The End of Bipolarity - Class 12 Political Science - Chapter 1 - Notes, NCERT Solutions & Extra Questions
Renews every month. Cancel anytime
Your personal doubt-solving assistant
Chatterbot AI gives you 100% accurate answers to your questions in an instant.
Extra Questions - The End of Bipolarity | Contemporary World Politics | Political Science | Class 12
In the author's opinion:
(a) Huge stockpiles of destructive weapons have so far saved mankind from a catastrophe.
(b) Superpowers have at last realized the need for abandoning the production of lethal weapons.
(c) Mankind is heading towards complete destruction.
(d) Nations in possession of huge stockpiles of lethal weapons are trying hard to avoid actual conflict.
In the author's opinion:
The correct option is (d): Nations in possession of huge stockpiles of lethal weapons are trying hard to avoid actual conflict.
Explanation: According to the author, nations with large collections of dangerous weapons are making significant efforts to prevent any real conflict from arising.
💡 Have more questions?
Ask Chatterbot AINCERT Solutions - The End of Bipolarity | Contemporary World Politics | Political Science | Class 12
Which among the following statements that describe the nature of Soviet economy is wrong?
a. Socialism was the dominant ideology
b. State ownership/control existed over the factors of production
c. People enjoyed economic freedom
d. Every aspect of the economy was planned and controlled by the State
The incorrect statement about the nature of the Soviet economy is:
c. People enjoyed economic freedom
In the Soviet system, the economy was planned and controlled by the state, and there was limited economic freedom for individuals.
Arrange the following in chronological order:
a. Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
b. Fall of the Berlin Wall
c. Disintegration of the Soviet Union
d. Russian Revolution
d. Russian Revolution
a. Soviet invasion of Afghanistan
b. Fall of the Berlin Wall
c. Disintegration of the Soviet Union
Which among the following is NOT an outcome of the disintegration of the USSR?
a. End of the ideological war between the US and USSR
b. Birth of CIS
c. Change in the balance of power in the world order
d. Crises in the Middle East
d. Crises in the Middle East
This option is not directly an outcome of the disintegration of the USSR as outlined in the chapter. The chapter specifically discusses the end of the Cold War confrontations (option a), the birth of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) (option b), and the shift to a world where the US emerged as the sole superpower affecting the world order (option c). The crises in the Middle East were influenced by many other geopolitical factors and not directly by the disintegration of the USSR.
Match the following:
Column I | Column II |
---|---|
i. Mikhail Gorbachev | a. Successor of USSR |
ii. Shock Therapy | b. Military pact |
iii. Russia | c. Introduced reforms |
iv. Boris Yeltsin | d. Economic model |
v. Warsaw | e. President of Russia |
i. Mikhail Gorbachev - c. Introduced reforms
ii. Shock Therapy - d. Economic model
iii. Russia - a. Successor of USSR
iv. Boris Yeltsin - e. President of Russia
v. Warsaw - b. Military pact
Fill in the blanks.
a. The Soviet political system was based on ___________________ ideology.
b. _________________ was the military alliance started by the USSR.
c. ____________________ party dominated the Soviet Union’s political system.
d. ______________________ initiated the reforms in the USSR in 1985.
e. The fall of the ____________________ symbolised the end of the Cold War.
a. The Soviet political system was based on communist ideology.
b. The Warsaw Pact was the military alliance started by the USSR.
c. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) dominated the Soviet Union’s political system.
d. Mikhail Gorbachev initiated the reforms in the USSR in 1985.
e. The fall of the Berlin Wall symbolised the end of the Cold War.
Mention any three features that distinguish the Soviet economy from that of a capitalist country like the US.
The Soviet economy was distinguished from capitalist economies like that of the US by several fundamental features:
State Ownership and Planning: Unlike the US where the economy is driven by private ownership and market forces, the Soviet Union implemented a centrally planned economy. Almost all businesses and economic resources were owned and controlled by the state. The government decided what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce, aiming to eliminate any market-based competition.
Elimination of Unemployment: The Soviet economy was structured to provide jobs for everyone, effectively eliminating unemployment. This contrasts sharply with capitalist economies like the US, where unemployment is considered a natural consequence of market fluctuations and economic cycles.
Subsidized and Guaranteed Services: In the Soviet Union, the government subsidized and guaranteed a minimum standard of living. Basic necessities such as healthcare, education, and housing were provided at minimal or no cost to the citizens. This is in contrast to the capitalist system, where access to such services is often dependent on personal wealth and the ability to pay.
These features underscore how the Soviet economic system prioritized state control and welfare provisioning over the market-driven, profit-oriented approach typical of capitalist economies like the US.
What were the factors that forced Gorbachev to initiate the reforms in the USSR?
Mikhail Gorbachev initiated reforms in the USSR primarily due to several internal and external pressures that highlighted the necessity for change within the Soviet system. Internally, the Soviet economy was faltering; it had become stagnant and was characterized by severe consumer shortages, indicating a dire need for economic reform. Additionally, the Soviet Union was technologically lagging behind the West, notably in essential sectors like information technology and consumer goods, which further stressed the need for economic modernization.
