Translated material
Putsch. Chronicle of troubled days. Olga Vasilyeva.Republics during the putsch.
Republics during the coup
(experience of commented chronicle)Olga Vasilyeva
Parts 1, 2CHRONICLE OF RESISTANCE
The reaction of the republics during the three days of the putsch was largely determined by the “initial conditions” that had developed by August 19: the degree of deformation of governance structures during perestroika, the attitude of the population towards the union structures, the degree of economic dependence of the republics on the union center, and the notorious “role of the individual in history” . Based on this, the situation in the republics developed according to three options, which I (very tentatively) designated below as 1) “chronicle of resistance” 2) “chronicle of waiting” and 3) “chronicle of compromise.” (It should be borne in mind that these designations are given solely based on the position of official structures - the majority of national and democratic organizations of all republics already on the first day expressed active rejection of the State Emergency Committee and its decisions.)
The republics are characterized by a single logic of the events taking place, including similar behavior of local separatists of the non-signatory republics: the State Emergency Committee was recognized by union structures (both party and heads of union enterprises), separatist territories (Transnistria and Gagauzia - in the evening of August 20) and strike committees of inter-movements . The most dynamic in the first days after the putsch was the situation in the Baltic republics and Moldova, whose parliaments almost immediately supported the position of the Russian leadership and began forming their own emergency management bodies (in the Baltic republics there is no institution of the presidency; the formation of security committees from among the heads of representative and executive power is a structure , integrating all emergency management functions). The actions of the leadership of the Baltic republics, although situational, were distinguished by unity and clarity: from the organization of security of state institutions to the decision of the Council of the Baltic States to entrust the formation of governments in exile to the foreign ministers of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.
But despite the “measures worked out during military operations by local riot police” to protect government institutions, by the evening of August 20, army units had already completely taken control of communications, television and radio in the Baltic republics. However, such activity of the Baltic Military District is explained by the sharply expressed confrontation in the republics between the troops of the district and the parliaments of the republics. According to reports from various news agencies, it seems that on the first day the heads of repressive bodies in the regions did not receive orders from the State Emergency Committee. Moreover, the army as a whole chose undeclared neutrality for three days in August.
Of course, each republic pursued its own interests. For example, the leadership of Moldova hoped, in the event of an unfavorable development of the situation in the USSR, to use its geopolitical position and proclaim the reunification of Moldova and Romania (which the Popular Front of Moldova has long called for). In addition, after the publication of the draft union treaty, Moldova took a very loyal position to the union center and increasingly declared the eastern market as the only one for Moldova - and therefore was interested in the stabilization and reconstruction of legitimate power in Moscow. Latvia
August 19
At 4 p.m., member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Latvia Alfred Rubiks, in his speech at a press conference, stated that Latvia is among those regions of the country in which a state of emergency is being introduced. All power passes into the hands of an emergency commission, which will be formed within the next 24 hours by the commander of the Baltic Military District, Fyodor Kuzmin. “All political parties in Latvia,” said Rubiks, “whose activities contradict the Constitution of the RSFSR and the Latvian SSR, will be disbanded within 24 hours.”
At 5 p.m., speaking on Latvian radio and television, the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia, Anatoly Gorbunov, read out a rather calm statement from the Presidium of the Supreme Court of Latvia and the Council of Ministers of the Republic about the seizure of power in the USSR by an unconstitutionally created committee, which does not and cannot have any claims to power in the territory of the Latvian Republic. “In the event of intervention by external forces, the Supreme Council and the Council of Ministers of Latvia call on the residents of the republic to remain calm and join the campaign of non-violent civil disobedience.” The Popular Front of Latvia joined the government's statement. Such a sustained reaction from Latvia is explained, firstly, by the strong influence of the “Equal Rights” faction (supports the unity of the USSR), although the latter is also heterogeneous and can be conditionally divided into a liberal (the primacy of individual rights over class and national interests) and a socialist wing. Secondly, the demographic situation in Latvia, where the percentage of Russian-speaking population is high. By the time the statement appeared, the attitude of the collectives of enterprises under union subordination was still unclear.
However, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Latvia, Ivars Godmanis, deprived of the need to take into account the balance of political interests, added that “any active cooperation with illegal groups or persons who are trying to seize state power by any means is considered a state crime.”
At 20.00 the Latvian TV broadcast was stopped. At 21.00 the building of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Latvia was occupied by riot police units.
