Shevardnadze Resigns

Eduard Shevardnadze, Speech to the Congress of People's Deputies. December 21, 1990

Comrade Deputies! Today I am going to make what is perhaps the shortest and most difficult speech of my life. I did not ask for the floor. But since certain Deputies have insisted (and I know the reasons why this particular group of Deputies insisted that I speak), I prepared the text of such a speech and am submitting it to the Secretariat. The Deputies can familiarize themselves with what has been accomplished in the field of foreign policy by the country's leadership, the President and the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and with how external conditions are shaping up for the country's development and the implementation of plans for its democratization, renewal, economic development, and so on. I want to make a brief statement, consisting of two parts.

First. Yesterday there were speeches by certain comrades (they are our veterans) that posed the question of the need to adopt a declaration forbidding the President and the country's leadership from sending troops to the Persian Gulf zone. That, roughly, was the speeches' content. And they were not the first or second such speeches; there have been many notes to the presidium, as well as articles in the press and statements on television. But the comrades' speeches yesterday exhausted one's patience, I will say that bluntly. When it comes right down to it, what is happening in the Persian Gulf?

On about a dozen occasions, both in our country and abroad, I have spoken about and explained the Soviet Union's attitude and policy toward this conflict. It is a serious, well-considered and sensible policy, one that is in keeping with all present-day standards of civilized relations among states. We have friendly relations with the state of Iraq, relations that have been built over the years and remain intact today. But we have no moral right to reconcile ourselves to aggression and the annexation of a small, defenseless country. Why should we nullify all that has been accomplished in the past few years by the entire country, by our people, in the field of establishing the principles of the new political thinking?

Second. I have explained repeatedly, and M. S. Gorbachev talked about this in his speech at the meeting of the USSR Supreme Soviet, that the Soviet leadership has no plans in this respect. I don't know, maybe some specific person or some group does have a definite plan, but in official agencies, in the Ministry of Defense, there is no such plan; however, it is now being charged that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs does have a plan for landing troops in the Persian Gulf. I have said that there are no such plans, that they do not exist in any shape or form, and that no one intends to send to that area a single man in military uniform, a single representative of the USSR Armed Forces. But once again someone has found it necessary to raise this question, this problem.

Third. I have said, and I declare it for all to hear, that if the interests of Soviet citizens are harmed, if a single Soviet person is harmed, wherever this might take place (not only in Iraq, but in any other country), the Soviet government, the Soviet Union will defend the interests of its citizens. I think that the Deputies should support the Soviet leadership in this. (Applause.)

I want to raise another question. Excuse me, but is all this accidental? The statement by two members of parliament to the effect that the Minister of Internal Affairs has been removed successfully and now the time has come to settle scores with the Minister of Foreign Affairs-is this accidental? That statement was reported in the entire world press and in our own newspapers. Are these lads (I will use that word, since my age allows me to say it; they are really young fellows in colonel's shoulder boards) so bold as to address such statements to a Minister, to a member of the government? Read the newspapers. I will not name any names today. I believe we must give some serious thought to this: Who and what is behind these comrades? Why does no one try to refute this, to say that this isn't so, that there are no such plans? Can it be that there are such plans?

In this connection, allow me to say a few words about personal human dignity and about personal feelings, since many people apparently think that members of the government, the President or various others are hired hands and one can treat them as one pleases.

I believe this is impermissible. In this connection, I remember the 28th CPSU Congress. Can it be that what happened there was accidental? After all, a real struggle was waged at the Congress, a very sharp struggle between the reformers and (I will not say "conservatives," I respect the conservatives, because they do have their own views that are acceptable to society), and the reactionaries and neo-reactionaries. (Applause.) It must be said bluntly that this battle was won by the progressive-thinking delegates to the Congress, and that they won it with dignity.

I want to recall another incident. Against my will and without consulting me, my name was included on the secret ballot. As a result, 800 delegates voted against me. What was this-happenstance, or not? Is the policy pursued by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, or the Minister personally, not to someone's liking? This is a serious question, extremely serious. I think that this phenomenon is no accident.

I recall the USSR Supreme Soviet session. At the initiative of Comrade Lukianov, a serious question was included on the agenda on the very eve of the session-the treaties with the German Democratic Republic. Was this accidental? I was traveling at the time, so they called in my deputies, and people found themselves in a really foolish position. And as a result, the question "fell through." I had to speak on my return. And what happened? The same people who are speaking now made some serious charges against the Minister of Foreign Affairs, accusing him of unilateral concessions, incompetence and ignorance. Not a single person, including the presiding officer, replied and said that this was dishonest, that this isn't done in civilized states. I feel this deeply. Things went as far as personal insults. But I endured that, too.

Comrades, a real hounding is under way. I'm not going to name the periodicals. What kind of articles haven't they published? To these publications, I will add the Pamyat' [Memory] Society. What expressions they use: "Down with the Gorbachev clique!" They also mention Shevardnadze and several other names. Who are they, the so-called reformers?

I must say frankly that I was shaken by the events of the Congress's first working day. Pressing a button decided the fate not only of the President but also of restructuring and democratization. Can this be normal? Comrade democrats, in the broadest sense of the word, you have scattered, the reformers have taken to the bushes. A dictatorship is coming-I say this in no uncertain terms. No one knows what kind of dictatorship it will be, what kind of dictator will come to power, or what kind of system will be established.

I want to make the following announcement: I am resigning. Let this be my protest, if you will, against the coming of a dictatorship. I express deep gratitude to M. S. Gorbachev. I am his friend, and we share the same views. I have always supported the ideas of restructuring, the ideas of renewal and the ideas of democratization, and will support them to the end of my days. We have accomplished great things in the international arena, but I believe that this is my duty as a man, as a citizen, as a Communist. I cannot reconcile myself to the events that are taking place in our country, to the ordeals that await our people. Nevertheless, I believe that a dictatorship will not succeed, and that the future belongs to democracy and freedom. (Applause.)

Source: Current Digest of the Soviet Press. Vol. XLII, No. 52 (1990), pp. 7-8