For example, in January 1936, he initiated a review of cases against collective farmers and representatives of rural authorities convicted of theft in the early 30s. Tens of thousands of them were released.
Less well known are activities aimed at supporting Soviet defense. In numerous speeches and writings, he defended the independence and procedural powers of lawyers, often criticizing his colleagues for neglecting the defense. However, the declared ideals were not realized in practice, if we recall, for example, the “troikas”, which were the opposite of the adversarial process.
The diplomatic career of A. Ya. Vyshinsky is no less interesting. IN last years During his life, he served as the permanent representative of the USSR to the UN. In his speeches, he expressed authoritative opinions on many areas of international politics and international law. His speech on the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is well known - Vyshinsky foresaw problems with the implementation of the proclaimed rights, which are only now being noticed in the scientific and professional community.
The personality of Andrei Yanuaryevich Vyshinsky is ambiguous. On the one hand, participation in retributive justice. On the other hand, scientific and professional achievements, strong personal qualities, and the desire to achieve the ideal of “socialist legality.” It is they who force even Vyshinsky’s most fierce opponent to recognize in him that bearer of the highest values - “a man of his craft.”
We can conclude that it is possible to be one under totalitarianism. This was confirmed by A. Ya. Vyshinsky.
Born into a family of railway workshop workers. After the family moved to Tashkent, he studied first at the gymnasium and then at the secondary school.
In 1926 he graduated from the Faculty of Law of Moscow state university named after M.V. Lomonosov and the Agrarian Faculty of the Institute of Red Professors.
Since 1926 - in the justice authorities, in 1926-1928 he worked as a prosecutor in Yakutia. Since 1929 - on scientific work. In 1933-1935 he worked in the political department of one of the Siberian state farms. After the publication of a number of notable articles, he was invited to the Institute of Economics of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Since 1935 - in the apparatus of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks (Department of Science). As Leonid Mlechin reports, at one of the meetings on scientific issues, Shepilov “allowed himself to object to Stalin.” Stalin suggested that he back down, but Shepilov stood his ground, as a result of which he was expelled from the Central Committee and spent seven months without work.
Since 1938 - Scientific Secretary of the Institute of Economics of the USSR Academy of Sciences.
In the first days of the war, he volunteered to go to the front as part of the Moscow militia, although he had a “reservation” as a professor and the opportunity to go to Kazakhstan as director of the Institute of Economics. From 1941 to 1946 - in the Soviet Army. He worked his way up from a private to major general, head of the Political Department of the 4th Guards Army.
In 1956, Khrushchev achieved the removal of Molotov from the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, installing his comrade-in-arms Shepilov in his place. On June 2, 1956, by decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Shepilov was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, replacing Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov in this post.
In June 1956, the Soviet Foreign Minister toured the Middle East for the first time in history, visiting Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Greece. During negotiations in Egypt with President Nasser in June 1956, he gave secret consent to the USSR to sponsor the construction of the Aswan Dam. At the same time, Shepilov, by the nature of his previous activities, not being a professional international affairs specialist, was impressed by the truly “pharaonic” reception that the then President of Egypt Nasser gave him, and upon returning to Moscow, he managed to convince Khrushchev to speed up the establishment of relations with the Arab countries of the Middle East in counterweight to normalization of relations with Israel. It should be taken into account that during the Second World War, almost the entire political elite of the Middle East countries collaborated with Hitler’s Germany in one way or another, and Nasser himself and his brothers then studied at German higher military educational institutions.
Represented the USSR's position on the Suez crisis and the uprising in Hungary in 1956. He headed the Soviet delegation at the London Suez Canal Conference.
Contributed to the normalization of Soviet-Japanese relations: in October 1956, a joint declaration was signed with Japan, ending the state of war. The USSR and Japan exchanged ambassadors.
In its speech at the 20th Congress, the CPSU called for the forcible export of socialism outside the USSR. At the same time, he participated in the preparation of Khrushchev’s report “On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences,” but the prepared version of the report was significantly changed.
Shepilov called for the forced export of socialism outside the USSR
When Malenkov, Molotov and Kaganovich tried to remove Khrushchev at a meeting of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee in June 1957, presenting him with a whole list of charges, Shepilov suddenly also began to criticize Khrushchev for establishing his own “personality cult,” although he was never a member of this group. As a result of the defeat of the group of Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich, at the Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee that followed on June 22, 1957, the formulation “anti-party group of Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich and Shepilov who joined them” was born.
