Richard Pipes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Richard Pipes
Richard Pipes 2004.JPG
Richard Pipes in October 2004
Born (1923-07-11) July 11, 1923 (age 90)
Cieszyn, Poland
Nationality American
Alma mater Cornell University
Harvard University
Occupation Historian
Spouse(s) Irene Eugenia Roth
Children Daniel Pipes
Awards National Humanities Medal

Richard Edgar Pipes (born July 11, 1923) is a Polish-American academic who specializes in Russian history, particularly with respect to the Soviet Union. In 1976 he headed Team B, a team of analysts organized by the Central Intelligence Agency who analyzed the strategic capacities and goals of the Soviet military and political leadership.

Background[edit]

Richard Pipes was born in Cieszyn, Poland to an assimilated Jewish family (whose name had originally been spelled "Piepes").[1] His father Marek was a businessman and a Polish legionnaire.[2] By Pipes's own account, during his childhood and youth, he never thought about the Soviet Union; the major cultural influences on him were Polish and German. When he was age 16, Pipes laid eyes upon Adolf Hitler at Marszałkowska Street in Warsaw when Hitler made a victory tour after the Invasion of Poland.[3] The Pipes family fled occupied Poland in October 1939 and arrived in the United States in July 1940, after seven months passing through Italy.[4] Pipes became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1943 while serving in the United States Army Air Corps. He was educated at Muskingum College, Cornell University, and Harvard University. He married Irene Eugenia Roth in 1946, and had two children with her. His son Daniel Pipes is a scholar of Middle Eastern affairs.[5][6]

Career[edit]

Pipes taught at Harvard University from 1958 until his retirement in 1996. He was the director of Harvard's Russian Research Center from 1968 to 1973 and is now Baird Professor Emeritus of History at Harvard University. In 1962 he delivered a series of lectures on Russian intellectual history at Leningrad State University. He acted as senior consultant at the Stanford Research Institute from 1973 to 1978. During the 1970s, he was an advisor to Washington Senator Henry M. Jackson. In 1981 and 1982 he served as a member of the National Security Council, holding the post of Director of East European and Soviet Affairs under President Ronald Reagan.[7] Pipes was a member of the Committee on the Present Danger from 1977 until 1992 and belongs to the Council of Foreign Relations. In the 1970s, Pipes was a leading critic of détente, which he described as "inspired by intellectual indolence and based on ignorance of one's antagonist and therefore inherently inept".[8]

Team B[edit]

Pipes was head of the 1976 Team B, composed of civilian experts and retired military officers and agreed to by then-CIA director George H W Bush at the urging of the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) as a competitive analysis exercise.[7] Team B was created as an antagonist force to a group of CIA intelligence officials known as Team A. It argued that the National Intelligence Estimate on the Soviet Union, generated yearly by the CIA, underestimated both Soviet military strategy and ambition[9] and misinterpreted Soviet strategic intentions.

According to Vadim Zagladin, the First Deputy Secretary of the Central Committee's International Department, Moscow pursued a double strategy: "Rejecting nuclear war and struggling to prevent it, we, nevertheless, proceeded from the possibility of winning victory in it" (Izvestiia, no. 179, June 27, 1988, p. 3). This statement indirectly confirmed the findings of Team B.

As may be expected, Team B faced criticism. The international relations journalist Fred Kaplan writes that Team B "turns out to have been wrong on nearly every point."[10] Pipes's group insisted that the Soviet Union, as of 1976, maintained "a large and expanding Gross National Product,"[11] and argued that the CIA belief that economic chaos hindered the USSR's defenses was a ruse on the part of the USSR. One CIA employee called Team B "a kangaroo court".[12]

Pipes called Team B's evidence "soft."[7] Team B came to the conclusion that the Soviets had developed several new weapons, featuring a nuclear-armed submarine fleet that used a sonar system that did not depend on sound, and was thus undetectable by existing technology.[13] A sonar system not dependent on sound is, however, an oxymoron.

