How history is rewritten in school textbooks of the peoples of the former USSR
The retelling of the 2009 study of the year stories Russia and the peoples of the post-Soviet countries in school textbooks of the history of the new independent states ”for ease of reading is divided into two parts.
About this study
187 12 history textbooks and textbooks from the countries of the former Soviet Union: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and Estonia were collected, partially translated from national languages and analyzed. Tajikistan and Turkmenistan remained outside the field of analysis, and they could not get their textbooks.
The textbooks studied are the most popular or even the only ones in the schools of the respective states. At the same time, mass polls were conducted in the countries, allowing to assess what images of the past exist in the public consciousness of each of the countries. Based on the materials collected in the framework of these projects, this report has been prepared. A study of this scale in Russia was conducted for the first time.
How history is rewritten in school textbooks of the peoples of the former USSR
The collapse of the USSR and the formation of independent states on its territory made new textbooks of history vital for the idea of a new national statehood vital.
In the book “How a story is told to children in different countries of the world,” written at the turn of 1980-1990, Mark Ferro stated: “In the east, from Prague to Ulan Bator, all ethnic and national conflicts were explained until recently according to one the same model allegedly belonging to Marx, but in the Moscow interpretation. And all the societies of the South decolonize their history, and often by the same means that the colonialists used, that is, they construct a story opposite to the one that was imposed on them before. ”
At the present time, “decolonization” historiography and the corresponding educational literature have fully developed in the post-Soviet countries. An analysis of school textbooks on the history of post-Soviet countries shows that all other countries (with the exception of Belarus and to a lesser extent Armenia) have taken the path of teaching the younger generation a nationalistic interpretation of history based on myths about the antiquity of their people, about the high cultural mission of their ancestors and about the “sworn the enemy. " At the same time, the image of Russia and Russians is often used as a “sworn enemy”.
Further on a number of the most vivid and illustrative examples taken from the studied textbooks, let's see how they cover the following key questions:
Contacts with Russia and Russians
Joining Russia
Being in Russia
Evaluation of the Soviet period
Origin of the Second World War
Contacts with Russia and Russians
A common feature of school textbooks of new national states (with the exception of Belarus and Armenia) is the desire to present contacts with Russians and Russia as a source of disasters.
Latvia and Estonia
In Latvian and Estonian textbooks, attempts to jointly reflect the crusades, which were highlighted in the Soviet period, are relegated to the shadows. The crusades themselves in modern textbooks are interpreted as communion with civilization. It is regretted that the crusade stopped at the borders of Russia: “Why did the West not carry out a large-scale crusade against Russia? By 1240, time was lost. ”
“The Livonian War (1558 – 1583) turned into a disaster for Estonia. Most of the population died. " The Livonian War brought "unheard of disasters to the Latvian people." It was only because of bad organization that the Russians were forced to cede Livonia to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden. At the same time, the Russians are to blame for the fact that the Latvian peasants received, besides the remaining German barons, also new masters, and the free city of Riga surrendered to the Poles.
However, the Swedes, the Danes, the Poles, and the local Livonian noblemen were operating on the lands of Livonia. The blame for the destruction lies with Russia. The final desolation of Livonia came after the Swedish-Polish wars (1600 – 1629), which resulted from the desire to break apart, as before Livonia, which had suffered from the Troubles in Russia. Hunger 1602- 1604 and the plague coupled with the merciless Polish and Swedish raids over a whole generation almost completely destroyed the Estonian peasant population. According to the Estonian Encyclopedic Reference Book, the decline in population in 4 – 5 is noted not once after the Livonian War, but in 1620 – 1640, that is, just at the time of the end of the Swedish-Polish wars.
The temporary elimination of Russia from the Eastern European arena due to the Time of Troubles turned out to Livonia even more terrible wars, epidemics, hunger strikes and instability. But Estonian textbooks are silent about this.
Georgia
In the Georgian textbook to characterize the allied relations of Peter I and Vakhtang VI, the words of the writer Ivane Javakhishvili are cited: “Having drawn Georgia into a war in their own interests, betraying the enemy and leaving it to their fate, Peter the Great did not even want to shelter himself deceived unfortunate Vakhtang VI. The authors are silent about the fact that the Presny region was donated to Moscow in Vakhtanga, where he and his associates founded a significant Georgian settlement in Moscow and were able to develop, according to other Georgian authors, “intensive creative activity”.
Azerbaijan
The first historical acquaintances of Azerbaijanis with Russians are described in the textbooks as terrible disasters for the former: “During the 914 campaign of the year, the Slavic militia for months continuously plundered and plundered settlements on the Azerbaijani shores of the Caspian Sea. They persecuted civilians, hijacked women and children. ” In other episodes of the section, the authors describe the savagery perpetrated by the Russians, as if they themselves were witnesses to this. The whole section is a complete list of atrocities. When describing Iranian, Arabic and all other invasions, the atrocities of the conquerors were nowhere to be so accentuated, and if they were mentioned, they were immediately softened by examples of positive content.
Uzbekistan
If you follow the logic of Uzbek historians, the development of the Turkestan khanate was distinguished by relative stability until the beginning of the 18th century. But then difficult times came, and Russia was to blame for this: “the origins of the Russian conquest of Turkestan go back to the time of Peter I, when in 1717 a two-thousand detachment of Russian soldiers headed by Bekovich-Cherkassky invaded the territory of the Khiva principality, but was destroyed by the ruler of Khiva Shergazi- Khan. Did the Russian emperor, who had by this time created one of the strongest armies of Europe and Asia, venture to move such small forces to war? The fact is that the Bekovich-Cherkassky detachment is one of the many military topographic expeditions often sent by the Russian emperor to the borders and beyond the borders of Russia. Had it really been military intervention, after the defeat of Bekovich, more powerful forces would have moved to the Khiva border, since the Russian military command had no obstacles to the movement of its military contingents. But the destruction of a geographical expedition only proved to Russia that the Central Asian territories are dangerous to explore.
Joining Russia
The accession of territories to Russia and the Russian Empire, as a rule, is evaluated negatively. The benefits received by the peoples within the framework of a large state are ignored; the emphasis is on the loss of independence.
Estonia
In Estonian textbooks, when describing the events of the 17th century, when the territory of Estonia was part of Sweden, the improvement of the economic and cultural position of the Estonian people by the end of the century mainly dominated. Despite the legalization of serfdom, the massive "witch hunt", the Swedish time is regarded as extremely favorable. The Northern War (1700 – 1721) is regarded as a terrible disaster, and joining Russia is a national tragedy. Estonians, according to all textbooks, acted on the side of the Swedes, served in the Swedish army and local militia. The final conclusion, assessing Russia's victory in the Northern War, leaves behind the fact that the demographic impact on Estonia was caused by the pre-war “great famine” of 1695 – 1697, and the plague that killed three-quarters of the city’s inhabitants and about half of the rural population brought Estland and Livonia are Swedish troops. Peter came to the land, deserted before the war from famine, already devastated by Swedish exactions and almost finished off with plague.
Ukraine
In Ukrainian textbooks, the reunification of Ukraine with Russia is presented as Moscow’s recognition of Ukraine’s independence. The March Articles, which establish the conditions of service of the Zaporozhye troops to the Russian Tsar, are called the Ukrainian-Moscow 1654 Treaty: "Ukraine was recognized as an independent power ... the Ukrainian-Moscow Treaty of 1654 ... legalized the Ukrainian Cossack Power as an independent participant in international politics." The fictional “Ukrainian Cossack Power” is then “destroyed” by Moscow, which is called one of the “grave crimes of tsarism before the Ukrainian people”.
