Report of the General Secretary

Sedimentology ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-193
Keyword(s):  
1994 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 580-590
Author(s):  
Jan Niessen

In the 1970s, during the Cold War era, European and North American states began a dialogue in Helsinki which became known as the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), or the Helsinki process. For Western states the CSCE served as a platform to raise questions related to security in Europe and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Eastern European states considered the CSCE as a means to secure the postwar borders and an opportunity to discuss economic and scientific cooperation. Today, 51 European States, plus the United States of America and Canada, participate in this process. Notwithstanding the many and often intense political tensions between the West and the East during those twenty years, quite a number of conferences, seminars and other meetings were held and a great many agreements were adopted and documents issued, dealing with matters related to CSCE's three main areas of concern: security in Europe; cooperation in the fields of economics, science, technology and environment; the promotion of human rights. In response to the fundamental changes in Europe in the late 1980s, the CSCE was given a new impetus and its operational framework was broadened. CSCE offices were established in Prague (CSCE Secretariat), Vienna (Conflict Prevention Center) and Warsaw (Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights) with the aim to strengthen and monitor compliance with CSCE commitments, especially in the area of human rights. A Parliamentary Assembly was established and met twice, first in Budapest and then in Helsinki. A General Secretary and a High Commissioner on Minorities were appointed, with offices in Vienna and The Hague, respectively.


Author(s):  
Enrico Landoni

The election of Bettino Craxi as PSI general secretary marked, from 1976, a very important turning point in thehistory of Italian socialism. His dynamic and charismatic leadership in fact contributed to a profound revisionof its ideological seeds, the so-called scientific Marxism, and above all to the recovery of the humanitarianand libertarian suggestions of pre-Marxist socialism. This led to the clear and definitive condemnation of theMarxist-Leninist model, which had found its practical realization in the Soviet system and in the countriesbeyond the Curtain, and prompted PSI to support the anti-communist dissidence and to establish strongrelations with the Polish opposition and above all with Solidarność. Craxi, both in the role of PSI generalsecretary and as Italian prime minister, was able to provide it with a great political-diplomatic support and alot of concrete help. Up to now, the history of these relations has not yet been adequately studied and thispaper therefore aims to fill the gap.


1982 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
B. L. Jacobson ◽  
M. M. Gimadeev

The XXVI Congress of the CPSU defined the current national economic problems of the 1980s and the XI Five-Year Plan. As the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR Comrade LI Brezhnev noted, "our country has entered a new decade, making it the main task to ensure the further growth of the welfare of Soviet people." The program for improving the well-being of the people in the XI Five-Year Plan provides for the solution of the housing problem, improvement of working, living and recreation conditions. Caring for the health of Soviet people in the coming years remains one of the most important social tasks.


2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 160-173
Author(s):  
Fedor L. Sinitsyn

This article examines the development of social control in the Soviet Union under Leonid Brezhnev, who was General Secretary of the Communist Party from 1964 to 1982. Historians have largely neglected this question, especially with regard to its evolution and efficiency. Research is based on sources in the Russian State Archive of Modern History (RGANI), the Russian State Archive of Socio-Political History (RGASPI) and the Moscow Central State Archive (TSGAM). During Brezhnevs rule, Soviet propaganda reached the peak of its development. However, despite the fact that authorities tried to improve it, the system was ritualistic, unconvincing, unwieldy, and favored quantity over quality. The same was true for political education, which did little more than inspire sullen passivity in its students. Although officials recognized these failings, their response was ineffective, and over time Soviet propaganda increasingly lost its potency. At the same time, there were new trends in the system of social control. Authorities tried to have a foot in both camps - to strengthen censorship, and at the same time to get feedback from the public. However, many were afraid to express any criticism openly. In turn, the government used data on peoples sentiments only to try to control their thoughts. As a result, it did not respond to matters that concerned the public. These problems only increased during the era of stagnation and contributed to the decline and subsequent collapse of the Soviet system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document