1. The death of the Russian empire and the formation of the USSR.
2. National policy in the USSR.
3. The collapse of the USSR.
The perestroika that began in 1985 politicized all spheres of the country's public life. Gradually, the true history of the USSR as a multinational state was recognized, an interest arose in issues of interethnic relations, in the practice of solving the national question in the Soviet state. One of the consequences of this process was an explosive surge of national identity. The charge of violence, once directed at the national regions, returned to the center, taking on a clear anti-Russian direction. The long-standing press of fear was gone, and nationalist slogans became the most effective way not only to put pressure on the central authorities, but also to distance the increasingly stronger national elites from the weakening Moscow.
Developing in the USSR by the end of the 1980s. the socio-political atmosphere was in many ways reminiscent of the situation of the period of disintegration Russian Empire... The weakening of autocratic power at the beginning of the twentieth century, and then its elimination by the February revolution, stimulated the centrifugal aspirations of heterogeneous parts of the empire. The national question in tsarist Russia was long time"Blurred": the differences between the peoples of the empire were, rather, not on a national, but on a religious basis; national differences were replaced by class affiliation. In addition, in Russian society, a split over social characteristics, which also muted the urgency of the national question as such. It does not follow from this that national oppression did not exist in Russia. Its most striking expression was Russification and resettlement policy. Solving with the help of the latter the problem of the lack of land of European peasants, not only Russians, but also Ukrainians, Belarusians, some peoples of the Volga region, Orthodox by religion, tsarism significantly oppressed other peoples, primarily in Siberia, on Far East, in Kazakhstan, in the foothills of the North Caucasus. In addition, some peoples of the empire, for example the Poles, were never able to come to terms with what they lost in the second half of the 18th century. own national statehood. Therefore, it is no coincidence that at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. national and national liberation movements are beginning to gain strength, which in some cases acquire a distinctly religious connotation, the ideas of pan-Islamism find their adherents among the Muslim peoples of the empire: the Volga Tatars, the Transcaucasian Tatars (Azerbaijanis), in the Central Asian protectorates.
The habitual border of the Russian Empire took shape only by the end of the 19th century. it was a "young" country that had just found its geographical boundaries. And this is its essential difference from the Ottoman or Austro-Hungarian empires, which at the beginning of the twentieth century. were on the verge of natural decay. But they were united by one thing - these empires had a military-feudal character, that is, they were created mainly by military force, and economic ties, a single market were formed already within the framework of the created empires. Hence the general looseness, weak connection between the regions of the empire and political instability. In addition, these empires included different peoples and cultures, for example, territories with completely different economic and cultural types and other spiritual landmarks were included in the Russian Empire. Lithuanians were still guided by Catholicism in its Polish version: long-standing ties with Poland and the memory of the once united Polish-Lithuanian state - the Commonwealth - had an effect. Naturally, in the very Russian part of Poland, the historical memory of the local population was even stronger. Latvians and Estonians did not lose their spiritual and cultural ties with the Protestant Baltic area - Germany and Scandinavia. The population of these territories still saw themselves as part of Europe, and the power of tsarism was perceived as national oppression. Although the centers of the Islamic world - Turkey and Persia - remained outside the Russian Empire, this did not lead to a significant change in the cultural and spiritual orientation of the population of the Central Asian and, in part, the Caucasian regions, to the loss of their previous preferences.
There was only one way out for the central government - the inclusion of the conquered or annexed lands into the ruling elite of the nobility. The all-Russian census of 1897 showed that 57% of the Russian hereditary nobility called Russian their native language. The rest - 43% of the nobility (hereditary!), Being in the ruling elite of the Russian society and the state, still considered themselves to be the Polish or Ukrainian gentry, Eastsea barons, Georgian princes, Central Asian beks, etc.
Hence the main feature of the Russian Empire: it did not have a clear national (and geographical) distinction between the Russian metropolis proper and foreign colonies, as, for example, in the British Empire. Almost half of the oppressive stratum consisted of representatives of the conquered and annexed peoples. Such a powerful inclusion of the local nobility in the ruling structures of the Russian state to some extent ensured the stability of the empire. The policy pursued by such a state, as a rule, did not have an overt Russophile orientation, that is, it did not proceed from the interests of the Russian part of the empire's population proper. Moreover, all the forces of the people were constantly spent on military expansion, on the extensive development of new territories, which could not but affect the state of the people - the "conqueror". On this occasion, the famous Russian historian V.O. Klyuchevsky wrote: “From the middle of the 19th century. the territorial expansion of the state is inversely proportional to the development of the internal freedom of the people ... as the territory expanded, along with the growth of the external strength of the people, its internal freedom became more and more embarrassed. In a field that was constantly increasing due to conquest, the scope of power increased, but the lifting force of the people's spirit decreased. Outwardly, the success of the new Russia resembles the flight of a bird, which the whirlwind carries and throws its wings beyond the strength of its strength. The state was plump, but the people were sickly "(Klyuchevsky V.O. Course of Russian history. M., 1991. T. 3. P. 328).
After its collapse, the Russian Empire left the Soviet Union, which emerged on its basis, with a number of its unresolved problems: different economic and cultural orientations of the peoples and territories that were part of it, which ensured the permanently growing influence of various cultural and religious centers on them; the weakness of economic ties between its various parts, which gave impetus to the beginning of centrifugal processes, especially with the weakening of the central government and the deterioration of the economic situation; the persistent historical memory of the conquered peoples, capable of splashing out into emotions at any moment; often hostile attitude towards the Russian people, with whom national oppression was associated.
But even in the summer of 1917, apart from Polish, Finnish, and part of Ukrainian nationalists, not a single national movement raised the issue of secession from Russia, limiting itself to the demands of national and cultural autonomy. The process of the empire's disintegration intensified after October 25-26 and especially after the adoption of the "Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia" by the Soviet government on November 2, 1917. The main postulates of the document were: equality of all peoples and the right of nations to self-determination, up to separation and formation of independent states. In December 1917, the Soviet government recognized the state independence of Ukraine and Finland. The ideas of national self-determination were also very popular in the international social democratic movement, and were not supported by all, even by recognized leaders. According to Rosa Luxemburg, the transformation of this provision into real politics threatened Europe with medieval anarchy if each ethnic group demanded the creation of its own state. She wrote: “On all sides, nations and small ethnic groups claim their rights to form states. The decayed corpses, full of the desire for revival, rise from the hundred-year-old graves, and the peoples that did not have their own history, did not know their own statehood, are filled with the desire to create their own state. On the nationalist mountain, Walpurgis Night, national movement leaders have used this call for national self-determination more often to address their own political ambitions. Questions about whether national independence is useful for the people themselves, for their neighbors, for social progress, or whether there are economic conditions for the emergence of a new state and whether it is capable of carrying out its own public policy, not subject to the whims of other countries, as a rule, were not posed or discussed.
For the Bolsheviks, the thesis about the right of nations to self-determination was an important argument for attracting at least some of the leaders of various national movements to their side. It contrasted sharply with the slogan of the white movement about "one and indivisible Russia" and became a successful tactical device of the Bolshevik propaganda in the national regions. In addition, the realization of the right of nations to self-determination not only shattered, but blew up the entire system of the administrative structure of Russia from within and dealt a final blow to the non-Bolshevik local authorities. Thus, the provincial principle of organizing the country's political space was eliminated, which ensured equal rights to citizens regardless of their nationality and place of residence.
The empire collapsed. On its wreckage in 1917-1919. independent states arose, recognized by the world community as sovereign. In the Baltics - Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia; in the Caucasus - Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan; in Central Asia, the Bukhara Emirate and the Khiva Khanate restored their independence; the Ukrainian and Belarusian republics arose. Centrifugal processes have affected not only the national outskirts. Regionalism has become a similar phenomenon to national movements in the Russian regions proper. Usually, it refers to socio-political movements expressed in the protest of certain regions against redistributive actions. central authorities or who do not support their political orientation. In 1917-1918. the territory of Russia was covered with a grid of "independent" republics independent of Bolshevik Moscow: Orenburg, Siberian, Chita, Kuban, Black Sea, etc.
Thus, for the Soviet state, the outbreak of civil war meant not only the struggle to preserve Soviet power, but also the policy of collecting the lands of the disintegrated empire. The end of the war on the territory of Great Russia proper and Siberia led to the concentration of the Fifth Army on the border with Central Asia, and the Eleventh Army approached the border with Transcaucasia. In January 1920, the Transcaucasian Regional Committee of the RCP (b) appealed to the working people of independent Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan with an appeal to prepare armed uprisings against their governments and appeal to Soviet Russia and the Red Army in order to restore Soviet power in the Transcaucasus. Accusing the governments of Georgia and Azerbaijan of cooperation with A.P. Denikin, the Eleventh Army crossed the border. In February 1920, an anti-government uprising broke out in Georgia at the call of the All-Russian Revolutionary Committee, then the rebels turned to Soviet Russia for help, and the Red Army supported them. The democratic government of the independent Georgian Republic was overthrown. By its nature, it was nationalist, although it was covered by social democratic (Menshevik) slogans. In the spring of 1920, in Baku, the Bolsheviks were able to raise an armed uprising against the Musavat government formed by the bourgeois Muslim party. In Armenia, the pro-Bolshevik uprising was defeated, but the outbreak of war with Turkey created favorable conditions for the entry into the Armenian territory of the Red Army and the establishment of Soviet power. Three Soviet republics arose in Transcaucasia, which in 1922 merged into the Transcaucasian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (TSFSR).
Events in Central Asia developed in a similar way - the uprising of the working people and the help of the Red Army. After the successful anti-Khan uprising, the troops of the Fifth Red Army were sent to Khiva, and in February 1920 the Khorezm People's Soviet Republic was formed. In August of the same year, there was an uprising against the emir of Bukhara. In September Bukhara fell and the Bukhara People's Soviet Republic was proclaimed. Soviet power was finally established in Turkestan.
It should be noted that the Bolshevik leadership did not have a scientifically developed national policy as an independent program: all its actions were subordinated to the main task - building a socialist society. The national question was perceived by the leaders of the party and the state as a private aspect of the class struggle, as its derivative. It was believed that with the solution of the problems of the socialist revolution, national problems would be automatically resolved.
Reflecting on the state structure of the future Soviet state, V.I. Lenin stood on the position of a unitary character of the future state until the fall of 1917, and only the search for allies of the proletariat in the socialist revolution pushed the leader to a compromise. At the III Congress of Soviets (January 1918), the "Declaration of the Rights of the Working and Exploited People" was adopted, which fixed the federal structure of the Russian Soviet Republic. It is interesting that in an interview given by I.V. Stalin in the spring of 1918, Poland, Finland, Transcaucasia, Ukraine, Siberia were meant among the possible subjects of the Russian Federation. At the same time, JV Stalin emphasized the temporality of federalism in Russia, when "... compulsory tsarist unitarianism will be replaced by voluntary federalism ... which is destined to play a transitional role to the future socialist unitarianism." This thesis was fixed in the Second Party Program adopted in 1919: "The Federation is a transitional form to complete unity of the working people of different nations." Consequently, the Russian Federal Republic, on the one hand, was thought of as a new political form of unification of all territories of the former Russian Empire, on the other hand, the federal structure was viewed by the party and its leaders as a temporary phenomenon on the way to "socialist unitarianism", as a tactical compromise with national liberation movements.
The principles of the organization of the state became administrative-territorial and national-territorial, which laid political, socio-economic inequality between different regions, ensuring the emergence of not only nationalism, but also regionalism in the future.
In the summer of 1919, V.I.Lenin came, as it seemed to him, to a compromise regarding the future state structure: to a combination of the unitary principle and federalism - the republics organized according to the Soviet type should form the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, within which autonomy is possible. It turned out that the federal principle was put in the basis of the USSR, and the union republics were unitary formations. Later, in a letter to LB Kamenev, V.I. "-" unification together with the RSFSR "into the Union of Soviet Republics of Europe and Asia." And further: "The spirit of concession is understandable: we recognize ourselves as equal with the Ukrainian SSR and others, and together and on an equal footing with them we enter a new union, a new federation ..." (V. I. Lenin. Complete collection of works. Vol. 45 . P. 212).
