What changes did Alexander Dubcek seek to make in Czechoslovakia 1968 and what happened?

Similarities and differences between the Hungarian uprising and the Prague spring?

The main similarities and difference between this two conflict is that both two crises in the Soviet Union as regards the way communism rule their countries or the signs of rejection of the existing regime were the Hungarian uprising (1956) and the Prague spring (1968). In both cases there was military intervention and both were stopped by Soviet power, through the thread of spreading the reform ideas throughout Eastern Europe. As it may be obvious, the causes were in both cases almost the same: the hostility to Russian control (due to the fact that the orders were taken in Moscow), repression, poor economic development and Russian refusal to change the old regime. With reference to the aims of the people wanting change, it can be found that the Hungarians wanted to end with the Soviet System; it means that they wanted to operate as an independent country (regarding Yugoslavia where Tito successfully defied Stalin) and leave the Warsaw Pact. Czechoslovakia thought differently. They wanted greater democracy and free speech. That is why Alexander Dubcek tried to introduce a number of reforms to fulfill his people expectations. However, as it was expected, the Soviet Union (in this case Khrushchev, the new leader at that time) found these changes unacceptable. Some changes could be accepted in Hungary but not Hungarian neutrality. If Hungary left the Warsaw Pact, other countries might follow, and the Soviet Union was not prepared for that. Regarding Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union (in this case Brezhnev was the Soviet leader) did not accept the reforms proposed by Dubcek (although he insisted on the idea of remaining loyal to the Warsaw Pact) because Brezhnev was afraid that once the communist system allowed free speech the country would become chaotic and that people in all other Eastern bloc countries would demand the same rights and this would weaken the power of the communist parties throughout eastern Europe. As it was pointed out before, in both cases the Soviet Union decided to invade. Nevertheless it was not done in the same way. When the Soviet forces reached Budapest, the Hungarians fought against the invaders (the red army forces comprised 200000 soldiers and 2500 tanks) and as a result at least 3000 Hungarians were killed. However, when soviet forces crossed the Czechoslovak frontier a large-scale loss of life was avoided because the Czechoslovak government decided not to resist the invading army. It is true that people took to the streets to protest but there was none of the bloody street fighting that had taken place in Budapest in 1956. As regards the treatment of the leadership after the invasion, it can be found a huge difference between the two crises. Considering the Hungarian Uprising, not only around 3000 Hungarians died but also opposition group leaders as well as Imre Nagy (the first Prime Minister) who was executed. As a result, communist around the world were dismayed by the Soviet Union used force against the Hungarian people. Considering the Prague Spring (the invasion of Czechoslovakia), the way the Soviet Union dealt with Czechoslovakia was less bloody than the treatment of Hungary. Alexander Dubcek, the new communist leader that was determined to improve communism, was thrown out of the communist party but he kept his life and his freedom.