There is another, less literary-spectacular explanation for the origins of the formulation using the word “aligned”: a group that would consist of eight members would be awkward to call a “breakaway anti-party group”, since it turned out to be a clear majority, and this would be obvious even to readers of Pravda. To be called "factional schismatics", there had to be no more than seven members of the group; Shepilov was eighth.
It sounds more reasonable to assume that, unlike the seven members of the “anti-party group” - members of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee, Shepilov was defined as a “joiner”, since, as a candidate member of the Presidium, he did not have the right to a decisive vote in the voting.
Shepilov was relieved of all party and government posts. Since 1957 - director, since 1959 - deputy director of the Institute of Economics of the Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz SSR, in 1960-1982 - archaeographer, then senior archaeographer at the Main Archival Directorate under the USSR Council of Ministers.
Since the cliché “and Shepilov, who joined them,” was actively discussed in the press, a joke appeared: “The longest surname is And Shepilov, who joined them”; when a half-liter bottle of vodka was divided “for three,” the fourth drinking companion was nicknamed “Shepilov,” etc. Thanks to this phrase, the name of the party functionary was recognized by millions of Soviet citizens. Shepilov’s own memoirs are polemically entitled “Non-Aligned”; they are sharply critical of Khrushchev.
Shepilov himself, according to his memoirs, considered the case fabricated. He was expelled from the party in 1962, reinstated in 1976, and in 1991 reinstated in the USSR Academy of Sciences. Retired since 1982.
Of all the Russian and Soviet foreign ministers, only one, Andrei Andreevich Gromyko, served in this post for a legendary length of time - twenty-eight years. His name was well known not only in the Soviet Union, but also far beyond its borders. His position as Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR made him famous throughout the world.
The diplomatic fate of A. A. Gromyko was such that for almost half a century he was at the center of world politics and earned the respect of even his political opponents. In diplomatic circles he was called the “patriarch of diplomacy”, “the most informed foreign minister in the world.” His legacy, despite the fact that the Soviet era is far behind, is still relevant today.
A. A. Gromyko was born on July 5, 1909 in the village of Starye Gromyki, Vetkovsky district, Gomel region. In 1932 he graduated from the Economic Institute, in 1936 - graduate school at the All-Russian Research Institute of Economics Agriculture, Doctor of Economic Sciences (since 1956). In 1939 he was transferred to the People's Commissariat of Foreign Affairs (NKID) of the USSR. By this time, as a result of repressions, almost all the leading cadres of Soviet diplomacy had been destroyed, and Gromyko began to quickly make his career. At just under 30 years old, a native of the Belarusian hinterland with a PhD in Economics, almost immediately after joining the NKID, received the responsible post of head of the Department of American Countries. It was an unusually steep rise, even for those times when careers were created and destroyed overnight. No sooner had the young diplomat settled into his new apartment on Smolenskaya Square than he was summoned to the Kremlin. Stalin, in the presence of Molotov, said: “Comrade Gromyko, we intend to send you to work at the USSR Embassy in the USA as an adviser.” Thus, A. Gromyko became an adviser to the embassy in the United States for four years and at the same time an envoy to Cuba.
In 1946-1949 deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR and at the same time in 1946-1948. fast. Representative of the USSR to the UN, 1949-1952. and 1953-1957 first deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, in 1952-1953. USSR Ambassador to Great Britain, in April 1957 Gromyko was appointed Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR and served in this post until July 1985. Since 1983, First Deputy Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers. In 1985-1988 Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.
The diplomatic talent of Andrei Andreevich Gromyko was quickly noticed abroad. The authority of Andrei Gromyko, recognized by the West, was of the highest standard. In August 1947, Times magazine wrote: “How permanent representative Soviet Union In the Security Council, Gromyko does his job at a level of mind-blowing competence.”
At the same time, with the light hand of Western journalists, Andrei Gromyko, as an active participant in the “ cold war”, became the owner of a whole series of unflattering nicknames like “Andrey the Wolf”, “robot misanthrope”, “man without a face”, “modern Neanderthal”, etc. Gromyko became well known in international circles for his eternally dissatisfied and gloomy expression, as well as extremely unyielding actions, for which he received the nickname “Mr. No”. Regarding this nickname, A. A. Gromyko noted: “They heard my “no” much less often than I heard their “know,” because we put forward much more proposals. In their newspapers they called me “Mr. No” because I did not allow myself to be manipulated. Whoever sought this wanted to manipulate the Soviet Union. We are a great power and we won’t allow anyone to do this!”