On December 30, 1922, four republics - the Ukrainian SSR, the BSSR, the ZSFSR and the RSFSR - signed a union treaty. In many ways, the electoral system, the principle of organizing power, the definition of the main bodies of power and their functions repeated the provisions of the Russian Constitution of 1918, and the agreement became the basis for the first Union Constitution, approved by the II Congress of Soviets of the USSR on January 31, 1924, it stated a single simultaneous citizenship, voluntary the nature of the unification, the invariability of the borders, for the most part given without taking into account the real settlement of peoples, as well as the declarative right to "exit from the union state" was preserved, the mechanism of such "exit" remained outside the field of vision of legislators and was not determined.
In special committees and commissions engaged in the preparation of a new document, opposing positions clashed on the issues of the powers of union and republican departments, the competence of the central people's commissariats, and the advisability of establishing a single Soviet citizenship. The Ukrainian Bolsheviks insisted that broader sovereign rights be recognized for each individual republic. Some Tatar communists demanded that the autonomous republics (Tataria, in the form of an autonomous Soviet socialist republic, be part of the RSFSR) should also be elevated to the rank of allies. Georgian representatives advocated that the three Transcaucasian republics join the USSR separately, and not in the form of a Transcaucasian federation. Thus, already at the stage of discussion of the first Union Constitution, its weaknesses were clearly identified, and unresolved contradictions served as a breeding ground for aggravating the interethnic situation in the second half of the 1980s.
According to the 1924 Constitution, the central government was endowed with very broad prerogatives: five people's commissariats were only allied. The GPU also remained under the central authority. The other five people's commissariats had a union-republican status, that is, there were both in the Center and in the republics. The rest of the people's commissariats, for example, agriculture, education, health care, social security, etc., were initially exclusively republican in nature. Inherent in the party documents, the installation to impart unitary content to the union state over time led to a gradual increase in the importance of the central (union) authorities, in particular, through an increase in the number of the latter. On the eve of the collapse of the USSR, there were about 60 (instead of the original 5) union ministries. The latter reflected the process of centralization of power and the practice of solving virtually all problems of the union republics in the Center. The flip side of this phenomenon was a decrease in their real independence.
In 1923-1925. there was a process of national-territorial delimitation in Central Asia. The peculiarities of this region consisted, firstly, in the traditional absence of clear territorial boundaries between the khanates and the emirate; secondly, in the inter-lane living of the Turkic-speaking and Iranian-speaking ethnic groups. The main principles of national-territorial delimitation were the process of allocation of titular nations, whose name was given to the new national-territorial entity, and the geographical definition of the borders of the new Soviet republics. The Bukhara and Khorezm People's Republics, formerly part of the RSFSR and renamed into "socialist", were merged, and on their basis the Uzbek SSR was formed. In 1925, she, as well as the Turkmen SSR, entered the USSR with the rights of union republics.
The national-territorial demarcation in Central Asia took the form of mild “ethnic cleansing”. Initially, the titular nations did not constitute the majority of the population in "their" republics. For example, within the Uzbek SSR, the Tajik Autonomous Region was formed as an autonomy, but in such large cities as Bukhara and Samarkand, Tajiks (Iranian-speaking ethnos) constituted the majority of the population. But already in the 1920s. In the Bukhara People's Soviet Republic, schooling was translated from Tajik into Uzbek. In the commissariats and other authorities, a fine of 5 rubles was imposed for each case of appeal in the Tajik language. As a result of such actions, the share of Tajiks was rapidly decreasing. In Samarkand from 1920 to 1926. the number of Tajiks dropped from 65,824 to 10,700. Considering that the civil war had ended by this time, it can be assumed that most of the Tajiks switched to the Uzbek language (which was easy to do, since there was bilingualism in Central Asia) and later, with the introduction of passports, changed their nationality. Those who did not want to do this were forced to migrate from Uzbekistan to their autonomy. Thus, the principle of the forcible creation of mono-ethnic union republics was realized.
The very process of separating autonomous entities was extremely arbitrary and often proceeded not from the interests of ethnic groups, but was subordinated to the political conjuncture. This was especially evident in the definition of autonomies in the Transcaucasus. In 1920, the Revolutionary Committee of Azerbaijan in its Appeal and Declaration recognized the territory of Nakhichevan and Zanzegur districts as part of Armenia, and the right to self-determination was recognized for Nagorno-Karabakh. In March 1921, when the Soviet-Turkish agreement was signed, the Nakhichevan autonomy, where half of the population was Armenians and which did not even have a common border with Azerbaijan, was recognized as part of Azerbaijan under pressure from Turkey. At a meeting of the Caucasian Bureau of the Central Committee of the RCP (b) on July 4, 1921, a decision was made on the entry of the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region into the Armenian Republic. A little later, on the direct instructions of I.V. Stalin, Nagorno-Karabakh, in which the Armenians accounted for 95% of the population, was transferred to Azerbaijan.
In the 1930s. nation building in the USSR continued. According to the 1936 Constitution, the USSR included 11 union republics and 33 autonomies. The Kazakh SSR and the Kirghiz SSR withdrew from the RSFSR; back in 1929, Tajik autonomy was transformed into a union republic; The TSFSR also disintegrated, and three union republics - Armenian, Azerbaijan and Georgian - emerged from it as independent republics. After the implementation of the secret protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in 1939, the reunification of Western Ukraine and the Ukrainian SSR, Western Belarus and the BSSR took place. Bessarabia, torn away from Romania, merged with the Moldavian autonomy (which was part of the Ukrainian SSR), and in August 1940 the Moldavian SSR arose, which became part of the USSR. In the summer of 1940, three Baltic republics did the same - the Lithuanian SSR, the LatSSR, and the Estonian SSR. In the fall of 1939, the Soviet-Finnish war began, and in 1940 the Karelo-Finnish SSR was formed, which did not last long. After its liquidation, the number of union republics (15) remained unchanged until the collapse of the USSR. In the early 1940s. The USSR, with the exception of Finland and part of Poland, recovered within the framework of the disintegrated Russian Empire.
Assessing the Constitution of 1936, JV Stalin noted that such a state had been created, the disintegration of which was impossible, since the exit of one part of it would lead to the death of all. The role of a kind of detonators was assigned to autonomies, which were part of many union republics. This forecast was fully justified in the second half of the 1980s, when it was the autonomies that raised the question of their equality with the union republics, and then the collapse of the USSR followed.
The thirties and forties passed in the national regions under the banner of collectivization, industrialization and cultural revolution. There was an alignment of national economies. This was accompanied by a breakdown of the traditional way of life, the imposition of a single Soviet (not Russian!) Standard. A system of redistribution of financial, material and human resources has emerged in favor of the least industrially developed regions and, above all, the national outskirts. For this, the map was even redrawn: Rudny Altai, traditionally mastered by the Russians since the 18th century, was transferred to the Kazakh SSR and became the basis for the creation of a local industrial base. The natural donor was Russia. Despite massive aid, industrialization in Central Asia and in the North Caucasus has hardly changed the economic and cultural structure of the local population, which has thousands of years of tradition, and their orientation towards the values of the Islamic world.
Collectivization, accompanied by the creation of monocultural economies and also the breakdown of the usual way of life, in a short time caused a powerful psychological stress, impoverishment, hunger, disease. Economic equalization was accompanied by interference in the spiritual sphere: there was atheistic propaganda, and the clergy were subjected to repression. It should be borne in mind that the Russians, who also retained many features of the traditional way of life, were subjected to powerful pressure from the Soviet regime, and were also forced to turn from a rural population into townspeople in a short time.
The war years were accompanied by mass deportations of peoples suspected of treason. This process began in the summer of 1941, when, after accusing the two million German people of allegedly committed treason, the Republic of Germans - the Volga region was liquidated, and all Germans were deported to the east of the country. In 1943-1944. mass resettlements of other peoples of the European and Asian parts of the USSR were carried out. The accusations were standard: cooperation with the Nazis or sympathy for the Japanese. After 1956, they were able to return to their native places, and not all of them.
The “carrot” of the national policy was “indigenousization,” that is, the direction of people whose nationality was included in the name of the republic to leading, responsible posts. Conditions for obtaining education were facilitated for national cadres. So, for 100 scientific workers in 1989, there were postgraduates among Russians - 9.7 people; Belarusians - 13.4; Kyrgyz - 23.9; Turkmens - 26.2 people. The national cadres were guaranteed a successful promotion and up the career ladder. Nationality "determined" the professional, mental, business qualities of people. In fact, the state itself introduced nationalism and incited ethnic strife. And even the emergence of a European educated population in the national republics, the creation of modern industry and infrastructure, the international recognition of scientists and cultural figures from national regions was often perceived as something natural and did not contribute to the growth of trust between peoples, because totalitarian methods excluded the possibility of choice, were violent, and therefore they were rejected by society.
The logic of the development of perestroika processes raised the question of the rate of democratization of Soviet society, as well as the payment of each republic for socio-economic transformations. The question arose about the redistribution of federal revenues by the Center in favor of the least developed republics. At the I Congress of Deputies of the USSR (1989), the Baltic republics for the first time openly raised the issue of the relationship between the Central (Union) and republican authorities. The main demand of the Baltic deputies was the need to provide the republics with greater independence and economic sovereignty. At the same time, variants of republican cost accounting were being worked out. But the question of greater independence of the republics came up against the problem of the pace of economic and political reforms (perestroika) in different national and cultural regions of the USSR. The center was inflexible in trying to unify these processes. The accelerated course of perestroika reforms in Armenia, the Baltic states was restrained by the Center's slowness in the Central Asian region. Thus, the continued cultural and economic heterogeneity of Soviet society, the different mentality of the peoples that make up it, objectively determined the different pace and depth of economic reforms and democratization. Tsenr's attempts to "average" this process, to create a unified model of transformations for the entire state, failed. By the winter of 1991, the Baltic republics raised the issue of political sovereignty. Forceful pressure on them: the events in Vilnius in January 1991, provocations in Latvia and Estonia called into question the ability of the central government to continue the course towards democratization and openness of Soviet society, proclaimed in April 1985.
Even earlier, at the beginning of 1988, the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, which was part of Azerbaijan, declared national infringements. A week later, the reaction to this was anti-Armenian pogroms in Sumgait. As a result, according to some sources, 32 people died, more than two hundred were injured. There was no serious reaction from either Baku or Moscow. This was the beginning of the ongoing Karabakh conflict. The next one, 1989, brought new pogroms: in Novy Uzgen and Osh. And again there was no reaction from the Center. Impunity provoked new massacres on ethnic grounds. The dynamics of the growth of hotbeds of interethnic tension shows that in December 1988 there were 15 in the Union, in March 1991 - 76, a year later - 180. post-Soviet space. Gradually, a double standard in resolving the issue of self-determination began to appear more and more clearly: this right became the privilege of only the union republics, but not their autonomies. Although everyone recognized the arbitrary nature of the separation of union and autonomous formations, sometimes the artificiality of their borders, nevertheless, through the actions of the central and republican authorities, a conviction in the "illegality" of the demands of autonomies was formed in the public consciousness. Thus, it became obvious that the equality of peoples and the right of nations to self-determination, declared in the Constitution, were subject to political conjuncture.
An attempt to save the Union can be considered the holding of the All-Union referendum on the integrity of the Union on March 17, 1991; this no longer had any real consequences. In the spring and especially in the summer of 1991, almost all the union republics held their own referendums, and the population voted for national independence. Thus, the results of the all-Union referendum were annulled. Another attempt to save the Union can be considered a change in position regarding the signing of a new Union Treaty. Mikhail Gorbachev held numerous consultations with the heads of the republics. It seemed that this process could end with the conclusion of a new union treaty, the essence of which would be reduced to the redistribution of functions between the central and republican authorities in favor of the latter. Thus, the USSR from a virtually unitary state had a chance to become a full-fledged federation. But this did not happen: the fragile process was interrupted by the August events of 1991. For the Union republics, the victory of the putsch meant a return to the former unitary state and the end of democratic reforms. the limit of confidence in the central government was exhausted, the Union collapsed.
