The Third Wave of Russian De-Stalinization

Is the Kremlin finally coming to terms with its dark history?

BY MASHA LIPMAN | DECEMBER 16, 2010

"The Katyn crime was committed on direct order by Stalin and other Soviet leaders." This line, from a formal statement issued by the Russian parliament on Nov. 26, marks an important breakthrough. The execution in 1940 of about 22,000 Poles by the Soviet security police may be a well-recorded and broadly known historical fact, but it is the first time the Duma officially recognized that Stalin and his government were guilty of the massacre. And Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has now chimed in as well, telling Polish media before a visit to Warsaw this month that "Stalin and his henchmen bear responsibility for this crime."

These two official statements are the most recent examples of a surprising shift by the Russian government: Under Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin's stance on Stalinism was evasive at best, leading to a creeping restoration of Stalin's reputation in the early 2000s. But over the last year the Russian government has embarked on a new round of anti-Stalin rhetoric and initiatives, openly admitting some of the "forgotten" Soviet crimes revealed earlier under Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin.

What seems to drive the current de-Stalinization campaign is first and foremost Russia's new rapprochement with the West, which is pushing Russia for some recognition of the crimes of Soviet totalitarianism. But this doesn't necessarily mean the foreign-policy shift will be accompanied by political liberalization at home; in some ways, the current political order inside Russia is not too dissimilar from that of the Stalinist regime. Russia, whether there's a Stalin cult or not, is still being ruled under the centuries-long tradition that gives its top leaders a monopoly on decision-making, enshrines the state's dominance over the society, and relies on state security police as the main instrument of governance.

Nevertheless, this new anti-Stalin campaign is real, and has been on the rise since late 2009, when on Oct. 30 -- the day Russians traditionally acknowledge the victims of Soviet repression -- Medvedev posted a videoblog condemning "Stalin's crimes" in no uncertain terms and lamenting scarce public knowledge about the terror that he referred to as "one of the greatest tragedies in the history of Russia."

Then, in February 2010, Putin invited his Polish counterpart Donald Tusk to visit Katyn in time for the 70th anniversary of the massacre. Speaking in Katyn on April 7, Putin said: "Repressions smashed down people regardless of their nationality, their beliefs, or their faith.... We can't change the past, but what we can do is to preserve or restore the truth and this would mean to restore historical justice."

Just three days later, Polish President Lech Kaczynski and nearly 100 other Polish officials were killed in a tragic plane crash on their way to a Katyn memorial ceremony. The Russian leadership showed deep sympathy to Poland and did its best to help the victims' families. Katyn, a Polish film about the massacre that had been basically barred from distribution in Russia was shown twice in a matter of one week, including on one of the two biggest state-controlled national channels. The Russian state archives posted archival documents on the massacre on its website. Later, in May and December, Russia handed over to Polish officials portions of the Katyn files from a military prosecutor's investigation; the investigation had been completed in 2004, but the handover was delayed under farfetched pretexts.

In May, the Kremlin quashed a plan by Moscow city authorities to adorn Moscow with Stalin's images in time for the 65th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany. Medvedev explained why in an interview with the newspaper Izvestia, in which he said that the "state assessment" of Stalin has been that he "committed many crimes against his people. And even though the country achieved success under his guidance, what was done against his own people cannot be forgiven."

This fall, an adapted version of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago was published at what was reported to be Putin's personal initiative, following his meeting with Solzhenitsyn's widow last year to discuss how best to teach her husband's four-volume epic about communist repression.

And just recently Mikhail Fedotov, the chairman of the president's council on human rights and civil society, announced that the council had picked de-Stalinization as one of its primary themes. Early next year council members expect to present to the president their suggestions for a government program aimed at ridding Russia of the Stalinist legacy. The program includes a legal and political assessment of Stalinism and commemoration of the victims of the totalitarian regime. They're even teaming up on the project with the Memorial Society, a veteran Russian NGO that researches Stalinism and commemorates its victims.

WOJTEK RADWANSKI/AFP/Getty Images

 

Masha Lipman is the editor of Pro et Contra journal, published by the Carnegie Moscow Center.

CEOUNICOM

3:36 AM ET

December 17, 2010

"Koba the Dread"...

...The best book regarding Stalin I've ever read.

I've met a few Russian Stalin-apologists here in the US, while they were studying abroad. They tend to start with the POV that most of Stalin's image is a creation of the West post-WWII. They argue that he won WWII for the West, and got ripped off afterward. They don't tend to know anything about the Collectivization deaths in the Ukraine - or if they do, believe them to be wildly exaggerated. There's also an instinct to point to other historical examples of new nations in stages of development, where murder and terror reigns. They sometimes cite the French 'reign of terror' in the revolution, or the American civil war and history of slavery, as examples of National sin of equal scale. There is a tendency to equivocate responsibility... as though, "these things happen"... c'est normal... And the Gulag was mainly filled with 'bad apples' anyway.

