29. Perestroika and national relations in the USSR. Collapse of the USSR.

The current stage of Russian history can already be regarded as one of the most dynamic periods of its development.

On March 11, 1985, the world learned of the death of the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee K. Chernenko. On the same day, an extraordinary Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee was held, which elected the youngest member of the Politburo, fifty-four-year-old M. Gorbachev, as the new General Secretary. This politician was a symbol of the transition from a socialist society to a post-socialist one.

At first, Gorbachev decided to direct the course of his reforms towards acceleration only within the framework of socialism. But this course failed in practice.

For the first time, Gorbachev outlined the first stage of the reforms he had planned at the April plenum of the CPSU Central Committee in 1985. The main idea of ​​his speech was a kind of “innocence” of socialism for the economic decline in Soviet society. The core belief that Gorbachev stood for was that the potential of socialism was being underutilized.

However, Gorbachev's reform could not but affect the national structure of the Union. At the same time, Gorbachev hoped to preserve the unifying character of the party within the framework of the state, which, in order to achieve its democratic development, had to decentralize many functions, transferring them to the republics.

2nd half of the 80s. was marked by a series of clashes. The most important point remained the “intricacy of peoples in the motley mosaic of ethnic groups” that was the Soviet Union. In reality, there was not a single republic that was homogeneous in its national composition. Each had minorities distinct from the numerically dominant nation of the republic.

An important event (December 1986) was the removal of Kazakh Kunaev from the post of party leader In Kazakhstan . The Russian Kolbin was put in his place. The response to this action was protest demonstrations in Almaty. Soon Kolbin was forced to be removed.

In 1988, a crisis emerged in interethnic relations. The first conflict, which is still unresolved, arose not on the basis of contradictions between Russians and non-Russians, but on the basis of contradictions between two Caucasian peoplesArmenians and Azerbaijanis, regardingterritory of Nagorno-Karabakh(19871988, at war until 1994)Within the USSR, it was an autonomous region of Azerbaijan, populated predominantly by Armenians. Armenia considered that Baku allocated little funds for its development. 75 thousand people submitted a petition to Gorbachev to transfer Karabakh to Armenia.

In 1989, two centers of crisis arose on the outskirts of the Union (Georgia and the Baltic states), when the understandable desire to assert their own national dignity was transformed into separatist movements.

In the Baltic republicsPopular fronts, which initially declared themselves as organizations in support of perestroika, turned into movements for independence. From the very beginning, out of 3 countries, the leading role was taken by Lithuania. From an ethnic point of view, its population seemed to be the most compact: only20% non-Lithuanian population.

The common demand of the Balts was the condemnation of the 1939 agreement.

Georgian conflict. Here the movement was distinguished by chauvinistic sentiments hostile to all non-Georgians. The largest representative of the movement was Gamsakhurdia, a person prone to extremism. Separatist tendencies have developed quite seriously, as have tensions between different nations.

Extreme nationalism in Georgia, which prevailed with Gamsakhurdia coming to power, caused an immediate reaction: armed uprisings began by Abkhazians and Ossetians, peoples who were not only numerous, but also endowed with their own statehood under the Soviet Constitution.

Gamsakhurdia and his supporters wanted to subjugate them to their power. In response, the Abkhaz and Ossetians declared their separation from Georgia, insisting on the creation of their respective sovereign republics or joining the Russian Federation. In the Abkhaz village of Lykhny, a gathering of Abkhazians took place demanding the transfer of Abkhazia to the RSFSR. The rally in Abkhazia became the reason for the unfolding of a number of tragic events. On April 9, 1989, a demonstration was organized in Tbilisi under the slogans “Down with Soviet power!” The forces of internal troops tried to disperse the demonstration. They blamed everything on the local authorities, the KGB, the army, the Russians... In fact, the troops faced resistance from well-trained forces.

January 1990 events in Baku. The Popular Front opposed Soviet power in the person of the Prime MinisterVezirova. Entry of Soviet troops. The Azerbaijani authorities, relying on Soviet troops, suppressed the demonstrations. The authority of the Soviet government has been undermined.

January 1991 events in Vilnius. Pro-Moscow forces attempted to overthrow the legitimate Lithuanian authorities. The KGB is trying to storm the TV tower,myth about the execution of people by Soviet troops. Myth, because 1 of the managersnational forces spilled the beans: national forces fired into the crowd (injuries from above).

May-June 1989 1st Congress people's deputies, slogans of nationalists.War of laws: union and republican.

1990 Decree of the President of the USSR on the dissolution of illegal armed groups.

However, all the factors that were capable of maintaining a single Union remained quite strong. The level of economic integration between the various regions was so high that it seemed impossible for them to exist separately.

During the entire crisis period in interethnic relations, Gorbachev's line was doomed to defeat, despite the fact that it was consistent. Gorbachev remained true to his convictions thatThe Union, as a necessary form of existence for the peoples of the USSR, must be saved in any case.However, he understood that to achieve this goal, the Union had to be radically reformed, for which each republic needed to guarantee sovereignty and democratic control over its affairs, leaving the main functions ensuring life together in the Union, behind the Center. He allowed, although he condemned, the separation of some peoples from others, but demanded that everything happen within the framework of the law. He approved a legal procedure that opened the door for each nation to exercise its constitutional right to secede by consent of the parties. In this regard, Gorbachev was accused of causing the collapse of the Union.