According to Pipes, "Team B was appointed to look at the evidence and to see if we could conclude that the actual Soviet strategy is different from ours, i.e. the strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). It has now been demonstrated totally that it was".[14] In 1986, Pipes maintained that Team B contributed to creating more realistic defense estimates.[15]

Writings on Russian history[edit]

Pipes has written many books on Russian history, including Russia under the Old Regime (1974), The Russian Revolution (1990), and Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime (1994), and has been a frequent interviewee in the press on the matters of Soviet history and foreign affairs. His writings also appear in Commentary, The New York Times, and The Times Literary Supplement. At Harvard, he taught large courses on Imperial Russia as well as the Russian Revolution and guided over 80 graduate students to their PhD's.

Pipes is known for arguing that the origins of the Soviet Union can be traced to the separate path taken by 15th century Muscovy, in a Russian version of the Sonderweg thesis. In Pipes' opinion, Muscovy differed from every state in Europe in that it had no concept of private property, and that everything was regarded as the property of the Grand Duke/Tsar. In Pipes' view, this separate path undertaken by Russia (possibly under Mongol influence) ensured that Russia would be an autocratic state with values fundamentally dissimilar from those of Western civilization. Pipes has argued that this "patrimonialism" of Imperial Russia started to break down when Russian leaders attempted to modernize in the 19th century, without seeking to change the basic "patrimonial" structure of Russian society. In Pipes's opinion, this separate course undertaken by Russia over the centuries made Russia uniquely open to revolution in 1917. Pipes has strongly criticized the values of the radical intelligentsia of late Imperial Russia for what he sees as their fanaticism and inability to accept reality. The Russian writer Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has denounced Pipes' work as "the Polish version of Russian history". Pipes, in turn, has accused Solzhenitsyn of being an anti-Semitic Russian ultra-nationalist, who seeks to blame the ills of Communism on the Jews rather than to admit to the Russian roots of the Soviet Union. Writing of Solzhenitsyn's novel, August 1914 in the New York Times on November 13, 1985, Pipes commented: "Every culture has its own brand of anti-Semitism. In Solzhenitsyn's case, it's not racial. It has nothing to do with blood. He's certainly not a racist; the question is fundamentally religious and cultural. He bears some resemblance to Dostoevsky, who was a fervent Christian and patriot and a rabid anti-Semite. Solzhenitsyn is unquestionably in the grip of the Russian extreme right's view of the Revolution, which is that it was the doing of the Jews".[16] Pipes explained Solzhenitsyn's view of Soviet communism: "[Solzhenitsyn] said it was because Marxism was a Western idea imported into Russia. Whereas my argument is that it has deep roots in Russian history."[17] According to Pipes, this argument offended Solzhenitsyn, who described Pipes as a "pseudo-scholar."

Pipes has stressed that the Soviet Union was an expansionist, totalitarian state bent on world conquest. He is also notable for the thesis that, contrary to many traditional histories of the USSR at the time, the October Revolution was, rather than a popular general uprising, a coup foisted upon the majority of the Russian population by a tiny segment of the population driven by a select group of intellectuals who subsequently established a one-party dictatorship which was intolerant and repressive from the start, rather than having deviated from an initially benign course. In Pipes's view, the Russian Revolution of November 1917 was a total disaster, as it allowed the small section of the fanatical intelligentsia to carry out policies that were completely unrealistic.[citation needed]

Pipes is a leading advocate of the totalitarian school that sees Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union as being fundamentally similar regimes pursuing similar policies that, in fact, collaborated in a few essential respects. Citing the work of such historians as James Gregor, Henry Ashby Turner, Renzo De Felice, Karl Dietrich Bracher, Ernst Nolte, David Schoenbaum, and Hermann Rauschning, Pipes argued that there is no such thing as generic fascism, and that the Third Reich, the Soviet Union, and Fascist Italy were all totalitarian regimes united by their antipathy to democracy, in a chapter in his book Russia Under The Bolshevik Regime.

