After Stalin's death in February 1953, the transfer of power at the top of the Soviet Union became an extremely sensitive and complex issue. According to the traditional way of succession, Beria was supposed to naturally take Stalin's place as second-in-command, but he did not get such an opportunity.
First of all, Beria is a controversial figure. His political skill and the way he handled the issue were widely criticized. He served as interior minister during the Stalin era and led a series of political purges, which gave him great prestige at home but also brought him international notoriety. This complex image casts doubt on his leadership abilities.
Secondly, Beria's relationship with Khrushchev also had an impact on his fate. Although they had worked together at work, their personal relationship was not harmonious. Khrushchev repeatedly publicly criticized Beria's actions and questioned some of the policies of his leadership. These factors exacerbated the contradictions between them and also gave Khrushchev the opportunity to strike at Beria.
Finally, the political struggle within the Central Committee of the CPSU was also an important factor in Beria's ouster. In this struggle, the opposition, headed by Khrushchev, took advantage of popular discontent with Beria and succeeded in putting him in the dock. Beria did not receive justice during his trial, but confessed to his crimes under pressure, which led to the death sentence.
In general, the main reasons for Beria's failure to succeed Stalin smoothly were his personal character, political maneuver and relations with other leaders. In addition, the political struggle within the CPSU also played a key role in his downfall. Although he was a figure of profound influence, it was clear that his position could not be stable during that particular period. However, even in the face of many difficulties, he never gave up his pursuit of the cause of socialism, and this is undoubtedly worthy of our deep consideration.