The current collapse of the USSR, although in many ways resembles the collapse of the Russian Empire, is qualitatively different. Soviet Union within the empire was restored with the help of provocations and the use of military force, which contradicts the principles of democracy, the adherence to which has been declared by most of the new states. In the early 1920s. peoples who made up former empire, they could still believe the new leadership of Moscow, allegedly abandoning the imperial, unifying policy. But the new existence already within the framework of the Union did not solve the former national problems, it increased their number. The reasons for the explosion of nationalism in the USSR were also some of the results of the implemented national policy. Soviet nationality policy led to the emergence of national identity and its strengthening among many ethnic groups that did not have it before. Having proclaimed the slogan of the destruction of the national division of mankind, the regime built and strengthened nations on the territories artificially defined by it. Nationality, enshrined in the passport, tied ethnic groups to a certain territory, dividing them into "indigenous population" and "outsiders". Despite the subordination of the republics to the Center, they had the prerequisites for an independent existence. During the Soviet period, a national elite was formed in them, national cadres were trained, “their own” territory was defined, and a modern economy was created. All this also contributed to the collapse of the USSR: the former union republics could now do without monetary receipts from the Center, especially since the union treasury with the beginning of reforms very quickly became scarce. In addition, some peoples only during the years of Soviet power first received their national statehood (first in the form of union republics, and after the collapse of the USSR - independent states: Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, etc.), not counting a short period of independence in 1917-1920 Their states are very young, there are no traditions of solid statehood, hence their desire to establish themselves and show their complete independence, first of all, from Moscow.
The collapse of the Russian Empire, and later the USSR, fits quite logically into the general historical picture of global world changes: the twentieth century. generally became the century of the collapse of empires that arose in previous eras. One of the reasons for this process is modernization, the transition of many states to the rails of an industrial and post-industrial society. Economic and political transformation is much easier in culturally and mentally homogeneous societies. Then there are no problems with the pace and depth of transformations. our state, both at the beginning of the twentieth century, and in the 1980s. was a conglomerate of various economic and cultural types and mentalities. In addition, although modernization as a whole enhances integration trends, they come into conflict with the growth of national self-awareness, with the desire for national independence. In the conditions of authoritarian or totalitarian regimes, infringement of national interests, this contradiction is inevitable. Therefore, as soon as the hoops of autocracy and totalitarianism weakened and transformative, democratic tendencies intensified, the threat of the collapse of the multinational state arose. And although the collapse of the USSR is largely logical, over the past 70 years, and over the previous centuries, the peoples living in the Eurasian space have accumulated a lot of experience living together... They have in many ways a common history, numerous human connections. Under favorable conditions, this can facilitate a natural, albeit slow, integration. And it seems that the existence of the CIS is a step towards the common future of the peoples of the once united country.
Synopsis on the history of Russia
With the development of perestroika, they began to acquire more and more importance national problems... Moreover, national contradictions and clashes were often artificially inflated by politicians from various camps who tried to use the tension to solve certain problems.
With the beginning of democratization and the restoration of historical truth, the tension that had accumulated over many years was discharged in the rapidly growing centrifugal forces. Thus, the anniversary of the signing of the Soviet-German pact of 1939 (for the first time in many years in the center of attention of the press) became a pretext for mass demonstrations on August 23, 1987 in the capitals of the three Baltic republics. These speeches marked the beginning of a process that culminated in the later proclamation of the independence of these republics.
Tensions related to ethnic relations arose in almost all the republics. She touched upon a variety of issues, from the requirements for the recognition of the state status of the national language (formulated first in the Baltic republics, then in Ukraine, in Georgia, Moldova, Armenia, and, ultimately, as the movement expanded and deepened, put forward in other republics: RSFSR, Belarus, Azerbaijan and the Muslim republics of Central Asia) until the return of the deported peoples to their historical homeland.
The national problems that have come into the center of attention have led to an aggravation of conflicts between Russian "colonialists" and representatives of "indigenous" nationalities (primarily in Kazakhstan and the Baltic states) or between neighboring nationalities (Georgians and Abkhazians, Georgians and Ossetians, Uzbeks and Tajiks, Armenians and Azerbaijanis etc.). The most tragic forms were taken by the conflict between Armenians and Azerbaijanis over Nagorno-Karabakh, which was annexed to Azerbaijan in 1923, despite the Armenian majority of its population. In February 1988, the Armenians of this autonomous region within Azerbaijan formally demanded reunification with Armenia. Due to the ambiguous position of the union government and the resistance of the Azerbaijani leadership, the conflict escalated, and the pogrom of Armenians perpetrated by the Azerbaijanis in Sumgait became a prologue to a real war between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
In 1989 and especially in 1990-1991. happened bloody clashes in Central Asia(Fergana, Dushanbe, Osh and a number of other regions). National minorities, including the Russian-speaking population, were particularly affected. The region of intense ethnic armed conflicts was the Caucasus, primarily South Ossetia and Abkhazia. 1990-1991 in South Ossetia, in essence, there was a real war, in which only heavy artillery, aircraft and tanks were not used. Clashes, including with the use of firearms, also took place between various mountain peoples.
The confrontation also took place in Moldova, where the population of the Gagauz and Transnistrian regions protested against the infringement of their national rights, and in the Baltic States, where part of the Russian-speaking population opposed the leadership of the republics. These confrontations were supported and provoked by part of the central leadership of the USSR and the CPSU.
In the Baltic republics, in Ukraine, in Georgia sharp forms takes struggle for independence, for leaving the USSR. In early 1990, after Lithuania declared its independence and negotiations on Nagorno-Karabakh stalled, it became obvious that the central government was unable to use economic ties in the process of a radical revision of federal relations, which was the only way to prevent, or although would stop the collapse of the Soviet Union.
480 RUB | UAH 150 | $ 7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR," #FFFFCC ", BGCOLOR," # 393939 ");" onMouseOut = "return nd ();"> Dissertation - 480 rubles, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week
240 RUB | UAH 75 | $ 3.75 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR," #FFFFCC ", BGCOLOR," # 393939 ");" onMouseOut = "return nd ();"> Abstract - 240 rubles, delivery 1-3 hours, from 10-19 (Moscow time), except Sunday
Tsai Vladimir Ilyich. Historical experience of interethnic relations in the USSR, the Russian Federation (1953-2003): Dis. ... Dr. East. Sciences: 07.00.02: Moscow, 2004 352 p. RSL OD, 71: 05-7 / 59
Introduction
Section I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF FORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN THE DOREVO OF LUCION RUSSIA AND THE USSR 18
Section II. ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF HUMAN RESOURCES IN DECISION OF NATIONAL POLICY AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 61
Section III. NATIONAL AND CULTURAL POLICY OF THE PARTY AND STATE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE PEOPLES OF THE USSR AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 115
Section IV. FEATURES OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS IN THE TERRITORY OF THE USSR, RUSSIAN FEDERATION 167
Section V. THE STATE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AFTER THE DISSOLUTION OF THE USSR 263
CONCLUSION 313
NOTES 326
LIST OF USED SOURCES AND REFERENCES 342
Introduction to work
Relevance research topics. The problems associated with the management and functioning of the state in ethnically divided societies are the subject of special attention of modern scientists and politicians. Therefore, the issues of improving international relations, the formation of a culture of communication, the establishment of the values of internationalism and friendship of peoples were relevant in all multinational states.
These questions have been and remain the most burning issues for Russian society. The Russian Federation, as the legal successor to the USSR, is known to be one of the world's largest multinational states, in which more than 150 nations and nationalities live. Each of them has its own specifics - in terms of number, social and professional structure, type of economic and cultural activities, language, characteristics of material and spiritual culture. The boundaries of the settlement of peoples, as a rule, do not coincide with the boundaries of republics, territories, regions and districts. The number and nature of their settlement in various regions of the Russian Federation is particularly influenced by the intensity of migration processes. The overwhelming majority of ethnic communities have evolved over the centuries and in this sense are indigenous. Hence their historical role in shaping Russian statehood and claims to independent national-territorial or at least national-cultural entities.
The dramatic collisions of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the aggravation of interethnic relations practically throughout the entire post-Soviet space dictate the need for study and rethinking
experience of national-political processes. This is primarily due to the fact that in modern conditions the problem of preserving the unity of the Russian Federation is one of the most important and urgent. The experience of the recent Soviet past teaches that underestimation of the role of the ethnic factor and mistakes in assessing its real role lead to the accumulation of its enormous potential for conflict, which can serve as a threat to the integrity of a multinational state. The recent collapse of the USSR also shows how important it is to build national policy and interethnic relations on a scientific basis.
Therefore, according to the doctoral student, the urgent problem of modern Russia is the problem of preserving the political, economic, cultural and historical unity of Russian society, the integrity of the territory, the revival on this basis of really strong, mutually beneficial, extremely necessary interethnic relations.
Therefore, without a thorough study of the rich Soviet experience of national movements and the extraction of those historical lessons, an objective picture of contemporary national relations in Russia is impossible. All this emphasizes the need to study the causes and main stages of national policy and interethnic relations. This is necessary for the formation of such a national policy in the country, which would lead to a more complete development of the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation.
The study of the problems of interethnic relations in the USSR and in the Russian Federation, in particular, shows that their analysis in relation to different stages historical development societies
it is noted both for its features arising from specific goals and objectives, and for the forms of their resolution.
In this regard, it must be admitted that during the years of socialist construction, interest in the problems of interethnic relations has noticeably increased. This became especially noticeable in the 60-70s. Much attention was paid to the coverage of the activities of the party and the state in the implementation of interethnic policy, i.e. the practical side of this problem. The emergence of generalizing monographs in the field of national policy and interethnic relations 1 belongs to this period.
Naturally, in these works, the specifics of national policy and
interethnic relations in the USSR, the role of the national program
The CPSU in the conditions of building a socialist society
were considered exclusively on the basis of the Marxist-Leninist methodology of approaching the problem as an integral part of the general question of the social revolution.
The degree of scientific knowledge of the problem shows that the problem of national policy and interethnic relations in the years under consideration, due to the specifics of the study, began to be studied by domestic historical science relatively recently, and therefore the concrete historical picture of the formation of national policy, interethnic relations remains far from complete and unevenly studied. Conceptual framework for all Soviet historiography
Gardanov V.K., Dolgikh B.O., Zhdanko T.A. The main directions of ethnic processes among the peoples of the USSR. // Sov. Ethnography. 1961. # 4; Groshev I.I. Historical experience of the CPSU in the implementation of the Leninist nationality policy. -M., 1967; SI beam. Ethno-demographic processes in the USSR (based on the 1970 census) // Sov. Ethnography. 1971. # 4; Sherstobitov V.P. Formation of the USSR and historical objects of our country // History of the USSR. 1971.№3; Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development; Malanchuk V.E. The historical experience of the CPSU in resolving the national question and the development of national relations in the USSR, Moscow, 1972, etc.
national policy and interethnic relations were theses of the complete and final victory of socialism in the USSR and the beginning of the transition from socialism to communism. In the 1960s, the previously existing ideological framework of scientific work on national issues was supplemented by the concept of developed socialism, the main emphasis of which was placed on the idea of achieving social and national homogeneity of society.
The state leaders of the USSR declared the "monolithic unity" of the Soviet people, that national question in the USSR "successfully resolved." Hence all the literature of this time in rainbow colors. painted a cloudless picture of national and interethnic relations in the USSR. Secondly, an analysis of the historiography of this period shows that "in the USSR, on the one hand, all nations flourish, on the other hand, their rapprochement," which was first announced at the 22nd Congress of the CPSU in the report "On the Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." They tried not to notice the contradictory, multidirectional nature of these statements.
A number of works by Soviet scientists of this period were aimed at examining the main directions of criticism of the bourgeois "falsifications" of the development of national and interethnic relations in the USSR. The authors of these works, although they pointed to the preservation of remnants of chauvinism and nationalism in the Soviet Union, at the same time, explained this by backward cultural and religious traditions, the weakness of atheistic and international education, as well as anti-Soviet propaganda.