In what was meant to be an "off-the-record" interview, Pipes told Reuters in March 1981 that "Soviet leaders would have to choose between peacefully changing their Communist system in the direction followed by the West or going to war. There is no other alternative and it could go either way - Détente is dead." Pipes also stated in the interview that Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher of West Germany was susceptible to pressure from the Soviets. It was learned independently that Pipes was the official who spoke to Reuters. This potentially jeopardized Pipes's job. The White House and the "incensed" State Department issued statements repudiating Pipes's statements.[18] However, with President Reagan's backing[citation needed] Pipes stayed on for two more years, after which he returned to Harvard because his leave of absence had expired.

In 1992, Pipes served as an expert witness in the Constitutional Court of Russia's trial of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Controversy[edit]

The writings of Richard Pipes have provoked controversy in the scholarly community, for example in The Russian Review.[19][20][21][22][23][24]

Criticism of Pipes's interpretation of the events of 1917 has come mostly from "revisionist" Soviet historians,[citation needed] who, under the influence of the French Annales school, have tended since the 1970s to center their interpretation of the Russian Revolution on social movements from below in preference to parties and their leaders, and interpreted political movements as responding to pressures from below rather than directing them.[25] Amongst members of this school, Lynne Viola and Sheila Fitzpatrick claim that Pipes has focused too narrowly on intellectuals as causal agents. Peter Kenez (a one-time PhD student of Pipes') argued that Pipes has approached Soviet History as a prosecutor, intent solely on proving the criminal intent of the "defendant" to the exclusion of anything else.[26][27] Pipes' critics argue that his historical writing is concerned with perpetuating the Soviet Union as the "evil empire" in an attempt "to put the clock back a few decades to the times when Cold War demonology was the norm".[28][29]

Some of Pipes' interpretations are particularly controversial. His writing on Lenin portrays Lenin as "merely a psychopath to whom ideas barely mattered and whose only motivation is to dominate and to kill", as Robert Service put it.[30] Other critics have written that Pipes writes at length about what Pipes describes as Lenin's "unspoken" assumptions and conclusions, while neglecting what Lenin actually said.[31] Alexander Rabinowitch writes that whenever a document can serve Pipes' long-standing crusade to demonize Lenin, Pipes will comment on it at length; if the document allows Lenin to be seen in a less negative light, Pipes passes over it without comment.[32]

Pipes, in his turn - following the demise of the USSR - has charged the revisionists with skewing their research, by means of statistics, to support their preconceived ideological interpretation of events, which made the results of their research "as unreadable as they were irrelevant for the understanding of the subject"[33] to provide intellectual cover for Soviet terror and acting as simpletons and /or Communist dupes.[34] He has also stated that their attempt at "history from below" only obfuscated the fact that "Soviet citizens were the helpless victims of a totalitarian regime driven primarily by a lust for power".[35]

Honors[edit]

Pipes has an extensive list of honors, including: Honorary Consul of the Republic of Georgia, Foreign Member of the Polish Academy of Learning (PAU), Commander's Cross of Merit of the Republic of Poland, Honorary DHL at Adelphi College, Honorary LLD at Muskingum College, Doctor Honoris Causa from the University of Silesia, Szczecin University, and the University of Warsaw. Honorary Doctor of Political Science from the Tbilisi (Georgia) School of Political Studies. Annual Spring Lecturer of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Institute, Walter Channing Cabot Fellow of Harvard University, Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Fellow of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, Guggenheim Fellow (twice), Fellow of the American Council of Learned Societies and recipient of the George Louis Beer Prize of the American Historical Association.[36] He is a member of the Board of Advisors of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy. He serves on a number of editorial boards including that of the International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence. He received one of the 2007 National Humanities Medals[37][38] and in 2009 he was awarded both the Truman-Reagan Medal of Freedom by the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation [39] and the Brigham-Kanner Prize by the William & Mary Law School.[40] In 2010, Pipes received the medal "Bene Merito" by the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Since 2010 he belongs to the Russian Valdai Discussion Club.