August 20
In Riga, at about 450 am, riot police occupied the premises of a long-distance telephone exchange. The premises of the Latvian Radio building were broken into. As a result of the action, there were wounded, including People's Deputy of the Latvian Armed Forces Aivars Berkis.
The rapid development of the situation at night intensified the activities of official structures: at 9.00 a meeting of the ruling faction of the Popular Front of the Latvian Armed Forces began, and at 10.00 a plenary meeting of the parliament began, at which the Supreme Court adopted an appeal to police officers and deputies of local councils with demands: not to assist persons and formations speaking on behalf of the State Emergency Committee; publicly dissociate themselves from illegal groups and government agencies; consider any orders of the State Emergency Committee illegal and causing legal consequences on the territory of the Republic of Latvia; in any case, comply only with the laws and regulations of the Council of Ministers and the Armed Forces of Latvia. At 13:00 it was broadcast by the only television studio in Rezekne remaining at the disposal of the Republic of Latvia.
At 23.50, forces of the Airborne Forces and the Riga OMON attacked the CM of Latvia; The leadership of the Council of Ministers of Latvia decided to hand over weapons - 20 machine guns and 20 pistols. However, there appears to be a split in the ranks of the Ministry of Defense forces: the ships of the Baltic Fleet sailed on August 20 into the open sea, where they report only to the command of the Navy, and not to the coastal command. It is likely that ship personnel retain the legal option of disobeying orders from coastal command.
And on August 21, speaking following a meeting with the Commander-in-Chief of the Baltic Military District Fedor Kuzmin, First Deputy Chairman of the Latvian Armed Forces Dainis Ivans said that by midnight on August 21, accompanied by the Riga traffic police, the withdrawal of military and armored equipment from the territory of Riga would begin. Lithuania
August 19
At 11.30 the military seized the television building, and at 18 o'clock the telephone exchange in Kaunas. The roads to Vilnius are blocked, and troops are being redeployed towards Vilnius. At 14:00 the Klaipeda port was blocked - warships entered.
However, the republican leadership, historically prepared for such measures on the part of the Center, already at 11.00 gathered for a meeting of the Lithuanian Defense Committee (Chairman of the Lithuanian Armed Forces Vytautas Landsbergis, Prime Minister Vagnorius, Deputy Prime Minister Zigmas Vaišvila, Head of the Department of Regional Defense Audrius Butkevicius). It was decided to begin implementing already developed plans for the protection of government buildings and to begin organizing non-violent resistance throughout the republic, in the event that the military tried to seize power. A statement was made about the illegality of the State Emergency Committee. The official reaction of Lithuania was based not only on the “radicalism” of the parliament, which was the first in the USSR to adopt the Declaration of Independence (out of 141 deputies, 120 were supporters of secession from the USSR), but also, above all, on the results of the republican plebiscite on February 9, during which the overwhelming majority of the population (90%) supported the course towards independence. The position of the Russian-speaking population was confirmed at 14:00 - the democratic movements of the city of Snechkus, which is predominantly inhabited by Russians, expressed support for the statement of the Russian leadership.
(Note: True, opinion polls, as a rule, demonstrated significantly greater popularity of Kazimira Prunskienė and Algis Brazauskas, who take more moderate positions on issues of tactics to achieve independence. The peak of Landsbergis’s popularity comes in the era of “meeting democracy” and January 1991.)
At 15.00, riot police occupied the republican international telegraph and telephone station.
Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Lithuania Juozas Ermolavichus, referring to the lack of a common position of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Communist Party of Lithuania, expressed his personal opinion: “I consider Landsbergis’s announced in the morning and regularly repeated calls to the regional security department for armed resistance as attempts at confrontation, provoking the situation with the aim of interfering in internal affairs of the USSR by external forces".
On the evening of August 19, the emergency session of the Supreme Council, convened on August 2 after the events in Medininkai, continued its work. A resolution was adopted on preparations for an indefinite political strike, which would be declared if “military commandants” took power in the republic, and the agreement with the RSFSR was unanimously ratified. An appeal to Boris Yeltsin and Russia was adopted, expressing solidarity with the progressive forces of Russia and actions of civil disobedience. Estonia
August 17
Valentin Pavlov postponed the meeting with Edgar Savisaar from August 19 to August 22, which was reported to the reception of the Estonian Prime Minister.