"Groshev I I., Chechenkina OI Criticism of the bourgeois falsifications of the national policy of the CPSU. - M, 1974; Bagramov EA The national question in the struggle of ideas. - M., 1982; B> rgeois historiography of the formation and development of the USSR. - M., 1983; Criticism of falsifications of national relations in the USSR.-M., 1983, etc.
A number of studies in the 60s and 70s were devoted to the general achievements of national policy in the USSR. Despite the fact that the name of such a theoretician of national relations as Stalin was not mentioned in scientific works. The literature has rehabilitated the Stalinist model of building socialism in previously backward national republics; 3 covered ethnic processes in the USSR - internationalization, assimilation, the emergence and formation of a new historical community "Soviet people"; 4, considerations were expressed about the dialectics of the national and the international in the development of Soviet society in the process of rapprochement and integration of the peoples of the USSR. 5 In this case, firstly,
"Sherstobitov VP The formation of the USSR and historical subjects of the peoples of our country // History of the USSR. 1972. No. 3. Kukushkin YS Problems of studying the history of creation // History of the USSR. 1972. No. 6 .; Gardanov V.K., Dolgikh B .O., Zhdanko TA The main directions of ethnic processes among the peoples of the USSR. // Soviet ethnography.] 961 No. 4, Brook SI Ethno-demographic processes in the USSR (according to the 1970 census). // Sov ethnography. 1971 No. 4 .; Groshev II Historical experience of the CPSU in the implementation of Lenin's nationality policy. - M., 1967; Kulichenko MI National relations in the USSR and their development trends; Malanchuk VE Historical experience of the CPSU in solving the national question and the development of national relations in the USSR. - M., 1972.
4 The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. - Proceedings of the interuniversity scientific concept (October 15-19, 1969). - Volgograd, 1969 .; Kaltakhchyan SR. Leninism about the unity of the nation and the ways of forming an international community of people. M., 1976 .; Kim MP The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. - M, 1972. "Abd> Latipov RG, Burmistrov TY Lenin's policy of internationalism in the USSR: history and modernity - M, 1982; Bagramov EA Lenin's national policy of achievement and prospects. - M, 1977; Burmistrov T.Yu.Regularities and features of the development of socialist nations in the conditions of building communism.
L. 1974, Dialectics of the international and the national in a socialist society, - M, 1981; Drobizheva L.M. Spiritual Community of the Peoples of the USSR: Historical and Sociological Outline of Interethnic Relations. - M, 1981; Kaltakhchyan SR. Marxist-Leninist theory of the nation and modernity. - M., 1983; Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development. - M., 1972; Its the same. The flourishing and rapprochement of socialist nations in the USSR. - M, 1981; Metelitsa L.V. The flourishing and rapprochement of socialist nations. - M, 1978; National relations in a developed socialist society. - M., 1977; Likholat A.V., Panibudlaska V.F. In a single family of nations. - M, 19789; Rosenko M.N. Patriotism and national pride of the Soviet people. -L., 1977; Sulzhenko V.K. Internationalism at the stage of developed socialism - the implementation of the Leninist nationality policy of the CPSU in Ukraine - Lvov, 1981; Tsameryan I.P. Nations and national relations in a developed socialist society. - M., 1979, etc.
emphasized the objective nature of the formation and development of the "new interethnic community" - the "Soviet people" on the basis of the common economic space and the Russian language as the language of all-Union communication, 6 secondly, often the dialectics of the national and international in the development of Soviet society was viewed through the prism of the formula "interpenetration and the mutual enrichment of the two tendencies of socialism in the development of nations and national relations - the flourishing and rapprochement of nations. " Obviously, such a limitation of this problem did not reveal in its entirety and complexity the dynamics of the development of this most important task of society. Some researchers have invariably emphasized that history does not provide us with convincing material for the conclusion about the withering away of nations. The problem of dialectical contradictions in the national sphere of the USSR was not only not considered by many authors, but even the term "contradiction" itself is not even mentioned in many publications. 7
Works on national policy in the USSR, published in the 70s-80s, acquire a new quality. In a number of these works, national
6 Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development. - M., 1972; Kim M.P. The ratio of national and international in the life of peoples: its typology. // Fraternal unity of the peoples of the USSR. - M., 1976; Drobizheva L.M. Spiritual community of the peoples of the USSR (Historical and sociological sketch of interethnic relations). - M., 1981; The development of national relations in the USSR. - M., 1986, etc.
B> rmistrova T.Yu. National policy of the CPSU in the conditions of mature socialism. - In the book: National policy of the CPSU. -M., 1981; Burmistrova T.Yu., Dmitriev O.L. Close-knit friendship: the culture of interethnic communication in the USSR. - M., 1986, etc.
Modern ethnic processes in the USSR. M. 1977; The main directions of the study of national relations in the USSR. - M., 1979 .; Social politics and national relations (based on the materials of the All-Union scientific-practical conference "Development of national relations in the conditions of mature socialism." - M., 1982; "Experience and problems of patriotic and international education." - Riga, July 28-30, 1982; Problems of perestroika: social Aspect. - M., 1984; Semenov VS, Jordan M.V., Babakov V.G., Samsonov V.A.Inter-ethnic contradictions and conflicts in the USSR. - M., 1991; Kukushkin BS, Barsenov A.K. On the issue of the concept of the national policy of the Russian Federation. - Ethnopolis. // Ethnopolitical Bulletin of Russia. -
relations and national policy are considered in a generalized form, attempts are made to highlight the key points in them in order to get closer to understanding the origins and causes of the collapse of the USSR and the modern national problems of Russia and do not touch upon the problems we are investigating.
In the 90s, researchers were faced with the task of rethinking all the accumulated experience in the field of interethnic relations. During these years, many works were published on this issue, 9 which highlighted the problems of interethnic relations between the peoples of Russia, the war in Chechnya, the problems of the Russian-speaking population, who, through no fault of their own, found themselves abroad as small peoples in the newly formed national states in the near abroad.
In general, it should be noted that in these works the question of the relationship between national and international factors is raised, the question of the general culture of our thinking in
M, 1992, No. 1 .; Will Russia share the fate of the USSR? The crisis of interethnic relations and federal policy - M, 1993 .; Mikhalin V.A. National policy as a factor of state building. - M, 1995 .; Kalinina K.V. National minorities in Russia - M., 1993; Bugai N.F., Mekulov DKh. People power "Socialist experiment", - Maikop, 1994, etc.
Yu Borodai. From ethnic diversity to national unity // Russia in a new r> bezha. -M., - 1991 .; A.I. Vdovin. Features of ethnopolitical relations and the formation of a new statehood in Russia (historical and conceptual aspects) -M., - 1993; M.N. D> bogo. Protection and self-defense of nationalities // Ethnopolitical Bulletin. -M., - 1995. -No. 4; A.I. Doronchenkov. Interethnic relations and national policy in Russia: actual problems. -M., -1995; LM Drobizheva. Nationalism, ethnic identity and conflicts in a transforming society: the main approaches to the study // National consciousness and nationalism in the Russian Federation in the early 1990s. -M., -1994; A.G. Zdravomyslov. Diversity of interests and institutions of power. -M., - 1994; V.Yu. Zorin. National policy - legal basis // National policy of Russia: history and modernity. - M., -1997; K.V. Kalinin. Institutions state power- regulators of interethnic relations. - M., -1995; L. M. Karapetyan. Facets of sovereignty and self-determination of peoples // State and Law. - 1993 - No. 1; NI Medvedev National policy of Russia. From Unitarianism to Federalism. -M „-1993. Interethnic relations in the regions of the Russian Federation. -M., -1992; Interethnic relations in the Russian Federation // IEARAN Annual Report. -M., -1998; V.I. Tsai. Interethnic relations in the USSR and the Russian Federation. -M., - 2004 and DR-
the national question, without which it would be difficult to count on making a real contribution to solving the problems of national and interethnic relations, taking into account the urgent problems here. In this regard, the book “National Policy of Russia. History and modernity "(SV Kuleshov, DA Amanzholova, OV Volobuev, VA Mikhailov), which is the first study in national national politics at all its stages and in interconnection
theoretical constructions with practical implementation.
Many questions of the ethnological situation in the USSR, in its individual regions are reflected in the collection of articles "National Processes in the USSR", written by scientists of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology named after N.N. Miklouho-Maclay and the Center for the Study of Interethnic Relations of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. The articles of V. Muntian, V. Tishkov, S. Cheshko attract attention, in which a new level of comprehension of the most characteristic tasks in the development of national relations is seen, their typological groups are highlighted, the policy of M. Gorbachev in the years of perestroika is highlighted through the prism of critical analysis. eleven
The monograph by the scientists F. Gorovsky and Yu. Rymanenko, published in 1991, deserves special attention. The main interest for us is the second chapter "Results of the traversed path: successes and deformations". The authors, without belittling what was done in the interethnic sphere, noting how the level of socio-economic development, education, culture of the union and autonomous republics rose during the years of Soviet power, emphasizing that deep, progressive changes have taken place in the life of every nation and nationality,
National policy of Russia. History and modernity. - M., 1997. 1 National processes in the USSR: collection of articles. - M., 1991.
Gorovsky F.Ya., Rymanenko Yu.I. The national question and socialist practice: the experience of historical and theoretical analysis. - Kiev: Vishcha school, 1991 .-- 225 p.
considerable attention was paid to the analysis of problems, errors, miscalculations in
national policy. The source base of the monograph consists of
various publications, archival sources were not used.
Let us turn further to the works written and published after
Belovezhsky meeting. The monograph
^ researchers-historians A.I. Zalessky and P.N. Kobrinets, in which
along with great achievements in economic and cultural development, mistakes and miscalculations are analyzed, especially in the field of language construction. The authors deeply and convincingly expose the contemporary falsifiers of the history of national relations in the USSR.
Based on the above, as well as on the fact that the interethnic
the problem is one of the most difficult and acute problems of any state,
4fc, which requires a special approach and daily attention, in
the dissertation aims to reveal the most urgent tasks of national policy and interethnic relations, their effectiveness, problems and contradictions in 1953-2003.
In connection with this goal, as well as relying on the accumulated research experience, widely drawing on the results of existing publications in the field of interethnic relations, new documentary and archival materials, the author decides the following tasks:
to uncover historical background formation
interethnic relations in pre-revolutionary Russia and the USSR;
explore the role and importance of human resources in solving
f | i national and interethnic relations;
Zalessky A.I., Kobrinets P.N. On national relations in Soviet Belarus: historical essays. - Grodno: State University, 1992 .-- 192 p.
analyze the national and cultural policy of the party and the state in the system of interethnic relations between the peoples of the USSR and the Russian Federation;
show the features of interethnic conflicts on the territory of the USSR, the Russian Federation,
to summarize the state of interethnic relations in the Russian Federation after the collapse USSR.
The subject of research are the national policy and interethnic relations in the Soviet, Russian societies in 1953-2003.
By defining chronological framework research (1953-2003), the author proceeded from the fact that during these years, along with the painful manifestations of echoes of unreasonable repressions of national cadres, especially leaders and intelligentsia in the 30s - early 50s, there was an active process of renewal that affected after the death of I. Stalin, all spheres of public life, including the national state policy. The atmosphere of democratization created by the 20th Congress of the CPSU gave a powerful impetus to social progress and inspired the country. The stream of scientific discoveries was carried out by the Soviet man, who was the first to pave the way into space. The standard of living, education and culture of the masses grew. In national literatures there is a fireworks display of bright poetic names. Along with this, the moral and political unity of the nations and nationalities of the country was strengthened.
In subsequent years, the active development of nations continued, the processes of democratization deepened critical area the life of the Soviet state - national personnel policy, the training of specialists in economics, science, culture, management, military affairs from representatives of all nations and nationalities was widely deployed
USSR, national culture and art reached a high level, much was done to develop national languages, national literature, national traditions, etc.
At the same time, the national factor was sometimes underestimated; it was not always taken into account that national relations retain their specificity and relative independence, and develop according to their own special laws. The sphere of using the national languages of some republics of the USSR has narrowed. During the reforms of the second half of the 1980s, the existing contradictions in the national sphere still remained.
