Meiji Japan and post-Soviet Russia · 1993
Did shock therapy cause Russia’s 1990s economic collapse?
The seminar question: “Did shock therapy cause Russia’s economic collapse in the 1990s, or was it a response to a collapse that had already begun?”
On 2 January 1992 Yegor Gaidar’s government freed most prices at once, betting that one sharp change would hurt less than a slow one. Goods returned to the shops, but prices rose about 2,500% in 1992 and wiped out savings, and from October 1992 voucher privatisation handed most ownership to insiders.
Chapter 10 is included with every paid plan. WW2 is free in full, and chapter 1 of every atlas is free. A free account opens 3 more chapters a day. Starter, at $9 a month, opens all 21 with no daily limit — see the plans.
Free printable Meiji Japan and post-Soviet Russia study guide, sent by email ↓
The reformers inherited an economy in which a price on a shop shelf told only part of the story. By late 1991 prices were fixed, but shops were nearly empty and people held far more money than there were goods to buy. Gold and foreign currency reserves had been spent. Keeping controls meant queues; freeing prices would mean an immediate rise. Yegor Gaidar, aged 35, Anatoly Chubais and their colleagues, advised by Western economists including Jeffrey Sachs, chose rapid change. They expected free prices to bring goods back and feared that delay would give the old bureaucracy time to regroup. Shock therapy promised one sharp operation rather than a series of smaller ones.
The short answer
- The Soviet economy left too much money and too few goods. Perestroika left people holding savings for which state shops had little to offer, while the government financed its budget by printing money. Price controls kept the prices down but lengthened queues and increased rationing. Removing them would bring a sudden rise. Gaidar chose immediate liberalization, believing that postponement would make the eventual shock larger.
- Reformers believed speed protected reform. Gaidar, Chubais and their Western advisers had seen communists and old ministries obstruct Gorbachev’s reforms. They feared slow change would give those opponents another chance. Rapid privatization would create owners with an interest in the new system and make a return to planning impossible. That political aim placed speed ahead of fairness and careful design.
- Two branches claimed the same authority. The parliament elected in 1990 under Soviet rules and the president elected in 1991 could both claim supreme authority under Russia’s constitution. Inflation and falling living standards turned parliament against the president’s government. Neither side accepted a way to settle the dispute, and each exercised its claimed powers until force decided it.
- The Union’s collapse broke trade and supply. Soviet factories depended on suppliers across fifteen republics. Independence made those transactions foreign trade, often paid in roubles that new states printed themselves. Until 1993 the shared currency allowed republics to create rouble credits, adding to inflation. Broken supply chains also cut output: some decline attributed to shock therapy came from the Union’s dissolution itself.
THE TURNING POINT
Prices freed, 2 January 1992. The decision on 2 January 1992 put prices in place of officials as the means of rationing goods, ending the planned economy in a single day. Empty shelves filled again. Yet households lost most of their savings, high inflation continued for years and reform became deeply unpopular. That opposition fed the political conflict of 1993. The choices made around this moment, when speed seemed the only defense against collapse, shaped later disputes over vouchers and oligarchs.
What it changed
A new owning class took shape. Millions received nominal shares through privatization, while managers, bankers and traders gained effective control over much of the property. Among the bankers who made fortunes were Vladimir Potanin and Mikhail Khodorkovsky; they would soon lend to the state in exchange for its best companies. Ownership had moved faster than the laws governing it.
A presidency above parliament. After December 1993 the president could appoint governments, issue decrees and dissolve the Duma. Yeltsin governed through the crises of the 1990s with these powers, including the decision to go to war in Chechnya. His successor inherited a constitutional system already weighted toward the executive.
The borderlands were left to Russia’s soldiers. The wars left Russian soldiers with a continuing role beyond Russia. Ceasefires in Transnistria and South Ossetia in 1992, and Abkhazia and Karabakh in 1994, left Russian peacekeepers or garrisons in several successor states. Their presence gave Moscow lasting influence over neighbors and set precedents for its treatment of breakaway regions within Russia.
The full answer, argued
The crisis began before shock therapy. Anders Åslund and Yegor Gaidar point to empty shops, exhausted reserves and a budget financed by printing money in 1991; the Union’s breakup also severed supply chains that no policy could have saved. Some defenders argue that central-bank money creation prolonged inflation because reform was too timid. Critics including Joseph Stiglitz, Peter Reddaway and Dmitri Glinski hold that freeing prices and selling assets before institutions were built caused hyperinflation and theft amid an output fall deeper than America’s Great Depression. Poland’s rapid reforms worked better, while China’s gradual reforms took place in a very different society. A strong answer separates the collapse Russia inherited from decisions about who bore its costs, and asks who made those decisions. Markets need governing institutions if their outcomes are to be fair, whatever the speed of change.
An interesting fact
The architect of Russia’s market reforms at 35 had deep roots in Soviet culture. Yegor Gaidar’s grandfather Arkady Gaidar wrote children’s adventure stories read by generations of Soviet pupils. His other grandfather, Pavel Bazhov, wrote Ural folk tales that became a classic Soviet book and a famous ballet score. His father, a naval officer and Pravda correspondent, reported from Cuba. Gaidar himself edited economics at Kommunist, the Central Committee’s theoretical journal and ideological voice, before taking charge of reform.
This is the study layer of Shock therapy in Russia, chapter 10 of Remaking the State: Meiji Japan 1600–1912 and Post-Soviet Russia 1964–2000; the full index of the atlas is here.
Related questions
THE FREE PRINTABLE STUDY GUIDE
Get the printable study guide for Remaking the State free. I’ll send you a few short letters, then one when a new atlas opens. That’s all. — Paul
NO TRACKING · YOUR ADDRESS IS USED FOR THE DISPATCH AND NOTHING ELSE · UNSUBSCRIBE ANYTIME