August 19
At 11 o'clock, the Chairman of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Estonia, Arnold Ruutel, was informed by the commander of the PribVO, Colonel General Fedor Kuzmin, that a state of emergency had been declared in Estonia. Kuzmin demanded the dissolution of all armed groups, the confiscation of weapons from the population, and the prohibition of all rallies and meetings. However, at 12 o'clock the Emergency Defense Committee of the Republic of Estonia (consisting of Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Estonia Arnold Rüütel, Speaker of the Supreme Court of Estonia Ülo Nugis, Minister of Economy of Estonia Jaak Leiman) adopted a statement and confirmed that the authorities of the Republic of Estonia and the government will continue the course towards peaceful restoration independence.
At 2 p.m., an Il-76 landed at the Tallinn airfield, delivering the first hundred paratroopers; 2 more aircraft are expected to arrive. Border Guard Commissioner Edgar Eero reported that two columns of military vehicles crossed the Estonian border. One of them, consisting of approximately 120 armored personnel carriers and 20 trucks, appeared from the direction of Pskov. The second convoy, consisting of trucks with military personnel and several mobile radio stations (presumably for jamming), appeared from the direction of Riga and passed through the Ikla border point and then the city of Pärnu (at about 18 hours).
At 3 p.m., the Estonian government issued a statement in which what was happening was clearly characterized as an “attempted coup d’etat” (later a similar statement was adopted by the Estonian Armed Forces). The statement notes that the legitimate President of the USSR, Mikhail Gorbachev, has been removed from power, and what is happening is contrary to international law. The Constitution of the USSR and the Law of the USSR on the legal regime for introducing a state of emergency. The Estonian government supports the call of the leadership of the RSFSR to start a general strike and not comply with the orders of the State Emergency Committee. The statement calls on the governments of the world to actively express their negative attitude towards the attempted military coup in the USSR and provide all possible support for the restoration of legitimate power in the USSR. At a meeting of the Estonian government, it was also decided to interrupt all vacations of civil servants.
At 4 p.m., at a meeting of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Estonia, Ruutel noted that the statement of the State Emergency Committee in Estonia was supported only by the Intermovement. At the same time, the Central Union of Trade Unions of Estonia, which unites almost all workers in Estonia, clearly expressed its negative attitude towards what was happening. According to Rüütel, “the moment has come when every organ, movement, association and party must clearly and without hesitation express its attitude.”
At the session, an appeal was adopted to all residents of Estonia to organize picketing of the radio, television and Press House buildings due to the danger of the republic's media being captured by units of the Soviet Army moving towards the capital of Estonia. The Estonian Parliament decided to grant emergency powers to the Emergency Defense Council of the Republic of Estonia. When voting “for”, 70 deputies cast their votes, 3 were against, and there were no abstentions. Members of the Estonian Armed Forces must not leave the parliament building until further notice. The Board of the National Foundation of Estonia called for "an end to the current uncertain state-legal status of Estonia and to declare itself a truly independent state."
August 20
The Estonian Republican Council of Strike Committees of Enterprises of the Estonian SSR declared support for the State Emergency Committee. Estonian Radio continued throughout the day to train listeners in the methods of secret activities in emergency situations. Estonian Foreign Minister Lennart Meri, who is on a visit to Finland, was instructed to remain there until further notice from the government in order, if necessary, to create an Estonian government in exile.
At 4 p.m., on the initiative of the NFE, a rally was held under the slogan “The dictatorship will not pass.” The Central Council of Trade Unions of Estonia appealed to workers to start a general political strike from 0 o'clock on August 21.
August 21
At 11:30, the mayor of Leningrad, Anatoly Sobchak, called the Presidium of the Estonian Armed Forces, saying that, having learned about the seizure of the Tallinn TV tower, he immediately contacted the Chairman of the USSR Armed Forces, Anatoly Lukyanov, and demanded the return of the Pskov paratroopers to their place of permanent deployment and the immediate liberation of the TV tower building. According to Sobchak, Lukyanov promised to take the necessary steps in this direction.
By decision of the government of the republic, in Tallinn and a number of counties of the Republic of Estonia, on August 21, from 12 to 14 o’clock, a nationwide strike was held, in which, according to the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, about 350 thousand people took part (at 150 enterprises in 11 cities of the Republic).
