December 25, 1991: Gorbachev Announces the End of the USSR

Fotogramma del discorso di Gorbaciov del 25 dicembre 1991 sulla fine dell’URSS – still image from Gorbachev’s 25 December 1991 speech announcing the end of the USSR

Introduction. On the late afternoon of Christmas Day 1991, millions of Soviet citizens watched in astonishment as a historic announcement was made: Mikhail Gorbachev, speaking live on television, declared he was ending his tenure as President of the USSR and thereby effectively pronouncing the end of the superpower born in 1922. This event marked the culmination of a dissolution process that had begun at least two years earlier, a watershed moment that radically transformed the world’s geopolitical balance. From the vast Soviet empire, 15 independent states emerged; even specific sectors like the Soviet watch industry experienced a sudden shock: the great watch factories (Poljot, Raketa, Vostok, etc.), long accustomed to central planning, suddenly found themselves without state support, forced to navigate the market economy on their own.

🚀 The Last Soviet Citizen

In December 1991 cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev was aboard the space station Mir. Launched into space as a Soviet citizen, he returned to Earth in March 1992 as a Russian citizen: during his mission the Soviet Union had ceased to exist. This anecdote vividly illustrates the epochal magnitude of that historical change.

In this article, we recount—without political judgments—the key events from 1989 to 1991 that led to the USSR’s collapse, then explore the birth of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and its subsequent failure. We will use authoritative historical sources and official documents (including the full text of Gorbachev’s famous speech in the original Russian and an English translation) to ensure accuracy and depth.


The Premises (1989–1990): From Eastern Europe to Internal Secessionist Pressures

The “end” of the Soviet Union did not happen overnight, but was the culmination of reforms and tensions that had been building for years. In 1985 Gorbachev launched the policies of perestroika (economic restructuring) and glasnost (political openness) in an attempt to renew the Soviet system. These reforms, while relaxing repression and easing the Cold War, also exposed the severe economic problems and national tensions that had long been suppressed.

  • 1989: The year of revolutions in Eastern Europe. The USSR’s satellite states in Eastern Europe abandoned their communist regimes one after another. The iconic event was the fall of the Berlin Wall (November 9, 1989), which signaled the beginning of the collapse of the Soviet bloc in Europe. Gorbachev chose to not intervene militarily in the Warsaw Pact countries in revolt, breaking with the interventionist doctrine of the past. This decision earned the USSR international respect but also encouraged independence aspirations within the Union. By the end of ’89, the climate in the USSR had changed: on one side, reformers pushing for more change; on the other, conservatives alarmed by the disintegration of the system.
  • 1990: The Soviet republics move toward autonomy. Within the USSR, the republics began proclaiming their own sovereignty. On March 11, 1990, Lithuania unilaterally declared independence – the first Soviet republic to do so (followed in the subsequent months by Estonia and Latvia). Moscow initially deemed these declarations illegal, but the signal was clear. In the months that followed, other republics also pushed for greater autonomy: for example, on June 12, 1990, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (Russia) adopted a Declaration of State Sovereignty, asserting the primacy of its laws over those of the Union; a few weeks later Ukraine did the same. In practice, while Gorbachev tried to negotiate a new federative pact to hold the USSR together, many parts of the federation were already paving the way for independence.

These centrifugal forces were accompanied by the sunset of the Soviet imperial order on the international stage. In 1990 the USSR consented to the reunification of Germany and severed the remaining ties of the old bloc: in 1991 both the Comecon (the communist economic alliance) and the Warsaw Pact were formally dissolved. Meanwhile, within the USSR, elements of democracy were introduced: in March 1990, relatively free elections were held in the republics, and the Communist Party lost its monopoly in several areas. Gorbachev himself, in March 1990, assumed the newly created position of President of the USSR (a role established for him) in an attempt to give the state a more presidential and less party-driven structure. Despite the international prestige he gained (Nobel Peace Prize in 1990), Gorbachev faced growing internal difficulties: a grave economic crisis, with shortages of consumer goods and inflation, undermined public confidence, while the republics pressed to break away and party hardliners accused him of having weakened the Union.


1991: Coup d’État and the Dissolution of the Soviet Union

The year 1991 was decisive. Events unfolded rapidly, from the dramatic August coup to the final collapse in December. Let’s review them in chronological order:

