Project and content management for Contemporary Authors volumes
WORK TITLE: Soviet Internationalism after Stalin
WORK NOTES:
PSEUDONYM(S):
BIRTHDATE:
WEBSITE:
CITY:
STATE:
COUNTRY:
NATIONALITY:
http://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/history/staff/rupprecht/ * http://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/history/staff/rupprecht/publications/ * http://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/history/staff/rupprecht/biography/
RESEARCHER NOTES:
PERSONAL
Male.
EDUCATION:European University Institute, Ph.D., 2012.
ADDRESS
CAREER
University of Exeter, Exeter, England, faculty, 2015—. Guest professor, Catholic University, 2016. Has also taught at FU Berlin and the University of Aarhus/Denmark.
WRITINGS
SIDELIGHTS
Tobias Rupprecht specializes in art history, comparative literature and modern history, and he has conducted extensive research at the Universidad de los Andes and the German Historical Institute. He completed his doctorate at the European University Institute in 2012 and then went on to teach at FU Berlin and the University of Aarhus/Denmark. Rupprecht has served on the faculty at the University of Exeter since 2015, and he has also been a visiting professor at the Catholic University in Santiago de Chile.
Rupprecht’s first book, Soviet Internationalism After Stalin: Interaction and Exchange Between the USSR and Latin America During the Cold War, was published by Cambridge University Press in 2015. As the title suggests, the book explores Cold War-era relationships between the USSR and Latin America. The book also address U.S. responses to those relationships. From exchange students to trade agreements and delegations, Rupprecht provides a unique history of international diplomacy. Ultimately, the author finds that the USSR was so economically disadvantaged, that any efforts it made in Latin America were limited. In fact, the USSR’s close ties to Cuba were too expensive to support. In fact, the USSR paid billions to Cuba, which then hobbled its ability to fund communist efforts in Nicaragua. Nevertheless, the United States took drastic measures in response to the situation.
Discussing his debut volume in a lengthy article posted on the Imperial & Global Forum Web site, Rupprecht explained: “Historians of the Soviet Union, for the most part, have shunned approaches of ‘global history’ and have focused either on Russia’s inner history, or influences from the West. In much of what has been written on Soviet participation in the world’s integrative processes, there is a tendency to emphasise the shortcomings of the Soviet model compared to western global integration, an approach which contrasts with a core demand of global history–not to take the West as the conceptual norm. Debates on global history should thus make more allowance for encounters and exchange between the ‘Second’ and ‘Third Worlds’.” The author added: “Comparisons and shared histories of different non-western countries, as I attempt in my book, put the pivotal role of the West in world history in perspective.” Praising this approach in Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries, N.E. Bou-Nacklie lauded the volume’s “veracity” and called Soviet Internationalism After Stalin “an excellent book on what might have been a humdrum topic.”
BIOCRIT
PERIODICALS
Choice, April, 2016, N.E. Bou-Nacklie, review of Soviet Internationalism after Stalin: Interaction and Exchange between the USSR and Latin America during the Cold War, p. 1218.
ONLINE
Imperial & Global Forum, https://imperialglobalexeter.com (November 24, 2015), Tobias Rupprecht, author statement.
University of Exeter Humanities Department Web site, http://humanities.exeter.ac.uk/ (March 29, 2017), author profile.*
History
Photo of Dr Tobias Rupprecht
Dr Tobias Rupprecht
Overview
Research
Publications
External engagement and impact
Research supervision
Teaching
Biography
Dr Tobias Rupprecht
Lecturer in Latin American/Caribbean History
Email: T.Rupprecht@exeter.ac.uk
Extension: 4300
Telephone: 01392 724300
My research deals mostly with contacts between the Second and Third Worlds during the Cold War and its aftermath, and I am especially interested in the role of both Latin America and Russia in the global history of the late 20th century. I have recently published a book, with Cambridge University Press, which explores Latin American encounters with the Soviet Union and the ways in which arts and culture shaped how people made sense of the Global Cold War. In a follow up project, I am currently examining the impact of Chilean economic reforms under the military dictatorship on the transformation of Eastern European states around 1989.
Dr Tobias Rupprecht
Biography
I studied Modern History, Art History and Comparative Literature in Salamanca and Tübingen, where I was awarded a Magister degree in 2007. Interrupted by research stays at the Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá and at the German Historical Institute in Moscow, I lived in Italy after that and wrote my PhD dissertation at the European University Institute in Florence, where I defended my thesis in 2012. After postdoc and teaching positions at FU Berlin and the University of Aarhus/Denmark, I have come to Exeter in January 2015. In early 2016, I was a guest professor at the Catholic University in Santiago de Chile.