The most important political and historical step was the organization of a referendum throughout the country in March 1991. 80% took part in the vote, but the referendum was not held in the Baltic states and Moldova.76% were in favor of preserving the union, subject to its reformation on a democratic basis. The following month, negotiations began with the Republics to conclude a Treaty that would define the foundations of a renewed state.

This document was namedNovo-Ogarevo Treaty(named after the residence near Moscow where it was compiled).

According to this document, each individual republic, which agreed to delegate a number of powers to the Central Government in the field of defense, foreign policy, and economic sphere, was recognized as sovereign and independent. Yeltsin signed the treaty for Russia.

Gorbachev regarded the positive results of the referendum as a personal political victory. However, Gorbachev made a grave political miscalculation:On March 28, the opening day of the Extraordinary Congress of People's Deputies of the RSFSR, troops were sent into Moscow, which was perceived by radicals, moderates andby Conservative MPs as an insult. In conversations with Khasbulatov, Gorbachev agreed to withdraw troops only the next day. The activities of the congress were suspended. On August 19, 1991, a coup began that lasted three days. However, the State Emergency Committee was unable to realistically assess the reaction of the masses of the Russian population to its actions; another miscalculation of the putschists was to overestimate the power of the Center over the union republics. On August 23, Gorbachev was asked to signDecree on the immediate dissolution of the CPSU. Following this, the collapse of all old government structures began.

On December 8, during a meeting in Belarus, which was held in secret from Gorbachevthe leaders of the three Slavic republics (Yeltsin, Kravchuk and Shushkevich) concluded a separate interstate agreement in which they announced the formation of the Commonwealth Independent States within the Republic of Belarus, the RSFSR and Ukraine.

Without consulting anyone, three men put an end to the USSR. Moreover,The republics could only withdraw from the union, but not liquidate it.On December 25, Gorbachev resigned as president of a state that no longer existed.

A few days later, the Central Asian republics and Kazakhstan expressed their readiness to join the Commonwealth. On December 21, at a meeting in Almaty, where Gorbachev was not invited, 11 former Soviet republics (except the Baltic states and Georgia), later independent states, announced the creation of a Commonwealth primarily with coordinating functions without any legislative, executive or judicial powers.

The actions of national elites and intelligentsia were decisive reason collapse of the USSR.

At the moment, there is no consensus on what the prerequisites for the collapse of the USSR are. However, most scientists agree that their beginnings were laid in the very ideology of the Bolsheviks, who, albeit in many ways formally, recognized the right of nations to self-determination. The weakening of central power provoked the formation of new power centers on the outskirts of the state. It is worth noting that similar processes occurred at the very beginning of the 20th century, during the period of revolutions and the collapse of the Russian Empire.

Briefly speaking, the reasons for the collapse of the USSR are as follows:

A crisis provoked by the planned nature of the economy and leading to a shortage of many consumer goods;

Unsuccessful, largely ill-conceived reforms that led to a sharp deterioration in living standards;

Massive dissatisfaction of the population with interruptions in food supplies;

The ever-increasing gap in living standards between citizens of the USSR and citizens of countries in the capitalist camp;

Exacerbation of national contradictions;

Weakening of central power;

The processes that led to the collapse of the USSR became apparent already in the 80s. Against the backdrop of a general crisis, which only deepened by the beginning of the 90s, there was a growth in nationalist tendencies in almost all union republics. The first to leave the USSR were: Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia. They are followed by Georgia, Azerbaijan, Moldova and Ukraine.

The collapse of the USSR was the result of the events of August - December 1991. After the August putsch, the activities of the CPSU party in the country were suspended. The Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the Congress of People's Deputies lost power. The last Congress in history took place in September 1991 and declared self-dissolution. During this period, the State Council of the USSR became the highest authority, headed by Gorbachev, the first and the only president THE USSR. The attempts he made in the fall to prevent both the economic and political collapse of the USSR did not bring success. As a result, on December 8, 1991, after the signing of the Belovezhskaya Agreement by the heads of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, the Soviet Union ceased to exist. At the same time, the formation of the CIS - the Commonwealth of Independent States - took place. The collapse of the Soviet Union was the largest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, with global consequences.

Here are just the main consequences of the collapse of the USSR:

A sharp decline in production in all countries of the former USSR and a drop in the standard of living of the population;

The territory of Russia has shrunk by a quarter;

Access to seaports has again become difficult;

The population of Russia has decreased - in fact, by half;

The emergence of numerous national conflicts and the emergence of territorial claims between the former republics of the USSR;

Globalization began - processes gradually gained momentum, turning the world into a single political, informational, economic system;

The world has become unipolar, and the United States remains the only superpower.