  • March 1991: Referendum on the Union. In an effort to find legitimacy for a “renewed Soviet Union,” Gorbachev called a nationwide referendum on March 17, 1991. Citizens were asked whether they wanted to maintain the USSR as a federation of sovereign republics. Nine republics participated (the six most secession-minded – the three Baltic states, Armenia, Georgia, and Moldova – boycotted the vote). The outcome apparently favored unity: about 76% of voters supported a reformed Soviet Union. This result showed that, despite everything, a large part of the population (especially in Russia, Belarus, Central Asia) feared disintegration. However, the apparent popular support for the Union was not enough to stop the course of events.
  • June 1991: Yeltsin becomes President of Russia. Another sign of change came with the first popular presidential election in the Russian republic. On June 12, 1991, Boris Yeltsin – a reformist politician and outspoken critic of Gorbachev – was elected President of the RSFSR (Russian Federation) with 57% of the vote, defeating Gorbachev’s preferred candidate (Nikolai Ryzhkov). For the first time, Russia – the key republic of the USSR – had a president elected by popular vote, separate from and a rival to the Union’s president. Yeltsin became the champion of Russian sovereignty and of further market-oriented economic reforms. The Gorbachev–Yeltsin dualism grew increasingly tense: Gorbachev sought to save the Union via a new Union Treaty, scheduled for August 1991, which would have transformed the USSR into a looser federation; Yeltsin aimed to transfer powers from Moscow to the individual republics, defending the interests of the newly sovereign Russia.
  • August 1991: Hardliners’ coup (“August Putsch”). On the eve of the new Union Treaty’s signing (set for August 20, 1991), the unexpected happened: on August 19, 1991, a group of high-ranking conservative Soviet officials attempted a coup in Moscow to halt the breakup of the USSR. Vice President Gennady Yanayev, Prime Minister Valentin Pavlov, Defense Minister Dmitry Yazov, KGB chief Vladimir Kryuchkov, and others formed a State Committee for the State of Emergency, declaring that Gorbachev (vacationing in Crimea at the time) was “incapacitated”. Tanks rolled through the streets of Moscow and a state of emergency was announced. The plotters belonged to the hardline wing of the regime, fearful that the new treaty would decentralize too much power and cause the Union to implode. The popular resistance and Yeltsin’s stance, however, doomed the coup: thousands of citizens flooded the streets of Moscow, erecting barricades to protect the White House (the Russian parliament) where Yeltsin had set up headquarters. In a famous scene, Yeltsin climbed atop a tank to rally the crowd and denounce the coup as illegal. The army hesitated to fire on the protesters; after three days (by August 21) the putsch collapsed. The coup leaders were arrested and Gorbachev returned to power, but he was now gravely delegitimized. The failed coup effectively ended the CPSU’s political dominance (Communist Party of the Soviet Union): the party was suspended and later banned in Russia, and Gorbachev’s authority – even though he had been the plotters’ victim – was irreparably undermined. As Gorbachev himself acknowledged in his final speech, “the August putsch brought the crisis to a head” and what followed – the dissolution of the Soviet state – was its most destructive consequence.
  • Autumn 1991: The republics declare independence. In the aftermath of the failed coup, real power swiftly shifted to the republic leaders. Yeltsin, in Russia, assumed control of central institutions (he even ordered the red flag to be lowered from the Russian parliament building and Soviet symbols to be removed). The Union republics, one after another, declared their independence: on August 24, 1991, Ukraine proclaimed independence (confirming it later in a popular referendum on December 1, in which over 90% of Ukrainian citizens voted to leave the USSR). By the end of August, Belarus, Moldova, Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan had also declared independence; in September, Armenia, Tajikistan and the three Baltic states followed suit (their separation was finally recognized by Moscow on September 6, 1991). In short, within weeks the Soviet Union ceased to exist as a political entity: Moscow no longer exercised authority over the republics, which were now acting as independent states. Gorbachev made one last desperate attempt to maintain at least a minimal confederation among the new states, but the die had been cast.
  • December 8, 1991: The Belavezha Accords – the USSR ends, the CIS is born. The final blow came at the beginning of December. On December 8, 1991, at a dacha in the Belavezha Forest (in Belarus), the leaders of Russia (Boris Yeltsin), Ukraine (Leonid Kravchuk), and Belarus (Stanislav Shushkevich) met secretly. They signed the Belavezha Accords, which formally declared the Soviet Union dissolved and announced the creation of a new entity, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The joint statement read: “The USSR, as a subject of international law and a geopolitical reality, has ceased to exist.” It was an effectively revolutionary act: three founding republics of the USSR (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus) were renouncing the 1922 Union Treaty and sealing the end of the Soviet state. Gorbachev had not even been invited to this decisive meeting, a sign that his role was by then marginal. A few days later, on December 12, the Russian Supreme Soviet ratified the agreement and recalled the Russian deputies from the Union’s Supreme Soviet, completing the Russian secession from the USSR (in effect, the act that made the Union’s continued existence impossible).
  • December 21, 1991: Alma-Ata Protocol. The Belavezha Accords invited all former Soviet republics to join the new CIS. On December 21, 1991, in Alma-Ata (Almaty, Kazakhstan), another eight leaders – including those of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Moldova – joined the Commonwealth by signing the Alma-Ata Protocols. Thus, 11 of the 15 ex-republics became part of the CIS (the only ones excluded were the three Baltic states, which had chosen an entirely independent, pro-Western path, and Georgia, which was then embroiled in internal conflicts and joined later in 1993). In these protocols, beyond expanding the CIS, the signatories confirmed the end of the USSR and agreed on principles of cooperation among the newly independent states.
  • December 25, 1991: Gorbachev resigns on live TV. At this point the facts on the ground were accomplished: only the final formal act remained. On the evening of December 25, 1991, at 7:00 p.m. Moscow time, Mikhail Gorbachev appeared on central television to announce his resignation as President of the USSR. In his solemn address, broadcast worldwide, Gorbachev declared: “In consideration of the situation that has developed with the formation of the CIS, I hereby cease my activities as President of the USSR.”. He lauded the successes of the reforms and democratization since 1985 but expressed regret at the dismemberment of the Soviet state, stating he could not endorse that choice imposed by events. It was a historic and emotional moment: after nearly 70 years, for the first time there was no Soviet President and no Union government. That same evening, at 6:35 p.m., the red flag of the Soviet Union was lowered from the Kremlin and in its place the tricolor flag of the Russian Federation was raised. The USSR, born from the 1917 Revolution, effectively no longer existed.
  • December 26, 1991: Official dissolution of the USSR. The next day, December 26, the final legal act took place: the Soviet of the Republics, the upper chamber of the Soviet parliament, passed a resolution formally dissolving the Soviet Union and abolishing all its institutions. At the same time, it recognized the independence of all the former republics. The largest country in the world by area had peacefully fragmented into a constellation of independent states. Fortunately – as Gorbachev would later emphasize – this happened without a full-scale civil war, a very real danger given the nuclear arsenal and ethnic tensions involved. The Soviet armed forces were placed under joint CIS command (temporarily) and then gradually under the control of the individual new states. Within days, all the former Soviet republics had achieved independence and the international community rushed to recognize them diplomatically.
  • 9 November 1989 – Fall of the Berlin Wall

    The barrier dividing East and West Berlin is torn down. It becomes the symbol of the collapse of communist regimes in Eastern Europe and foreshadows the end of Soviet influence in the region.

  • 11 March 1990 – Lithuania declares independence

    Lithuania, followed shortly by Estonia and Latvia, proclaims the restoration of its independence from the USSR. It is the first Soviet republic to do so, openly defying Moscow.

  • 17 March 1991 – Referendum to save the USSR

    A referendum is held in 9 republics: 76.4% of voters approve the proposal to maintain a “Union of Sovereign States.” The Baltic republics, Georgia, Armenia, and Moldova boycott the vote.

  • 12 June 1991 – Yeltsin elected President of Russia

    Boris Yeltsin wins the first presidential elections of the Russian Republic with 57% of the vote, defeating Gorbachev’s favored candidate. Russia thus asserts its political autonomy within the USSR.