Thanks to his intransigence, Gromyko received the nickname "Mr. No"
However, Willy Brandt, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, noted in his memoirs: “I found Gromyko a more pleasant interlocutor than I imagined him from the stories about this sarcastic “Mr. No.” He gave the impression of a correct and imperturbable person, reserved in a pleasant Anglo-Saxon manner. He knew how to make it clear in an unobtrusive manner how much experience he had.”
A. A. Gromyko adhered extremely firmly to the approved position. “The Soviet Union on the international stage is me,” thought Andrei Gromyko. - All our successes in the negotiations that led to the conclusion of important international treaties and agreements are explained by the fact that I was confidently firm and even adamant, especially when I saw that they were talking to me, and therefore to the Soviet Union, from a position of strength or playing in "cat and mouse". I never fawned over Westerners and after being hit on one cheek, I did not turn the other. Moreover, I acted in such a way that my overly obstinate opponent would have a hard time.”
Many did not know that A. A. Gromyko had a delightful sense of humor. His remarks could include pointed comments that came as a surprise during tense moments when receiving delegations. Henry Kissinger, coming to Moscow, was constantly afraid of eavesdropping by the KGB. Once, during a meeting, he pointed to a chandelier hanging in the room and asked the KGB to make him a copy of American documents, since the Americans’ copying equipment was “out of order.” Gromyko answered him in the same tone that chandeliers were made during the reign of the tsars and they could only contain microphones.
Among the most important achievements, Andrei Gromyko highlighted four points: the creation of the UN, the development of agreements on the limitation of nuclear weapons, the legalization of borders in Europe and, finally, the recognition of the USSR as a great power by the US.
Few people today remember that the UN was conceived in Moscow. It was here in October 1943 that the Soviet Union, the United States and Great Britain declared that the world needed an international security organization. It was easy to declare, but difficult to do. Gromyko stood at the origins of the UN; the Charter of this organization bears his signature. In 1946, he became the first Soviet representative to the UN and at the same time deputy and then first deputy minister of foreign affairs. Gromyko was a participant and subsequently the head of our country’s delegation at 22 sessions of the UN General Assembly.
“The question of questions,” the “super task,” as A. A. Gromyko himself put it, was for him the process of negotiations to control the arms race, both conventional and nuclear. He went through all the stages of the post-war disarmament epic. Already in 1946, on behalf of the USSR, A. A. Gromyko made a proposal for a general reduction and regulation of weapons and a ban on the military use of atomic energy. Gromyko considered the Treaty Banning Tests of Nuclear Weapons in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water, signed on August 5, 1963, the negotiations on which had dragged on since 1958, to be a source of special pride.
A. A. Gromyko considered consolidating the results of World War II to be another priority of foreign policy. This is, first of all, a settlement around West Berlin, the formalization of the status quo with the two German states, Germany and the GDR, and then pan-European affairs.
The historical agreements of the USSR (and then Poland and Czechoslovakia) with Germany in 1970-1971, as well as the 1971 quadripartite agreement on West Berlin, required enormous strength, persistence and flexibility from Moscow. How great the personal role of A. A. Gromyko in the preparation of these fundamental documents for peace in Europe is evident from the fact that to develop the text of the Moscow Treaty of 1970, he held 15 meetings with Chancellor W. Brandt’s adviser E. Bar and the same number with the minister Foreign Affairs V. Sheel.
It was they and the previous efforts that cleared the way for détente and the convening of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The significance of the Final Act signed in August 1975 in Helsinki had a global scale. It was, in essence, a code of conduct for states in key areas of relations, including military-political. The inviolability of post-war borders in Europe was secured, to which A. A. Gromyko attached special importance, and the preconditions were created for strengthening European stability and security.
It was thanks to the efforts of A. A. Gromyko that all the i’s were dotted between the USSR and the USA during the Cold War. In September 1984, at the initiative of the Americans, a meeting between Andrei Gromyko and Ronald Reagan took place in Washington. These were Reagan's first negotiations with a representative of the Soviet leadership. Reagan recognized the Soviet Union as a superpower. But another statement became even more significant. Let me remind you of the words spoken by the herald of the myth of the “evil empire” after the end of the meeting in the White House: “The United States respects the status of the Soviet Union as a superpower ... and we have no desire to change its social system.” Thus, Gromyko's diplomacy obtained from the United States official recognition of the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of the Soviet Union.