Cossacks are an all-Russian phenomenon, not a Ukrainian peculiarity. This is exactly what brings the history of the two countries together, and does not divide. The Cossacks are a military organization, not a state, it did not have sovereignty, it served the sovereign, protecting the borders of the state. And it could not become the basis of Ukrainian statehood and identity, it is a myth. Ukrainian school textbooks assert that the Zaporozhian Army was an independent state. The Cossack state allegedly possessed all the attributes of sovereignty: symbols (emblem and banner), army, court, administrative system (regiments, hundreds). And now, for comparison, take the Don Cossack army. Without difficulty it turns out that it possessed all the listed attributes. It even led an independent foreign policy, sometimes creating a serious problem for the Moscow state with its neighbors (Turkey and Persia).
Georgia
The Georgian textbook for the 5 class “Chronicle of Our Motherland” treats the annexation of the territories of the Georgian kingdoms and principalities to Russia as a conquest: “In Georgievsk, Georgia and Russia concluded a friendly agreement. This contract is known as the Georgievsk Treaty ... The Russian government did not fulfill the terms of the Georgievsk Treaty ... In 1801, by order of the Russian emperor, the kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti was abolished - Eastern Georgia became one of the provinces of Russia ... It was the turn of other Georgian kingdoms and principalities. Gradually, Russia conquered all of Georgia and established Russian rule in it. ”
The authors of the textbook for the 10 class “History of Georgia (from ancient times to 1801 year)” do not find a single positive word regarding the treatise: “The conclusion of the Treaty of St. George was a great diplomatic mistake. Its consequences turned out to be disastrous not only for Kartli and Kakheti, but also for the whole of Georgia. ” The corresponding paragraph ends like this: “Russia has unhindered achieved what Turkey and Iran could not achieve in fierce battles. She abolished the Kartli-Kakheti kingdom without any complications. The abolition of the kingdom was the result of both internal weakness and unfavorable international situation. But the Georgian people did not put up with the loss of independence and continued to fight for their freedom. ”
Azerbaijan
The annexation of the territories of modern Azerbaijan to Russia, which began at the end of the 18th century, is drawn exclusively as anti-Azerbaijani expansion: “The natural resources of Azerbaijan, in particular, the richest mineral deposits available here, were well known to Russian science. It is not by chance that the government of Catherine II linked the appropriation of these riches with the occupation of this country. ”
Descriptions of any actions of Russians, their intentions, as well as specific characters are supplied with characteristic epithets - “cruel”, “treacherous”, “greedy”. But the paradox is that the material given in the textbook does not confirm these characteristics and, on the contrary, there are far greater reasons to extend these characteristics to the opposite side. Here is an example of the "deceit" of the Russians: “In the hands of the colonialists, the military courts were a convenient punitive weapon for dealing with those who opposed social and colonial oppression. A number of cruel punishments during the khans were canceled. ” It seems that the author deliberately brings the thesis to the point of absurdity.
Being in Russia
The main content of national history in the period of being a part of the Russian Empire and the USSR is the national liberation struggle. This struggle is constructed by the authors of the "scrap materials".
Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan’s textbook provides an example of such a design: “The struggle of the Kazakh people against Russian colonialism lasted a long time, covering the second half of the 18th century. until 90-ies of XX century. ". Next in the series of events of the national liberation struggle, the “events in Temirtau 1959” were named - protests of workers of the all-Union Komsomol youth construction against unbearable living conditions.
Estonia
An Estonian high school student must finish school with the firm conviction that modern Estonian culture, despite all the Russification, is the result of the influence of the disappeared local Ostsee culture. “There was a professional culture in the native language. Its development took place in the context of opposition from the Baltic and Russian circles. The level achieved by Estonian literature, art and music by the end of the 19th century is comparable to the level of Ostsee culture that has developed over the centuries. At the same time, we must not forget that the Ostsee provincial culture was part of the great German culture, and through it - the common Western European culture. ”
At the same time, textbooks silence the fact that the emerging professional Estonian culture, in order to compete with the “great German culture,” relied on Russian professional culture, and not in the Ostsee province, but in the Russian capital. Suffice it to say that all the leaders of the Estonian national revival either studied in St. Petersburg, or lived or were there. Subsequently, Estonian painting, sculpture, music, ballet, theater, jurisprudence, military science, etc. etc. grew up under the direct influence of representatives of Russian art and scientific schools.
Ukraine
Ukrainian textbooks view the stay of the territories of modern Ukraine within Russia as the destruction of the “Ukrainian Cossack State”.
The participation of the "Hetman" in the Northern War, some Strukevich AK, Romanyuk I.M., Pirus TP considered as “the tragedy of the Ukrainian people”, and a protest against Peter I of Hetman I. Mazepa as “an attempt to free themselves from Moscow tsarism”. V. Mysan presents I. Mazepa’s treason as a plan of “liberation from the Moscow yoke”, which he used to use Karl XII for his own purposes. Karl XII, thus, from one of the main actors of the Northern War turns into an object of the policy of the ingenious hetman. V. Vlasov betrayed I. Mazepa originally defined as an "anti-colonial uprising against Muscovy", then softened the wording to "Mazepa's uprising." He is trying to prove that the hetman had no choice: allegedly a victory for any of the parties would have meant the elimination of “Ukrainian autonomy”, so he chose “the only possible solution”: “release from the power of the king before the end of the war and the signing of a separate peace treaty” . In reality, it was not a separate peace, but a transition to the side of Charles XII.
Georgia
Georgian historiography claims that “as a result of the abolition of statehood and the establishment of the Russian military-occupation regime, the entire population of Georgia, all social strata and classes were in a difficult situation. That is why, at the beginning of the 19th century, the whole of society was involved in the struggle for the restoration of statehood: the royal house of Bagration, princes, Aznauri (nobles), clergy, and peasantry. ”
All this can hardly be called anything other than myth-making. A large part of Georgian society took the entry of Georgian lands into the Russian Empire purely positively. Numerous Georgians, including representatives of aristocratic families, honestly served Russia, which the authors prefer to keep silent or speak casually and unwillingly. They did not say a word about the fact that not all representatives of the Bagration family were opposed to Russia. The authors decided not to mention General Peter Ivanovich Bagration. Obviously, they are so annoyed by the fact that PI Bagration was an illustrious Russian commander that only two sentences were devoted to the 1812 war of the year in the textbook: “In June 1812, the French Emperor Napoleon attacked Russia. The military successes of the French army put Russia in a difficult position. ”
Evaluation of the Soviet period
With the exception of Armenia and Belarus, history textbooks of new national states bring charges against the Russian empire and the Soviet Union of the genocide of their peoples.
In the Kazakhstan textbook, the paragraph on hunger 1931 – 1933. bears the name “Goloshchekin's genocide and the tragedy of the Kazakh aul”. In Kyrgyzstan’s textbooks, the suppression of the uprising in Turkestan 1916 is called genocide. In the Ukrainian textbooks, the all-Union famine 1932 – 1933 is described as genocide. In Azerbaijani textbooks, the whole policy of Russia and the USSR is depicted as genocide. Textbooks of Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Moldova and Uzbekistan assess political repression as an ethnic genocide.
Latvia and Estonia
The entire period of “Soviet occupation” (1944 – 1991) was estimated by Moscow as carrying out a targeted “genocide against the people of Latvia”, during which the USSR carried out “terror”, “intensified russification” and “colonization”, tried using “migrants” and "Unreasonable growth of industry" to achieve its main goal - "destroy the identity" of Latvians. It is emphasized that many "innocent people" suffered, who were "accused of collaborating with the Nazis." After the war, the resistance of the Soviet authorities in Latvia was much broader and more organized than in 1940, since "the population of Latvia already had the bitter experience of the Soviet occupation." Despite the fact that in the resistance units there were persons “prepared by the Germans for the struggle in the rear of the Red Army”, this movement “had a national character”.
The restoration and development of industry in the Latvian SSR is assessed as “unreasonable growth of industry” due to the “migration” of the population from other regions of the USSR and the infringement of collectivization of agriculture. It is emphasized that "the consequences of this policy were the pollution of nature, the shortage of housing and food." It is “migration” that has become a “colossal problem” for Latvia, where “foreigners” have gone in “searching for a better life”. And the conclusion is made: "The leadership of the USSR purposefully flooded Latvia with hundreds of thousands of migrants and tried to destroy the identity of the people of Latvia with their help."