  • 19–21 August 1991 – Failed coup in Moscow

    A group of hardline communist officials attempts a putsch to stop Gorbachev’s reforms. The population and Yeltsin resist: after three days the coup fails. The Communist Party is banned in Russia.

  • 8 December 1991 – Belavezha Accords

    Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus sign an accord that declares the Soviet Union dissolved and establishes the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). The other former republics are invited to join.

  • 25 December 1991 – Gorbachev resigns

    In a televised address to the nation, Mikhail Gorbachev announces his resignation as President of the USSR and the end of the Union. The red flag over the Kremlin is lowered and replaced by the Russian tricolor.

  • 26 December 1991 – Legal end of the USSR

    The USSR’s Supreme Soviet officially declares the Soviet Union dissolved. The 15 republics are now fully independent states, marking the formal conclusion of the USSR’s history.

  • 21 December 1991 – Alma-Ata Protocol (chronologically earlier than 25/12)

    (Occurs just before 25/12) Eight other ex-republics (including Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia) join the CIS by signing the Alma-Ata Protocols. The CIS thus initially has 11 members, excluding the Baltic states and Georgia.

  • 1992–1993 – Birth of the CIS and early frictions

    The CIS members approve a Charter (January 1993) but Ukraine and Turkmenistan refuse to ratify it, opting for an associate status. This weakens the Community’s cohesion from the start.

  • August 2009 – Georgia leaves the CIS

    Following its conflict with Russia (the 2008 South Ossetia war), Georgia formally withdraws from the CIS. It is the first country to leave the organization, underscoring its fragility.

  • May 2018 – Ukraine exits the CIS

    Years after limiting its participation, Ukraine (the second most populous ex-USSR republic) ends all involvement in the CIS. By now the Commonwealth, without Ukraine and Georgia, has lost much of its original significance.

The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS): birth and decline

Objectives and early period. The Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was born, as we have seen, immediately after the dissolution of the USSR, with the expectation of maintaining a cooperative bond among the former Soviet republics. Initially, 11 states joined (all the former republics except the three Baltic states and Georgia, which would enter in 1993). The CIS was conceived as an international organization to manage the orderly transition of the post-Soviet space: to coordinate economic policies, oversee the division of the Soviet military and nuclear arsenal, facilitate trade relations, and possibly develop common policies in certain areas. Its administrative headquarters was set in Minsk (Belarus), and Russian was adopted as the organization’s official working language. In those early months, one urgent priority was ensuring control over the Soviet nuclear arsenal: warheads stationed in Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan were swiftly brought under unified oversight (and later transferred to Russia in the following years). On the economic front, efforts were made to prevent a complete collapse of interdependence: a de facto free-trade area was maintained, and members committed to cooperate so as not to abruptly sever the industrial supply chains developed in the Soviet era.

From the start, however, significant internal divisions emerged. Ukraine, for example, sought to limit its participation: although it took part in founding the CIS, it never ratified the CIS Charter adopted in January 1993, in part because it did not accept Russia being recognized as the sole successor state of the USSR (for instance, maintaining the USSR’s seat at the UN). Similarly, Turkmenistan did not ratify the charter, opting for a more loose “associate member” status. This meant that from the outset some key republics viewed the CIS not as a binding supranational entity, but rather as a voluntary forum.

The limits and failure of the CIS. Despite initial hopes, the CIS never developed into a deep political or economic union. By the mid-1990s it was clear that the organization was struggling to achieve its main objectives. According to many observers, even the CIS’s limited goals proved difficult to realize: the Commonwealth showed itself incapable of stanching the centrifugal forces and the conflicts among the former allies. For example, within a few years of independence, local conflicts erupted (the war in Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan; the civil war in Tajikistan; the secessionist conflict in Transnistria in Moldova; the separatist wars in Georgia) without the CIS being able to do much to resolve them. Moreover, no common foreign or defense policy ever materialized: each country pursued its own national interests. Russia formed separate military alliances (like the Collective Security Treaty Organization, from which some countries later withdrew) and bilateral agreements, but the CIS as such remained politically weak.

It should be noted that some aspects of the CIS were functional: more than a purely symbolic entity, the Commonwealth did serve as a platform for dialogue and technical cooperation. On the economic front, for example, the major tangible achievement was the creation of a free trade area among many of the member countries, formalized through agreements implemented by 2005. The CIS also facilitated cooperation in areas like transportation, telecommunications, immigration policy, and the fight against organized crime. Remarkably, even at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics, athletes from the former Soviet republics competed together under the CIS flag, honoring commitments made by the USSR before its dissolution. These positive elements, however, could not reverse the broader trend toward fragmentation.

During the 2000s, the CIS further waned in relevance. Georgia withdrew entirely from the organization in 2009, following its conflict with Russia, viewing CIS membership as incompatible with its pro-NATO orientation. Ukraine, which had always been a member in only a nominal sense, decided in 2018 to formally end its participation in the Commonwealth amid the ongoing crisis with Russia. Today (2025), the CIS mainly includes Russia and a number of Eurasian states (such as Kazakhstan, Belarus, Uzbekistan, and others), and serves an almost purely consultative role. In practice, the CIS never succeeded in achieving the political integration or strategic cohesion that some had envisioned in 1991, remaining a rather weak organization. Many of the former republics charted their own paths: the three Baltic states joined the European Union and NATO; Georgia and Ukraine pursued closer ties with the West; other countries engaged in alternative structures led by Russia (such as the Eurasian Economic Union, established in 2015).

In conclusion, Gorbachev’s announcement of December 25, 1991 was the culmination of a peaceful yet turbulent process of dissolution. That speech – which we present in full below, in Russian with an English translation – remains a moving testament to the end of an era. Gorbachev spoke of achievements and mistakes, of hope for democracy and anguish over the country’s breakup, and he wished the peoples of the former Soviet Union a prosperous and free future. Although the Commonwealth of Independent States that arose from the USSR’s ashes never became the integrated successor that some hoped, the fact that the Soviet colossus imploded without immediately descending into widespread chaos is an outcome many attribute to the measured leadership of figures like Gorbachev.