On August 21 at 5:30 p.m., negotiations began at the TV tower between members of the Government of Estonia, headed by Edgaram Savisaar, and representatives of the military, led by Lieutenant General Fedor Melnichuk, on the withdrawal of the military. According to the Minister of Estonia Raivo Vare, the negotiations in the TV tower lasted about 2 hours: the military did not believe that the situation in Moscow had changed. By 7 p.m., the power grid control center in Tapa was cleared. At 19:07, the paratroopers' vehicles began to leave the territory of the Tallinn TV tower. At 19:00 Estonian TV started working. Moldova
According to the PF agency, on the night of August 17-18, Soviet troops blocked the border of Moldova with Romania. On the night of August 18-19, there was intensive movement of military units throughout the entire territory of Moldova, all intersections, all roads were blocked by military patrols.
August 19
At 11 o'clock, the commander of the military district, Osipov, turned to the Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Valeriu Muravschi, and demanded the disbandment of special police units. The Council of Ministers of Moldova did not respond to his demands: on the night of August 20, police units began protecting state facilities in Chisinau - the parliament building, the television building and the Press House.
At 16:00, First Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Council of Moldova, Ion Khodirke, spoke on local television and assessed the coup that took place in Moscow as illegal and unconstitutional. Khodyrke demanded the return of Gorbachev and the convening of an extraordinary congress of people's deputies of the USSR. The President of the Republic, Mircea Snegur, interrupted his vacation. A Declaration was adopted on behalf of the parliament and government of Moldova with support for Russia’s statement on a general strike and disobedience to the State Emergency Committee if the putschists remain in power.
August 20
The Moldovan leadership attempted to seize the initiative: Moldovan Prime Minister Muravsky decided to ban the publication in the republic of union newspapers and newspapers publishing information from the State Emergency Committee. President of Moldova Mircea Snegur issued two decrees. On the creation of a national security committee consisting of President Snegur, Chairman of the Supreme Council Mosanu, Prime Minister Muravski and others. The second decree of the State Emergency Committee outlawed the law, its actions are “invalid on the territory of the republic.”
A permanent rally (about 8 thousand people) takes place at the foot of the former Lenin monument with demands: to release USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev and restore his presidential powers; legally prohibit the activities of the CPSU on the territory of Moldova and nationalize its property; Parliament of Moldova urgently adopt the Declaration of Independence.
On August 20, a statement was published by the secretariat of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Moldova, which does not assess the activities of the State Emergency Committee. However, the secretariat of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Moscow stands for the consistent continuation of the “Gorbachev case.”
On the evening of August 20, the Armed Forces of Transnistria and Gagauzia approved the activities of the State Emergency Committee. The position of the separatists of Moldova is not unexpected: after the new republics achieved economic sovereignty (from April 1 - Transnistria and August 1 - Gagauzia formed their own budget and began to contribute taxes to the union budget, and the leadership of Transnistria at a meeting with Valentin Pavlov on July 16 achieved division resource funds with Moldova), they tried to use the situation to achieve political independence from Moldova. CHRONICLE OF WAITING
The remaining republics acted on the principle “we have sovereignty, and everything else is your Moscow invention, as long as the new authorities recognize our sovereignty.” However, by the evening of August 20, statements by the leaders of Kazakhstan and Ukraine - republics whose support could be decisive both for the Russian leadership and for the State Emergency Committee - become more harsh in relation to the State Emergency Committee and its actions than a day ago. But both Nazarbayev and Kravchuk - as leaders of official structures in the republics - spoke only against the unconstitutionality of the State Emergency Committee, with the initiative to convene an extraordinary session of the Supreme Council and the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. In fact, if the State Emergency Committee had carried out more decisive actions (for example, carried out a purely symbolic and bloodless (!) seizure of the Russian parliament building on the first day of the putsch or managed to isolate the Russian leader before arriving at the White House), and then complied with the republics’ demand to convene extraordinary session of the USSR Supreme Council, it is likely that the State Emergency Committee would have been able to get rid of the label of “anti-constitutionality” in the eyes of the official leaders of the majority of the expectant republics.
The “radicalization” of the position of Nazarbayev and Kravchuk was largely influenced by two factors: the position of the republican parties and strike committees, which declared pre-strike readiness on their behalf, and the development of the situation in Moscow. The “caution” of the Ukrainian (as well as Belarusian) authorities is explained, in turn, by the position of the national communist majority in the presidium and the Supreme Council itself: after an unsuccessful meeting of the PVS on the night of August 20-21, Leonid Kravchuk, in a conversation with Anatoly Lukyanov, said that he personally does not recognize the State Emergency Committee.
