Читаем A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution, 1891-1924 полностью

in Tashkent towards this had been one of callous indifference. One of the Bolsheviks had been heard to say that the Kirghiz were 'the weakest race from the Marxist point of view and must die out anyway.'91

Under pressure from Lenin, the Tashkent government slowly changed its attitudes after 1920. Land taken from the natives was returned; requisitionings were reduced, and brought to a halt from 1921 under the NEP; bazaars were allowed to reopen; mosques were taken out of Soviet control; and Koranic law, which the Tashkent government had abolished in 1918, was restored for believers. All this helped to quell the Basmachi revolt: by 1923 it had virtually been liquidated and remained only in the isolated eastern mountain regions of Uzbekistan and Tajikstan, where with the aid of the mujahaddin, it continued for several more years. Meanwhile, the Soviet regime pursued its policy of recruiting native elites. Over half the delegates to the Turkestan Party Congress in 1921 were Muslims, many of them from the old secular intelligentsia, or jadid, who saw in the regime a modernizing force. And indeed to a large extent it was. The new republics of Central Asia — Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia and Tajikstan — were all, in a cultural sense at least, built up as modern nations in the 1920s. Vast resources were invested in education at all levels, which greatly improved literacy rates. Special efforts were devoted to the training of a native political and technical elite. There was a boom in native-language publications for the new reading public. Most journalists, it is true, had to be recruited from the Volga Tatars, who were culturally more advanced than the Central Asians but not always conversant with the nuances of the local language. Thus one Uzbek daily, Kyzyl bairak, appeared for a time with the slogan above its title-head: 'Tramps of the World Unite!'92 But such mistakes are bound to happen when a national culture is built up from scratch.

International relations complicated the Soviet conquest of the Caucasus. Turkey and Britain both vied with Russia for domination of this vital region after 1918. The Turks had designs on Azerbaijan, to whose population they were ethnically and linguistically related. They also wanted to keep Armenia weak in order to retain their hold on eastern Anatolia, which they had cleared of its Armenian population through the genocide of 1915. As for the British, they saw in the Caucasus a buffer protecting Persia and India from Russia. It was also rich in manganese and oil, which the British, in their best traditions of colonial piracy, were busily exporting from the Baku oil-fields whilst their troops were stationed there as a 'protective force'. The brief independence of the three Caucasian nations (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) was almost wholly dependent upon the temporary post-war weakness of Russia and Turkey, the traditional powers in the region, and, at least in the case of the last two, the protection of Britain as well. On their own, these nations were much too


small and ethnically divided to maintain their independence once Russia and Turkey began to reassert their domination in the region.

Перейти на страницу:

Похожие книги

1917–1920. Огненные годы Русского Севера
1917–1920. Огненные годы Русского Севера

Книга «1917–1920. Огненные годы Русского Севера» посвящена истории революции и Гражданской войны на Русском Севере, исследованной советскими и большинством современных российских историков несколько односторонне. Автор излагает хронику событий, военных действий, изучает роль английских, американских и французских войск, поведение разных слоев населения: рабочих, крестьян, буржуазии и интеллигенции в период Гражданской войны на Севере; а также весь комплекс российско-финляндских противоречий, имевших большое значение в Гражданской войне на Севере России. В книге используются многочисленные архивные источники, в том числе никогда ранее не изученные материалы архива Министерства иностранных дел Франции. Автор предлагает ответы на вопрос, почему демократические правительства Северной области не смогли осуществить третий путь в Гражданской войне.Эта работа является продолжением книги «Третий путь в Гражданской войне. Демократическая революция 1918 года на Волге» (Санкт-Петербург, 2015).В формате PDF A4 сохранён издательский дизайн.

Леонид Григорьевич Прайсман

История / Учебная и научная литература / Образование и наука