“Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev gave us 30 years of sunlight,” Maksim, a twenty-year-old political science student, told the New York Times in early September shortly after Gorbachev’s death. “Unfortunately, this time has passed, and there is no more sun, only darkness.”

Gorbachev left us an exceptional legacy, shining a light on the critical issues that confronted his generation—both at home and in the West. He brought an energy and enlightenment for which we must all be deeply thankful.

As an American lawyer with a practice in Russia, I had the occasion to observe first-hand the lasting changes Gorbachev brought to his country and was privileged to interact with him and his staff on a number of occasions. This article sets forth some of my own personal experiences—based on contemporaneous notes—which highlight Gorbachev’s character and commitment to improving the world. He focused on the “big picture,” taking risks that few, if any, leaders of a great nation would have pursued. Taken together, these reminiscences provide a small window onto a remarkable man who changed our future.

Initial Meeting with Gorbachev

My first experience with Gorbachev occurred in the Spring of 1996 when I met him (one on one) in a Stalinist-era building in the center of Moscow where he had his office. Gorbachev had decided to run for elected office as the president of Russia, reflecting, in part, his belief that his years as a Soviet leader were flawed because his power derived from the Communist Party

machine, and not from Soviet citizens directly. The meeting was arranged by a deputy to Gorbachev who, when visiting my office, and seeing a picture of Gorbachev displayed there, surmised I might be interested in supporting the reforms.

Gorbachev was rather good-looking. I was surprised that the large blemish on his forehead was so nondescript and barely noticeable. He looked healthy and extremely confident—unlike a recent television scene where he appeared like a fallen leader.

We sat down in a small coffee table setting. I said I was deeply honored to have the opportunity to meet him. He then replied with a comment that caught me entirely off guard. He said: “Haven’t we met before?” It was a clever way for Gorbachev to put me at ease, subliminally conveying a message that perhaps I was important enough to be remembered. I had heard that Gorbachev was a consummate politician, charming and personable, and it was wonderful to see that for myself. I went along with the pretense, so I fumbled my words in responding and left the impression that perhaps we met in a large gathering or conference he addressed.

After this unexpected beginning, I introduced myself as a lawyer in a large firm in Washington, DC, which had been involved in Western business initiatives in Russia since 1988. Gorbachev responded that he had just heard on the news that a political initiative in Washington might reduce or eliminate U.S. financial assistance to Russia. After a moment to reflect, I replied that the Clinton administration was very committed to Russian reforms. I added that I thought President Bill Clinton considered Gorbachev’s initiatives of enormous importance, changing the underlying psychology of the relationship between the United States and Russia.

Gorbachev replied that he had never met Clinton—a very telling comment because two weeks earlier, Clinton paid a brief visit to Moscow. In addition to his meeting with Boris Yeltsin, Clinton met Gennady Zyuganov, the head of the Communist Party, who was the other leading presidential candidate in the first round of the upcoming presidential elections. The snub to Gorbachev was obvious to all and was reported as such.

After about fifteen minutes, our meeting concluded, with a gaggle of people waiting outside his office. I thanked the assistant who arranged the meeting, and said I hoped to return to Moscow in June, looking forward to joining him for the victory celebration. He appreciated the sentiment, and we exchanged a thumbs-up gesture.

Unfortunately, the election results six weeks later were devastatingly negative for Gorbachev. He received 0.5 percent of the votes (386,069), with Yeltsin receiving 35.8 percent (26,665,495) and Zyuganov pulling in a close second at 32.5 percent (24,211,686).

Gorbachev’s humiliating rejection ended what proved to be his last quixotic aspiration to regain political power in Russia. The fractional lead Yeltsin scored over the Communist Party in the first round also highlighted the fragility of Russia’s new democracy.

Gorbachev and Walter Rockler

In the following years, I had several occasions to interact with Gorbachev and his staff because of the “mutual admiration” friendship he developed with Walter Rockler, a senior partner at our law firm.

Rockler had served as a prosecutor during the Nuremberg trials of German bankers. Years later, when the U.S. Justice Department set up the Office of Special Investigation to deport Nazi war criminals, Rockler took a leave of absence to head the new office. He traveled to the Soviet Union, working closely with officials there to document Nazi atrocities. In more recent years, Rockler has written critically about U.S. foreign policy, particularly in connection with NATO action in Yugoslavia. The Economist devoted a full page to his obituary when he passed away in 2002.

Gorbachev greatly respected Rockler for his exceptional life and achievements. That respect and admiration were fully reciprocated. In 1997, in one of their informal meetings, Gorbachev indicated he was thinking of establishing a base in the United States to pursue humanitarian objectives. Rockler advised him to form a U.S. nonprofit foundation, which later became The Foundation for the Development Democracy and World Peace, discussed later in this piece. Its objectives were to pursue closer Russian American relations, and the resolution of international conflicts through principles of international law.