Below, we present the complete transcript of Mikhail Gorbachev’s December 25, 1991 address, in the original Russian with an English translation, as an invaluable primary source document.


The Speech of Mikhail Gorbachev – December 25, 1991 (original text and translation)

(Source: «Российская газета», December 26, 1991; Wikisource archive. English translation by the author, based on the official AP translation.)[rbth.com]

Original text (Russian):

«Дорогие соотечественники! Сограждане!

В силу сложившейся ситуации с образованием Содружества Независимых Государств я прекращаю свою деятельность на посту Президента СССР. Принимаю это решение по принципиальным соображениям.

Я твердо выступал за самостоятельность, независимость народов, за суверенитет республик. Но одновременно и за сохранение союзного государства, целостности страны.

События пошли по другому пути. Возобладала линия на расчленение страны и разъединение государства, с чем я не могу согласиться. И после Алма-Атинской встречи и принятых там решений моя позиция на этот счет не изменилась.

Кроме того, убежден, что решения подобного масштаба должны были бы приниматься на основе народного волеизъявления.

Тем не менее я буду делать все, что в моих возможностях, чтобы соглашения, которые там подписаны, привели к реальному согласию в обществе, облегчили бы выход из кризиса и процесс реформ.

Выступая перед вами последний раз в качестве Президента СССР, считаю нужным высказать свою оценку пройденного с 1985 года пути. Тем более что на этот счет немало противоречивых, поверхностных и необъективных суждений.

Судьба так распорядилась, что, когда я оказался во главе государства, уже было ясно, что со страной неладно. Всего много: земли, нефти и газа, других природных богатств, да и умом и талантами Бог не обидел, а живем куда хуже, чем в развитых странах, все больше отстаем от них.

Причина была уже видна – общество задыхалось в тисках командно-бюрократической системы. Обреченное обслуживать идеологию и нести страшное бремя гонки вооружений, оно – на пределе возможного.

Все попытки частичных реформ – а их было немало – терпели неудачу одна за другой. Страна теряла перспективу. Так дальше жить было нельзя. Надо было кардинально все менять.

Вот почему я ни разу не пожалел, что не воспользовался должностью Генерального секретаря только для того, чтобы „поцарствовать“ несколько лет. Считал бы это безответственным и аморальным.

Я понимал, что начинать реформы такого масштаба и в таком обществе, как наше, – труднейшее и даже рискованное дело. Но и сегодня я убежден в исторической правоте демократических реформ, которые начаты весной 1985 года.

Процесс обновления страны и коренных перемен в мировом сообществе оказался куда более сложным, чем можно было предположить. Однако то, что сделано, должно быть оценено по достоинству:

– Общество получило свободу, раскрепостилось политически и духовно. И это – самое главное завоевание, которое мы до конца еще не осознали, а потому, что еще не научились пользоваться свободой. Тем не менее, проделана работа исторической значимости:

– Ликвидирована тоталитарная система, лишившая страну возможности давно стать благополучной и процветающей.

– Совершен прорыв на пути демократических преобразований. Реальными стали свободные выборы, свобода печати, религиозные свободы, представительные органы власти, многопартийность. Права человека признаны как высший принцип.

– Началось движение к многоукладной экономике, утверждается равноправие всех форм собственности. В рамках земельной реформы стало возрождаться крестьянство, появилось фермерство, миллионы гектаров земли отдаются сельским жителям, горожанам. Узаконена экономическая свобода производителя, и начали набирать силу предпринимательство, акционирование, приватизация.

– Поворачивая экономику к рынку, важно помнить – делается это ради человека. В это трудное время все должно быть сделано для его социальной защиты, особенно это касается стариков и детей.

Мы живем в новом мире. – Покончено с „холодной войной“, остановлена гонка вооружений и безумная милитаризация страны, изуродовавшая нашу экономику, общественное сознание и мораль. Снята угроза мировой войны.

Еще раз хочу подчеркнуть, что в переходный период с моей стороны было сделано все для сохранения надежного контроля над ядерным оружием.

– Мы открылись миру, отказались от вмешательства в чужие дела, от использования войск за пределами страны. И нам ответили доверием, солидарностью и уважением.

– Мы стали одним из главных оплотов по переустройству современной цивилизации на мирных, демократических началах.

– Народы, нации получили реальную свободу выбора пути своего самоопределения. Поиски демократического реформирования многонационального государства вывели нас к порогу заключения нового Союзного договора.

Все эти изменения потребовали огромного напряжения, проходили в острой борьбе, при нарастающем сопротивлении сил старого, отжившего, реакционного – и прежних партийно-государственных структур, и хозяйственного аппарата, да и наших привычек, идеологических предрассудков, уравнительной и иждивенческой психологии. Они наталкивались на нашу нетерпимость, низкий уровень политической культуры, боязнь перемен. Вот почему мы потеряли много времени. Старая система рухнула до того, как успела заработать новая. И кризис общества еще больше обострился.

Я знаю о недовольстве нынешней тяжелой ситуацией, об острой критике властей на всех уровнях и лично моей деятельности. Но еще раз хотел бы подчеркнуть: кардинальные перемены в такой огромной стране, да еще с таким наследием, не могут пройти безболезненно, без трудностей и потрясений.

Августовский путч довел общий кризис до предельной черты. Самое губительное в этом кризисе – распад государственности. И сегодня меня тревожит потеря нашими людьми гражданства великой страны – последствия могут оказаться очень тяжелыми для всех.

Жизненно важным мне представляется сохранить демократические завоевания последних лет. Они выстраданы всей нашей историей, нашим трагическим опытом. От них нельзя отказываться ни при каких обстоятельствах и ни под каким предлогом. В противном случае все надежды на лучшее будут похоронены.

Обо всем этом я говорю честно и прямо. Это мой моральный долг.

Сегодня хочу выразить признательность всем гражданам, которые поддержали политику обновления страны, включились в осуществление демократических реформ.

Я благодарен государственным, политическим и общественным деятелям, миллионам людей за рубежом – тем, кто понял наши замыслы, поддержал их, пошел нам навстречу, на искреннее сотрудничество с нами.