In Estonian textbooks, the idea of the purposeful relocation of large masses of the "Russian-speaking" population to the Baltic states does not even require, in the opinion of the authors, evidence. “Some regions of Estonia — first of all, large industrial cities — have become Russian-speaking as a result of the colonization policy, and the Estonian population has practically disappeared from them”. In short, it can be said that the emergence of a large Russian population is primarily associated with rapid industrial construction, which began in the 60s. Estonia was notable for its discipline and good organization of production, investments in the Estonian industry were efficient and yielded great returns. Estonia from the end of the 50-ies became a kind of Western showcase of the Soviet Union. This is also written by the authors of textbooks. Labor for industrial construction and work in built enterprises was brought in from outside, from other republics of the USSR. For all these achievements, of course, I had to pay. Estonians had to pay a decrease in their share in the country's population to almost 62%. The Russian national minority paid for the achievements of the Soviet Estonian economy with its lower social status.
“If you take the position of the“ occupation ”theory, it seems completely implausible that in Estonia in 60 – 80 years there was a completely Estonian-centrist situation in the field of culture, science, education ... The proportions of employment of Estonians and Russian-speaking residents in the republic in the national economy science, public administration. If 2 / 3 industrial workers were non-Estonians, in management, educational and cultural spheres the ratio was exactly the opposite ... In a sociological context, by the beginning of 80-s, the structure of the Estonian population gives grounds for asserting that Estonians were then formed into a social group with a higher social status, and between Estonians and non-Estonians there were not just differences, but social distance, ”writes a well-known Estonian sociologist and philosopher Yevgeny Golikov.
Ukraine
Ukrainian textbooks cultivate the myth of the USSR as a totalitarian "empire", leading a policy of "Russification", where "there was no Ukrainian statehood." Thus, the role of the Ukrainian SSR as the founder of the USSR is reduced and the question of the violent “Ukrainization” of 1920 - the beginning of the 1930's - is removed. On the whole, the pre-war period in the history of Ukraine within the USSR is characterized as follows: “under extremely difficult conditions of a lack of statehood and the totalitarian Stalinist regime, it (the Ukrainian nation) in a short time rebuilt its economy and achieved its further development.
In Ukrainian textbooks, the all-Union famine of 1932-1933 qualifies as genocide. The “Holodomor” is viewed in the context of Stalin’s repressions. The authors of the textbooks refer to losses from the “famine” from 3 to 12 million, which, given the general demographic situation in the country, is a clear exaggeration. In addition, often all-union hunger losses are issued for the losses of one Ukraine.
As one of the main features of the Soviet post-war policy in the Ukrainian SSR, all authors of textbooks distinguish Russification. At the same time, they themselves bring facts that contradict their myth. For example, “the volume of broadcasts of national television was shared in half in the language”, and as regards the ratio of published books and released films in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, here, as a rule, it is not taken into account that a significant part of them were produced outside Ukraine, including in Belarus and Moldova.
Georgia
Georgian textbooks characterize Soviet power as the “Russian occupation regime.” It is indicative that the authors, consistently stigmatizing the Soviet power, quite neutrally and even with some sympathy, characterize the personality of I.V. Stalin. The roots of this “neutralism” are clear: being nationalists, the authors are prone to apologetics of their compatriots. They notice that the Soviet political system established by Stalin "somewhat embellished the Russian occupation regime."
The interpretation by the authors of the consequences of dispelling the cult of personality is extremely curious. As is known, in the spring of 1956 in Georgia there were large-scale protests against the new course of the party, proclaimed by N.S. Khrushchev. The authors are trying to convince schoolchildren that "criticism of the personality cult of Stalin ... turned into a clear insult and humiliation of the Georgian nation ... It was emphasized ... that the Georgian factor played a significant role in the Stalinist repressions." Where the authors have gathered such facts remains unknown.
Azerbaijan
In the Azerbaijani textbooks, the whole policy of Russia and the USSR is depicted as genocide: “As a result of the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide, deliberately carried out in the past two centuries in the Caucasus against Azerbaijanis, our people survived the hardship and deprivation, national tragedies.”
The authors of the motives for the rejection of the Cyrillic alphabet are curious, in addition to the fact that it was also a manifestation of Russification: “In 1929, work was completed on translating Azerbaijani script from Arabic into Latin. However ... starting with 1940, they began to introduce the Cyrillic alphabet. And this, becoming a new expression of Russification, at the same time was an attempt to deprive the Azerbaijani people of ancient written sources reflecting its centuries-old history. ” The authors clearly did not think that the Azeri in ancient times did not use Latin graphics.
Such a collection of facts presented in the textbook, of course, cannot objectively reflect the reality of 20's. The intention to present everything in black as the targeted anti-Azerbaijan intrigues of the “eternal enemies” - Armenians - in alliance with the Russians under the tutelage of the “Soviet empire” cannot lead to historical truth. This becomes obvious immediately with the transition to the next section of the textbook on industrialization: “Drunk by communist propaganda, living and working with faith in building a communist society soon ... the workers erecting more and more gigantic industrial objects with great enthusiasm. Living half starving, working in difficult conditions and not having any equipment at hand, the workers showed wonders of labor courage and heroism. ” Where could the enthusiasm of Russian-Armenian oppression come from?
Uzbekistan
In general, it can be stated that modern Uzbek history textbooks deny the progressive, modernizing and innovative role of the “Center” (ie, Soviet Russia and other Union Republics) in the development of the economy and culture of Uzbekistan in the 20th century. According to the authors of the textbooks, the “Center” only brutally oppressed, exploited and used the unhappy Uzbek people for their own selfish purposes, and the latter, despite all the machinations of the “Center”, built, irrigated, sowed and collected, built, invented, developed it.d. . etc. It turns out that the Uzbek people in the XX century did not get anything, absolutely nothing good from living together side by side with the Russian people. Only violence, terror, exploitation.
The complete lack of textbooks on the destructive Tashkent earthquake 26 of April 1966 of the year is striking. An earthquake with a jolting force greater than 8 on the Richter scale and an 5,3 magnitude destroyed 10 square kilometers in the center of the capital of the then Uzbek SSR. 78 of thousands of families or over 300 of thousands of 1,5 millions living in Tashkent then remained without shelter. Thanks to the help of the fraternal peoples of the USSR, of all the Union republics, Tashkent not only survived a terrible catastrophe, but was also fully restored by 1969. The city was actually rebuilt into a modern metropolis, the area and population of which increased 1,5 times. Tashkent then turned into the most beautiful city of Asia, into its informal capital. And just about this, the authors of textbooks prefer not to recall.
Causes of World War II
The causes of the Second World War textbooks of Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Moldova and Ukraine are associated with the “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact” and call the Soviet Union the aggressor. Such an image of the USSR helps to justify local accomplices of fascism and to represent them as fighters for national independence.
Latvia
The “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact” as the primary source of the “Soviet occupation” of Latvia is mentioned in all Latvian history books of the 20th century. It is emphasized that, despite the mutual ideological hatred, Hitler and Stalin "unanimously agreed on the destruction of the new states that emerged after the collapse of the old empires."
It is emphasized that in June 1940, the Soviet government, under the threat of military force and a far-fetched pretext, categorically demanded that the Latvian government allow any number of Red Army soldiers to be deployed in Latvia. The government of Ulmanis, "without asking the opinion of the people, agreed with such an unjust demand to save the population from heavy casualties in an unequal war."
The process of establishing Soviet power in Latvia was accompanied by Kremlin “provocations” and the activity of pro-Soviet “collaborators”. The Soviet special services "began to provoke demonstrations and street processions of disgruntled residents in the largest cities of Latvia, and also contributed to their clashes with the police." At the same time, it is recognized that among the participants of demonstrations and processions "there were also volunteers" who believed in communism or hoped to extract some benefits from the change of power.