The reaction of the official leaders and political organizations of Armenia was based on the principle common to expectant republics. Prime Minister Vazgen Manukyan spoke most frankly in a conversation with journalists on August 20: “The fate of the entire country is now being decided in Moscow and Leningrad. Information about the situation in these cities is the basis for choosing a position, since it is not yet known who will prevail - whether the State Emergency Committee, or Yeltsin. The state bodies of Armenia should for now refrain from any definite point of view. Whoever wins in Moscow, the main thing is how he will relate to the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh."
The position of consistent wait-and-see was taken by the Belarusian leadership and the leaders of a number of republics of the Central Asian Union, who did not make any statements at all. True, an analysis of the speeches of the republican mass media shows that the Belarusian leadership was ready to recognize the State Emergency Committee. One of the most influential Confederalists of Belarus, Prime Minister Vyacheslav Kebich, called in sick and did not return from vacation in Kislovodsk, which, however, later gives him a chance to strengthen the position of the National Communists in parliament. The small opposition of the Belarusian parliament, despite demands to the Presidium of the Supreme Council to convene an extraordinary session and condemn the coup of the State Emergency Committee, has not achieved success. Polarization occurred at the level of political and public organizations: full support for the State Emergency Committee was expressed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus and the Presidium of the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (albeit, subject to the condition that the State Emergency Committee acquired “constitutional status”). Democratic organizations and the Minsk strike committee declared support for the position of the Russian leadership and began preparations for a general strike.
There were more similarities than differences in the reactions of the Central Asian republics. Perhaps this is due to the fact that on June 23 last year in Alma-Ata the Central Asian Union of Republics was announced, and on the eve of the putsch (August 13-14), it was formalized. In addition to their religious community, these republics share a common regional mechanism for the transition to the market:
- nationalization of property by agreement with the union ministries (Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan - from August 1) and without a previous wave of strikes (the exception is Kazakhstan);
- the Communist Party as the main owner of privatized property (for example, the association "EKOMPT" - "Economy of the Communist Party of Tajikistan") - according to local press reports, will be able to control a significant part of the Tajik economy;
- strengthening of local power and economic elites according to the feudal-bai type (taxes from the export of agricultural products to local government structures in Uzbekistan).
In addition, the current political elite of the Central Asian republics, formed according to the feudal-bai type, has always considered the union center as a guarantor of its own stability (primarily military and subsidized) - which is why the reaction of these republics to the actions of the State Emergency Committee was very restrained, and the statements of official bodies The authorities were formed according to the principle: “Whoever can master it, we will deal with it.”
In a critical situation, the leaders of the Central Asian republics preferred to focus on the undisputed leader of the region - Nazarbayev, rather than making independent decisions. It is characteristic that in this situation, Nazarbayev, as his press secretary Shalakhmetov admitted on August 21, refused to play a consolidating role. Apparently, Nazarbayev was afraid in the future of losing his special status among regional leaders by making “the wrong decisions.” Moreover, he has a potential rival with the same halo of a reformer in the West and in allied circles - the leader of Kyrgyzstan Askar Akaev.
As a result, Asian presidents, at best, only emphasized their determination to defend republican sovereignty.
The reaction of opposition democratic organizations and parties was more definite, calling not to obey the decisions of the State Emergency Committee. However, with the exception of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, political organizations in Central Asia are rather weak and have little popularity among the population. The national parties and movements of the Central Asian republics were primarily interested in issues of republican sovereignty, and not in the problems of Russia and its coups. Ukraine
August 19
In the morning, Army General Varennikov warned the Chairman of the Ukrainian PVS Leonid Kravchuk about the position of the Armed Forces in connection with the resignation of Gorbachev and the creation of the State Emergency Committee. The head of the military-political department of the internal troops of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ukrainian SSR and Moldova, Major General Vasily Sanin, spoke more clearly: “I, like the entire command of the internal troops, consider the decision made to be legal and correct. We are ready to carry out all the tasks assigned to us by the Emergency Committee.” .
At 16:00, the Chairman of the Supreme Council of Ukraine, Leonid Kravchuk, spoke on Ukrainian TV and radio, saying that the republic’s Supreme Council does not yet know everything about the latest events in the country and “it takes time to figure everything out.” Kravchuk said that “no state of emergency has been declared in the republic, and at present the priority task is to protect democracy, legality and constitutional order based on the laws of Ukraine, Ukrainian sovereignty and decisions of legally elected authorities.” Due to the lack of quorum at the meeting of the Ukrainian PVS, it was postponed to August 20.