A friend studying in St Petersburg recently shared similar experiences, and ranked the pro-Stalin crowd at around 20-30% of the population, regardless of age groups. She also related that there was little particular debate in public between those that felt he was a monster, and those who saw him as a historical hero. Its the lack of discussion, if anything, I find most telling. All of them tend to consider it so much a matter of personal opinion, and not something of any particular importance to reconcile.

That said: (@#$@# FP, please do something to delete the spam posts made by these (i assume to be) Chinese fashion knock-off wholesalers. Normally it doesn't bother me.... But on a topic as serious as this, it particularly grates. I'd think the authors of articles like this would feel the same way. It's disrespectful.

 

OTUS

10:41 AM ET

December 17, 2010

I have to say that your knowledge of stalinism

is also quite incomplete and not free from the Western myths (and there are lots of them, believe me: I am reading both sides).

It is not a criticism in a way that you HAVE to know about this - it is not the history of your country after all. But if you say that someone else is ignorant you are assumed to be knowledgeable, aren't you? And you are not quite.

Just a few points:
1. You obviously merged in your mind Collectivization and the Great Famine. They are closely connected but still produced two distinct waves of deaths and sufferings.
2. Both tragedies happened not in Ukraine but in the USSR. The areas caused by the famine included RSFR (i. e. current territory of Russia), Kazakhstan, etc. with Ukraine suffering about 50% of deaths. The deaths caused by Collectivization were anywhere and, for instance, Siberia rebelled much more than Ukraine.
3. You are absolutely write saying that the society is much polarized on this topic - but absolutely wrong saying that there is not much discussion on this. There is even a saying that mentioning the Stalin's name leads to an affront in 99% of cases.
4. Stalin was definitely a bloody monster to its own countrymen. However, you indeed cannot say that he was one man out. Famine in Burma in 1943 for which the Brits were definitely responsible killed as many people as the Great Famine in Ukraine. Do you think that the Westerners know much about Churchill’s famine-related comments like "Indians bread like rabbits" or "if there is famine there why Gandhi is not dead yet?" Or what about the astonishing atrocities committed in the Belgium king's personal colony in Africa at the beginning of XX century? Or carpet bombings of the German and Vietnamese cities?

Lastly, I almost fully agree with you on the last paragraph. The only thing I am not sure about how would the author react: Masha is a special kind of person. I'll comment on this in the next post.

 

JAMES_ATTREE

12:44 PM ET

December 17, 2010

What have you been

What have you been smoking?

The famine in the Ukraine was a deliberate act to destroy the kulaks and any potential opposition to the Soviet state that might come from the Ukraine.

The Bengali famine of 1943 was caused by the invasion of Burma by the Japanese, a major cyclone at the end of 1942 and a very sluggish and lazy response by the governing British. It certainly was not a deliberate act of genocide.

 

CEOUNICOM

12:47 PM ET

December 17, 2010

re: "incomplete?"

I don't recall providing an encyclopedic lecture on my 'knowledge' of Stalin here? Where do you get off playing the More Informed Than Thou, ad hominem card?

I've read 4 or 5 books either about Stalin personally or Russia 1927-1956; I know enough to not start declaring myself either an expert or to take accusations of ignorance lightly. If you have something informative to add, go for it, but starting off with a dismissal of what is my own personal experience with Stalin-apologists is obnoxious and nothing but empty self-aggrandizement.

 

CEOUNICOM

1:00 PM ET

December 17, 2010

re: Collectivization

"Great Famine" vs. "Collectivization"... vs "De-Kulakization"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivization_in_the_Soviet_Union

""The Soviet government responded to these acts by cutting off food rations to peasants and areas where there was opposition to collectivization, especially in Ukraine. Many peasant families were forcibly resettled in Siberia and Kazakhstan into exile settlements, and most of them died on the way. Estimates suggest that about a million so-called 'kulak' families, or perhaps some 5 million people, were sent to forced labor camps.[6][15]

On August 7, 1932, the Decree about the Protection of Socialist Property proclaimed that the punishment for theft of kolkhoz or cooperative property was the death sentence, which "under extenuating circumstances" could be replaced by at least ten years of incarceration. With what some called the Law of Spikelets ("????? ? ????????"), peasants (including children) who hand-collected or gleaned grain in the collective fields after the harvest were arrested for damaging the state grain production. Martin Amis writes in Koba the Dread that 125,000 sentences were passed for this particular offense in the bad harvest period from August 1932 to December 1933.