The presentation of the topic of "incorporation" and "annexation" of Latvia is dominated by political and legal qualifications of the actions of the USSR as "illegal, illegal"; Kirchenstein's pro-Soviet government is defined as “puppet”, holding elections to the people's Seimas and its decision to declare Soviet power as “anti-constitutional” and inspired from Moscow, and the election results themselves as “corrected”.
Latvian textbooks claim that in the summer of 1941, the Latvians met the Germans as “liberators”. The reason for this was “the ruthless treatment of the population in the year of communist rule”, which was remembered as a “terrible year”. The Germans were greeted with flowers, as it was “all the same who would have banished the hated Soviet occupation power from Latvia”. But the trouble was that Hitler was a totalitarian leader just like Stalin, so "already at the beginning of the occupation, the Latvians lost all hope of restoring the independence of the state." It is reported that it was the Soviet repressions that were “to blame” for the fact that in Latvia there was no resistance movement to the German occupiers.
Latvian textbooks emphasize that the people of Latvia were “illegally drafted” into the Latvian SS Legion, but “fought for freedom”. "The Latvian warriors, however, fought bravely, they believed that Latvia’s freedom would be restored." The Latvians "had hopes that in time the Legion, as well as the Latvian Riflemen in the First World War and the Liberation War, will become the core of the army of restoring independent Latvia." In some textbooks, the Latvian Legion’s membership in the SS is not mentioned at all, in others it is explained that “only the name” connected the organization and parts of the SS to the Latvians.
Estonia
In Estonian textbooks, the key event for the interpretation of the Second World War is the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Responsibility for the failure of the Anglo-Soviet-French negotiations on concluding an agreement on mutual assistance aimed at curbing Hitler’s aggression rests solely with the USSR. The reason indicates the expansionist aspirations of the Kremlin. One of the textbooks writes that negotiations on the anti-Hitler coalition began in Moscow in July 1939 and reached an impasse after Soviet representatives demanded the immediate passage of Soviet troops to the western borders of Poland and Romania. Why the Soviet Union had to send troops through Poland is by no means explained.
In Estonia, the themes of the outbreak of World War II and the loss of independence by the Baltic countries are considered as interrelated. On September 1, 1939, Germany attacked Poland. On September 28, 1939, the USSR forced Estonia to conclude a mutual assistance treaty, according to which Soviet land, sea and aviation military bases and troops totaling 25 people. Nevertheless, there was no question of the annexation and sovietization of Estonia. There is no documentary evidence of such plans. The only intention was to create their own spheres of influence in Eastern Europe within the framework and limits allowed by the then international law and custom, and taking into account the growing war. The limited contingent of the Red Army was located in strictly designated areas. It was strictly forbidden to the military to contact the local population.
Events in Estonia 21 June 1940, when numerous left-wing activists gathered in the capital, demanded the resignation of the government from President Päts, in the textbooks they call it the “June coup”. To illustrate the direct intervention of the Red Army in these events, the textbook lists two similar photos with the caption “Accompanied by the Red Army armored vehicles, demonstrators are sent to Kadriorg. Later, when the participation of the Red Army in the June coup was required to hide, such pictures were “processed” - the armored cars disappeared (see the bottom photo). ” However, on closer examination it can be seen that this is not a photo that has been retouched, but two different photos. Moreover, photos with armored cars were repeatedly published and widely known.
The desire to present the USSR only as a “fellow traveler”, who at some stage joined the anti-Hitler coalition, whose founders and main forces were the United States and Great Britain, forces them to manipulate chronology. "The formation of the anti-fascist coalition began with the proclamation of the Atlantic Charter, signed by Roosevelt and Churchill on August 14 of 1941 of the year." After a couple of paragraphs, the author casually informs that “the official military alliance between the USSR and England was concluded on July 12 of the year 1941”. And the Washington Declaration of 26 of countries (including the USSR) of 1 in January of 1942, which officially issued the anti-Hitler coalition, is not even mentioned.
The role of the USSR and the Red Army in the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allies in Estonian textbooks, as a rule, is not denied, but is diminished by simple rhetorical devices. So, Theodorov in the "Newest History" evades from disclosing the fact that it was the Soviet troops who took Berlin. If you do not know in advance, when reading a textbook, you might think that either all allies together or the Americans did it. Only a few pages later, narrating about the Potsdam Conference, the author notes that “the troops of the Western allies were brought into Berlin, occupied by Soviet troops ...”
Over the past two decades, official ideas about the role and place of Estonia and Estonian in World War II have radically changed. The initial post-Soviet view of Estonians about the war as a fratricidal tragedy was replaced by the statement that Estonia had lost the war. They try to present history textbooks with the German occupiers as forced rather than voluntary and conscious. Estonian history textbooks see such cooperation with the fascists primarily as a struggle for independence. Strictly speaking, only the battles that were fought by the Estonian SS units, the Wehrmacht, rear guard units, the Luftwaffe, etc. are referred to as freedom fights. on the territory of Estonia. But the participation of Estonian volunteers in the battles of Stalingrad, punitive operations in Belarus and the Pskov region, the protection of concentration camps in the Donbas and defensive battles in Poland is also not called aggression and occupation.
Ukraine
In Ukrainian textbooks, the term Great Patriotic War is not used by all authors. Some call it "Soviet-German." It is alleged that the Second World War was unleashed jointly by the USSR and Germany as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, here both powers act as an aggressor.
An important role in the textbooks is played by the myth of the two currents of the Resistance movement in Ukraine: the Soviet and the independent, while the independent OUN-UPA allegedly “had to fight on two fronts” and “presented the greatest threat to the Nazis”. However, not a single successful operation of the UPA against the Germans. Not reported who supplied them with uniforms and weapons. The facts of the murder of the Soviet intelligence officer N. Kuznetsov and General Vatutin by the OUN men are ignored. The Volyn tragedy of 1943 was not mentioned when the OUN organized the genocide of the Polish population in Volyn.
There is a clear attempt to rehabilitate collaborators in the context of "repression in Western Ukraine" after the arrival of the Red Army. The Ukrainian textbooks replicate falsification of punitive operations against the population of Western Ukraine of the NKVD employees disguised as UPA. In the textbook S.V. Kulchitsky and Yu.I. Shapoval is a photo with the signature: “The soldiers of the special forces of the NKVD, disguised as UPA soldiers. Western Ukraine, 1947 However, it is proved that the picture - "bohku" UPA. And this is despite the fact that the same authors admit that the UPA fighters wore the Soviet uniform to carry out their punitive actions against the local population, who were pro-Soviet. As we see, the atrocities committed by nationalists in historical reality are attributed to the Soviet authorities by modern history textbooks.
Georgia
History textbooks of Georgia call the culprits of World War II Germany and the Soviet Union. When describing events 1941 – 1945. Georgian textbooks use the term “Great Patriotic War”, but at the same time they say that it was not domestic for all Georgians. The term “Soviet-German war” is widely used as a “neutral”. The authors are forced to maneuver between sympathies with the Stalinist Soviet Union and Georgian collaborators, representatives of the “national movement” who fought against the “Russian occupation regime”. Equally in detail about the participation of Georgians in the war as part of the Soviet Army and partisan movement, and in the ranks of the German Wehrmacht.
Azerbaijan
In the Azerbaijani school, the events of the Great Patriotic War are served ambivalently. The nostalgic pathos of Soviet patriotism clearly sounds in phrases scattered throughout the text, like: “May 9 went down in history as Victory Day ... The USSR emerged victorious from the war. The achievement of this victory of the Azerbaijani people is of great merit. " At the same time, literally, “by lines from another song”, confusing everything, the topic of cooperation with the Nazis bursts in: “December 22 1941. Hitler ordered the creation of special national military units from the Muslims of the Caucasus ... actively participated in the capture of the strategic heights of Mozdok, Kazbek and Elbrus. The Germans praised their fighting qualities, awarding many of them with medals. ” As we see, this topic is paradoxically fanned by heroic pathos. The treachery and fratricide is justified by the imaginary striving for independence, because the SSA Azerbaijanis were supposed to shoot at the Red Army Azeris.