Thanks to Gromyko, relations between the USSR and the USA were stabilized
Andrei Gromyko carried in his memory many facts that had been forgotten by wide circles of the international community. “Can you imagine,” Andrei Gromyko told his son, “it’s none other than the polished Macmillan, the Prime Minister of Great Britain. Since this was at the height of the Cold War, he makes attacks on us. Well, I would say that the usual UN cuisine is working, with all its political, diplomatic and propaganda techniques. I sit and think about how to respond to these attacks on occasion, during debates. Suddenly, Nikita Sergeevich, who was sitting next to me, bends down and, as I first thought, was looking for something under the table. I even moved away a little so as not to disturb him. And suddenly I see him pull out his shoe and start pounding it on the surface of the table. Frankly speaking, my first thought was that Khrushchev felt ill. But after a moment I realized that our leader was protesting in this way, seeking to embarrass MacMillan. I became all tense and, against my will, began to bang on the table with my fists - after all, I had to somehow support the head of the Soviet delegation. I didn’t look in Khrushchev’s direction, I was embarrassed. The situation was truly comical. And what’s surprising is that you can make dozens of smart and even brilliant speeches, but in decades no one will remember the speaker, Khrushchev’s shoe will not be forgotten.
As a result of almost half a century of practice, A. A. Gromyko developed for himself the “golden rules” of diplomatic work, which, however, are relevant not only for diplomats:
- it is absolutely unacceptable to immediately reveal all your cards to the other side, to want to solve the problem in one fell swoop;
— careful use of summits; poorly prepared, they do more harm than good;
- you cannot allow yourself to be manipulated either by crude or sophisticated means;
— Success in foreign policy requires a realistic assessment of the situation. It is even more important that this reality does not disappear;
— the most difficult thing is to consolidate the real situation through diplomatic agreements and international legal formalization of a compromise;
- constant struggle for initiative. In diplomacy, initiative is The best way protection of state interests.
A. A. Gromyko believed that diplomatic activity is hard work, requiring those who engage in it to mobilize all their knowledge and abilities. The task of a diplomat is “to fight to the end for the interests of his country, without harming others.” “To work across the entire range of international relations, to find useful connections between seemingly separate processes,” this thought was a kind of constant in his diplomatic activity. “The main thing in diplomacy is compromise, harmony between states and their leaders.”
In October 1988, Andrei Andreevich retired and worked on his memoirs. He passed away on July 2, 1989. “The State, the Fatherland is us,” he liked to say. “If we don’t do it, no one will.”
Born on January 25, 1928 in the village of Mamati, Lanchkhuti district (Guria).
Graduated from Tbilisi Medical College. In 1959 he graduated from Kutaisi Pedagogical Institute. A. Tsulukidze.
Since 1946, at Komsomol and party work. From 1961 to 1964 he was the first secretary of the district committee of the Communist Party of Georgia in Mtskheta, and then the first secretary of the Pervomaisky district party committee of Tbilisi. In the period from 1964 to 1972 - First Deputy Minister for the Protection of Public Order, then - Minister of Internal Affairs of Georgia. From 1972 to 1985 - First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia. In this post, he carried out a highly publicized campaign against the shadow market and corruption, which, however, did not lead to the eradication of these phenomena.
In 1985-1990 - Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, from 1985 to 1990 - member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee. Deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR 9–11 convocations. In 1990-1991 - People's Deputy of the USSR.
In December 1990, he resigned “in protest against the impending dictatorship” and in the same year left the ranks of the CPSU. In November 1991, at the invitation of Gorbachev, he again headed the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs (called at that time the Ministry of Foreign Relations), but after the collapse of the USSR a month later this position was abolished.
Shevardnadze was one of Gorbachev's associates in pursuing the policy of perestroika
In December 1991, the Minister of Foreign Relations of the USSR E. A. Shevardnadze was one of the first among the leaders of the USSR to recognize the Belovezhskaya Agreements and the upcoming demise of the USSR.
E. A. Shevardnadze was one of M. S. Gorbachev’s associates in pursuing the policy of perestroika, glasnost and détente.