1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Tanya [424]
3 years ago
15

The Russian term glasnost refers to what? while perestroika refers to what?

History
2 answers:
laiz [17]3 years ago
6 0

"Glasnost" and "Perestroika" were measures imposed by Gorbachev during his reign of the Soviet Union from 1988 to 1991. He was also the leader of the Communist Party from 1985 to 1991, and the last leader of the Soviet Union. Perestroika was the policy of reforming the economy and the political system of the Soviet Union. Initially, it was conceived as an improvement in the efficiency of labor and automation, but it ended with the failure of central planned economy typical for communist regimes, and thus announced and implemented  the end of the Soviet Union. Glasnost from the Russian word "glas", which means voice, is transparency in the work and implementation of reforms and state policy.

Helga [31]3 years ago
3 0
The Russian term glasnost refers policies that are generally "transparent"--meaning that the general public can "see" into the workings of government. Perestroika had to do more with "reconstructing" Russian policies to fit a more modern world. 
You might be interested in
Explain the US policy of containment. What policies did the United States implement to achieve the goals of containment?
musickatia [10]

containment was the US' attempt to prevent the spread of communism. they implemented things such as NATO which gave the western countries a defense team against communism, the Marshall plan which helped European countries recover after ww2 which stopped them from being vulnerable enough for the communist countries to take over. (they also used military force as seen in vietnam but its not a policy)

6 0
3 years ago
WILL GIVE 40 PTS!!!!!!! PLEASE HELP
melisa1 [442]
D. people in the south wanted slavery
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
To trace the course of Korean war through the cease fire
garri49 [273]
Is to delare war for everyone in Korea
7 0
3 years ago
Need help asap.
timofeeve [1]

at the center of these events stands President Lyndon B. Johnson, who inherited the White House following the November 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The circumstances of Johnson’s ascendance to the Oval Office left him little choice but to implement several unrealized Kennedy initiatives, particularly in the fields of economic policy and civil rights. But LBJ was equally committed to winning the fight against the Communist insurgency in Vietnam—a fight that Kennedy had joined during his thousand days in office. While Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower had committed significant American resources to counter the Communist-led Viet Minh in its struggle against France following the Second World War, it was Kennedy who had deepened and expanded that commitment, increasing the number of U.S. military advisers in Vietnam from just under seven hundred in 1961 to over sixteen thousand by the fall of 1963. Kennedy’s largesse would also extend to the broader provision of foreign aid, as his administration increased the amount of combined military and economic assistance from $223 million in FY1961 to $471 million by FY1963.2

Those outlays, however, contributed neither to greater success in the counterinsurgency nor to the stabilization of South Vietnamese politics. Charges of cronyism and corruption had dogged the government of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem for years, sparking public condemnation of his rule as well as successive efforts at toppling his regime. Diem’s effort to construct strategic hamlets—a program run by his brother Ngo Dinh Nhu—ended up alienating increasing numbers of South Vietnamese, arguably creating more recruits for the Communists instead of isolating them as the program had intended. The shuffling and reshuffling of military personnel also contributed to Diem’s troubles, further undermining the counterinsurgency; indeed, by reserving some of the South’s best troops for his own personal protection instead of sending them out to defeat the Communists, Diem contributed to the very incident—his forcible removal from power—he was trying to forestall.3 A poor showing against the Vietcong at the battle of Ap Bac in January 1963 sparked the most probing questions to date about those personnel shifts and about the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). But it was the attack by Diem’s minions on parading Buddhists four months later that ignited the nationwide protest that would roil the country for the remainder of the year and eventually topple the regime. Both Diem and Nhu were killed in the coup that brought a military junta to power in early November 1963, ending America’s reliance on its “miracle man” in Vietnam.4

Kennedy’s own assassination three weeks later laid the problems of Vietnam squarely on Johnson’s desk. Unhappy with U.S. complicity in the Saigon coup yet unwilling to deviate from Kennedy’s approach to the conflict, Johnson vowed not to lose the war. If anything, he encouraged his closest advisers to work even harder at helping South Vietnam prosecute the counterinsurgency. Those officials included many of the same figures who had acquiesced in Diem’s removal, as the desire for continuity led him to retain Kennedy’s presumed objectives as well as his senior civilian and military advisers.5 Uncertainty about his own foreign policy credentials also contributed to Johnson’s reliance on figures such as Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, and National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy, all of whom had been with Kennedy since the outset of that administration. “I need you more than he did,” LBJ said to his national security team.6

That need was now more pressing because the counterinsurgency was deteriorating. The Diem coup had unleashed a wave of instability below the seventeenth parallel that Communist forces were only too eager to exploit. Raids by the local Communists—dubbed the Vietcong, or VC, by Diem—had picked up in frequency and intensity in the weeks following Diem’s ouster. All signs were now pointing to a situation that was more dire than the one Kennedy had confronted.7

Or so it seemed. Compounding the new administration’s problems was the realization that earlier assumptions about progress in the war were ill-founded. Although State Department officials had maintained in October 1963 that that statistical evidence pointed not to success but to mounting troubles against the Vietcong, Pentagon officials—both civilian and military—had rejected those arguments. By December, with attacks increasing in the countryside, a look back at those earlier metrics revealed that State Department analyses were indeed on the mark.8



8 0
2 years ago
Which is an example of a conservative view of government?
bogdanovich [222]

Answer:

a the gov shoukd proctect ind

Explanation:the gov is the gov

7 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST (if correct)
    12·1 answer
  • What is inca? <br><br> help help
    6·1 answer
  • The 1848 revolutions in Europe were centered around what common issues?
    11·1 answer
  • How does migration affect cultures and society
    9·1 answer
  • What is half-life?<br> Dhdhdhdhdhdhdhdhdhdhdhhdhdhdhddhdhdhdhhddhhdhddh
    11·1 answer
  • Help please answer this!!!!
    8·1 answer
  • Before he was president Eisenhower was a general ,What war is he in?
    15·1 answer
  • Why were the Intolerable Acts passed?
    7·1 answer
  • What was the area that Spain controlled and created conflicts with the<br> Americans? *
    12·1 answer
  • Can someone answer these, please
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!