Я покидаю свой пост с тревогой. Но и с надеждой, с верой в вас, в вашу мудрость и силу духа. Мы – наследники великой цивилизации, и сейчас от всех и каждого зависит, чтобы она возродилась к новой современной и достойной жизни.

Хочу от всей души поблагодарить тех, кто в эти годы вместе со мной стоял за правое и доброе дело. Наверняка каких-то ошибок можно было бы избежать, многое сделать лучше. Но я уверен, что раньше или позже наши общие усилия дадут плоды, наши народы будут жить в процветающем и демократическом обществе.

Желаю всем вам всего самого доброго».

English translation:

“Dear compatriots, fellow citizens!

In light of the situation which has developed with the formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States, I am ceasing my activity in the post of President of the USSR. I take this decision for reasons of principle.

I have firmly stood for the independence and self-rule of peoples, for the sovereignty of the republics. But at the same time, I have fought to preserve the union state and the country’s unity.

Events have taken a different course. The policy of dismembering the country and disuniting the state has prevailed – something I cannot agree with. Even after the Alma-Ata meeting and the decisions taken there, my stance on this issue has not changed.

Moreover, I am convinced that decisions of such magnitude should have been made on the basis of a popular expression of will.

Nevertheless, I will do everything in my power to ensure that the agreements signed there lead to genuine accord in society and facilitate the way out of the crisis and the continuation of reforms.

Addressing you for the last time as President of the USSR, I find it necessary to share my assessment of the path we have traveled since 1985 – especially since there are many contradictory, superficial, and unfair judgments on this subject.

Fate willed that when I found myself at the helm of the state, it was already clear that something was wrong in the country. We had plenty of everything – land, oil and gas, other natural riches, and God endowed us with intelligence and talent – yet we lived much worse than the developed countries, falling further and further behind them.

The reason was already evident: society was suffocating under the grip of the command-bureaucratic system. Condemned to serve ideology and carry the terrible burden of the arms race, it had reached the limits of its capacity.

All attempts at partial reform – and there were many – failed one after another. The country was losing perspective. We could not go on living like that. Everything had to be changed radically.

That is why I have never for a moment regretted that I did not use my position as General Secretary merely to “reign” for a few years. I would have considered that irresponsible and immoral.

I understood that initiating reforms of such scale in a society like ours was an extremely difficult and even risky undertaking. But even today I am convinced of the historical rightness of the democratic reforms that were begun in the spring of 1985.

The process of renewing the country and of profound changes in the world community turned out to be far more complex than could be anticipated. However, what has been accomplished should be given its due:

– Society has obtained freedom; it has been liberated politically and spiritually. This is the most important achievement, one we have not yet fully grasped because we have not yet learned how to use freedom. Nonetheless, work of historic significance has been done:

– The totalitarian system, which had long deprived the country of the opportunity to become prosperous and affluent, has been eliminated.

– A breakthrough has been achieved on the road to democratic transformation. Free elections, freedom of the press, religious freedoms, representative bodies of power, multi-partisanship – all have become realities. Human rights have been recognized as the highest principle.

– Movement toward a diversified economy has begun, and the equality of all forms of ownership is being affirmed. As part of land reform, the peasantry has begun to revive; private farming has appeared; millions of hectares of land are being given to rural and urban people. Economic freedom for the producer has been legalized, and entrepreneurship, joint-stock companies, and privatization have gained momentum.

– In turning the economy toward the market, it is important to remember that this is being done for the sake of the people. In this difficult time, everything must be done to protect the social well-being of the people – especially the elderly and children.

We are living in a new world. The “Cold War” is over; the arms race has been stopped, as has the insane militarization of the country that had distorted our economy, public consciousness, and morals. The threat of world war has been lifted.

I want to emphasize again that, during this transition period, everything necessary was done on my part to maintain reliable control over nuclear weapons.

– We have opened up to the world, renounced interference in others’ affairs, and renounced the use of troops outside our country. And in response, we have been met with trust, solidarity, and respect.

– We have become one of the main pillars in the restructuring of modern civilization on peaceful, democratic foundations.

– Peoples and nations have obtained a real freedom to choose the path of their self-determination. The search for a democratic reform of our multi-national state had brought us to the threshold of signing a new Union Treaty.

All these changes demanded immense exertion; they took place in sharp struggle, amid growing resistance from the old, obsolete, reactionary forces – from the former party-state structures and the economic apparatus, and also from our own habits, ideological prejudices, and leveling, dependent mentality. They encountered our intolerance, our low level of political culture, our fear of change. That is why we lost a lot of time. The old system collapsed before the new one had time to begin functioning, and the crisis in society grew even more acute.

I am aware of the dissatisfaction with the current grave situation, the sharp criticism of the authorities at all levels and of my own actions. But once again I want to stress: radical changes in such a vast country, especially given its legacy, cannot occur painlessly, without difficulties and upheavals.

The August coup brought the general crisis to its ultimate limit. The most devastating aspect of this crisis is the disintegration of statehood. And today I am troubled by the fact that our people have lost the citizenship of a great country – the consequences could be very grave for everyone.

I consider it vitally important to preserve the democratic achievements of recent years. They have been paid for through all our history and our tragic experience. We must not abandon them under any circumstances or pretexts; otherwise all our hopes for a better future will be buried.

I speak of all this honestly and directly. It is my moral duty.

Today, I would like to express my gratitude to all the citizens who supported the policy of renewing the country, who got involved in implementing the democratic reforms.

I am grateful to the statesmen, political and public figures, and to millions of people abroad – to all those who understood our aspirations, supported them, and came to meet us in sincere cooperation.

I leave my post with concern, but also with hope, with faith in you, in your wisdom and strength of spirit. We are the heirs of a great civilization, and now the revival of that civilization to a new, modern and dignified life depends on each and every one of us.

I want to thank from the bottom of my heart those who, over these years, stood with me for what is right and good. Certainly, some mistakes could have been avoided and many things could have been done better. But I am convinced that, sooner or later, our common efforts will yield fruit, and our peoples will live in a prosperous and democratic society.