Estimates of the deaths from starvation or disease directly caused by collectivization have been estimated as between 4 and 10 million. According to official Soviet figures, some 24 million peasants disappeared from rural areas but only 12.6 million moved to state jobs[citation needed]. The implication is that the total death toll (both direct and indirect) for Stalin's collectivization program was on the order of 12 million people.[16]""

You're not pointing out any ignorance - just semantics about which terms you apply to different examples of widespread slaughter. You're suggesting the term 'collectivization' doesn't apply to what happened in the Ukraine, when clearly that's absurd. The reason the 'great famine' happened was because of the prevalence of smaller, independent farms in Ukraine. It strikes me as a meaningless distinction to argue any one term being more 'accurate'.

And again...regarding the divide in Russia regarding their history = my comments were anecdotal. Maybe they were not the norm? Fine. Show me some surveys to clarify things = not simply contradict with.... your own anecdotes.

 

ROOBIT

11:33 AM ET

December 18, 2010

oops

Why would you care?
I assume you are a denizen of the Evil Empire aka the U.S. of A. - I understand that the Nazi, oops, American government is concerned about affairs of entire world and sticks its nose into any hole no matter how smelly or remote, but why would you care about those irrelevancies? I mean in Russia (or say in Austria or in Italy) people don't normally care about crimes committed by American rulers on its own home term lest crimes historic and of no significance today (on the scale of evil, Stalin versus the USA, then or now, is just a copic opera personage). I am intrigued by the sickness of American mind, then would be concerned with stuff that of no concern to it. I understand Masha Lipman, a known Russopbe, a Israeli, after all her tribe has an ax to grind with Russian people, but why so many specimens of American species and I don't mean just the foreign policy establishment of the Evil Empire, are apparently concerned about stuff they should not be in a culture they don't understand in a place they have no historic or any other connection. Indeed not Stalinism but America is the evil that has to be eradicated.

 

OTUS

11:18 AM ET

December 17, 2010

The point I'd like to mention

The point I'd like to mention and which never stops puzzling me is why the Western media is constantly using a very small bunch of people like Masha Lipman and Garry Kasparov to comment on the Russia's life?

I am not saying that is wrong to give them a word (although I have not heard that many Western media published Bobby Fisher - and they are that kind of people) but why thousands of more reasonable, balanced and talented observers and journalists are never invited?

I hate conspiracy theories - they are for primitive minds; but how can you explain that all Western media (except for a few, mainly Internet, outcasts again) behaves in the same way? Is it just a tradition to publish only opinions of outcasts as long as it relates to Russia?

This article is yet relatively reasonable. But even here Masha makes quite strange statements like:

1) "Anti-Stalin discourse is not forced underground, and one is equally free to profess pro-Stalin views."

Ok, it is a freedom of speech that some deny to be existing in Russia, isn't it? What do you propose, to prohibit 1/3 of the population to express their views? Censor them, yeh!

2) "Nor would they want de-Stalinization to compromise the state security organs, which enjoy absolute impunity in Russia and have been the main source of top-level government officials over the years of Putin's tenure. Even Medvedev ... dutifully greeted the FSB on its special holiday ..."

Ok, what are you suggesting, to COMPROMISE the state security organs? Like at the beginning of 90s when they were made almost inoperable? Really? Just in the middle of the war on terror with our operators and gunfighters fighting the terrorists to prevent the attacks on the public transport, schools and hospitals? Have you heard about 4 more Beslans? No, because they were planned BUT prevented and the bastards were gunned down before they started to kill.

Don't you feel obliged to these brave men and women? To those graves of young handsome men who sacrificed their life for you being able to drink coffee in a Moscow cafe and to go to the theatre? To the mothers mourning their sons?

Or may be you think that they are responsible for the Great Terror? Many of them had relatives who had suffered or had been murdered during that time but they are the 3rd or 4th generation anyway.

I can probably agree that the Putin too much relied upon FSB and SVR to fill up the ranks of the bureaucracy (although there was actually no source of qualified managers at that time in Russia anyway) but how on Earth does this relate to Stalinism?!

 

CEOUNICOM

1:11 PM ET

December 17, 2010

re:

""I can probably agree that the Putin too much relied upon FSB and SVR to fill up the ranks of the bureaucracy ... but how on Earth does this relate to Stalinism?!""

Uh... they still operate out of The Lubyanka? The state still relies heavily on secret police? Putin was himself a cold-war KGB officer? Many former KGB have been handed major roles in industry by the crony government?

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/04/news/international/powell_KGB.fortune/index.htm

I believe the point was that while decrying the history of Stalin, they are very much still his children. Not too complicated I think?