About this study
187 12 history textbooks and textbooks from the countries of the former Soviet Union: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and Estonia were collected, partially translated from national languages and analyzed. Tajikistan and Turkmenistan remained outside the field of analysis, and they could not get their textbooks.
The textbooks studied are the most popular or even the only ones in the schools of the respective states. At the same time, mass polls were conducted in the countries, allowing to assess what images of the past exist in the public consciousness of each of the countries. Based on the materials collected in the framework of these projects, this report has been prepared. A study of this scale in Russia was conducted for the first time.
How history is rewritten in school textbooks of the peoples of the former USSR
The collapse of the USSR and the formation of independent states on its territory made new textbooks of history vital for the idea of a new national statehood vital.
In the book “How a story is told to children in different countries of the world,” written at the turn of 1980-1990, Mark Ferro stated: “In the east, from Prague to Ulan Bator, all ethnic and national conflicts were explained until recently according to one the same model allegedly belonging to Marx, but in the Moscow interpretation. And all the societies of the South decolonize their history, and often by the same means that the colonialists used, that is, they construct a story opposite to the one that was imposed on them before. ”
At the present time, “decolonization” historiography and the corresponding educational literature have fully developed in the post-Soviet countries. An analysis of school textbooks on the history of post-Soviet countries shows that all other countries (with the exception of Belarus and to a lesser extent Armenia) have taken the path of teaching the younger generation a nationalistic interpretation of history based on myths about the antiquity of their people, about the high cultural mission of their ancestors and about the “sworn the enemy. " At the same time, the image of Russia and Russians is often used as a “sworn enemy”.
Further on a number of the most vivid and illustrative examples taken from the studied textbooks, let's see how they cover the following key questions:
Contacts with Russia and Russians
Joining Russia
Being in Russia
Evaluation of the Soviet period
Origin of the Second World War
Contacts with Russia and Russians
A common feature of school textbooks of new national states (with the exception of Belarus and Armenia) is the desire to present contacts with Russians and Russia as a source of disasters.
Latvia and Estonia
In Latvian and Estonian textbooks, attempts to jointly reflect the crusades, which were highlighted in the Soviet period, are relegated to the shadows. The crusades themselves in modern textbooks are interpreted as communion with civilization. It is regretted that the crusade stopped at the borders of Russia: “Why did the West not carry out a large-scale crusade against Russia? By 1240, time was lost. ”
“The Livonian War (1558 – 1583) turned into a disaster for Estonia. Most of the population died. " The Livonian War brought "unheard of disasters to the Latvian people." It was only because of bad organization that the Russians were forced to cede Livonia to the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and Sweden. At the same time, the Russians are to blame for the fact that the Latvian peasants received, besides the remaining German barons, also new masters, and the free city of Riga surrendered to the Poles.
However, the Swedes, the Danes, the Poles, and the local Livonian noblemen were operating on the lands of Livonia. The blame for the destruction lies with Russia. The final desolation of Livonia came after the Swedish-Polish wars (1600 – 1629), which resulted from the desire to break apart, as before Livonia, which had suffered from the Troubles in Russia. Hunger 1602- 1604 and the plague coupled with the merciless Polish and Swedish raids over a whole generation almost completely destroyed the Estonian peasant population. According to the Estonian Encyclopedic Reference Book, the decline in population in 4 – 5 is noted not once after the Livonian War, but in 1620 – 1640, that is, just at the time of the end of the Swedish-Polish wars.
The temporary elimination of Russia from the Eastern European arena due to the Time of Troubles turned out to Livonia even more terrible wars, epidemics, hunger strikes and instability. But Estonian textbooks are silent about this.
Georgia
In the Georgian textbook to characterize the allied relations of Peter I and Vakhtang VI, the words of the writer Ivane Javakhishvili are cited: “Having drawn Georgia into a war in their own interests, betraying the enemy and leaving it to their fate, Peter the Great did not even want to shelter himself deceived unfortunate Vakhtang VI. The authors are silent about the fact that the Presny region was donated to Moscow in Vakhtanga, where he and his associates founded a significant Georgian settlement in Moscow and were able to develop, according to other Georgian authors, “intensive creative activity”.
Azerbaijan
The first historical acquaintances of Azerbaijanis with Russians are described in the textbooks as terrible disasters for the former: “During the 914 campaign of the year, the Slavic militia for months continuously plundered and plundered settlements on the Azerbaijani shores of the Caspian Sea. They persecuted civilians, hijacked women and children. ” In other episodes of the section, the authors describe the savagery perpetrated by the Russians, as if they themselves were witnesses to this. The whole section is a complete list of atrocities. When describing Iranian, Arabic and all other invasions, the atrocities of the conquerors were nowhere to be so accentuated, and if they were mentioned, they were immediately softened by examples of positive content.
Uzbekistan
If you follow the logic of Uzbek historians, the development of the Turkestan khanate was distinguished by relative stability until the beginning of the 18th century. But then difficult times came, and Russia was to blame for this: “the origins of the Russian conquest of Turkestan go back to the time of Peter I, when in 1717 a two-thousand detachment of Russian soldiers headed by Bekovich-Cherkassky invaded the territory of the Khiva principality, but was destroyed by the ruler of Khiva Shergazi- Khan. Did the Russian emperor, who had by this time created one of the strongest armies of Europe and Asia, venture to move such small forces to war? The fact is that the Bekovich-Cherkassky detachment is one of the many military topographic expeditions often sent by the Russian emperor to the borders and beyond the borders of Russia. Had it really been military intervention, after the defeat of Bekovich, more powerful forces would have moved to the Khiva border, since the Russian military command had no obstacles to the movement of its military contingents. But the destruction of a geographical expedition only proved to Russia that the Central Asian territories are dangerous to explore.
Joining Russia
The accession of territories to Russia and the Russian Empire, as a rule, is evaluated negatively. The benefits received by the peoples within the framework of a large state are ignored; the emphasis is on the loss of independence.
Estonia
In Estonian textbooks, when describing the events of the 17th century, when the territory of Estonia was part of Sweden, the improvement of the economic and cultural position of the Estonian people by the end of the century mainly dominated. Despite the legalization of serfdom, the massive "witch hunt", the Swedish time is regarded as extremely favorable. The Northern War (1700 – 1721) is regarded as a terrible disaster, and joining Russia is a national tragedy. Estonians, according to all textbooks, acted on the side of the Swedes, served in the Swedish army and local militia. The final conclusion, assessing Russia's victory in the Northern War, leaves behind the fact that the demographic impact on Estonia was caused by the pre-war “great famine” of 1695 – 1697, and the plague that killed three-quarters of the city’s inhabitants and about half of the rural population brought Estland and Livonia are Swedish troops. Peter came to the land, deserted before the war from famine, already devastated by Swedish exactions and almost finished off with plague.
Ukraine
In Ukrainian textbooks, the reunification of Ukraine with Russia is presented as Moscow’s recognition of Ukraine’s independence. The March Articles, which establish the conditions of service of the Zaporozhye troops to the Russian Tsar, are called the Ukrainian-Moscow 1654 Treaty: "Ukraine was recognized as an independent power ... the Ukrainian-Moscow Treaty of 1654 ... legalized the Ukrainian Cossack Power as an independent participant in international politics." The fictional “Ukrainian Cossack Power” is then “destroyed” by Moscow, which is called one of the “grave crimes of tsarism before the Ukrainian people”.
Cossacks are an all-Russian phenomenon, not a Ukrainian peculiarity. This is exactly what brings the history of the two countries together, and does not divide. The Cossacks are a military organization, not a state, it did not have sovereignty, it served the sovereign, protecting the borders of the state. And it could not become the basis of Ukrainian statehood and identity, it is a myth. Ukrainian school textbooks assert that the Zaporozhian Army was an independent state. The Cossack state allegedly possessed all the attributes of sovereignty: symbols (emblem and banner), army, court, administrative system (regiments, hundreds). And now, for comparison, take the Don Cossack army. Without difficulty it turns out that it possessed all the listed attributes. It even led an independent foreign policy, sometimes creating a serious problem for the Moscow state with its neighbors (Turkey and Persia).