I wish all the best to all of you.” [rbth.com]


Conclusion. The end of the Soviet Union, formalized by Gorbachev’s announcement on December 25, 1991, remains one of the pivotal events of the 20th century. In a few months, a chapter that had lasted seventy years was closed, and another opened, filled with uncertainties. For enthusiasts of Russian and Soviet horology, that moment was also a dividing line between two eras in manufacturing: the watch factories of the former USSR suddenly had to face a new reality on their own – some shut down or transformed, while others found ways to survive and continue their proud tradition (for instance, the First Moscow Watch Factory – Poljot – was privatized in the 1990s; the Raketa factory in Saint Petersburg sought out new markets, etc.). On the broader historical level, the dissolution of the USSR occurred in a relatively orderly and peaceful manner – a result that was by no means guaranteed, made possible by both the sense of responsibility of leaders like Gorbachev (who refused to use force to hold together an empire that was falling apart) and by the willingness of the republics to cooperate, at least to some extent, within the CIS to avoid total chaos. Although the CIS did not achieve the integration that had been hoped for, that exit of the Soviet Union stands as an example of a tectonic transition managed without sliding into civil war among the former compatriots.

Thirty years later, history books offer varying judgments on the protagonists of those days – Gorbachev revered by some as the architect of freedom, criticized by others as the one who “lost the Empire” – but the importance of understanding the events of 1989–1991 is beyond dispute. We hope this article, rich in documented details and primary sources, provides a useful and authoritative resource for those who wish to delve into that crucial period, which truly was a turning point for Russia, Europe, and the entire world. [en.wikipedia.org]

How to Remove Scratches from the Plexiglass of Your Watch: Complete Guide

scratched-watch

If you have a watch with a scratched plexiglass face, don’t worry. With a few tools and a bit of patience, you can restore the glass to its original splendour. In this guide, I’ll explain step by step how to remove scratches from the plexiglass of your watch, whether it’s a robust Vostok Amphibia or a delicate Slava. By following these tips, your watch will look as good as new.

Step 1: Preparing the Glass

Before you start working, it’s important to consider the shape of the glass. If the glass protrudes from the case, you can proceed directly with sanding. However, if it is flush with the case, it’s advisable to protect the edges with masking tape. If the watch has a rotating bezel, remove it to make the job easier and avoid damage.

Step 2: Choosing the Sandpaper

To remove scratches from plexiglass, I use sandpaper with grits ranging from 400 to 1200 and beyond. Start with the coarsest grit to eliminate deeper scratches, then move to finer grits to refine the surface. For thicker glass, like that on Amphibias, you can apply more pressure, while for thinner glass, such as on Slava or Raketa watches, you need to proceed more gently to avoid damaging the glass.

Step 3: Sanding Technique

When sanding, alternate circular and perpendicular motions. I recommend sanding in a circular motion for at least 2-3 minutes for each grit. If the scratches are deep, you can increase the time to 5 minutes per grit. Remember not to apply too much pressure and to check your progress frequently to avoid removing too much material.

Step 4: Polishing the Glass

Once sanding is complete, it’s time to polish the glass. I prefer to use Iosso polishing paste, which gives excellent results. Apply the paste in circular motions, using moderate pressure until you achieve a shiny finish. Polishing is crucial to remove any sanding residues and to give the glass a smooth, glossy appearance.

Step 5: Final Cleaning

After polishing, it’s important to remove the paste and any residues. If you are working on a bare case, like on Komandirskie and Amphibia models, cleaning is quite simple. Just rinse the glass with a bit of water. If the watch is more complex, take precautions to protect the delicate parts, such as covering them with tape or a soft cloth.

Conclusion

By following these simple steps, you can remove scratches from the plexiglass of your watch and restore it to its original condition. Remember to be patient and proceed carefully, especially with thinner glass. If you want to use the products mentioned in this guide, you can find the purchase links on my website. Happy restoring!

Were you looking for Sovietitaly, Soviet Italy or just Soviet? No worries! This is the Sovietaly website.

Logo di Sovietaly

If you’re a devoted collector of Soviet watches and you’ve been searching online for the “Sovietaly” channel and website, you may have noticed that some individuals tend to type “Soviet Italy” or “Soviet Itali” instead. No worries, you’re in the right place! In this article, we’ll delve into the backstory of this distinctive name and guide you on how to easily locate us on the web, even if you’ve used a different spelling.

Origin of the Name Sovietaly

“Sovietaly” is a combination of two meaningful words: “Soviet” and “Italy.” This name was created by an Italian collector of Russian and Soviet watches who manages a TikTok channel and a YouTube channel dedicated to the passion for Soviet watchmaking. But why this choice of name?

Soviet: This part of the name pays homage to the world of Soviet watches. The Soviet Union was famous for producing high-quality and reliable watches that continue to fascinate watch enthusiasts worldwide. Soviet watchmaking has a rich and fascinating history and is an endless source of collectibles.

Italy: This part of the name represents the Italian pride of the channel and website’s creator. Being Italian, the collector wanted to emphasize their origin, promoting the passion for Soviet watches within the Italian and international watch community.

How to Find Us Online

Now that you know the origin of the name “Sovietaly,” you understand that it’s a combination of “Soviet” and “Italy” that reflects the passion for Soviet watches and the Italian pride of the creator. But how can you easily find us online, even if you’ve written “Soviet Italy” or “Soviet Itali”?

Here are some tips to improve your search:

Sovietaly on Google: If you’ve searched for “Soviet Italy” on Google, be sure to include “Sovietaly” in your search. For example, type “Sovietaly Soviet watches” to quickly find the channel and website.

Sovietaly on YouTube and TikTok: If you’re looking for video content from the channel, search directly for “Sovietaly” on YouTube and TikTok. You’ll find interesting videos about Soviet watchmaking and the host’s passions.

Use Synonyms: If you have difficulty remembering the exact name, search using synonyms like “Italian Soviet watches” or “Italian collector of Russian watches.”

Follow Us on Social Media: To stay updated on the latest news and new content related to Soviet watches, follow Sovietaly on social media platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok.

In conclusion, if you searched for “Soviet Italy” or “Soviet Itali” and ended up on this page, now you know that “Sovietaly” is the correct name. This unique name reflects the passion for Soviet watches and the Italian pride of the channel and website’s creator. So, continue to explore Sovietaly’s content and join the community of Soviet watch enthusiasts. No matter how you spell it, we are here to share with you the beauty and history of these extraordinary timepieces.