Externally, the arms race with the United States was proving unsustainable for the Soviet economy. The heavy financial burden of maintaining a vast military arsenal alongside the costs associated with exerting influence over Eastern Europe was draining the Soviet resources.
Moreover, there was a growing dissatisfaction among the citizens and a palpable sense of stagnation and corruption. Gorbachev’s reforms, known as Perestroika (restructuring) and Glasnost (openness), were intended to revitalize the economy through decentralization and introduce some democratic elements into the Soviet political system. These reforms were seen as imperative to make the USSR competitive and maintain its status as a superpower, particularly in the light of rapid technological advancements in the West.
What were the major consequences of the disintegration of the Soviet Union for countries like India?
The disintegration of the Soviet Union had significant consequences for countries like India, particularly in the realms of politics, economy, and strategic alignments. Politically, the end of the Soviet Union transformed global power dynamics, shifting from a bipolar to a unipolar world dominated by the United States. This shift necessitated India to reevaluate and adjust its foreign policy, moving towards greater engagement with Western nations while retaining its traditional ties with Russia.
Economically, the collapse resulted in the disruption of long-standing trade relationships India had with the Soviet bloc. India needed to diversify its trade and seek new markets and sources for essential commodities, including energy supplies.
Strategically, the dissolution marked a significant change in the international security environment. India had to navigate a new international landscape without the assured support of the Soviet Union on critical issues like Kashmir and during conflicts. The relationship dynamics shifted to a more multipolar approach, with India forging new partnerships and strengthening its strategic autonomy.
Overall, while India faced challenges due to the newfound void in its international relations matrix, it also found opportunities to recalibrate its foreign relations and economic strategies in a fundamentally altered global scenario.
What was Shock Therapy? Was this the best way to make a transition from communism to capitalism?
Shock Therapy referred to the abrupt and radical shift from a state-controlled socialist economy to a market-oriented capitalist economy, primarily implemented in post-communist countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. This method involved drastic measures such as massive privatization of state-owned enterprises, lifting of price controls, cutting state expenditures, and opening up economies to international markets.
While Shock Therapy aimed at quickly transforming economies to thrive under capitalism, it controversially resulted in significant hardships. Economies suffered severe contractions, many individuals faced poverty and unemployment, and the rapid changes led to widespread social distress and the rise of oligarchical structures. Consequently, whether Shock Versus was the best way to transition remains debatable. It arguably achieved market liberalization and integration into global capitalism but at the cost of significant social and economic upheaval, implying that a more gradual and socially cushioned approach might have mitigated such intense impacts.
Write an essay for or against the following proposition: “With the disintegration of the second world, India should change its foreign policy and focus more on friendship with the US rather than with traditional friends like Russia”.
Essay Against the Proposition:
While the disintegration of the Soviet Union marked a seismic shift in global geopolitics, it is not in India's best interests to pivot entirely from Russia towards the United States. Historical ties, strategic agreements, and mutual benefits forged over decades underscore the importance of Indo-Russian relations. The long-standing collaboration weathered the Cold War and transformed into a multifaceted partnership encompassing military, energy, political, and technological dimensions.
India’s relations with Russia involve substantial defense procurements which are vital for India's security architecture. Russia remains one of India's top suppliers of defense hardware, significantly affecting India's military readiness and strategic autonomy.
Moreover, India's energy security heavily relies on collaboration with Russia, especially in nuclear energy and hydrocarbons. Abandoning such a reliable partnership could jeopardize India's energy needs and strategic stability.
While fostering stronger ties with the US is beneficial, especially in areas like trade, technology, and counter-terrorism, this should not result in diminishing the robust partnership with Russia. Balanced diplomacy is paramount, and India should aim to strengthen its international relations on all fronts, safeguarding its national interests without tilting excessively towards one power.
Thus, a shift in focus from Russia to the US might not serve India's long-term strategic interests, as it could compromise established defense, energy, and geopolitical relations that have long supported India’s regional and global standing. A multi-aligned policy, maintaining strong ties with both the US and Russia, is a pragmatic approach in the complex dynamics of current global politics.
💡 Have more questions?
Ask Chatterbot AINotes - The End of Bipolarity | Class 12 Contemporary World Politics | Political Science
The End of Bipolarity: Class 12 Notes
The end of bipolarity marks a significant turning point in world history, characterised by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the subsequent end of the Cold War. This period, spanning the late 20th century, saw dramatic shifts in power dynamics, political ideologies, and global relations.
Introduction to the End of Bipolarity
Definition and Context
Bipolarity refers to the global power structure dominated by two superpowers: the United States and the Soviet Union, primarily during the Cold War era. The end of bipolarity signifies the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the consequent emergence of a unipolar or multipolar world order.
Historical Significance
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, symbolising the collapse of the Soviet bloc, heralded the end of the Cold War and the ideological contest between communism and capitalism. This event reshaped global political and economic landscapes.