Rupprecht, Tobias. Soviet internationalism after Stalin: interaction and exchange between the USSR and Latin America during the Cold War
N.E. Bou-Nacklie
CHOICE: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries. 53.8 (Apr. 2016): p1218.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2016 American Library Association CHOICE
http://www.ala.org/acrl/choice/about
Listen
Full Text:
Rupprecht, Tobias. Soviet internationalism after Stalin: interaction and exchange between the USSR and Latin America during the Cold War. Cambridge, 2015. 334p bibl index ISBN 9781107102880 cloth, $99.00; ISBN 9781316212769 ebook, contact publisher for price
53-3632
F1416
2014-48633 MARC
This reviewer, whose West African homeland, Ghana, swung toward the USSR in the 1960s under President Kwame Nkrumah, can testify to the veracity of all that Rupprecht (Latin American and Caribbean history, Univ. of Exeter, UK) has written about. The delegations, exchange students, propaganda, attempts at trade, consequences, reactions, cynicism, etc., were all the same. The author has done his work exceedingly well. His book is well documented, well researched, and well written on what might have been a boring subject on a dead matter. Rupprecht argues that the US overreacted to the presence of the USSR in Latin America, but it should not have, because of the dilapidated Soviet economy and general confusion. The USSR was not ready to invest heavily in the continent and was not pleased when Cuba fell in its lap along with the consequential problems that the involvement elicited. The billions paid to Cuba cooled the Soviet ardor to support Nicaragua and other prospective movements in that region, and left Che Guevara in the lurch when he decided to go it alone. An excellent book on what might have been a humdrum topic. Summing Up: *** Highly recommended. Upper-division undergraduates and above.--N. E. Bou-Nacklie, Johnson State College
Soviet Internationalism in Latin America
PUBLISHED ON November 24, 2015 by CIGH Exeter
SovietInternationalism
Tobias Rupprecht
History Department, University of Exeter
‘This is a great conservative system,’ reported the visitor following his trip to Moscow, ‘there is no lack of order, no anarchy, no lack of discipline! Everyone respects the authorities!’ While the liberal leaders of the materialist and soulless West allegedly no longer took up a stance against decadent art, degenerate music, and immoral sexual libertarianism, the leaders in the Kremlin, he claimed, heroically defended traditional family values and a ‘healthy patriotism’.
The tone of this argument will sound rather familiar to a contemporary observer of Russia’s reactionary domestic policies and its regression to Cold War style foreign intervention. A swashbuckling Vladimir Putin has attracted the tacit, and sometimes open, admiration from many Europeans who no longer feel represented by what they see as the liberal mainstream in politics and media.
Yet in this case, the visitor to Moscow was a Alberto Dango, lawyer from Bogotá – and his trip took place as early as 1967. Dango was a member of the Conservative Party in the Colombian Parliament. His diary from the motherland of socialism (“Mi diario en la Unión Soviética. Un conservador en la U.R.S.S.”) is one of many documents that I have unearthed for my recently published book Soviet Internationalism after Stalin, which assesses the specific Soviet way of participating in an increasingly interconnected world from the 1950s, an integration that did not always follow the binary ideological boundaries that we have long associated with the Cold War.
Based on other travelogues, memoirs, archival material, scientific and popular journals, newspapers, fictional literature, theatre plays, poetry, songs and films, as well as interviews from Russia and several Latin American countries, I examine the cautious opening up of the USSR to the world under Nikita Khrushchev and Soviet cultural and intellectual international exchange until the disintegration of the Soviet state in 1991. Both Soviet officials and ordinary Soviet citizens were ever more confronted with an influx of ‘exotic’ people and imagery. By looking at Latin American political decision makers, intellectuals, students and the wider public, Soviet Internationalism after Stalin also reveals new insights on hitherto unstudied target groups of Soviet advances in what came to be known as the Third World. These Soviet campaigns, I argue in the book, were initially very successful in convincing many of their diverse audiences, at home and abroad, of the Soviet model as a viable alternative to Western liberal capitalism.
Historians know a fair bit about what it meant for someone from the West to live through the period of the Global Cold War. Two factors defined the general view of geopolitics: there was an ideological confrontation with the East that included a looming threat of mutual annihilation. At the same time, ordinary people experienced an ever increasing interconnected world at political, cultural and intellectual levels. Independence movements, charismatic national leaders and cruel proxy wars brought the Global South ever more to the attention of the populace in Western Europe as much as Northern America. What is less known is that similar processes played out on the Eastern side of the Iron Curtain. While late Stalinism was still a period of extreme self-isolation, one of the characteristics of Khrushchev’s de-Stalinising reforms was to reduce this isolation tremendously. For Soviet citizens, too, the Cold War now meant not only geopolitical confrontation but also increased interaction with a wider world.