Georgia
The Georgian textbook for the 5 class “Chronicle of Our Motherland” treats the annexation of the territories of the Georgian kingdoms and principalities to Russia as a conquest: “In Georgievsk, Georgia and Russia concluded a friendly agreement. This contract is known as the Georgievsk Treaty ... The Russian government did not fulfill the terms of the Georgievsk Treaty ... In 1801, by order of the Russian emperor, the kingdom of Kartli-Kakheti was abolished - Eastern Georgia became one of the provinces of Russia ... It was the turn of other Georgian kingdoms and principalities. Gradually, Russia conquered all of Georgia and established Russian rule in it. ”
The authors of the textbook for the 10 class “History of Georgia (from ancient times to 1801 year)” do not find a single positive word regarding the treatise: “The conclusion of the Treaty of St. George was a great diplomatic mistake. Its consequences turned out to be disastrous not only for Kartli and Kakheti, but also for the whole of Georgia. ” The corresponding paragraph ends like this: “Russia has unhindered achieved what Turkey and Iran could not achieve in fierce battles. She abolished the Kartli-Kakheti kingdom without any complications. The abolition of the kingdom was the result of both internal weakness and unfavorable international situation. But the Georgian people did not put up with the loss of independence and continued to fight for their freedom. ”
Azerbaijan
The annexation of the territories of modern Azerbaijan to Russia, which began at the end of the 18th century, is drawn exclusively as anti-Azerbaijani expansion: “The natural resources of Azerbaijan, in particular, the richest mineral deposits available here, were well known to Russian science. It is not by chance that the government of Catherine II linked the appropriation of these riches with the occupation of this country. ”
Descriptions of any actions of Russians, their intentions, as well as specific characters are supplied with characteristic epithets - “cruel”, “treacherous”, “greedy”. But the paradox is that the material given in the textbook does not confirm these characteristics and, on the contrary, there are far greater reasons to extend these characteristics to the opposite side. Here is an example of the "deceit" of the Russians: “In the hands of the colonialists, the military courts were a convenient punitive weapon for dealing with those who opposed social and colonial oppression. A number of cruel punishments during the khans were canceled. ” It seems that the author deliberately brings the thesis to the point of absurdity.
Being in Russia
The main content of national history in the period of being a part of the Russian Empire and the USSR is the national liberation struggle. This struggle is constructed by the authors of the "scrap materials".
Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan’s textbook provides an example of such a design: “The struggle of the Kazakh people against Russian colonialism lasted a long time, covering the second half of the 18th century. until 90-ies of XX century. ". Next in the series of events of the national liberation struggle, the “events in Temirtau 1959” were named - protests of workers of the all-Union Komsomol youth construction against unbearable living conditions.
Estonia
An Estonian high school student must finish school with the firm conviction that modern Estonian culture, despite all the Russification, is the result of the influence of the disappeared local Ostsee culture. “There was a professional culture in the native language. Its development took place in the context of opposition from the Baltic and Russian circles. The level achieved by Estonian literature, art and music by the end of the 19th century is comparable to the level of Ostsee culture that has developed over the centuries. At the same time, we must not forget that the Ostsee provincial culture was part of the great German culture, and through it - the common Western European culture. ”
At the same time, textbooks silence the fact that the emerging professional Estonian culture, in order to compete with the “great German culture,” relied on Russian professional culture, and not in the Ostsee province, but in the Russian capital. Suffice it to say that all the leaders of the Estonian national revival either studied in St. Petersburg, or lived or were there. Subsequently, Estonian painting, sculpture, music, ballet, theater, jurisprudence, military science, etc. etc. grew up under the direct influence of representatives of Russian art and scientific schools.
Ukraine
Ukrainian textbooks view the stay of the territories of modern Ukraine within Russia as the destruction of the “Ukrainian Cossack State”.
The participation of the "Hetman" in the Northern War, some Strukevich AK, Romanyuk I.M., Pirus TP considered as “the tragedy of the Ukrainian people”, and a protest against Peter I of Hetman I. Mazepa as “an attempt to free themselves from Moscow tsarism”. V. Mysan presents I. Mazepa’s treason as a plan of “liberation from the Moscow yoke”, which he used to use Karl XII for his own purposes. Karl XII, thus, from one of the main actors of the Northern War turns into an object of the policy of the ingenious hetman. V. Vlasov betrayed I. Mazepa originally defined as an "anti-colonial uprising against Muscovy", then softened the wording to "Mazepa's uprising." He is trying to prove that the hetman had no choice: allegedly a victory for any of the parties would have meant the elimination of “Ukrainian autonomy”, so he chose “the only possible solution”: “release from the power of the king before the end of the war and the signing of a separate peace treaty” . In reality, it was not a separate peace, but a transition to the side of Charles XII.
Georgia
Georgian historiography claims that “as a result of the abolition of statehood and the establishment of the Russian military-occupation regime, the entire population of Georgia, all social strata and classes were in a difficult situation. That is why, at the beginning of the 19th century, the whole of society was involved in the struggle for the restoration of statehood: the royal house of Bagration, princes, Aznauri (nobles), clergy, and peasantry. ”
All this can hardly be called anything other than myth-making. A large part of Georgian society took the entry of Georgian lands into the Russian Empire purely positively. Numerous Georgians, including representatives of aristocratic families, honestly served Russia, which the authors prefer to keep silent or speak casually and unwillingly. They did not say a word about the fact that not all representatives of the Bagration family were opposed to Russia. The authors decided not to mention General Peter Ivanovich Bagration. Obviously, they are so annoyed by the fact that PI Bagration was an illustrious Russian commander that only two sentences were devoted to the 1812 war of the year in the textbook: “In June 1812, the French Emperor Napoleon attacked Russia. The military successes of the French army put Russia in a difficult position. ”
Evaluation of the Soviet period
With the exception of Armenia and Belarus, history textbooks of new national states bring charges against the Russian empire and the Soviet Union of the genocide of their peoples.
In the Kazakhstan textbook, the paragraph on hunger 1931 – 1933. bears the name “Goloshchekin's genocide and the tragedy of the Kazakh aul”. In Kyrgyzstan’s textbooks, the suppression of the uprising in Turkestan 1916 is called genocide. In the Ukrainian textbooks, the all-Union famine 1932 – 1933 is described as genocide. In Azerbaijani textbooks, the whole policy of Russia and the USSR is depicted as genocide. Textbooks of Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Moldova and Uzbekistan assess political repression as an ethnic genocide.
Latvia and Estonia
The entire period of “Soviet occupation” (1944 – 1991) was estimated by Moscow as carrying out a targeted “genocide against the people of Latvia”, during which the USSR carried out “terror”, “intensified russification” and “colonization”, tried using “migrants” and "Unreasonable growth of industry" to achieve its main goal - "destroy the identity" of Latvians. It is emphasized that many "innocent people" suffered, who were "accused of collaborating with the Nazis." After the war, the resistance of the Soviet authorities in Latvia was much broader and more organized than in 1940, since "the population of Latvia already had the bitter experience of the Soviet occupation." Despite the fact that in the resistance units there were persons “prepared by the Germans for the struggle in the rear of the Red Army”, this movement “had a national character”.
The restoration and development of industry in the Latvian SSR is assessed as “unreasonable growth of industry” due to the “migration” of the population from other regions of the USSR and the infringement of collectivization of agriculture. It is emphasized that "the consequences of this policy were the pollution of nature, the shortage of housing and food." It is “migration” that has become a “colossal problem” for Latvia, where “foreigners” have gone in “searching for a better life”. And the conclusion is made: "The leadership of the USSR purposefully flooded Latvia with hundreds of thousands of migrants and tried to destroy the identity of the people of Latvia with their help."