Orologi da Polso 1989: Italian Watch Magazine and the Soviet Wristwatch Boom

Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 pagina 1

I recently recovered a copy of “Orologi da Polso” Year III no. 9 (March–April 1989, Edizioni Studio Zeta, Monza), an influential Italian magazine dedicated to horology during the late-1980s Soviet watch boom.
Inside, you’ll find an insightful article by Arturo Chiti, full of details about Soviet watchmaking, Italy’s first Russian watch importers, and a unique perspective on the Italian watch scene during the era of Gorbachev.
Below is the original article in Italian, followed by an English translation, to preserve and share this important piece of watch history with an international audience.

Testo originale – Italiano

Anche se il Congresso sovietico del ’25 proclamava per l’URSS l’obiettivo dell’autosufficienza economica, la trasformazione da paese importatore di macchine e attrezzature a paese che voleva produrre in proprio, sino a qualche anno fa sarebbe stato impensabile che un orologio sovietico diventasse non solo di moda, ma quasi fenomeno di costume.

Pure la storia dell’orologeria russa ha antenati illustri. Gli orologi da torre del Cremlino furono costruiti agli inizi del Quattrocento da Lazar Serbin, mentre per i carillon della torre del Salvatore, restaurati nel secolo scorso, lo Zar si rivolse a due fratelli russi, gli orologiai Butenop. E ancora sotto uno Zar, Pietro il Grande, che aveva chiamato famosi artigiani francesi, si sviluppò una scuola di orologeria, anche se i francesi sembra avessero maggiori privilegi degli artigiani locali. Preziosi orologi di Ivan Kulihin, che visse nel ‘700, sono all’Hermitage di Leningrado e musei moscoviti e di altre città hanno sezioni dedicate all’orologeria. Nello scorso autunno ci fu un’esposizione a Firenze di alcuni splendidi pezzi delle collezioni dei Romanoff e sfogliando antichi libri si apprende che nella storia dell’orologio russo la famiglia dei Bronnikov era famosa per i suoi orologi in legno (filie molle erano in metallo) e che rivestirono un ruolo importante per i miglioramenti apportati alla meccanica, gli orologiai Tolstoj e Nosov.

Prima della rivoluzione si importavano parti e meccanismi dalla Svizzera provvedendo poi al loro assemblaggio. A cavallo del secolo la Francia fece diversi investimenti nei domini dello Zar e dopo la prima Guerra mondiale, per recuperare parte dei capitali, pretese che l’Italia acquistasse orologi russi da tasca che furono poi dati in dotazione al personale delle Ferrovie.

«Le prime industrie sovietiche di orologi risalgono solo agli anni Trenta» dice Jacopo Marchi, P.R. dell’Artime, che è andato a Mosca nello scorso dicembre dopo che l’azienda napoletana aveva sottoscritto un accordo di collaborazione con la Boctok (ma si legge Vostok). Dal viaggio in Russia Marchi ha riportato molte notizie, tanto che per il lancio dei «Komandirskie» ha realizzato per Time Trend, distributore del prodotto, un tabloide sulla storia dell’Armata rossa e dei suoi orologi.

Due industrie (una di orologi preziosi e l’altra di orologi con casse di legno) vennero convertite in aziende belliche negli anni ’40, per tornare poi alle funzioni originali. L’industria principale di Mosca diede vita nel ’42 alla Boctok, una delle più importanti e tra le poche di cui per le strade moscovite si possono vedere cartelloni pubblicitari. Dopo la fine della guerra altre industrie furono aperte a Serdobsk, Yerevan, Petrodvoretes e Uglich. Venne creato un istituto per la ricerca e il design nelle lavorazioni meccaniche. Nel 1962 furono anche prodotti i primi orologi a diapason.

Oggi in URSS operano oltre quindici fabbriche di orologi, molte delle quali specializzate in produzioni particolari. Tra le più note ricordiamo Chaika, Poljot, Zaria, Paketa, Slava e Penza, quest’ultima destinata alla produzione di orologi da polso femminili. Il quantitativo di orologi prodotti è imponente. Intorno agli anni Cinquanta iniziò anche l’esportazione destinata per lo più a nazioni aderenti al patto di Varsavia. Erano orologi di buon livello con prezzi politicamente differenziati. È di quegli anni il Mark che pubblichiamo e il cui quadrante è simile a quello del Poljot. È un orologio con una storia romantica. Fu donato a un nostro collega, allora bambino, da una signora italiana che aveva sposato un russo che, per le leggi staliniane, non poteva venire a vivere in Italia e i due erano costretti così a vedersi di tanto in tanto solo come turisti.

La prima importazione di orologi russi in Italia è stata fatta da Orazio Occhipinti della Mirabilia di Milano che nella seconda metà del 1988 ha iniziato sul territorio nazionale la distribuzione dei Paketa fabbricati a Pietrogrado. Paketa in russo significa «razzo» e si legge «raketa», La bontà dell’idea, complice anche l’apertura generale verso Gorbaciov, è stata ampiamente confermata dalla vera e propria corsa all’orologio russo che si è scatenata in seguito. Vien da pensare a questo proposito che solo pochi anni or sono un dirigente di una grande azienda europea, dopo un viaggio in Unione Sovietica durante il quale era rimasto colpito dagli orologi, ne propose l’importazione ma si sentì chiedere dai suoi se aveva voglía di scherzare. Dunque i primi russi che hanno rotto il ghiaccio sul nostro mercato sono stati i Paketa. Oggi sono disponibili nove versioni che si differenziano sia per il design del quadrante per le funzioni. Sono meccanici a carica manuale e cassa antishock. Alla fiera di Vicenza Mirabilia ha presentato anche i Poljot prodotti a Leningrado, un cronografo e uno svegliarino, a carica manuale, proposti in quattro versioni. Gli orologi dell’Armata rossa, i Boctok, sono disponibili in cinque modelli con quadranti realizzati per le specializzazioni dell’esercito al quale sono destinati. Sono orologi meccanici a carica manuale, impermeabili a 10 atmosfere, hanno la ghiera girevole con indici e lancette fosforescenti.

