Agree with the article and the sentiments expressed. Mikhail, well done thou good and faithful servant, RIP.
Alan B.

Mikhail Gorbachev, dead at 91, rest in peace old man. Regardless of his "colour", Gorby was a great world leader, and a man of peace, a worthy recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace. He managed to oversee the destruction of the Soviet Union and Communism there, and in Eastern Europe, without bloodshed, for that we should all be eternally grateful.

A fitting tribute to a fair and decent leader! Gorbachev was a good man. His big failing though was to underestimate and over-trust the manipulative power and rapacious greed of the West.

As with most Western commentators, Suter's lauding of Gorbachev's achievements has been spoilt by his opportunistic and simplistic demonising of Putin.

<< Another possible source of regret was Putin's reversal of Gorbachev's goal of Russia's being part of the "European home". >>

This is a misleading and incomplete reading of history. Putin tried in vain for Russia to join NATO and to be part of creating a united and secure Europe. He was rebuffed at every turn. Instead of working to bring Russia into the fold, US-led NATO very deliberately kept it out. It broke its promise to Gorbachev and expanded eastward with the sole aim of weakening and containing Russia.

Any fair and comprehensive commentary on Russia's military intervention in Ukraine needs to acknowledge NATO's role in provoking the conflict. Simply labelling it as Putin's damage lazily perpetuates the manipulative Western trope of Putin as evil. We should be able to expect better from influential academics like Suter.

Try and paint Putin as a great leader is to spit/defecate/urinate on the grave of arguably Russia's greatest leader, i.e., Mikhail Gorbachev.

It was not the West that failed Mikhail but, really, really stupid Russians. They had a chance to become a prosperous and free democracy. But screwed it big time. Now look where they are and how far back, they've gone!
Alan B.

Putin tried to join NATO!?

What planet are you on Bronwyn?

Be careful when you slide down the beam trying to escape? They might just turn the torch off and let you fall to your doom.

I mean, if you believe that garbage about Putin, then sliding down a beam of light to escape from the asylum, should be even more believable!
Alan B.

An incompetent leader can also be consequential. As I've written elsewhere, I was actually in Moscow the week Gorbachev took over. There was great excitement in that time because the people saw Gorbachev a new young, dynamic leader.

Unfortunately, Gorbachev, and indeed most Russians, severely, naively misunderstood the processes and difficulties of introducing a market economy to a nation that had endured 70 years of totalitarian suppression.

Economically, Gorbachev was a disaster. The Soviet economy was a mess when he took over but had utterly unravelled by the time he left.

Its wrong to say Gorbachev surrendered in the Cold War. He recognised that he couldn't keep up with Reagan's arms build-up and the Russians were truly terrified that Reagan's SDI would make their nuclear force obsolete. He tried to offset the massive disadvantage in armaments through treaties. But Reagan's "trust but verify" policy defeated all of Gorbachev's efforts.

In the end, the Soviets didn't surrender in the Cold War but simply lost the ability to prosecute it.

To be fair, Gorbachev was probably the best of a very bad bunch when he took over. But he was completely overwhelmed by the problems the Soviets faced, had his ideas for fixing it shown to be completely irrelevant and left his nation and people in a far worse state then he found it.

Not for nothing did Deng Xiaoping call him an idiot.