90s of the last century, which marked the beginning and formation of the Russian state. During these years, the Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted (December 12, 1993), agreements were signed "On the delimitation of jurisdictions and mutual delegation of powers between the state authorities of the Russian Federation and the state authorities of the subject", the strengthening of the vertical of power began, and so on.
At the same time, during this period, the concept of national policy was adopted, as well as federal laws influencing the decision interethnic issue and national statehood: on national and cultural autonomy of May 22, 1996; on guarantees of the rights of the indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation dated April 16, 1999; on the general principles of the organization of legislative (representative) and executive bodies of power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation dated September 22, 1999, etc. At the regional level, a lot of work is also being done to improve national policy and interethnic relations. It has become especially active in the new 21st century.
The source base of the dissertation was made up of published and unpublished materials. The published materials are mainly the service records and nationality of members of the leaders of party and state bodies, the army, public organizations, etc. Periodic printing was used to cover almost all the problems studied in the dissertation.
The dissertation also used unpublished documents identified by the author in the archives of years. Moscow, Minsk, Kiev. In particular, empirical material was obtained from the following state archives: 1) the state archive of the Russian Federation. - F. 5508; 2) Russian State Historical Archives. - F. 776; 3) Center for storage of special documentation. - F. 5, 89; 4) Central State Archives of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 1; 5) National Archives of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 4, 74, 974; 6) Archive of the information center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 23; 7) Archive of the Main Information Bureau of Ukraine. - F. 4; 8) The Central State Archives of the Bodies of Power and Administration of Ukraine. - F. 288.
Valuable materials reflecting the implementation of national policy are concentrated in the funds of union and republican ministries and departments, in particular, the State Planning Committees of the Central Statistical Administration, culture, education and others. Various aspects of the problem under consideration are highlighted in references, information, reports sent by the ministries and departments of the republics to the party and higher state bodies. Of great importance for penetrating into the topic are the memos (for internal apparatus, official use) of the heads of departments of party committees at various levels and of the Administration of Affairs of the Council of Ministers of the Union republics,
addressed to the secretariats of the regional committees, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Union republics, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Councils of Ministers of the USSR republics on various issues of economic, cultural and national development.
The materials of party and state statistics and periodicals were of great importance for the writing of the work. The study also used articles, speeches, speeches by the leaders of the USSR, the RSFSR, the Ukrainian SSR, the Byelorussian SSR and other regions of the country, as well as the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc.
Evaluating the entire array of sources, it should be noted that they do not always give an adequate understanding of the problem under study. Due to this, the necessary verification (rechecking) was carried out in order to confirm the stated facts. In addition, many questions in the sources are focused only on positive data, are interpreted one-sidedly, sometimes schematically. This state of the sources was taken into account, and their data were critically interpreted in the course of the study.
At the same time, the analysis of historical sources, published documents and archival materials made it possible to consider the problem objectively, for almost forty years, a very controversial and dramatic period, to reveal those problems and issues that were not previously the subject of special study. The author believes that this study will help to better understand and comprehend many pages of recent history in the field of national politics and interethnic relations.
Scientific novelty of research consists in the following: 1. First of all, a wide range of documents and materials has been identified that make it possible to reveal the content of national policy and interethnic
relations in the period under study, many of the documents are introduced into scientific circulation for the first time; 2. The preconditions and reasons for the aggravation of contradictions are revealed, the role and place of state authorities in resolving existing conflicts and easing tensions in interethnic relations are shown; 3. On the basis of the collected and generalized, previously not studied documentary material, new historical material on the problems of national policy and interethnic relations of the Soviet society of the Russian Federation, in the years 1953-2003, is harmoniously introduced into the fabric of the study; 4. The mechanism of collusion in the signing of the Belovezhskaya agreements on the collapse of the USSR is investigated, a complex of negative circumstances of both internal and external order is shown, which, according to the author, played a significant role in the collapse of the Soviet Union, which caused dire consequences in the sphere of national, economic and other areas. development of the former republics of the USSR; 5. A mechanism is proposed for the formation of a new concept of national policy and interethnic relations in the regions of Russia, taking into account the present state of the Russian Federation.
The practical significance of the study consists primarily in the fact that its provisions and conclusions, as well as documentary material on national policy and interethnic relations introduced for the first time into scientific circulation, can be used by specialists in solving problems related to national and interethnic processes, as well as scientists, university teachers , school teachers in the preparation of generalizing works on national issues and special courses on the history of Russia, diploma and term papers of students of historical faculties of universities, etc.
Approbation of work. The main content of the research is reflected in monographs, textbooks, articles, collections of scientific papers,
The structure of the work is determined by the objectives of the research. It consists of an introduction, five chapters, a conclusion, a list of sources and literature.
historical prerequisites for the formation of interethnic relations in pre-revolutionary russia and the USSR
Investigating the problem, we note that by the beginning of the 19th century. Russia was a huge continental country covering a vast area of Eastern Europe, North Asia and part of North America (Alaska and the Aleutian Islands). For the first half of XIX century, its territory increased from 16 to 18 million square meters. km due to the annexation of Finland, the Kingdom of Poland, Bessarabia, the Caucasus, Transcaucasia and Kazakhstan. According to the first revision (1719), in Russia there were 1sh 15.6 million people of both sexes, the fifth (1795) - 7.4 million, and the tenth (1857) - 59.3 million (excluding Finland and the kingdom Polish). Natural population growth in the first half of the 19th century. was about 1% per year, and the average life expectancy was 27.3 years, 1 which was generally typical, as foreign demographic calculations show, for “countries of pre-industrial Europe”. Low indicators of life expectancy were due to high infant mortality and recurrent epidemics.
In addition, there were other reasons for these disasters. In particular, more than 9/10 of the population of Russia lived in rural areas. According to the 1811 census, the urban population numbered 2,765 thousand people, and according to the 1863 census - already 6,105 thousand, that is, over half a century it increased 2.2 times. However, its share in relation to the entire population increased insignificantly during this time - only from 6.5 to 8%. The number of cities themselves for half a century increased from 630 to 1032. However, small cities predominated among them: at the beginning of the 19th century. out of 630 cities, 500 had less than 5 thousand each and only 19 had more than 20 thousand inhabitants. This ratio between small and large cities was practically preserved by the beginning of the 60s of the 19th century. The largest cities were both "capitals" - St. Petersburg and Moscow. The number of St. Petersburg in the first half of the XIX century. increased from 336 to 540 thousand, and Moscow - from 275 to 462 thousand. At this time, the official division of settlements into cities and villages was carried out on an administrative basis. Therefore, there were many large commercial and industrial settlements, which, by the nature of the occupation of the inhabitants and even by their appearance, were real cities (such as, for example, the large factory village of Ivanovo, which, in terms of the number of inhabitants, even surpassed the provincial city of Vladimir). Such industrial villages were Pavlovo, Kimry, Gorodets, Vichuga, Mstera. However, they continued to remain in the position of villages, for most of them belonged to large landowners-magnates-Sheremetev, Panin, Golitsyn, Yusupov, Vorontsov. The right of landowners to own such villages impeded the process of city formation. Thus, the village of Ivanovo received the status of a city only in 1871, when it finally freed itself from all its obligations towards its former owner, Count Sheremetev.
Administratively, the European part of Russia was divided into 47 provinces and 5 regions (Astrakhan, Tauride, Caucasian, the land of the Don Army and the land of the Black Sea Army). Subsequently, the number of provinces increased due to the division of some of them and the annexation of new territories. The Astrakhan and Tavricheskaya regions received the status of provinces. According to the administrative division of 1822, Siberia was divided into Tobolsk, Tomsk, Omsk, Irkutsk, Yenisei provinces and Yakutsk oblast. In the 50s of the XIX century. the Kamchatka, Transbaikal, Primorsk and Amur regions were also formed.5
The role and importance of human resources in solving national policy and interethnic relations
The study of this problem showed that in its positive solution exclusively essential plays a personnel potential, that is, those workers who are directly involved in the development and stabilization of national and interethnic relations.
In this regard, the priority role belongs to the selection of management personnel based on business qualities, and not on national grounds, which in any state was considered and is considered a special definition of its high morality. In republics, territories and regions the former USSR tried to adhere to the principle of selection and appointment of leading personnel in all areas of the national economy, party, Soviet and other public bodies, taking into account the sound combination of their nationalities. This process was controlled by both party and Soviet bodies.
In the process of working on this problem, we examined in detail several of the largest republics of the former USSR within the framework of our period - 1953-2003. So, for example, in the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus, among the heads of departments, apart from Belarusians and Russians, Ukrainians also worked in some periods. Thus, as of January 1, 1960, there were 4 Belarusians (50 percent), 3 Russians (37.5 percent), Ukrainians - 1 (12.5 percent) .1 The proportion of Belarusians in this job group tended to grow. As of January 1, 1975, there were 8 Belarusians (61.5%), Russians 5 (38.5%). Belarusians headed the departments of science and educational institutions, culture, heavy industry and transport, chemical and light industry, construction and urban economy, Food Industry, administrative bodies, organizational and party work. Russians - departments of propaganda and agitation, foreign relations, Agriculture, trade and consumer services, general.2 As of January 1, 1985, Belarusians were in charge of 10 departments (62.5%), Russians 6 (37.5%). 3
Among the secretaries of the regional committees of the party of Ukraine (as of January 1, 1960 - 114 people, as of January 1, 1985 - 126 people), in addition to Ukrainians and Russians, statistics recorded Belarusians (as of January 1 of the corresponding year: 1980 - 1; 1985 - 2) .4 In the 60s, among the secretaries of the regional party committees of Ukraine, there were 78 to 82 percent of Ukrainians, in the 70s - from 82 to 85 (and as of January 1, 1975 - 87 percent). On January 1, 1985, this figure dropped to 78.5 percent. But the share of the secretaries of the regional committees of the titular nation was significantly higher than its share in the KPU.5 The share of the first secretaries of the regional committees - Ukrainians during the period under study was even higher than the secretaries in general. It did not fall below 84 percent, and on January 1, 1970 it was 88 percent, on January 1, 1980 - 92 percent. the share of Ukrainians in the Communist Party of Ukraine. This is important to note, since it was these 21-23 people who ruled the republic. As we can see, only the Slavic super-ethnos was represented among the secretaries, including the first ones, of the regional committees of the Communist Party of Ukraine.
National and cultural policy of the party and the state in relation to the peoples of the USSR and the Russian Federation
When studying this problem, first of all, it should be noted that in the conditions of economic and cultural development nations, there is a certain inequality in the system of international relations. When developing a strategy for economic life, it is important to take into account natural features and industrial infrastructure. For example, the Republic of Belarus lags behind its neighbors in economic development several times, but its natural conditions favorable for light and food industries, forestry and woodworking industries, tourism, etc. Disproportion in the development of infrastructure in the republics, violation of the principles of social justice in relations within national entities and between them, the national consciousness worries, often lead it to a partial union with religious and patriarchal-clan traditions, to the emergence of national isolation. There were gross violations of the sovereign rights of the union republics, the lack of rights of autonomous formations, a lag in the development of national cultures, a crisis or pre-crisis state of many forms of cultural development and enrichment of the peoples of the USSR, and in particular, the peoples of Belarus, Ukraine, Russia.
Among the many forms of the state's national-cultural policy are monuments of architecture and art. Therefore, the organization of the case for the protection of architectural monuments, art is the most important component of national and interethnic relations in the USSR during the period under study. In this regard, on January 23, 1963, Minister of Culture Furtseva sent a note to the Central Committee of the CPSU on the state of protection of monuments in the country, their propaganda and study. At the same time, she stressed that there are the most serious shortcomings in this matter. Among them, E. Furtseva called the main and most serious - departmental disunity in the system of protection of cultural monuments. As a consequence of this, in a number of Union republics (Ukrainian SSR, BSSR, Armenian SSR, Lithuanian SSR, etc.), the protection of monuments is under the jurisdiction of the State Construction Committee of the Republics (architectural monuments) and the Ministry of Culture (art monuments), there is no unified system of subordination and in the network of restoration workshops ...
