Quote:
Originally Posted by unipus
Today, you have countries siding with Russia because they have fears about over-expansion from the West. But that's taken 30 years to develop.
|
I think, there is more to it than just the fear of over-expansion, but yes, the 30 years gap is a problem. Today, authoritarianism seems to be appealing, too again, not just for autocrats, but also the masses that vote them into power. Authoritarianism was never the selling point of the USSR, though, despite being part of the package. It had to be masked over, however, despite its appeal to some, since ending exactly that: tyranny, was part of the selling narrative the USSR always used.
So, why go into bed with the USSR after 1991? Well, the coup d'etat wasn't a bad thing for everyone. The Chinese applauded it, having long feared Gorbachev's policies of democratization and transparency. Cuba, North Korea and all other recipients of Soviet aid weren't to happy either, this included Serbian nationalists, by the way, since Yugoslavia slipped out of their hands for precisely the same reasons: transparency leads to questions and multi-party elections led to nationalist parties taking control in member states.
Everyone wanting to suppress this at home, might hop onboard the train of "anti-nationalist internationalism", if there's money to be made from, power gained or both. And there are plenty of anti-West, anti-American sentiments around by 1991 already. This is after decades of ideological warfare, keep in mind. I'd say, this could be argued to be plausible, despite "the end of history" being big talk. The anti-American and anti-Western narrative, historically, was a bid dead, sure, but it reared it's head in the form of terrorist attacks on capitalist and American institutions by 1993 (World Trade Center bombing) and then the 1998 United States embassy bombings.
The USSR was always quite good at spinning these narratives. Imagine, the likes of Timothy McVeigh getting some help by the KGB. Not in Soviet disguise, obviously, but maybe by some Irish guys. McVeighwas raised Catholic, the IRA was aided by the Soviets (as were other urban guerillas in Europe), contacts could be established. If the US appear vulnerable from the inside, this would drive flock into the Soviet camp.
If one wants to establish an alliance between Muslims and Soviets, I'd still consider Iran an unlikely true ally of the USSR. But influencing extremists that used to fight in Afghanistan into now fighting the US covertly, is not hard to imagine. The US weren't exactly a role model for many of the mujahedin, they were seen as imperialists, too. Especially after US forces were stationed more or less permanently in Saudi Arabia, did certain groups begin to target the US.
What the USSR would need to do in the 1990s is, get on its feet, start influencing covert groups wanting to hurt the US and then connect these groups to the nations from which their members come. The latter is the tricky part.
Can it be done in 7 years or so? No, probably not. But can a Soviet leader, who maybe thinks a little bit too much of himself come to think he has all the pieces in place for a necessary operation of the scale of invading Eastern Europe? Certainly. Miscalculations of that sort have happened before. It would probably make his so called allies turn their back on him, once they recognize his follies. But that just makes the world a messier place, not a safer one.