Loading subject…
What were the impacts of reconstruction policy in the post-war USSR (1945-1953)?
Elena Zubkova, in Russia After the War, argues that ordinary Soviet citizens expected genuine relief, even liberalisation, after 1945, having sacrificed so much for victory. The regime's decision to reimpose Stalinist priorities instead produced deep, if largely silent, popular disappointment.
Sheila Fitzpatrick reads reconstruction as continuous with 1930s practice: the same forced-pace methods, the same reliance on coercion and the Gulag, simply redirected from building new industry to rebuilding destroyed industry.
Oleg Khlevniuk resists framing the 1946-47 famine as a deliberate act of terror, situating it instead within a pattern of policy failure: a leadership that would not release grain reserves or slow procurement even as regional officials reported mass death.
Judgement: the balance of evidence supports Khlevniuk's reading of the famine as calamitous policy failure rather than intentional genocide, but this does not soften Fitzpatrick's and Zubkova's shared point: Stalin's post-war state treated reconstruction as a continuation of 1930s methods, prioritising heavy industry and security over the population's material welfare, and that choice killed people.
According to this article, roughly how many people died in the Soviet famine of 1946-47?
Markscheme