Taking into account this situation, the Minister of Culture of the USSR informed the Central Committee of the CPSU about cases of extremely irresponsible attitude of local bodies for the protection of the most valuable cultural monuments and executive committees of Soviets of Working People's Deputies to their preservation. So, the Council of Ministers of Belarus, on the proposal of the executive committee of the Vitebsk City Council on September 23, 1961, decided to exclude from the lists of monuments accepted for state protection, the most valuable work of ancient Russian architecture of the 12th century, a monument of all-Union significance - the former Church of the Annunciation. In December 1961, at the direction of the city executive committee, the monument was destroyed almost to the ground. Crushed stone from the walls of the XII century was used in the construction of roads. The Council of Ministers of the Republic of January 8, 1962 revised its decision and restored a monument in the lists, of which only part of the walls remained.
Aggravation of interethnic conflicts. In the mid-80s, 15 union republics were part of the USSR: Armenian, Azerbaijan, Belarusian, Georgian, Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Latvian, Lithuanian, Moldavian, RSFSR, Tajik, Turkmen, Uzbek, Ukrainian and Estonian. More than 270 million people lived on its territory - representatives of over a hundred nations and nationalities. In the opinion of the official leadership of the country, in the USSR, in principle, the national question was resolved and there was an actual alignment of the republics in terms of political, socio-economic and cultural development. Meanwhile, the inconsistency of national policy has given rise to numerous contradictions in interethnic relations. Under the conditions of publicity, these contradictions grew into open conflicts. The economic crisis, which engulfed the entire national economic complex, aggravated interethnic tensions.
failure to central authorities coping with economic difficulties caused growing discontent in the republics. It intensified due to the aggravation of pollution problems the environment, deterioration ecological situation due to the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. As before, local dissatisfaction was generated by insufficient attention of the union authorities to the needs of the republics, the diktat of the center in resolving issues of a local nature. The forces uniting local opposition forces were popular fronts, new political parties and movements (Rukh in Ukraine, Sayudis in Lithuania, etc.). They became the main spokesmen for the ideas of state separation of the union republics, their secession from the USSR. The country's leadership turned out to be not ready to solve the problems caused by interethnic and interethnic conflicts and the growth of the separatist movement in the republics.
In 1986, there were mass rallies and demonstrations against Russification in Alma-Ata (Kazakhstan). The reason for them was the appointment of G. Kolbin, a Russian by nationality, as the first secretary of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan. Public discontent took open forms in the Baltic republics, Ukraine, and Belarus. The public, led by the popular fronts, demanded the publication of the Soviet-German treaties of 1939, the publication of documents on the deportations of the population from the Baltic states and from the western regions of Ukraine and Belarus during the collectivization period, and on the mass graves of victims of repression near Kurapaty (Belarus). Armed clashes based on interethnic conflicts have become more frequent.
In 1988, hostilities began between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, a territory populated mainly by Armenians, but which was part of the AzSSR. Armed, a conflict between Uzbeks and Meskhetian Turks broke out in Fergana. Novy Uzen (Kazakhstan) became the hotbed of interethnic clashes. The appearance of thousands of refugees - this was one of the results of the conflicts that took place. In April 1989, mass demonstrations took place in Tbilisi for several days. The main demands of the demonstrators were the implementation of democratic reforms and the independence of Georgia. The Abkhaz population was in favor of revising the status of the Abkhaz ASSR and separating it from the Georgian SSR.
"Parade of Sovereignties". Since the end of the 80s, the movement for the withdrawal of their composition from the USSR in the Baltic republics has intensified. At first, the opposition forces insisted on recognizing the native language in the republics as an official one, on taking measures to limit the number of people moving here from other regions of the country, and on ensuring the real independence of local authorities. Now the first place in their programs has come to the requirement of separating the economy from the all-Union national economic complex. It was proposed to concentrate the management of the national economy in local administrative structures and to recognize the priority of republican laws over the all-Union ones. In the autumn of 1988, representatives of the Popular Fronts won the elections to the central and local authorities of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. They declared their main task to be the achievement of complete independence, the creation of sovereign states. In November 1988, the Supreme Soviet of the Estonian SSR approved the Declaration of State Sovereignty. Identical documents were adopted by Lithuania, Latvia, Azerbaijan SSR (1989) and Moldavian SSR (1990). Following the announcements of sovereignty, the presidents of the former Soviet republics were elected.
On June 12, 1990, the I Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR adopted the Declaration on the State Sovereignty of Russia. It legally enshrined the priority of republican laws over union laws. Boris N. Yeltsin became the first president of the Russian Federation, and A. V. Rutskoi became the vice president.
The declarations of the Union republics on sovereignty placed the question of the continued existence of the Soviet Union at the center of political life. The IV Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR (December 1990) spoke in favor of the preservation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its transformation into a democratic federal state. The congress adopted a resolution "On the general concept of the union treaty and the procedure for its conclusion." The document noted that the basis of the renewed Union will be the principles set forth in the republican declarations: equality of all citizens and peoples, the right to self-determination and democratic development, territorial integrity. In accordance with the resolution of the congress, an all-Union referendum was held to decide on the preservation of the renewed Union as a federation of sovereign republics. 76.4% of the total number of people who participated in the voting were in favor of preserving the USSR.
The final of the political crisis. In April - May 1991, in Novo-Ogaryovo (the residence of the USSR president near Moscow), Mikhail Gorbachev held talks with the leaders of nine union republics on a new union treaty. All negotiators supported the idea of creating a renewed Union and signing such an agreement. His project provided for the creation of the Union of Sovereign States (UIT) as a democratic federation of equal Soviet sovereign republics. Changes were outlined in the structure of government and administration, the adoption of a new Constitution, and a change in the electoral system. The signing of the contract was scheduled for August 20, 1991.
The publication and discussion of the draft of a new union treaty deepened the split in society. Supporters of Mikhail Gorbachev saw in this act an opportunity to reduce the level of confrontation and prevent the danger of a civil war in the country. The leaders of the Democratic Russia movement put forward the idea of signing a temporary agreement for up to one year. During this time, it was proposed to hold elections to the Constituent Assembly and delegate to it for decision the question of the system and procedure for the formation of all-Union bodies of power. A group of social scientists protested against the draft treaty. The document prepared for signing was regarded as the result of the center's surrender to the demands of the national separatist forces in the republics. The opponents of the new treaty rightly feared that the dismantling of the USSR would cause the collapse of the existing national economic complex and a deepening of the economic crisis. A few days before the signing of a new union treaty, opposition forces made an attempt to end the policy of reforms and stop the collapse of the state.
On the night of August 19, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev was removed from power. Group statesmen declared the impossibility of M. S. Gorbachev in connection with the state of his health to fulfill presidential duties. A state of emergency was introduced in the country for a period of 6 months, rallies and strikes were prohibited. The creation of the State Emergency Committee was announced - the State Committee for the State of Emergency in the USSR. It included Vice-President G. I. Yanayev, Prime Minister V. S. Pavlov, Chairman of the KGB V. A. Kryuchkov, Minister of Defense D. T. Yazov and other representatives of power structures. The State Emergency Committee declared its task to overcome the economic and political crisis, interethnic and civil confrontation and anarchy. Behind these words was the main task: the restoration of the order that existed in the USSR until 1985.
Moscow became the center of the August events. Troops were brought into the city. A curfew was imposed. Large sections of the population, including many members of the party apparatus, did not provide support to the members of the State Emergency Committee. Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin called on citizens to support the legally elected authorities. The actions of the Emergency Committee were regarded by him as an anti-constitutional coup. The announcement was made about the transfer of all Union executive bodies located on the territory of the republic to the jurisdiction of the Russian president.
On August 22, GKChP members were arrested. One of the decrees of Boris N. Yeltsin terminated the activity of the CPSU. August 23 ended its existence as a ruling state structure.
The events of August 19-22 brought the collapse of the Soviet Union closer. At the end of August, Ukraine announced the creation of independent states, and then other republics.
In December 1991, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha (BSSR), a meeting of the leaders of three sovereign states - Russia (Boris N. Yeltsin), Ukraine (L. M. Kravchuk) and Belarus (S. S. Shushkevich) was held. On December 8, they announced the termination of the union treaty of 1922 and the end of the activities of the state structures of the former Union. At the same time, an agreement was reached on the creation of the CIS - the Commonwealth of Independent States. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ceased to exist. In December of the same year, eight more former republics joined the Commonwealth of Independent States (Alma-Ata Agreement).
The restructuring, conceived and carried out by a part of the party and state leaders with the aim of democratic changes in all spheres of society, is over. Its main result was the collapse of the once mighty multinational state and the end of the Soviet period in the history of the Fatherland. In the former republics of the USSR, presidential republics were formed and operated. Among the leaders of sovereign states were many former party and Soviet workers. Each of the former union republics independently searched for ways out of the crisis. In the Russian Federation, these tasks were to be solved by President Boris N. Yeltsin and the democratic forces supporting him.
Chapter 42. Russia in the 90s of the XX century.
Since the end of 1991, a new state has appeared on the international political arena - Russia, the Russian Federation (RF). It included 89 constituent entities of the Federation, including 21 autonomous republics. The Russian leadership had to continue the course towards the democratic transformation of society and the creation of the rule of law. Among the priority tasks was the adoption of measures to get the country out of the economic and political crisis. It was necessary to create new governing bodies of the national economy, to form the Russian statehood.
- Investigators Telman Gdlyan and Nikolai Ivanov investigated one of the most notorious criminal cases of the 80s - the "cotton case"
- One of the defendants in the "cotton case", former first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uzbekistan Sharaf Rashidov and Nikita Khrushchev
Launch of the first artificial Earth satellite into orbit. The launch date is considered the beginning of the space age of humanity.
Launch of the world's first manned spacecraft. Yuri Gagarin became the first person to visit space. Yuri Gagarin's flight became the most important achievement of Soviet science and the space industry. The USSR became the undisputed leader in space exploration for several years. The Russian word "satellite" has entered many European languages. Gagarin's name became known to millions of people. Many pinned hopes on the USSR for a bright future, when the development of science would lead to the establishment of social justice and world peace.
The entry of the Warsaw Pact troops (except for Romania) into Czechoslovakia, which put an end to the reforms of the Prague Spring. The largest contingent of troops was allocated from the USSR. The political goal of the operation was to change the country's political leadership and establish a regime loyal to the USSR in Czechoslovakia. The citizens of Czechoslovakia demanded the withdrawal of foreign troops and the return of the leaders of the party and government taken to the USSR. In early September, the troops were withdrawn from many cities and towns of Czechoslovakia to specially designated locations. Soviet tanks left Prague on September 11, 1968. On October 16, 1968, an agreement was signed between the governments of the USSR and Czechoslovakia on the conditions for the temporary stay of Soviet troops on the territory of Czechoslovakia, according to which part of the Soviet troops remained on the territory of Czechoslovakia "in order to ensure the security of the socialist community." These events had a great impact on both domestic policy USSR, and the atmosphere in society. It became obvious that the Soviet authorities had finally chosen a hard line of government. The hopes of a significant part of the population for the possibility of reforming socialism, which arose during the Khrushchev "thaw", died away.
01 Sep 1969
Publication in the West of the book of the famous dissident Andrei Amalrik "Will the Soviet Union Survive until 1984?" A. Amalrik was one of the first to predict the imminent collapse of the USSR. The late 1960s and early 1970s were a time of stable economic growth and an increase in the standard of living of the population in the USSR, as well as a time of relaxation of international tension. Most Soviet people believed that they would always live under Soviet rule. Some were pleased, others were terrified, and still others were simply accustomed to this thought. Western Sovietologists also did not foresee the collapse of the USSR. Few have been able to see the signs of an imminent crisis behind the facade of relative prosperity. (From A. Amalrik's book "Will the Soviet Union Exist until 1984?" And From A. Gurevich's book "The History of a Historian").