 

KOWALSKIL

1:02 PM ET

December 17, 2010

test

test

 

KOWALSKIL

1:11 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Discussing Stalinism in the USA

Those interested in how Stalinism was discussed by American professors, several years ago should read Chapter 7 in my on-line book::

http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/father2/introduction.html

Names are not specified; I am Professor 4. My own evolution, from one extreme to another--from a devoted Stalinist to an active anticommunist is described in:

http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/intro.html

Ludwik Kowalski, Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Montclair State University, NJ, USA

 

ROOBIT

11:43 AM ET

December 18, 2010

Stalinist? Anti-Communist? Wake up!

Pan Kowalski, I understand your own charming tribe has an ax or two to grind with Russkies as well and that you can't openly be a Stalinist (you really can't) while teaching anything, not even botany, at one of Evil Empire's educational "institutions", nonetheless Stalin's persona today is as relevant as that of emperor Justinian (whose negative impact on today's world is way greater than Stalin's though like Stalin he did leave many works worthy of admiration - Hagia Sophia or mosaics at Ravenna). As Russia today is much freer and more free market than the USA has ever been the issue of Stalinism or Communism is of incredible irrelevance, it's like question of Arianism in today's setting, unless you work for the State Department, Carnegie Foundation (why hadn't they kicked it out of Russia) or advance the goals of the Evil Empire this issue is not an issue.

 

KOWALSKIL

1:47 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Medvedev's visit to Kolyma.

Another detail worth mentioning, as far as Russian attitude toward Stalinism is concerned, is Medvedev's visit to Kolyma, about two years ago. It was a business trip but he visited the Monument in Magadan. That monument has been erected to commemorate victims of Stalinism, Medvediev kneeled and deposited fowers. This was very significant to me; my father died near Magadan, at the age of 36.

Intuition told me, when I was watching the photo, that he was thinking about someone from his own family. Nearly every Russian of his parent's generation had a friend, or a family member, who was a victim of the Soviet proletarian dictatorship. The number of people killed in Kolyma, mostly by cold, overwork, disease, etc. was larger than the number killed in Auschwitz crematoria.

 

FBUNDY

10:49 PM ET

December 17, 2010

Sad about your father. The

Sad about your father. The more I read about Medvedev, I feel that many Russian have hope for him as a president that may bring more open freedom to the Russian people.

Every Russian that I've ever met has had someone in their family past that was arrested, starved or killed because of Stalin's government. Just sickening.

 

ROOBIT

11:51 AM ET

December 18, 2010

Nearly every Russian of his

Nearly every Russian of his parent's generation had a friend, or a family member - absolutely not. That's your Russophobe fantasy. The ration of victimhood was dependent primarily on belonging to a certain class. Stalin is not universally reviled because most people see him as a positive personage while others like myself don't. However considering the genocide of native Americans by the USA and continuous war it wages on people of this world (like over a million starved and murdered civilians just it Iraq. Auschwitz is comedy show compared to the cumulative American crimes of the 50 years), Stalin is of enormous irrelevance. Especially to Americans. He should be. It is understandable that Stalin is useful in promoting anti-Russian agenda and furthering Empire's own malicious goals but even you must admit, despite your personal grudge, that Stalin and Stalinism are non-issues in today's world.

 

RUSSIAN

2:03 AM ET

December 18, 2010

Execution in Katyni was the

Execution in Katyni was the certificate of revenge of Stalin for 60 000 captured Russian Red Army men who were lost in Polish captivity in 1920
Russia has confessed for this crime. And Poland? Doesn't think at all.

 

MULLIGAS

6:29 AM ET

December 18, 2010

Stalin

The Gulag Archipelago isn't a reliable source. Solzhenitzyn was a right wing fanatic, who supported the Portuguese and Spanish Fascist dictatorships and the restoration of the Russian monarchy. He also claimed that the victims of the Gulag included tens of millions of people.

Here is a good article about the Soviet prison system which examines Solzhenytsins claims.

http://www.mariosousa.se/LiesconcerningthehistoryoftheSovietUnion.html

The claims about a famine genocide seem very dubious. Thousands of Communist activists were killed as well in the practical civil war in the countryside. Many people died because of lack of modern medicines such as penicillin. Their were plenty of famines in Tsarist Russia but nobody, accused the Tsars of genocide. Here is an article on the issue. http://chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/vv.html Douglas Tottle's book Fraud Famine and Fascism is also available to be downloaded online.

Its rather self serving rather then courageous for Medvedev and Putin to denounce Stalin and the Soviet era, since the Communists are their political opponents and the denunciations help to ingratiate them with the West.

 

MELISSA.S

7:22 AM ET

December 22, 2010

Very sorrowfully that at will

Very sorrowfully that at will of one man killed many people and sent in prison. More sorrowful that even after so much time some people can justify it. I very soviet that Russian president does such that statements! It will help to heave up rating of Russia in the eyes of other world! I use this theme in college paper. Thank to the author.