Latin American music, cinema, art and literature enjoyed tremendous success with the Soviet public. Selectively imported foreign cultural products, and the adaption of Latin American motives by Soviet artists, helped entrench internationalist ideals to large parts of the Soviet population. Here, the Soviet Union’s favourite crooner Yosif Kobzon declares his love to Cuba.
Harking back to an idealised notion of pre-Stalinist socialism, Soviet politicians and intellectuals, after 1953, revived certain traditions of internationalism. Latin America, unlike other parts of the Global South with a distinct history of relations with the Soviets, became a target of Soviet advances. No longer, however, did the Kremlin propagate the violent overthrowing of governments. Moscow’s internationalists now sought to win over anti-imperialist politicians in office, intellectuals of different political leanings, and future elites as friends of the Soviet state. Through the dissemination of print media and radio shows, travelling exhibitions, and the invitation of young people, students, politicians and intellectuals, the Soviet Union after Stalin presented itself no longer as the cradle of world revolution, but as a role model of a technologically and culturally advanced, egalitarian, multicultural, and anti-imperialist modern state.
Yesenia
Politicised mass culture in the Soviet Union spread images of a world that was full of admiration for the USSR, and of imperialist villains who hindered the blossoming of their underdeveloped states. Propagandists could build on a widespread, and originally apolitical, fascination for exotic and adventurous outlands among large parts of the Soviet population: the most successful film ever shown in Soviet cinemas was the 1971 Mexican melodrama Yesenia, directed by Alfredo Crevenna. Over 91 million Soviet cinema goers suffered, cried and laughed through this rather turgid story of a militia man who falls in love with a racy gypsy woman.
It is a popular line of argument in Western post-Cold-War historiography that contacts with the world abroad provided for the spread of Western products and values in the USSR and thus undermined the belief in the superiority of the own system. In Soviet Internationalism after Stalin, I argue that we need to consider much more Soviet interaction with the Third World as an important integrative moment within Soviet society after Stalin. Contacts with underdeveloped countries of the Global South and the admiration for the USSR uttered by many of the visitors confirmed to many Soviet politicians, intellectuals and the wider public the ostensible superiority of their own system. Soviet Internationalism after Stalin was a source of legitimisation for the new Soviet political elite and an integrative ideational moment for Soviet society during the turmoil of de-Stalinisation and through much of the period under the rule of Leonid Brezhnev that has been labelled Stagnation.
plu2
Several thousands of young Latin Americans were invited to study at universities all over the USSR from the 1960s. Not usually affiliated with communist organisations, most of them were not uncritical about some hardships of Soviet life. Nevertheless, personal recollections reveal that the overwhelming majority remember their long years in the Soviet Union in a decidedly positive light. As a Bolivian student remembered: ‘those were the best years of my life and I miss them every day!’ And a Panamanian alumnus of Moscow State University concluded: ‘the only thing I could never accept in the Soviet Union was cold soups!’
The Latin American views of the Soviet Union presented extensively in the book shed light on the fact that the USSR looked fundamentally different from the South than from the West. While few maintained the uncritical admiration for the Soviet project we know from Western leftists of the 1920s and 30s, many Latin Americans, socialists and conservatives among them, found positive things to say about the USSR, and often still drew inspiration from it for the their own countries. This new perspective helps understand the attractive and thus cohesive factors of this system much better than the usual glance from Europe or North America. Time and again, Western observers have underlined the shortcomings and inner contradictions and conflicts within the Soviet Union to an extent that makes it difficult to understand why this system actually prevailed for so long and, through the late 1980s, enjoyed the at least passive support of the overwhelming majority of its population and the admiration of many political leaders and intellectuals in the Third World.
Historians of the Soviet Union, for the most part, have shunned approaches of ‘global history’ and have focused either on Russia’s inner history, or influences from the West. In much of what has been written on Soviet participation in the world’s integrative processes, there is a tendency to emphasise the shortcomings of the Soviet model compared to western global integration, an approach which contrasts with a core demand of global history – not to take the West as the conceptual norm. Debates on global history should thus make more allowance for encounters and exchange between the ‘Second’ and ‘Third Worlds’.
Comparisons and shared histories of different non-western countries, as I attempt in my book, put the pivotal role of the West in world history in perspective. A plethora of connections between formerly socialist states in the contemporary world take their cue from these Cold War contacts. Russia’s fortified relations with the so-called BRICS states, military and geopolitical cooperation with such countries as Nicaragua, Venezuela and Vietnam, and also the bond with the Syrian Baath Party are some of the legacies of Soviet Internationalism after Stalin that, for some time, had fallen from view because we too readily associated socialism with isolationism and global interconnectedness with free markets and liberal democracies.