He is a member of the advisory council of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.[41]

Works[edit]

  • "The Russian Military Colonies, 1810-1831," The Journal of Modern History Vol. 22, No. 3, September 1950
  • The Formation of the Soviet Union, Communism and Nationalism, 1917-1923 (1954) Rev. ed. 1964
  • (editor)The Russian Intelligentsia (1961)
  • Social Democracy and the St. Petersburg Labor Movement, 1885-1897 (1963)
  • Struve, Liberal on the Left (1970)
  • Europe since 1815 (1970)
  • Russia Under the Old Regime (1974)
  • Soviet Strategy in Europe (1976)
  • Struve, Liberal on the Right, 1905-1944 (1980)
  • U.S.-Soviet Relations in the Era of Détente: a Tragedy of Errors (1981)
  • Survival is Not Enough: Soviet Realities and America's Future (1984)
  • Russia Observed: Collected Essays on Russian and Soviet History (1989)
  • The Russian Revolution (1990)
  • Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime: 1919-1924 (1993)
  • Communism, the Vanished Specter (1994)
  • A Concise History of the Russian Revolution (1995)
  • The Three "Whys" of the Russian Revolution (1995)
  • The Communist System, in: Alexander Dallin/Gail W. Lapidus (eds.) The Soviet System. From Crisis to Collapse, 2nd. revised edition, Westview Press, Boulder/San Francisco/Oxford 1995 ISBN 0-8133-1876-9
  • The Unknown Lenin: From the Secret Archive (1996) - Editor
  • Property and Freedom (1999)
  • Communism: A History (2001)
  • Vixi: Memoirs of a Non-Belonger (2003)
  • The Degaev Affair: Terror and Treason in Tsarist Russia (2003)
  • Russian Conservatism and Its Critics (2006)
  • The Trial of Vera Z. (2010)
  • Scattered Thoughts (2010)
  • Russia's Itinerant Painters (2011)
  • Uvarov: A Life (2013) (In Russian)