Key Events Leading to the Disintegration of the Soviet Union
The Fall of the Berlin Wall
The Berlin Wall, a potent symbol of the Cold War, divided East and West Berlin from 1961 until 1989. Its fall was a pivotal moment that marked the beginning of the end for the Soviet-dominated Eastern Bloc.
Reforms by Mikhail Gorbachev
Mikhail Gorbachev, who became the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1985, introduced significant reforms known as perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness). These reforms aimed to revitalise the stagnant Soviet economy and open up the political system.
Rise of Nationalism in Soviet Republics
Gorbachev's reforms inadvertently triggered nationalist movements within various Soviet republics, each seeking greater autonomy or independence.
Economic Challenges and Stagnation
The Soviet economy faced severe stagnation, plagued by inefficiencies and an overemphasis on military expenditure. This economic decline alienated citizens and eroded confidence in the communist system.
The 1991 Coup Attempt
The failed coup attempt by hardliners within the Communist Party in August 1991 further weakened the Soviet Union and accelerated its collapse. Boris Yeltsin's opposition to the coup solidified his position and increased calls for independence among the Soviet republics.
The Collapse of the Soviet Union
Declaration of Independence by Soviet Republics
Encouraged by the weakening central authority, republics like Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Ukraine, and others declared independence, signalling the fragmentation of the Soviet Union.
Formation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)
In December 1991, Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus annulled the Soviet Union's 1922 Treaty and established the CIS, marking the formal end of the USSR.
Immediate and Long-Term Consequences
The collapse altered global power dynamics, ended the ideological battle between communism and capitalism, and led to the emergence of numerous independent states with diverse political and economic systems.
The Consequences of the Disintegration
End of Cold War Confrontations
With the end of bipolarity, the ideological and military standoff between the US and the Soviet Union ceased, paving the way for new international relations and reduction in arms races.
Changes in Global Power Dynamics
The collapse of the Soviet Union left the US as the sole superpower, fostering a unipolar world order. However, the possibility of a multipolar world, with multiple influential states, also emerged.
Emergence of New Independent States
Newly independent states from the former Soviet Union pursued varied paths, leading to unique political and economic challenges and opportunities.
Shock Therapy
Flowchart: Shock Therapy Process
graph TD;
A[Collapse of Communism] --> B[Transition to Capitalism];
B --> C[Privatisation of State Assets];
C --> D[Introduction of Free Trade];
D --> E[Opening to Foreign Investment];
E --> F[Social and Economic Instability];
Economic Impact
The abrupt transition from planned economies to market economies, known as shock therapy, led to economic turmoil. State industries collapsed, inflation soared, and social welfare systems disintegrated.
Social and Political Impact
The political landscape of the post-Soviet states saw the rise of authoritarian regimes, particularly in Central Asia, as hurriedly drafted constitutions granted extensive powers to executive leaders.
The Soviet System: An Overview
Political Structure
The Soviet political system was characterised by one-party rule by the Communist Party, which maintained stringent control over all aspects of governance.
Economic System
The Soviet economy was centrally planned, with state ownership of land and productive resources. Despite significant industrial output, the quality lagged behind the capitalist West.
Social Policies and Welfare
The Soviet regime provided extensive subsidies for health, education, and other basic needs, ensuring a minimum standard of living for all citizens. However, rampant bureaucracy and lack of freedom stifled personal and economic growth.
Key Leaders of the Soviet Union
Joseph Stalin: Rapid Industrialisation and Collectivisation
Stalin's tenure saw extreme industrialisation and forced collectivisation, but also severe repression and purges.
Nikita Khrushchev: Reforms and Foreign Policy
Khrushchev introduced some liberalising reforms and sought peaceful coexistence with the West but was also involved in suppressing dissent in Hungary and the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Leonid Brezhnev: Détente and Military Interventions
Brezhnev's era was marked by détente with the US but also saw military interventions in Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan.
Mikhail Gorbachev: Reforms and Disintegration
Gorbachev's policies of perestroika and glasnost aimed to modernise the Soviet Union but ultimately hastened its disintegration.
The Role of India in Post-Communist Relations
Historical Relationship with the Soviet Union
India's relationship with the Soviet Union was marked by strategic cooperation in economic, military, and political spheres, benefiting from Soviet aid and military hardware.
Indo-Russian Relations Post-1991
India has maintained strong relations with Russia, with collaborations in energy, defence, and space technology continuing to thrive.
Economic and Military Collaboration
India remains a significant market for Russian arms and an important ally in fostering a multipolar world order.
Conclusion
The end of bipolarity, marked by the disintegration of the Soviet Union, reshaped global politics, economics, and international relations. It heralded the end of the Cold War, introduced new independent states, and paved the way for contemporary political dynamics that continue to influence world affairs.
This period of transformation offers profound lessons on the volatility of political systems and the complex interplay of economic, social, and nationalist forces in shaping the modern world.
🚀 Learn more about Notes with Chatterbot AI