Ci sono poi orologi con meccanismo di fabbricazione russa e cassa e quadrante costruiti in Italia per accostare un «cuore» russo al design italiano, come il Soviet, disponibile in vari colori di cassa e quadrante. È un orologio quarzo impermeabile a 3 atm. E ancora i sei modelli della collezione Perestrojka (quattro al quarzo e due cronografi meccanici) che la Elmitex ha presentato sia a Vicenza sia a Mosca come un prodotto «italorusso».

Il sesto orologio con la stella rossa è quello proposto dalla I. Binda S.p.A. Il marchio BREMA, con la A che è una R rovesciata, si legge Vremia e significa Tempo. Sono orologi meccanici disponibili in tre modelli (normale, con suoneria e un cronografo) proposti in 17 versioni. I quadranti sono di ispirazione anni ’30 seguendo la tendenza culturale in voga in Russia e battezzata «strutturalista».


Full English Translation

Even though the 1925 Soviet Congress declared the USSR’s goal of economic self-sufficiency, turning the country from an importer of machinery and equipment into a producer, until just a few years ago it would have been unthinkable for a Soviet wristwatch to become not only fashionable, but a genuine social phenomenon.

Russian watchmaking, however, has illustrious origins. The Kremlin’s tower clocks were built in the early 15th century by Lazar Serbin, and when the chimes of the Saviour Tower were restored last century, the Tsar turned to two Russian brothers, the Butenops, who were master clockmakers. Under Peter the Great, who invited famous French craftsmen to Russia, a Russian watchmaking school developed—even if the French apparently enjoyed more privileges than the local artisans. Precious watches by Ivan Kulikhin, who lived in the 18th century, can be found at the Hermitage in Leningrad, and museums in Moscow and other cities have sections devoted to horology. Last autumn, a Florence exhibition featured stunning pieces from the Romanoff collections. Old books reveal that the Bronnikov family was famous for its wooden watches (with metal gears), and that watchmakers like Tolstoy and Nosov played a key role in technical improvements.

Before the Revolution, parts and movements were imported from Switzerland and assembled locally. At the turn of the century, France invested in the Tsar’s domains, and after the First World War—seeking to recover capital—demanded that Italy purchase Russian pocket watches, which were later issued to Italian railway workers.

“The first Soviet watch factories date only to the 1930s,” says Jacopo Marchi, PR manager for Artime, who travelled to Moscow last December after the Neapolitan company signed a collaboration agreement with Boctok (pronounced Vostok). Marchi brought back a wealth of information, so much so that for the launch of the ‘Komandirskie’ he produced a special magazine on the Red Army and its watches for Time Trend, the product’s Italian distributor.

Two factories—one producing luxury watches, the other making wooden-cased watches—were converted to wartime production in the 1940s, only to return to their original functions later. Moscow’s main factory gave rise in 1942 to Boctok, one of the most important Soviet brands, and among the few to have billboards in Moscow’s streets. After the war, new factories opened in Serdobsk, Yerevan, Petrodvorets and Uglich. An institute for mechanical research and design was founded. In 1962, the first Soviet tuning fork (diapason) watches were made.

Today, more than fifteen watch factories operate in the USSR, many specialising in particular types of production. The best known include Chaika, Poljot, Zaria, Paketa, Slava and Penza, the latter focusing on women’s wristwatches. The number of watches produced is enormous. From the 1950s, Soviet watches were exported mainly to other Warsaw Pact nations—well-made pieces, with politically adjusted pricing. One such watch, the Mark (with a dial similar to the Poljot) is featured here. It has a romantic history: it was given to a colleague, then a child, by an Italian woman who had married a Russian. Under Stalinist law, he was not allowed to live in Italy, so the couple could only meet occasionally as tourists.

The first import of Russian watches to Italy was by Orazio Occhipinti of Mirabilia (Milan), who began national distribution of Paketa watches from Petrograd in the second half of 1988. Paketa in Russian means “rocket” and is pronounced “Raketa.” The idea’s success—helped by the general mood of openness under Gorbachev—was clear from the sudden rush for Russian watches that followed. Interestingly, only a few years earlier, an executive at a major European firm, after visiting the USSR and being struck by the watches, suggested importing them—only to be asked if he was joking. So, Paketa were the first to break the ice in our market. Today, there are nine available versions, differing in dial design and function. They are manual-wind mechanicals with anti-shock cases. At the Vicenza fair, Mirabilia also presented Poljot watches made in Leningrad—a chronograph and an alarm watch, both manual-wind, offered in four versions. Red Army watches—Boctok—come in five models, each with dials themed for army specialisations. These are manual-wind mechanical watches, water resistant to 10 atmospheres, with rotating bezels and luminous hands and markers.

There are also watches with Russian-made movements, but Italian cases and dials, to combine a Russian “heart” with Italian design—such as the Soviet, available in a range of case and dial colours. This is a quartz watch, water resistant to 3 atm. Then there are six models in the Perestrojka collection (four quartz, two mechanical chronographs) presented by Elmitex at both Vicenza and Moscow as an “Italo-Russian” product.

The sixth red-star watch is offered by I. Binda S.p.A. The BREMA brand—with a reversed R for the “A”—is read as Vremia, meaning Time. These are mechanical watches available in three models (standard, alarm, and chronograph) with 17 dial versions. The dials are inspired by the 1930s, in keeping with a cultural trend currently popular in Russia, known as “structuralist.”

Conclusion


This rare 1989 issue of Orologi da Polso is a true time capsule for any vintage or Soviet watch collector. The article not only chronicles the arrival of Russian watches in Italy but also captures the atmosphere, tastes, and market dynamics of the era. Whether you’re passionate about Vostok, Raketa, Poljot, or the unique East-West collaborations, this publication is a valuable reference and a fascinating read for enthusiasts everywhere.
If you have memories or stories related to Orologi da Polso or the Russian watch craze in Italy, share them below or get in touc

Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 copertina
Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 pagina 1
Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 pagina 2
Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 pagina 3
Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 pag 4
Rivista orologi da polso marzo aprile 1989 n9 anno 3 indice