02 Sep 1972
The beginning of the super series of eight ice hockey matches between the national teams of the USSR and Canada. The USSR was a great sports power. The leadership of the USSR saw in sports victories a means of ensuring the prestige of the country, which was supposed to be the first in everything. They did it better in sports than in economics. In particular, Soviet hockey players almost always won the world championships. However, hockey players from the professional clubs of Canada and the United States, who were considered by many to be the best in the world, did not participate in these competitions. The 1972 Super Series was watched by millions of TV viewers around the world. In the first match, the USSR national team achieved a convincing victory with a score of 7: 3. In general, the series ended almost in a draw: the Canadian national team won 4 matches, the USSR national team - 3, but in the number of goals scored, the Soviet athletes were ahead of the Canadians (32:31).
The publication in Paris of Alexander Solzhenitsyn's book "The Gulag Archipelago" - an artistic study of the Stalinist repressions and Soviet society as a whole. The book was based on the personal testimonies of many hundreds of former prisoners, who told in detail about their experience of collision with the machine of state terror to A. Solzhenitsyn, who himself went through the Stalinist camps. Translated into many languages, the book made a strong impression on the readers, showing a wide panorama of the crimes committed by the Soviet regime against the population of the country. The Gulag Archipelago is one of those books that changed the world. The most important idea of A. Solzhenitsyn was the idea that the terror was not an accident, but a natural result of the establishment of the communist regime. The book dealt a blow to the international prestige of the USSR and contributed to the disillusionment of the Western "left" with Soviet-style socialism.
Signing of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Signed in Helsinki (which is why it is often called the Helsinki Agreement) by representatives of 35 states, including the USSR, this agreement became the highest point of the relaxation of international tension that began in the late 1960s. The treaty established the principle of inviolability of post-war borders in Europe and non-interference of the signatory countries in each other's internal affairs, proclaimed the need for international cooperation and respect for human rights. However, the USSR was not going to respect the political and civil rights of its citizens. The persecution of dissidents continued. The Helsinki Agreement became a trap for the USSR: it made it possible to accuse the communist regime of violating international obligations and contributed to the development of the human rights movement. In 1976, the first Russian human rights organization, the Moscow Helsinki Group, was created, the first chairman of which was Yuri Orlov.
The assault on the palace of Amin (leader of Afghanistan) in Kabul. Soviet troops under the pretext of supporting the democratic revolution, they invaded Afghanistan and established a puppet pro-communist regime. The response was a massive movement of mujahideen - guerrillas who spoke under the slogans of independence and religious (Islamic) slogans, relying on the support of Pakistan and the United States. A long war began, during which the USSR was forced to maintain a so-called "limited contingent" in Afghanistan (from 80,000 to 120,000 servicemen in different years), which, however, could not take control of this mountainous country. The war led to a new confrontation with the West, a further decline in the international prestige of the USSR and unbearable military spending. She cost thousands of lives Soviet soldiers, and as a result of hostilities and punitive expeditions against the partisans, hundreds of thousands of peaceful Afghans were killed (there is no exact data). The war ended in 1989 with the actual defeat of the USSR. It became a difficult moral and psychological experience for the Soviet people, and above all for the "Afghans", that is, military personnel who have gone through the war. Some have developed “Afghan Syndrome,” a form of mental illness created by experiences of fear and violence. During the years of perestroika, rumors circulated in society about special forces made up of "Afghans" and ready to drown the democratic movement in blood.
Holding the XXII Olympic Games in Moscow. The USSR national team won the unofficial team event, receiving 80 gold, 69 silver and 46 bronze medals. However, due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, many foreign athletes refused to attend the Moscow Olympics. The United States also boycotted the Olympics, which, of course, reduced the value of the victory of the Soviet team.
Funeral of Vladimir Vysotsky, an outstanding artist and singer-songwriter of popular songs. Tens of thousands of fans of his talent came to the Taganka Theater to say goodbye to their beloved singer, and they came against the will of the authorities, who did everything to silence the fact of the artist's death, which occurred during the days of the Moscow Olympics. The funeral of V. Vysotsky became the same mass demonstration of opposition sentiments, which at one time was the farewell of A. Suvorov (1800) or L. Tolstoy (1910) - the people's funeral of great people, whom the ruling elite did not want to arrange an honorable state funeral.
07 Mar 1981
On March 7, 1981, in the Leningrad Inter-Union House of Amateur Creativity at 13 Rubinshteina, a “rock session” permitted by the authorities took place.
False
Death of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Leonid Brezhnev, who ruled the country after Nikita Khrushchev was ousted from power in 1964. Leonid Brezhnev's board is divided into two stages. At its beginning, there were attempts at economic reforms, the rise of the Soviet economy and the growth of the international influence of the USSR, which achieved nuclear parity with the United States. However, the fear of the "erosion" of socialism, intensified by the events of 1968 in Czechoslovakia, led to the curtailment of reforms. The country's leadership has chosen a conservative strategy for maintaining the status quo (the current state of affairs). In the context of relatively high energy prices, this allowed for several years to maintain the illusion of growth, but in the 70s the country entered a period called stagnation. The crisis of the Soviet economy was accompanied by a new confrontation with the West, which intensified especially with the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan, a catastrophic decline in the prestige of the authorities, and a massive disappointment of the Soviet people with socialist values.
09 Feb 1984
Death of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Yuri Andropov, who was elected to this post after the death of Leonid Brezhnev. A middle-aged and seriously ill Y. Andropov, who had been the chairman of the KGB for many years, had extensive information about the situation in the country. He understood the urgent need for reforms, but was afraid of even the slightest manifestations of liberalization. Therefore, his attempts at reform were mainly reduced to "putting things in order", that is, to investigate corruption in the highest echelons of power and improve labor discipline with the help of police raids on shops and cinemas, where they tried to catch people who were skipping work.
29 Sep 1984
"Golden" joining of two segments of the Baikal-Amur Mainline under construction - the famous BAM, the last "great construction site of socialism." The docking took place at the Balbukhta junction in the Kalarsky district of the Chita region, where two groups of builders met, moving towards each other for ten years.
10 Mar 1985
Death of the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Konstantin Chernenko, who became the leader of the party and state after the death of Yu. Andropov. K. Chernenko belonged to the same generation of Soviet leaders as L. Brezhnev and Yu. Andropov. The politician is even more cautious and conservative than Y. Andropov, he tried to return to the practice of the Brezhnev leadership. The apparent ineffectiveness of his activities prompted the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee to elect a representative of the next generation, Mikhail Gorbachev, as its new general secretary.
11 Mar 1985
Election of Mikhail Gorbachev as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. The coming to power of a relatively young (fifty-four-year-old) leader aroused optimistic expectations of long-overdue reforms in Soviet society. M. Gorbachev, as general secretary, wielded tremendous power. Having created his team of liberal-minded party and state leaders of the new generation, he set about transformations. However, it soon became clear that the new leadership did not have a specific program. M. Gorbachev and his team moved forward intuitively, overcoming the resistance of the conservative wing of the leadership and adapting to changing conditions.
Adoption of the decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU "On measures to overcome drunkenness and alcoholism", followed by a wide anti-alcohol campaign, conceived during the reign of Yu. Andropov. Sales restrictions have been introduced alcoholic beverages, increased administrative penalties for drunkenness and cut down tens of thousands of hectares of unique vineyards in the Crimea, Moldova and other regions of the country. The result of the thoughtlessly conducted campaign was not so much a decrease in alcohol consumption as a decrease in budget revenues (which depended on revenues from the wine trade) and a general spread of home brewing. The campaign damaged the reputation of the new leadership. M. Gorbachev was nicknamed "mineral secretary" for a long time.
27 Sep 1985
Nikolai Ryzhkov was appointed head of the Soviet government - chairman of the Council of Ministers. An engineer by training, in the past the general director of one of the largest industrial enterprises of the USSR - Uralmash (Ural Machine-Building Plant), N. Ryzhkov was appointed Secretary of the Central Committee for Economics in 1982 and joined the team created by Yu. Andropov to implement economic reforms. N. Ryzhkov became one of the main associates of M. Gorbachev. However, his knowledge and experience (in particular, in the field of economics) were insufficient to guide the reforms, which was revealed as the economic crisis in the country grew.
The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is the largest accident in the history of nuclear energy. During the scheduled test, a powerful explosion of the fourth power unit occurred, accompanied by the release of radioactive substances into the atmosphere. The Soviet leadership tried first to silence the catastrophe, and then downplay its scale (for example, despite the danger of mass infection, the May Day demonstration in Kiev was not canceled). With a great delay, the resettlement of residents from the 30-kilometer zone around the station began. About one hundred people died during the accident and from its consequences, and more than 115 thousand people were evicted from the area of the disaster. More than 600 thousand people took part in eliminating the consequences of the accident (which are still felt in Belarus and Ukraine). The Chernobyl accident dealt a blow to the prestige of the USSR, showing the unreliability of Soviet technology and the irresponsibility of the Soviet leadership.
Soviet-American summit meeting in Reykjavik. M. Gorbachev and US President R. Reagan reached an understanding on the elimination of intermediate and shorter-range missiles and the beginning of the reduction of nuclear stockpiles. Both countries experienced financial difficulties and had to limit the arms race. The corresponding agreement was signed on December 8, 1987. However, the United States' unwillingness to abandon the development of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), colloquially called the "Star Wars" program (ie, nuclear strikes from space), did not allow an agreement on a more radical nuclear disarmament.
Landing near the Kremlin light aircraft German amateur pilot Matthias Rust. After flying out of Helsinki, the 18-year-old pilot turned off his instruments and crossed the Soviet border unnoticed. After that, he was discovered several times by the air defense service, but he again disappeared from the radar and escaped pursuit. M. Rust himself claimed that his flight was a call for friendship between peoples, but many Soviet military and intelligence officers saw this as a provocation of the Western special services. M. Rust's flight was used by M. Gorbachev to update the leadership of the Ministry of Defense. The new minister was Dmitry Yazov, who was then a supporter of M. Gorbachev, but later supported the Emergency Committee.
Airing of the first issue of the most popular TV program of the 90s "Vzglyad". This program of the Central Television (later ORT) was created on the initiative of A. Yakovlev as an infotainment youth program by a group of young journalists (in particular, Vlad Listyev and Alexander Lyubimov). The program was broadcast live, which was a novelty for the Soviet viewer. This largely ensured the popularity of "Vzglyad", since earlier in the live broadcast one could see only sports matches and the first minutes of the General Secretary's speech at the CPSU congresses.In December 1990, at a time of extreme aggravation of the political struggle, Vzglyad was banned for several months, but soon again became the main political program that supported Boris Yeltsin's democratic reforms. However, many Vzglyad journalists, including A. Lyubimov, did not support the president at the decisive moment of the conflict with the Supreme Soviet - on the night of October 3–4, 1993, urging Muscovites to refrain from participating in the demonstration organized by E. Gaidar.Since 1994, the program began to appear as information and analytical. Closed in 2001 (see articles "" and "").
The publication in the Pravda newspaper of an article about the "cotton business" - an investigation into embezzlement in Uzbekistan, in which representatives of the republic's top leadership were involved. This article served as the signal for a widespread campaign to expose the corruption of the party and state apparatus.
27 Feb 1988
Armenian pogrom in Sumgait (Azerbaijan). Several dozen people were killed and several hundred were injured. This was the first case of mass violence motivated by ethno-national hatred during the years of perestroika. The reason for the pogrom was the conflict over the predominantly Armenian-populated Nagorno-Karabakh autonomous region as part of the Azerbaijan SSR. Both the Armenian majority in this district and the leadership of Armenia demanded to transfer Karabakh to this republic, while the leadership of Azerbaijan categorically objected. Demonstrations began in Karabakh in the summer, and in autumn and winter the conflict continued to worsen, accompanied by mass rallies and armed clashes. The intervention of the allied leadership, who called for calm, but generally supported the principle of immutability of borders, i.e. position of Azerbaijan did not lead to the normalization of the situation. Mass emigration of Armenians from Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis from Armenia began, murders took place in both republics on the basis of ethno-national hatred, and new pogroms took place in November-December (").