However, already on August 19, a number of leaders at the republican and regional level expressed their firm rejection of the State Emergency Committee and its decisions: speaking on television, Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR Boris Grinev said: “All this is a military coup. Its organizers are state criminals, since they took an illegal, unconstitutional action ". I would not predict a long life for this coup. They do not have serious support among the people. Today the main thing is to prevent the committee from leading to a bloodbath. The troops of the Kiev Military District have been declared on combat readiness. But I think that it will not be possible to pit the army against the people. The fact that Yeltsin spoke from a tank today is an indicator."
A sharply negative assessment of the State Emergency Committee and the announcement of pre-strike readiness were adopted in areas where national democrats came to power as a result of the last elections (Lvov, morning of the 19th), in the mining regions of Ukraine, where the positions of the strike committees are strong as a result of the last year of struggle for their rights : at 15 o’clock the Donetsk strike committee stated that “regardless of what decision the Presidium of the Ukrainian SSR Armed Forces makes in connection with the situation in the country, the Donetsk strike committee does not recognize the putschist State Emergency Committee and its decisions.” And on the evening of August 19, the Coordination Council of the All-Ukrainian Union of Workers' Solidarity, which unites the strike committees of the republic, appealed to the people of Ukraine with an appeal to be ready for an all-Ukrainian action of civil resistance at the first request. The Constitutional Court demanded that the Supreme Court of Ukraine urgently cancel the resolution of the State Emergency Committee throughout Ukraine.
At 22:00 an extraordinary meeting of the “People’s Rada” (120 opposition deputies in the Supreme Council - deputies of Rukh, the Democratic Party of Ukraine, the Party of Democratic Revival of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Republican Party) was held, at which an appeal was adopted to the people of Ukraine about the support of the Russian leadership and readiness "number one" for holding an all-Ukrainian strike. The Democrats also decided to support the existing power structures in Ukraine, primarily the Ukrainian Armed Forces, if the latter comes to defend the interests of Ukraine and condemns the organizers of the coup.
August 20
In Kiev, at a meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Council (its composition reflects the balance of power in the Ukrainian parliament: the communist majority faction - 239 deputies; "People's Rada" - about 120 deputies) of the republic failed to adopt a final statement. According to the Ukrainian news agency "Respublika", the communists included in the PVS insisted on recognition of the State Emergency Committee. Representatives of the People's Rada objected to this decision. However, speaking on republican TV after the PVS meeting, Chairman of the Supreme Council of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk called the change of power in the country unconstitutional and assured that the republic would defend its sovereignty. Leonid Kravchuk, in a telephone conversation with Anatoly Lukyanov, said that the emergency session of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR, which is supposed to open on August 22, is not recognized by the State Emergency Committee.
On August 20, the All-Ukrainian Union of Workers' Solidarity (VOST) decided to start an indefinite all-Ukrainian strike from 0 o'clock on August 21. However, on the morning of the 21st, representatives of the Republican Strike Committee of Ukraine launched a campaign at enterprises, calling for a strike to begin on August 22.
August 21
On the night of August 20-21, the chairman of the parliamentary opposition "People's Rada", academician Igor Yukhnovsky, sent a telegram to the President of the RSFSR, expressing support for Boris Yeltsin and condemning the attempt to seize the House of Soviets of Russia. Yukhnovsky turned to Leonid Kravchuk with a demand to convene an emergency meeting of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR regarding the night events in Moscow. On August 21, a meeting of the “People's Rada” opened to develop specific actions in support of the strike, after which representatives of opposition parties intend to go to Kyiv enterprises with a call for a strike.
At 15.00 Leonid Kravchuk left for Donbass to meet with miners: in Donetsk, 60 percent of the mines are ready for a strike, in Donbass - 30. The text of a statement by the secretariat of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine was read out on Ukrainian radio, which does not directly assess the State Emergency Committee, but contains an appeal to the constitutionality of the measures taken (for which, apparently, the USSR Supreme Court is proposed to give a principled assessment of the latest events in Moscow, based on the Constitution of the USSR and the laws of the USSR, and, if necessary, to make a decision to convene an extraordinary Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR). Parts 1, 2