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Pipes, Richard. Vixi: Memoirs of a Non-Belonger. 2006, page 14-5
  2. ^ Gałęzowski, Marek: Żydzi w Legionach in Uważam Rze Historia, 10 November 2012.
  3. ^ Pipes, Richard (2014-03-07). Need To Know with Mona Charen and Jay Nordlinger. Interview with Jay Nordlinger. 
  4. ^ Romano, Sergio (2005). Memorie di un conservatore. TEA. p. 180. ISBN 88-304-2128-6. 
    *"Notes on Professor Richard Pipes". www.persiancarpetguide.com. Retrieved January 28, 2006. 
  5. ^ Norton, Anne. Leo Strauss and the politics of American empire. 2005, page 93
  6. ^ Steven M. Chermak, Frankie Y. Bailey, Michelle Brown. Media representations of September 11. 2003, page 22
  7. ^ a b c Press, Eyal (May 2004). [dead link] "Neocon man: Daniel Pipes has made his name inveighing against an academy overrun by political extremists but he is nothing if not extreme in his own views.". The Nation. Archived from the original on 2007-11-13. Retrieved 2007-08-17. 
  8. ^ Bogle, Lori Lyn "Pipes, Richard" page 922.
  9. ^ Betts, Richard K. and Mahnken, Thomas G. Paradoxes of Strategic Intelligence: Essays in Honor of Michael I. Handel. 2003, page 68.
  10. ^ Fred Kaplan, "Can the CIA Be Saved?" Slate (July 9, 2004).
  11. ^ Fareed Zakaria, "Exaggerating The Threats," Newsweek (16 June 2003).
  12. ^ Tanenhaus, Sam (February 11, 2003). "The Hard Liner: Harvard historian Richard Pipes shaped the Reagan administration's aggressive approach to the Soviet Union.". Boston Globe. Retrieved 2006-07-30. 
  13. ^ "Anatomy of a Neo-Conservative White House". Canadian Dimension 39 (03): 46. May 1, 2005. 
  14. ^ Tanenhaus, Sam (February 11, 2003). "The hard-liner". The Boston Globe. 
  15. ^ "Team B: The Reality Behind the Myth". Commentary Magazine. Archived from the original on 2006-06-24. Retrieved 2006-07-30. 
  16. ^ Thomas, D.M. Alexander Solzhenitsyn St. Martin's Press, New York, New York, United States of America, 1998 ISBN 0-312-18036-5 page 490.
  17. ^ Nancy deWolf Smith (August 20, 2011). "A Cold Warrior At Peace". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved August 20, 2011. 
  18. ^ Author Unknown (March 19, 1981). "U.S. Repudiates a Hard-Line Aide". New York Times: A8. 
    *Shribman, David (October 21, 1981). "Security Adviser Ousted for a Talk Hinting at War". New York Times: Section A; Page 1, Column 2. ; Author Unknown (November 2, 1981). "The Rogue General". Newsweek. 
  19. ^ David C. Engerman, Know your enemy. The rise and fall of America's Soviet experts, Oxford University Press, 2009, p.305.
  20. ^ Walter C. Clemens, Jr, Slavic Review, Vol. 42, No. 1 (Spring, 1983), pp. 117-118
  21. ^ Raymond L. Garthoff, Foreign Affairs, May 1995, pg. 197
  22. ^ Rabinowitch, A. 'Richard Pipes's Lenin', Russian Review Vol. 57 (1998), No. 1, pp. 110-113
  23. ^ http://www.jstor.org/stable/2124477
  24. ^ http://www.jstor.org/stable/2165391
  25. ^ Sheila Fitzpatrick, Revisionism in Soviet History, History and Theory, Vol. 46, Issue 4, December 2007
  26. ^ Peter Kenez, The Prosecution of Soviet History, Volume 2, Russian Review, vol. 54, April 1995
  27. ^ The Prosecution of Soviet History: A Critique of Richard Pipes' The Russian Revolution The Russian Review, vol. 50, 1991, pp. 345-51
  28. ^ Paul Flewers, review of Pipes' The Unknown Lenin, Revolutionary History, available at [1]
  29. ^ Alexander Rabinowitch, "Richard Pipes' Lenin", The Russian Review 57, January 1998.
  30. ^ Lenin: a biography. Robert Service 2000, page 6
  31. ^ Lenin rediscovered: what is to be done? in context, Volume 2005. Lars T. Lih, Vladimir Ilʹich Lenin 2006. page 23-4
  32. ^ Rabinowitch, "Richard Pipes' Lenin", The Russian Review, 57, january 1998, available at [2]
  33. ^ Pipes, apud Ronald I. Kowalski, The Russian Revolution, 1917-1921.London: Routledge, 1997, ISBN 0-415-12438-7, page 8.
  34. ^ cf. Vladmir Brovkin, [3] (Word file).
  35. ^ Pipes, "The evil of banality", New Republic, 12/18/2000, Vol. 223 Issue 25, p35; available at [4]
  36. ^ "Twelve FAS Faculty Members to Retire". Harvard Gazette Archives. Retrieved 2006-07-30. 
  37. ^ "6 Academics Receive National Honors in Arts and Humanities" Chronicle of Higher Education Nov. 16, 2007 summary
  38. ^ "Humanities Medals Awarded by President Bush. Recipients honored for outstanding cultural contributions"
  39. ^ VOCMF Photo Gallery
  40. ^ NNEH News Archive
  41. ^ "National Advisory Council". Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. Archived from the original on 2011-05-20. Retrieved 2011-05-20. 

Further reading[edit]

  • Bogle, Lori Lyn, "Pipes, Richard", pp. 922–923, from The Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing edited by Kelly Boyd, Vol. 2, London: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishing, 1999.
  • Malia, Martin Edward, "The Hunt for the True October", pp. 21–28, from Commentary, Vol. 92, 1991.
  • Pipes, Richard, "Vixi: The Memoirs of a Non-Belonger", 2003.
  • Poe, Marshall, "The Dissident", Azure (Spring 2008).
  • Somin, Ilya, "Riddles, Mysteries, and Enigmas: Unanswered Questions of Communism's Collapse", pp. 84–88, from Policy Review, Vol. 70, 1994.
  • Stent, Angela, "Review of U.S-Soviet Relations in the Era of Détente", pp. 91–92, from Russian Review, Vol. 41, 1982.
  • Szeftel, Marc, "Two Negative Appraisals of Russian Pre-Revolutionary Development", pp. 74–87, from Canadian-American Slavic Studies, 1980.

External links[edit]