13 Mar 1988
The publication in Sovetskaya Rossiya (a newspaper of state-patriotic orientation) of an article by Nina Andreeva, a teacher at the Institute of Technology in Leningrad, “I Can't Give Up Principles,” which condemned “excesses” in criticism of Stalinism. The author contrasted his position as "left-liberals", i.e. pro-Western intellectuals and nationalists. The article raised public concern: is it not a signal that the restructuring is over? Under pressure from M. Gorbachev, the Politburo decided to condemn N. Andreeva's article.
On April 5, the main party newspaper Pravda published an article entitled "The principles of perestroika: revolutionary thinking and actions" by Alexander Yakovlev, in which the course towards democratization of public life was confirmed, and N. Andreeva's article was described as a manifesto of anti-perestroika forces ( see articles "", "").
16 Sep 1988
Premiere of the film "Needle" in Alma-Ata (film studio "Kazakhfilm", director Rashid Nugmanov, starring famous rock musicians Viktor Tsoi and Petr Mamonov). The film, dedicated to the problem of youth drug addiction, very quickly became a cult.
A powerful earthquake in the northwestern regions of Armenia (with a magnitude of 7.2 on the Richter scale), affecting about 40% of the republic's territory. The city of Spitak was completely destroyed, Leninakan and hundreds of other settlements were partially destroyed. At least 25,000 people died and about half a million were homeless in the earthquake. For the first time since cold war the Soviet authorities formally requested assistance from other countries, which readily provided humanitarian and technical support to deal with the aftermath of the earthquake. Thousands of volunteers arrived at the scene of the tragedy to provide all possible assistance to the victims: people brought food, water and clothing, donated blood, looked for survivors under the rubble, and evacuated the population in their cars.
26 Mar 1989
Election of the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. These were the first partially free elections in the history of the USSR, when in most constituencies there were alternative candidates with different programs. Despite the fact that the law established numerous "filters" that allowed the authorities to weed out unwanted candidates, many democratic-minded public figures were still elected. The elections were a triumph for Boris Yeltsin, who received more than 90% of the votes in Moscow (with a turnout of almost 90%). This is how the future president of Russia returned to politics. On the contrary, many local party leaders lost the elections. A number of democratic candidates were elected from public organizations. But on the whole, most of the deputies were controlled by the party apparatus and took moderate or openly conservative positions.
Holding the First Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR in Moscow, the broadcast from the meetings of which was watched by tens of millions of TV viewers. At the congress, a sharp struggle unfolded between democratically-minded deputies and the "aggressively obedient majority", as one of the opposition leaders called it, historian Yuri Afanasyev. Conservative deputies “slammed” democratic orators (they did not let them speak with applause and noise and drove them out of the rostrum), such as Academician A. Sakharov. M. Gorbachev at the congress relied on the majority, while trying not to alienate the democratic opposition from himself. The congress elected the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and appointed M. Gorbachev as its chairman. Boris Yeltsin also got into the Supreme Soviet - he lacked one vote before the election, and then one of the elected deputies gave up his mandate, thus giving way to Yeltsin. During the congress, the organizational formation of the democratic opposition - the Interregional Deputy Group took place.
Death of A. Sakharov, an outstanding Soviet scientist and public figure, one of the creators of the hydrogen bomb, leader of the human rights movement in the USSR, laureate Nobel Prize the world (1975). Tens of thousands of Muscovites took part in the funeral of A. Sakharov.
The fall of the regime of Nicolae Ceausescu - the most authoritarian of the communist regimes in Eastern Europe - after weeks of mass demonstrations and an unsuccessful attempt to suppress them with military force. On December 25, after a short trial, N. Ceausescu and his wife (who took an active part in organizing reprisals against opponents of the regime) were shot.
Opening of the first in the USSR fast food restaurant "McDonald's". On Pushkinskaya Square, long queues of people wishing to try classic American food - hamburgers - lined up. McDonald's was striking with unusual cleanliness - even in the winter slush, its floors were always perfectly washed. The attendants - young men and women - were unusually diligent and helpful, trying to reproduce in their behavior the ideal image of the West, which was opposed to the Soviet ("soviet", as they said at the time) way of life.
04 Feb 1990
A demonstration in Moscow, in which more than 200 thousand people took part, demanding the deepening of democratic reforms and the abolition of the 6th article of the USSR Constitution, which consolidated the leading role of the CPSU in Soviet society. On February 7, the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU voted to abolish the 6th article. M. Gorbachev was able to convince the party that it would be able to maintain its leading role under a multi-party system.
Election by the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of Metropolitan of Leningrad and Novgorod Alexy (1929-2008) as the head of the Russian Orthodox Church - Patriarch of Moscow. Alexy II replaced Patriarch Pimen, who died in May, in this post. The period of the patriarchate of Alexy II was marked by decisive changes in the life of the country, the crisis of communist ideology, the end of the persecution of citizens for their religious beliefs and the growth of religious sentiments in society. Under the leadership of the Patriarch, the ROC made attempts to establish control over various spheres of public life and culture ( see article "").
The death in a car accident of Viktor Tsoi, the leader of the Kino group and the brightest figure of the Leningrad rock club. Tsoi belonged to the “generation of janitors and watchmen,” as another famous musician, Boris Grebenshchikov, called the representatives of the forbidden culture (“underground”) of the 70s and 80s. This generation was brightly revealed during the years of perestroika. V. Tsoi's albums and films with his participation were very popular. V. Tsoi's song “We are waiting for change” became one of the symbols of perestroika: “Change! - our hearts demand. // Change! - our eyes demand. " The death of an idol at the peak of fame caused an extraordinary resonance among young people. In many cities “Tsoi walls” appeared, covered with words from songs and statements “Tsoi is alive”. The former place of work of V. Tsoi - a boiler room in St. Petersburg - has become a place of pilgrimage for fans of his work. Later, in 2003, the V. Tsoi club-museum was opened there.
17 Mar 1991
Conducting a union referendum on the preservation of the USSR, as well as a Russian referendum on the introduction of the post of President of the RSFSR. The union referendum was attended by 79.5% of citizens who had the right to vote, and 76.4% of them supported the preservation of the USSR (Results in the union republics that supported the referendum on the preservation of the USSR on March 17, 1991). The Allied leadership wanted to use the victory in the referendum to prevent the collapse of the Union and force the republics to sign a new Union Treaty. However, six union republics (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Armenia, Georgia, Moldavia) boycotted the referendum on the grounds that they had already made decisions on secession from the USSR. True, in Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia (which sought to secede from Moldova and Georgia, respectively), the majority of citizens took part in the vote and spoke in favor of preserving the USSR, which meant an intensification of the internal conflict in these republics. 71.3% of the participants in the Russian referendum supported the creation of the presidency.
Election of Boris Yeltsin President of the RSFSR. He won already in the first round, ahead of the communist and nationalist candidates who opposed him. Simultaneously with B. Yeltsin, Aleksandr Rutskoi, General of Aviation and one of the leaders of the democratically-minded Communist deputies, was elected Vice-President. On the same day, the first direct elections of heads of regions took place. Mintimer Shaimiev was elected President of Tatarstan, and chairmen of the democratic Moscow City Council and Leningrad City Council Gavriil Popov and Anatoly Sobchak were elected mayors of Moscow and St. Petersburg.
On July 4, 1991, the Chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR Boris Yeltsin signed the law "On the privatization of the housing stock in the RSFSR"
False
On November 18, 1991, the Mexican television series "The Rich Also Cry" was released on the television screens of the USSR. It was the second soap opera to be shown on our television after the hugely successful Slave Izaura.
False
On December 25, 1991, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev announced the termination of his activity in this post "for reasons of principle."
The statement of the President of the USSR M. Gorbachev on his resignation and the transfer to the President of the RSFSR B. Yeltsin of the so-called "nuclear suitcase", with the help of which the head of state has the ability to control the use of nuclear weapons. From that day on, the RSFSR was officially called the Russian Federation. Instead of the Soviet red flag, a tricolor Russian flag was raised over the Kremlin.
On January 2, 1992, price liberalization took place in Russia, which marked the beginning of large-scale market reforms carried out by the government of Yegor Gaidar.
23 Feb 1992
From 8 to 23 February 1992, the 16th Winter Olympic Games were held in Albertville, France. They became the third in the history of France - the first were in Chamonix in 1924, the second in Grenoble in 1968.
31 Mar 1992
On March 31, 1992, the Federal Treaty was signed in the Kremlin, one of the main sources of the constitutional law of the Russian Federation in the field of regulating federal relations.
On April 6, 1992, the VI Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation opened. It was the first sharp confrontation between the legislative and executive branches of power on two main issues - the course of the economic reform and the draft of the new Constitution.
On August 14, 1992, Boris Yeltsin signed a decree "On the introduction of the system of privatization checks in the Russian Federation", which launched the voucher privatization in Russia.
07 Sep 1992
On October 1, 1992, Russia began issuing privatization checks, which are popularly called vouchers.
False
Support for the president in the referendum by the majority of Russians who expressed confidence in the president (58.7%) and approved of his socio-economic policy (53%). Despite Boris Yeltsin's moral victory, the constitutional crisis was not overcome.
23 Sep 1993
Holding the X Extraordinary (Extraordinary) Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation in connection with B. Yeltsin's decree No. 1400. On the very first day of its work, the congress decided to depose B. Yeltsin. Vice-president A. Rutskoi was appointed acting president, who, along with the chairman of the Supreme Soviet, R. Khasbulatov, was the leader of the opposition. The White House, the seat of the Supreme Soviet, around which the events of the August putsch unfolded, was cordoned off by the police. As in August 1991, the White House was surrounded by barricades. Nationalist militants hastily gathered in Moscow to defend the Supreme Soviet.
The capture of the White House by troops loyal to the president. During this operation, the tanks, warning of the opening of fire, fired several shots (and not with live shells, but with training blanks) at the upper floors of the White House, where, as it was known in advance, there was not a single person. In the afternoon, units loyal to the government occupied the White House and arrested the organizers of the coup. As a result of these events, there were no fatalities, which, unfortunately, cannot be said about armed clashes on the street: from September 21 to October 4, from 141 (according to the General Prosecutor's Office) to 160 (according to a special parliamentary commission) people died in them. This was a tragic consequence of the October conflict, but it was he who made it possible to avoid an even more terrible development of events - a repetition of the civil war, when more than 10 million people died.
Elections to the State Duma and a referendum on the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
The resignation of Yegor Gaidar from the post of First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation, to which he was appointed on September 18, 1993 - on the eve of the decisive events associated with the struggle between the President and the Supreme Soviet. On the night of October 3-4, when the militants of the Supreme Soviet tried to seize the Ostankino television center, E. Gaidar's televised address to Muscovites calling to gather at the Moscow City Council building and express support for the president helped to turn the tide in favor of Boris Yeltsin. However, the electoral bloc “Russia's Choice” created by E. Gaidar failed to obtain a majority in the Duma in the December 1993 elections, which could have allowed the continuation of radical market reforms. It became obvious that the government of V. Chernomyrdin would be forced to pursue the previous policy of compromises. Under these conditions, E. Gaidar left the government and focused on work as the leader of the Duma faction "Russia's Choice". More E. Gaidar did not work in the government ( see articles "", "" and "").
Return to Russia of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. On this day, the writer flew to Magadan from the United States, where he lived since 1974 after his expulsion from the USSR. The writer, widely regarded as a triumphant, made the long trip across the country.
01 Mar 1995
A military parade in Moscow in honor of the 50th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany. The parade consisted of two parts - historical and modern. The historical part took place on Red Square. It was attended by veterans of the Great Patriotic War, who marched across Red Square in columns of war-era fronts, with front banners in front; as well as servicemen dressed in the uniform of the Red Army of the 40s. The modern part of the parade took place on Poklonnaya Hill, where units of the Russian army and modern military equipment marched. The reason for this division was the condemnation of hostilities by the leaders of other countries on the territory of the Chechen Republic. They refused to attend the parade of the troops participating in these events, and it is for this reason that only the historical part of the parade was held on Red Square.