Brezhnev and Kosygin’s leadership

End of Khrushchev End of Khrushchev was as a result

due to the broad coalition of political elite that opposed him.

He was the only leader to be removed from power before his death (except Gorbachev, who resigned following the collapse of the Soviet Union).

Khrushchev left a society that was both wealthier than it had been and freer as well.

However, these changes, whilst positive had not made the country easier to govern.

Furthermore, officials had become tired of his unmanageable behaviour, outlandish predictions for Communism and constant reshuffling of colleagues.

Why Brezhnev?

Brezhnev had become Party leader because he offered exactly what they wanted: stability and predictability.

Brezhnev was seen as a safe pair of hands and a “decent” character (Tompson, 1991)

He was not strongly identified with any particular ideology and was thus more or less acceptable to everyone.

Why Kosygin?

Kosygin was one of the most able Soviet administrators and also a man who knew how to avoid being drawn into factional groups.

Khrushchev appreciated both his ability and reliability (Tompson, 2003).

Overall

Brezhnev ad Kosygin were somewhat of an odd couple.

In Brezhnev, they had a reliable party leader who would advance its interests without the arbitrary policy changes characterised under Khrushchev.

Kosygin, offered government an able administrator whilst holding no leadership ambitions therefore minimised the risk of rivalry with Brezhnev (True).

Moreover, Kosygin’s more reformist inclinations would counterbalance Brezhnev’s cautious conservatism (False).

Consolidation of power While Brezhnev’s rise to power had

taken longer than Khrushchev’s and Stalin's, his was smoother and avoided open conflict.

In ‘64 Brezhnev began to slowly sideline those who posed a threat to his leadership and promoting his supporters. These supporters who served under Brezhnev in Moldavia and Ukraine became known as the “Dnepropetrovsk mafia”.

Brezhnev started to become the face of the regime both domestically and internationally, though he cult of personality did not develop until about 1977.

However, some say that it was a personality cult without a personality.

Leadership style

As Brezhnev grew older, he had a preference for promoting cronies: Son to first deputy foreign minister Son-in-law first deputy interior minister

Both were ill qualified for these roles. However, he did manage to hold together the broad coalition

of elite interest that had backed the overthrow of Khrushchev.

Brezhnev brought a much needed period of stability and pragmatism, which he projected such qualities to the outside world.

Many have argued that there are two Brezhnev’s: The first, a young Brezhnev, who was willing to listen and

did not claim to be an expert in every area. The second, an old Brezhnev, who was less willing to

accept criticism, susceptible to flattery and often insecure, therefore promoting incompetent colleagues to depend on him rather than talented young men

Overall

Theme through Brezhnev’s era was to “protect the cadres”, which led to the ageing of the political elite.

Scraped Rule 25 limiting the number of years officials could stay in office.

However, the growing age of the Party elite meant a less effective regime. Politburo meetings which used to last for 3-6 hours in ‘60s now only went on for 30-40 minutes (Tompson, 2003)

Task

Read through p.85-88Write one paragraph on how the

following institutions developed under Brezhnev:The Politburo and Central CommitteeThe Nomenklatura (list of those to be

appointed to senior positions)The Party