On Rockler’s eightieth birthday at the end of 2000, Gorbachev sent him a beautiful congratulatory letter. It was accompanied by a personal telephone call while Gorbachev was traveling from Tokyo to Hiroshima to speak at the fifty-fifth-anniversary event of the dropping of the first atomic bomb.

In the congratulatory letter, whose words surfaced again in a condolence letter to Rockler’s family two years later, Gorbachev wrote this tribute:

My colleagues and I express our sincere admiration and deepest gratitude to you for those many years you have contributed with honesty and with great intelligence to the ideals of Good, Justice and Peace. [Walter] was a man of uncommon decency and of the highest moral integrity. We shall always remember him.

I believe his descriptions in Rockler’s eulogy reflected the essential character traits to which Gorbachev himself aspired. Standing for the “ideals of Good, Justice and Peace” and “of the highest moral integrity” are how Gorbachev wished to be remembered.

The Inauguration of the Gorbachev Foundation Building in Moscow

In May of 2000, I was invited to attend the opening of the elegant glass and steel three-story building in the center of Moscow that was constructed for the new Gorbachev Foundation. This was a formal affair, with a string quartet playing classical music in the background. There were several distinguished speakers, designed as a tribute for Gorbachev as he moved from his rented government office to an independent building funded, in part, by Ted Turner, the founder of CNN.

Raisa, Gorbachev’s beloved wife who passed away the previous year, was a motivating force for the establishment of the Gorbachev Foundation, as well as its new building designed to convey the prestige and status to which Gorbachev was felt due. Touted as one of the first independent think tanks in Russia, the foundation was to engage in research, sponsor conferences, publish books, fund worthy charitable causes, and, in Gorbachev’s words, “help the world in this transition to a triumph of humanism and justice, in making the 21^st century a century of a new human renaissance.”

Gorbachev gave a forty-five-minute speech describing the importance of the building to his future, and his gratitude to the people who made it possible to complete the construction after the financial collapse in 1998 when funding dried up. Turner spoke at the event, as did Shimon Peres, the former prime minister of Israel.

Gorbachev noted that he was very happy with the Turkish company which constructed the building, under Raisa’s ever-watchful eye to make sure all contractual undertakings were performed. On that latter point, and with a smile on his face, he related that Raisa and he adhered to President Ronald Reagan’s admonition to the effect: “Trust, but verify.” His self-deprecating humor was appreciated by the audience.

The Introductory Video

An introductory five-minute video preceded the formal speeches, designed to encapsulate Gorbachev’s historical contributions, with a special emphasis on arms reductions. It opened with a visual of the annual parade of military weapons in the Red Square, with a comment—and commitment—by Gorbachev in the late 1980s that the arms race spawned by the Cold War must be ended. Gorbachev did, in fact, fulfill that commitment, starting with the historical signing in December 1987 of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty which eliminated intermediate- and short-range missiles stationed in western Europe and the Soviet Union. That treaty was followed by two decades of progress in substantially reducing the arms race, with 80 percent of both countries’ nuclear arsenals decommissioned and destroyed.

The video featured a sobering image of a nuclear blast, with the terrifying mushroom cloud, capturing the ultimate confrontation between the superpowers. It was the ever-present consequence if the leaders of the major powers choose, consciously or by misstep, to resurrect the confrontation policies of the pre-Gorbachev era. Gorbachev understood what was at stake and made every effort during his time in office to lessen the prospect of a nuclear Armageddon.

Gorbachev’s famous speech where he proclaimed: “We can change history” appeared on the widescreen, together with the fall of the Berlin Wall, with construction cranes removing huge concrete slabs that threaded through the heart of Berlin. The wall served as a metaphor for previous Soviet regimes which deeply feared the West, both psychologically and militarily, and whose removal marked a turning point in the twentieth century.

A Free and Open Russia

The remarks of Professor Stephen Cohen of Princeton University spotlighted Gorbachev’s goal of liberating the Russian people from their repressive past and unleashing their creativity and energy. He asked the primarily Russian audience pointedly: “Where would you be today if not for Mr. Gorbachev?” “How many books would you not have published?” “How many newspaper articles and stories would you not have published?” “How many travels would you not have taken?” He emphasized, with words that were quite eloquent and moving, that Gorbachev had profoundly affected each of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

Cohen concluded with an allusion to the new and untested Putin administration. Putin’s KGB background had already given rise to concern both in Russia and the West as to Russia’s future direction. Cohen emphasized, with a real passion, that Gorbachev had “opened doors” for future leaders and citizens to enter. These doors led to progress and the betterment of mankind. Cohen continued that it was up to the current leaders to take advantage of these new doors. With an ominous tone in his voice, he queried whether new leaders would retreat, and go through “back doors.” He did not elaborate, but the meaning was well understood.