In Estonian textbooks, the idea of the purposeful relocation of large masses of the "Russian-speaking" population to the Baltic states does not even require, in the opinion of the authors, evidence. “Some regions of Estonia — first of all, large industrial cities — have become Russian-speaking as a result of the colonization policy, and the Estonian population has practically disappeared from them”. In short, it can be said that the emergence of a large Russian population is primarily associated with rapid industrial construction, which began in the 60s. Estonia was notable for its discipline and good organization of production, investments in the Estonian industry were efficient and yielded great returns. Estonia from the end of the 50-ies became a kind of Western showcase of the Soviet Union. This is also written by the authors of textbooks. Labor for industrial construction and work in built enterprises was brought in from outside, from other republics of the USSR. For all these achievements, of course, I had to pay. Estonians had to pay a decrease in their share in the country's population to almost 62%. The Russian national minority paid for the achievements of the Soviet Estonian economy with its lower social status.
“If you take the position of the“ occupation ”theory, it seems completely implausible that in Estonia in 60 – 80 years there was a completely Estonian-centrist situation in the field of culture, science, education ... The proportions of employment of Estonians and Russian-speaking residents in the republic in the national economy science, public administration. If 2 / 3 industrial workers were non-Estonians, in management, educational and cultural spheres the ratio was exactly the opposite ... In a sociological context, by the beginning of 80-s, the structure of the Estonian population gives grounds for asserting that Estonians were then formed into a social group with a higher social status, and between Estonians and non-Estonians there were not just differences, but social distance, ”writes a well-known Estonian sociologist and philosopher Yevgeny Golikov.
Ukraine
Ukrainian textbooks cultivate the myth of the USSR as a totalitarian "empire", leading a policy of "Russification", where "there was no Ukrainian statehood." Thus, the role of the Ukrainian SSR as the founder of the USSR is reduced and the question of the violent “Ukrainization” of 1920 - the beginning of the 1930's - is removed. On the whole, the pre-war period in the history of Ukraine within the USSR is characterized as follows: “under extremely difficult conditions of a lack of statehood and the totalitarian Stalinist regime, it (the Ukrainian nation) in a short time rebuilt its economy and achieved its further development.
In Ukrainian textbooks, the all-Union famine of 1932-1933 qualifies as genocide. The “Holodomor” is viewed in the context of Stalin’s repressions. The authors of the textbooks refer to losses from the “famine” from 3 to 12 million, which, given the general demographic situation in the country, is a clear exaggeration. In addition, often all-union hunger losses are issued for the losses of one Ukraine.
As one of the main features of the Soviet post-war policy in the Ukrainian SSR, all authors of textbooks distinguish Russification. At the same time, they themselves bring facts that contradict their myth. For example, “the volume of broadcasts of national television was shared in half in the language”, and as regards the ratio of published books and released films in the Russian and Ukrainian languages, here, as a rule, it is not taken into account that a significant part of them were produced outside Ukraine, including in Belarus and Moldova.
Georgia
Georgian textbooks characterize Soviet power as the “Russian occupation regime.” It is indicative that the authors, consistently stigmatizing the Soviet power, quite neutrally and even with some sympathy, characterize the personality of I.V. Stalin. The roots of this “neutralism” are clear: being nationalists, the authors are prone to apologetics of their compatriots. They notice that the Soviet political system established by Stalin "somewhat embellished the Russian occupation regime."
The interpretation by the authors of the consequences of dispelling the cult of personality is extremely curious. As is known, in the spring of 1956 in Georgia there were large-scale protests against the new course of the party, proclaimed by N.S. Khrushchev. The authors are trying to convince schoolchildren that "criticism of the personality cult of Stalin ... turned into a clear insult and humiliation of the Georgian nation ... It was emphasized ... that the Georgian factor played a significant role in the Stalinist repressions." Where the authors have gathered such facts remains unknown.
Azerbaijan
In the Azerbaijani textbooks, the whole policy of Russia and the USSR is depicted as genocide: “As a result of the policy of ethnic cleansing and genocide, deliberately carried out in the past two centuries in the Caucasus against Azerbaijanis, our people survived the hardship and deprivation, national tragedies.”
The authors of the motives for the rejection of the Cyrillic alphabet are curious, in addition to the fact that it was also a manifestation of Russification: “In 1929, work was completed on translating Azerbaijani script from Arabic into Latin. However ... starting with 1940, they began to introduce the Cyrillic alphabet. And this, becoming a new expression of Russification, at the same time was an attempt to deprive the Azerbaijani people of ancient written sources reflecting its centuries-old history. ” The authors clearly did not think that the Azeri in ancient times did not use Latin graphics.
Such a collection of facts presented in the textbook, of course, cannot objectively reflect the reality of 20's. The intention to present everything in black as the targeted anti-Azerbaijan intrigues of the “eternal enemies” - Armenians - in alliance with the Russians under the tutelage of the “Soviet empire” cannot lead to historical truth. This becomes obvious immediately with the transition to the next section of the textbook on industrialization: “Drunk by communist propaganda, living and working with faith in building a communist society soon ... the workers erecting more and more gigantic industrial objects with great enthusiasm. Living half starving, working in difficult conditions and not having any equipment at hand, the workers showed wonders of labor courage and heroism. ” Where could the enthusiasm of Russian-Armenian oppression come from?
Uzbekistan
In general, it can be stated that modern Uzbek history textbooks deny the progressive, modernizing and innovative role of the “Center” (ie, Soviet Russia and other Union Republics) in the development of the economy and culture of Uzbekistan in the 20th century. According to the authors of the textbooks, the “Center” only brutally oppressed, exploited and used the unhappy Uzbek people for their own selfish purposes, and the latter, despite all the machinations of the “Center”, built, irrigated, sowed and collected, built, invented, developed it.d. . etc. It turns out that the Uzbek people in the XX century did not get anything, absolutely nothing good from living together side by side with the Russian people. Only violence, terror, exploitation.
The complete lack of textbooks on the destructive Tashkent earthquake 26 of April 1966 of the year is striking. An earthquake with a jolting force greater than 8 on the Richter scale and an 5,3 magnitude destroyed 10 square kilometers in the center of the capital of the then Uzbek SSR. 78 of thousands of families or over 300 of thousands of 1,5 millions living in Tashkent then remained without shelter. Thanks to the help of the fraternal peoples of the USSR, of all the Union republics, Tashkent not only survived a terrible catastrophe, but was also fully restored by 1969. The city was actually rebuilt into a modern metropolis, the area and population of which increased 1,5 times. Tashkent then turned into the most beautiful city of Asia, into its informal capital. And just about this, the authors of textbooks prefer not to recall.
Causes of World War II
The causes of the Second World War textbooks of Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Moldova and Ukraine are associated with the “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact” and call the Soviet Union the aggressor. Such an image of the USSR helps to justify local accomplices of fascism and to represent them as fighters for national independence.
Latvia
The “Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact” as the primary source of the “Soviet occupation” of Latvia is mentioned in all Latvian history books of the 20th century. It is emphasized that, despite the mutual ideological hatred, Hitler and Stalin "unanimously agreed on the destruction of the new states that emerged after the collapse of the old empires."
It is emphasized that in June 1940, the Soviet government, under the threat of military force and a far-fetched pretext, categorically demanded that the Latvian government allow any number of Red Army soldiers to be deployed in Latvia. The government of Ulmanis, "without asking the opinion of the people, agreed with such an unjust demand to save the population from heavy casualties in an unequal war."
The process of establishing Soviet power in Latvia was accompanied by Kremlin “provocations” and the activity of pro-Soviet “collaborators”. The Soviet special services "began to provoke demonstrations and street processions of disgruntled residents in the largest cities of Latvia, and also contributed to their clashes with the police." At the same time, it is recognized that among the participants of demonstrations and processions "there were also volunteers" who believed in communism or hoped to extract some benefits from the change of power.
