Meeting Gorbachev, Fleeing ImeldaRoundup
tags: leadership, Mikhail Gorbachev, authoritarianism, Imelda Marcos
Astrid Tuminez is the president of Utah Valley University and a Research Consultant to the U.S. Institute of Peace.
For the last module of my Principles of Leadership class, I am assigning two documentaries. One is Werner Herzog and Andre Singer’s Meeting Gorbachev, which chronicles the unlikely rise of an agricultural leader from the provinces of Russia to the highest echelons of Soviet power, his efforts to reform the old Soviet Communist system and his fall from power.
I wanted to watch Meeting Gorbachev at home one evening with my 11-year-old son. He wasn’t interested. I proposed that I could tell him the story of World Wars I and II and the Cold War, and then explain what Gorbachev did for humanity. Then he could say yes or no.
Using stick drawings, I described the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, alliances that stumbled into war and the bloody consequences. We discussed Germany’s defeat and humiliation, reparations, and Hitler’s rise. Then on to Pearl Harbor and an even bigger second world war. We finished with the Cold War, when the U.S. and U.S.S.R., with their allies, armed themselves with enough nuclear weapons to destroy the earth many times over. I told my son that Gorbachev ended the Cold War and started denuclearization. He agreed to watch the movie.
I met Gorbachev four times. Once he was at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, where we traded autographed books (his memoir and my book on Russian nationalism). Watching Meeting Gorbachev made me recall his qualities as a humane leader. Empires do not fall peacefully, but the Soviet Union fell relatively peacefully because Gorbachev had little appetite for blood. He had power but wanted to use it to reform his country, not crush others.
He ended the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. He was the first Soviet leader to rub shoulders with ordinary people at home and abroad. He treated his wife, Raisa Maksimovna, as a real partner. He believed in dialogue and transparency, as evidenced by his glasnost (openness) campaign. He wanted to improve conditions for the Soviet people -- in his words, “more democracy and more socialism,” defined as a better quality of life. He ended the division of Germany. He signed arms control agreements, showing that peace was possible. His reward was to lose his country and his political power.
The other movie I’m assigning is Lauren Greenfield’s The Kingmaker, a documentary on Imelda Marcos of the Philippines. Imelda is known for the 3,000 pairs of shoes found in her palace after a people’s uprising in 1986 overthrew her husband, Ferdinand Marcos (who later died in exile in Hawaii). In 1991 the Marcoses returned to the Philippines to rebuild their power base. Imelda, her son and one of her daughters won major political offices. They never returned billions in wealth looted from the country. They never apologized to tens of thousands of former detainees and torture victims, or to families of people who “disappeared” during the Marcos dictatorship. When queried, Imelda claimed innocence in the 1986 assassination of her husband’s political nemesis, Benigno Aquino, who was shot dead on the airport tarmac in Manila after he returned from U.S. exile.
comments powered by Disqus
- The Deficit Hawks That Make Moderate Democrats Cower
- The Muddled History of Anti-Asian Violence
- Massive Investment in Social Studies and Civics Education Proposed to Address Eroding Trust in Democratic Institutions
- Lightning Strikes Twice: Another Lost Jacob Lawrence Surfaces
- Former Procter and Gamble CEO: America and the World Need History Majors
- Part of Being a Domestic Goddess in 17th-Century Europe Was Making Medicines
- How Dr. Seuss Responded to Critics Who Called Out His Racism
- Discovery Of Schoolhouse For Black Children Now Offers A History Lesson
- People Longing for Movie Theaters During the 1918 Flu Pandemic Feels Very Familiar in 2021
- How Did "Bipartisanship" Become a Goal In Itself? (Podcast)