In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

438 Document No. 56: Record of Conversation between Mikhail gorbachev and Margaret Thatcher April 6, 1989 The candor and depth of the conversations that took place between Gorbachev and the British prime minister testify to their close relationship, which contributed to Thatcher’s instrumental role as the first Western leader to take notice of the Soviet party boss (“a man you can do business with,” as she said in 1984). Her voice persuaded President Reagan to engage the new Kremlin leader, and her personal reassurances helped dramatically to reduce Gorbachev’s own sense of threat from the West. After Gorbachev’s U.N. speech in December 1988, Thatcher would proclaim the Cold War over and spearhead the effort to bring Gorbachev into the club of world leaders. Several striking impressions emerge from the talks in London: the quality of the discussion recorded in these notes, Gorbachev’s willingness to listen to Thatcher, her treatment of him in turn as a peer, the learning process occurring between them, and the prime minister’s sense that “political pluralism” in Poland and Hungary is well ahead of Gorbachev’s own conception. (Their discussions take place just after the conclusion of the Polish Roundtable agreement on reforms, which include relatively free elections scheduled for June.) […] Gorbachev: On the one hand, there is a point of view emerging in the White House that the success of our perestroika, the development of the new image of the Soviet Union, is not beneficial for the West. Secretary of State James Baker returned from his trip to Western Europe on the verge of panic. Europe, according to him, is ready to respond to our invitation to build new relations in Europe and in the entire world. The West germans, in this sense, have simply lost their minds. And so they are beginning to think about how to stem the influence of our policy and of our initiatives in the minds of the West. Of course, these processes are going through a struggle in the United States. There are a lot of people there who sympathize with our policy, who think that the continuation of perestroika is good for American interests because it would allow us to ensure security, development of the economy, and cultural and other kinds of exchanges. These forces are sufficiently large and influential. However, there is also another wing, which thinks in the tradition of the well-known statements by Kissinger, Brzezinski, and other right-wing individuals who have now gotten closer to the new American administration and are trying their best. We receive letters from george Bush and we see entire passages there that are copied from known public statements by Kissinger. In short, there is a clear concern Melyakova book.indb 438 2010.04.12. 16:20 439 there that the West is losing public opinion, and so they are trying to dilute the mood of cooperation with us. On the other hand, as we see from the negotiations that george Bush and James Baker had in Western Europe, the process of working out a response to our proposals is slowing down in the West. And from this fact comes the desire to undermine interest in perestroika, in our initiatives, and to present it all under the cover of general considerations—let’s see where perestroika will lead, how will it end, whether it is associated with the person of gorbachev only, and if so, whether we should make the future of the West dependent upon it. I tell you frankly, we are concerned about it. Even you, Mrs. Thatcher, as we can see, are exhibiting more reservations recently . We are informed that you are being advised, especially by banking circles, not to rush, to be careful. And this shows through, both in your statements and in your practical policy. Thatcher: If anybody made such a recommendation, it has not reached me. How did it reach you? Gorbachev: That’s how it happens. What an interesting world, isn’t it? […] Thatcher: That is why we are concerned about the immensity of your tasks. It is one thing to tell people what to do and where to work, and quite a different thing to make it so that they work properly under conditions of major production and complex technology. People start feeling less confident in themselves and their future. I saw this during my trip to the Soviet Union in 1987. The old order is being broken, and the people do not know what...

Share