The presentation of the topic of "incorporation" and "annexation" of Latvia is dominated by political and legal qualifications of the actions of the USSR as "illegal, illegal"; Kirchenstein's pro-Soviet government is defined as “puppet”, holding elections to the people's Seimas and its decision to declare Soviet power as “anti-constitutional” and inspired from Moscow, and the election results themselves as “corrected”.
Latvian textbooks claim that in the summer of 1941, the Latvians met the Germans as “liberators”. The reason for this was “the ruthless treatment of the population in the year of communist rule”, which was remembered as a “terrible year”. The Germans were greeted with flowers, as it was “all the same who would have banished the hated Soviet occupation power from Latvia”. But the trouble was that Hitler was a totalitarian leader just like Stalin, so "already at the beginning of the occupation, the Latvians lost all hope of restoring the independence of the state." It is reported that it was the Soviet repressions that were “to blame” for the fact that in Latvia there was no resistance movement to the German occupiers.
Latvian textbooks emphasize that the people of Latvia were “illegally drafted” into the Latvian SS Legion, but “fought for freedom”. "The Latvian warriors, however, fought bravely, they believed that Latvia’s freedom would be restored." The Latvians "had hopes that in time the Legion, as well as the Latvian Riflemen in the First World War and the Liberation War, will become the core of the army of restoring independent Latvia." In some textbooks, the Latvian Legion’s membership in the SS is not mentioned at all, in others it is explained that “only the name” connected the organization and parts of the SS to the Latvians.
Estonia
In Estonian textbooks, the key event for the interpretation of the Second World War is the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Responsibility for the failure of the Anglo-Soviet-French negotiations on concluding an agreement on mutual assistance aimed at curbing Hitler’s aggression rests solely with the USSR. The reason indicates the expansionist aspirations of the Kremlin. One of the textbooks writes that negotiations on the anti-Hitler coalition began in Moscow in July 1939 and reached an impasse after Soviet representatives demanded the immediate passage of Soviet troops to the western borders of Poland and Romania. Why the Soviet Union had to send troops through Poland is by no means explained.
In Estonia, the themes of the outbreak of World War II and the loss of independence by the Baltic countries are considered as interrelated. On September 1, 1939, Germany attacked Poland. On September 28, 1939, the USSR forced Estonia to conclude a mutual assistance treaty, according to which Soviet land, sea and aviation military bases and troops totaling 25 people. Nevertheless, there was no question of the annexation and sovietization of Estonia. There is no documentary evidence of such plans. The only intention was to create their own spheres of influence in Eastern Europe within the framework and limits allowed by the then international law and custom, and taking into account the growing war. The limited contingent of the Red Army was located in strictly designated areas. It was strictly forbidden to the military to contact the local population.
Events in Estonia 21 June 1940, when numerous left-wing activists gathered in the capital, demanded the resignation of the government from President Päts, in the textbooks they call it the “June coup”. To illustrate the direct intervention of the Red Army in these events, the textbook lists two similar photos with the caption “Accompanied by the Red Army armored vehicles, demonstrators are sent to Kadriorg. Later, when the participation of the Red Army in the June coup was required to hide, such pictures were “processed” - the armored cars disappeared (see the bottom photo). ” However, on closer examination it can be seen that this is not a photo that has been retouched, but two different photos. Moreover, photos with armored cars were repeatedly published and widely known.
The desire to present the USSR only as a “fellow traveler”, who at some stage joined the anti-Hitler coalition, whose founders and main forces were the United States and Great Britain, forces them to manipulate chronology. "The formation of the anti-fascist coalition began with the proclamation of the Atlantic Charter, signed by Roosevelt and Churchill on August 14 of 1941 of the year." After a couple of paragraphs, the author casually informs that “the official military alliance between the USSR and England was concluded on July 12 of the year 1941”. And the Washington Declaration of 26 of countries (including the USSR) of 1 in January of 1942, which officially issued the anti-Hitler coalition, is not even mentioned.
The role of the USSR and the Red Army in the defeat of Nazi Germany and its allies in Estonian textbooks, as a rule, is not denied, but is diminished by simple rhetorical devices. So, Theodorov in the "Newest History" evades from disclosing the fact that it was the Soviet troops who took Berlin. If you do not know in advance, when reading a textbook, you might think that either all allies together or the Americans did it. Only a few pages later, narrating about the Potsdam Conference, the author notes that “the troops of the Western allies were brought into Berlin, occupied by Soviet troops ...”
Over the past two decades, official ideas about the role and place of Estonia and Estonian in World War II have radically changed. The initial post-Soviet view of Estonians about the war as a fratricidal tragedy was replaced by the statement that Estonia had lost the war. They try to present history textbooks with the German occupiers as forced rather than voluntary and conscious. Estonian history textbooks see such cooperation with the fascists primarily as a struggle for independence. Strictly speaking, only the battles that were fought by the Estonian SS units, the Wehrmacht, rear guard units, the Luftwaffe, etc. are referred to as freedom fights. on the territory of Estonia. But the participation of Estonian volunteers in the battles of Stalingrad, punitive operations in Belarus and the Pskov region, the protection of concentration camps in the Donbas and defensive battles in Poland is also not called aggression and occupation.
Ukraine
In Ukrainian textbooks, the term Great Patriotic War is not used by all authors. Some call it "Soviet-German." It is alleged that the Second World War was unleashed jointly by the USSR and Germany as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, here both powers act as an aggressor.
An important role in the textbooks is played by the myth of the two currents of the Resistance movement in Ukraine: the Soviet and the independent, while the independent OUN-UPA allegedly “had to fight on two fronts” and “presented the greatest threat to the Nazis”. However, not a single successful operation of the UPA against the Germans. Not reported who supplied them with uniforms and weapons. The facts of the murder of the Soviet intelligence officer N. Kuznetsov and General Vatutin by the OUN men are ignored. The Volyn tragedy of 1943 was not mentioned when the OUN organized the genocide of the Polish population in Volyn.
There is a clear attempt to rehabilitate collaborators in the context of "repression in Western Ukraine" after the arrival of the Red Army. The Ukrainian textbooks replicate falsification of punitive operations against the population of Western Ukraine of the NKVD employees disguised as UPA. In the textbook S.V. Kulchitsky and Yu.I. Shapoval is a photo with the signature: “The soldiers of the special forces of the NKVD, disguised as UPA soldiers. Western Ukraine, 1947 However, it is proved that the picture - "bohku" UPA. And this is despite the fact that the same authors admit that the UPA fighters wore the Soviet uniform to carry out their punitive actions against the local population, who were pro-Soviet. As we see, the atrocities committed by nationalists in historical reality are attributed to the Soviet authorities by modern history textbooks.
Georgia
History textbooks of Georgia call the culprits of World War II Germany and the Soviet Union. When describing events 1941 – 1945. Georgian textbooks use the term “Great Patriotic War”, but at the same time they say that it was not domestic for all Georgians. The term “Soviet-German war” is widely used as a “neutral”. The authors are forced to maneuver between sympathies with the Stalinist Soviet Union and Georgian collaborators, representatives of the “national movement” who fought against the “Russian occupation regime”. Equally in detail about the participation of Georgians in the war as part of the Soviet Army and partisan movement, and in the ranks of the German Wehrmacht.
Azerbaijan
In the Azerbaijani school, the events of the Great Patriotic War are served ambivalently. The nostalgic pathos of Soviet patriotism clearly sounds in phrases scattered throughout the text, like: “May 9 went down in history as Victory Day ... The USSR emerged victorious from the war. The achievement of this victory of the Azerbaijani people is of great merit. " At the same time, literally, “by lines from another song”, confusing everything, the topic of cooperation with the Nazis bursts in: “December 22 1941. Hitler ordered the creation of special national military units from the Muslims of the Caucasus ... actively participated in the capture of the strategic heights of Mozdok, Kazbek and Elbrus. The Germans praised their fighting qualities, awarding many of them with medals. ” As we see, this topic is paradoxically fanned by heroic pathos. The treachery and fratricide is justified by the imaginary striving for independence, because the SSA Azerbaijanis were supposed to shoot at the Red Army Azeris.
Information