Unfortunately, Cohen’s foreboding has proven to be well founded. In the fall of 2022, we are witnessing a substantial closing of “the doors” evoked by his imagery. Vladimir Putin is attempting to take Russia back to its pre-Gorbachev era or even, some would contend, to its brutal Stalinist past. Freedom of press and speech, assembly and religion, an independent judiciary and rule of law, as well as other essential foundations of a democratic society are in accelerating retreat.

Nevertheless, the concepts and values that Gorbachev introduced into Russian society persist and have not been forgotten. I have spent considerable time in the past four years as a visiting lecturer at a major Russian law school in Moscow, interacting with dozens of young and aspiring lawyers. They are among the segment of Russian society that long for a country very different from the one Putin is now forcibly imposing. These students, many of whom aspire to study law in the United States or England, are silenced, at least for the immediate future. But Gorbachev’s values and principles are very much on their minds in the new Russia they hope to create—but which appears, for now, beyond their reach.

With the passage of more time, perhaps Russia may be able to revive and implement Gorbachev’s vision of a free and open society. Doors swing in both directions.

The Foundation for the Development of Democracy and World Peace

In the fall of 2000, Gorbachev established a new U.S. nonprofit entity, the Foundation for the Development of Democracy and World Peace, referenced earlier in this piece. I worked closely with Gorbachev’s assistants in the preparation of the legal papers and our firm was honored to host the first meeting of their board of directors in New York City. Gorbachev spent the morning there, chairing the meeting, with former Secretary of State Jim Baker, who was on the board, participating by telephone. Colin Powell was to serve on an Advisory Board. Prominent academics on both the U.S. and Russian sides were also board members, as was Walter Rockler. We felt that it had great potential considering the standing and gravitas of the founders.

The objectives of the new entity were grand ones. The United States, including the government itself, would join Russia in sponsoring major projects designed to improve Russian-American relations. A priority project in this regard was the establishment of a new international university with campuses in both countries. In a discussion in Moscow two years after the founding, Gorbachev’s aides told me that this idea had received the apparent endorsement of President Putin, and suggestions were aired about whether this project and others by the new foundation could be placed on the agenda of an upcoming summit in 2002 between Presidents Bush and Putin. The jointly sponsored foundation might help, they thought, in changing the widespread perception in Russia that America, having “won” the Cold War, now viewed Russia as a second- or third-class world player with few cards to play on the international scene. Gorbachev believed that the work of the foundation—with both countries working as equal partners—might help change these perceptions.

Sadly, the expectations and dreams of the foundation were never realized. Funding never materialized from governmental or private sources. And significantly, relations between the United States and Russia substantially deteriorated. Gorbachev condemned the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, which he saw as entirely undemocratic and without foundation in international law.

Other U.S. foreign policy decisions in subsequent years also undermined such cooperation, especially the enlargement of NATO—from sixteen to thirty members—an almost doubling in size. By contrast, Gorbachev had envisioned the integration of Russia into an entirely new security arrangement within the framework of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe.

Gorbachev’s Legacy

After the signing of the historic INF Treaty in 1987, Gorbachev outlined this stark choice facing the United States and the Russian people:

…civilization has approached a dividing line, not so much between different systems and ideologies, but between common sense and mankind’s feelings of self-preservation, on the one hand, and irresponsibility, national selfishness, prejudice—to put it briefly, old thinking—on the other … What matters now is that we cannot let those opportunities pass, and must use them as fully as possible to build a safer and more democratic world, free from the trappings and the psychology of militarism…

Today, we find ourselves and the world mired in a destructive and pointless war in Ukraine, initiated by the “irresponsibility, national selfishness, [and] prejudice” of the “old system” denounced by Gorbachev thirty-five years ago. The “trappings and psychology of militarism” are now ascendant in Putin’s Russia, as he seeks to restore his vision of a Soviet empire.

Gorbachev set forth an entirely different vision of the future of Russia: one that is nuclear-free, open, and democratic, with speech and the press undeterred by fear and repression; its economy offering its citizens a life comparable to that achievable abroad; a country residing in peace with its neighbors.

Gorbachev’s compelling vision may yet prevail. My recent experiences with students at Moscow’s largest law school evidence that many embrace that future. Patience, perseverance, diplomacy—and faith in the young people of today’s Russia—will be required in the difficult and perilous period ahead. The potential of this new generation of Russians making his vision a reality is Gorbachev’s lasting legacy.

Jeffrey A. Burt is a retired partner of Arnold & Porter, an international law firm based in Washington, D.C., who founded its Moscow office in the early 1990s. He has served as Chair of the American Bar Association’s committee on the former republics of the Soviet Union and more recently has been a visiting lecturer at the Kutafin Moscow State Law University.

Image: Reuters.