DEPTH STUDIES: How valid is "courageous failure" as an assessment of Khrushchev's policy towards national minorities?

Question 1

Evidence that Khrushchev’s courageous policies were ultimately failures:

Answer 1

• Khrushchev trying to appease Tito through appeasement - encouraged other Eastern European states to also follow the Yugoslavian model.
• Failure of the Hungarian crisis.
• Berlin Wall - Khrushchev resorting to repression.
• Desalinisation worsened relations with China.

Question 2

How did Khrushchev deal with Marshall Tito in Yugoslavia?

Answer 2

• Attempted to resolve the conflict with Tito by appeasement.
• Argument that this led to other Eastern European states to also follow calls for greater autonomy.
• Some argue that this created the stability that contributed to the final collapse of communism in 1991.

Question 3

Why was the Hungarian Crisis (1956) said to be a failure?

Answer 3

• It had appeared that by using force - Khrushchev had restored stalinists polices for dealing with opposition.
• Communist parties in the west lost support - dented the prospect of communism spreading outside the Soviet Union.

Question 4

Argument that Khrushchev’s handling of national minorities was successful?

Answer 4

• Khrushchev gained support from Tito over the Hungarian uprising.
• Poland, Czchoslovakia, Romania and Bulgaria and China supported the handling of the Hungarian uprising.
• West failed to intervene in Hungary - sort of a propaganda victory.
• Khrushchev stance on Germany presented the West from controlling Berlin.