Political reforms of the 90s. 20th century in Russia

After the collapse of the USSR in 1991, changes occurred in all areas of life in Russia. One of the most important events of the last decade of the 20th century. was the formation of a new Russian statehood.

Presidential power. The central place in the system of power of modern Russia is occupied by the institution of the President, who, according to the 1993 Constitution, is the head of state, and not the executive branch (as it was until December 1993).

Almost no important issue in the life of the state and society can be resolved without the consent and approval of the head of state.

The President is the guarantor of the Constitution and can take any measures to protect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Russia. The Government of the country is accountable to the President, the composition and main directions of whose activities he determines and whose work he actually directs. The head of state also heads the Security Council. He is the Supreme Commander-in-Chief of the country's Armed Forces, and can, if necessary, introduce a state of emergency, martial law or special state.

This scope of the President's powers is fully consistent with the historical traditions of the highest authorities in Russia. Some opponents of strong presidential power sometimes call this regime an elective monarchy. However, despite the full powers of the head of state, his power is sufficiently limited by a system of checks and balances.

From Soviets to parliamentarism. The main political event of the 90s. was the dismantling of the Soviet system of power and its replacement with the separation of powers - legislative, executive, judicial.

Using the historical experience of parliamentarism in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century, the Constitution of 1993 completed the process of formation of a new Russian parliamentarism that began during the years of perestroika.

The Russian parliament is the Federal Assembly, consisting of two chambers - the Federation Council (upper) and the State Duma (lower). The Upper House calls elections for the President and, if necessary, decides on his removal from office; approves the decision of the head of state to introduce martial law or a state of emergency; appoints and dismisses the Prosecutor General and members of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Arbitration Court of Russia. The main subjects of jurisdiction of the State Duma are the approval of the composition of the Government and the adoption of the laws of the country. Both houses of parliament approve the federal budget and national taxes and fees; ratify international agreements signed by Russia; declare war and make peace. All these decisions are subject to approval by the President.

Government. Executive power in the country is exercised by the Government of Russia. It develops and implements the federal budget after approval; ensures the implementation of a unified state financial, credit and monetary policy in the country; determines the parameters for the development of culture, science, education, healthcare, social security, and ecology; ensures the implementation of the country's defense and foreign policy; cares about the observance of law and order, the rights and freedoms of citizens. He is also responsible for the disposal of federal property.

The activities of the Government, unlike the pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods of Russian history, are not only directly dependent on the instructions and orders of the head of state, but also under significant control by parliament.

Judicial branch. Judicial power in the country is exercised through constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal proceedings. The Constitutional Court issues decisions at the request of the authorities final decision on the compliance of federal and regional laws and orders with the Constitution of the country; decrees of the President of the country and heads of the constituent entities of the Federation. At the request of citizens, he resolves the issue of violation of their constitutional rights and freedoms. If necessary, he gives an interpretation of those provisions of the Constitution that are not regulated by special laws and other documents.

The Supreme Court is the highest court in civil, criminal and administrative cases.

The Supreme Arbitration Court is the highest court for resolving economic disputes.

The prosecutor's office monitors compliance with the laws of the country both by citizens and by state and public bodies.

Center and regions. Russia is a federation consisting of 88 subjects. The political and economic rights granted by the federal authorities to the regions in the early 90s led to a significant weakening of the role of the Center. The laws adopted locally and even their own constitutional acts were in conflict with the federal Constitution and the laws of the federation. The creation of a network of provincial banks and even the constituent entities of the Federation’s own “gold reserve” began. In certain regions of the country, not only did the transfer of funds to the federal budget cease, but also a ban on the export of various types products beyond the borders of territories and regions. There were voices about giving administrative borders (especially national regions) the status of state ones. The Russian language has ceased to be recognized as the state language in a number of republics. All this gave rise to a dangerous trend of transformation of the federation into a confederation and even the possibility of its collapse.

The situation in Chechnya was especially alarming, where “state independence” was proclaimed, and power essentially passed into the hands of criminal and extremist groups. Weakened Federal Center Having failed to achieve compliance with federal legislation here through political means, he took forceful action. During the first (1994-1996) and second (from the summer of 1999) military campaigns in Chechnya, it was possible to ensure control of the central authorities over the territory of this subject of the Federation. But production and social sphere The region was completely destroyed during protracted hostilities. The losses were significant both among the federal forces and among the local population. However, emerging in the 90s. tendency for Chechnya to leave Russian Federation was stopped.

Local government. Developing traditions local government established during the zemstvo (1864) and city (1870) reforms, the 1993 Constitution gave local authorities the right independent decision issues of local importance, ownership, use and disposal of municipal property. The main forms of local self-government are referendums (national expressions of will) and elections of heads of deputies of municipalities. During referendums of the population, issues of changing the boundaries and belonging of a city or village to a particular district or region are also resolved. Local authorities independently manage municipal property, form and execute the local budget, determine the articles and amounts of local taxes and fees, protect public order, etc. In 1998, Russia ratified the European Charter of Local Self-Government, in which local governments are recognized as one from the basic foundations of a democratic system. An important event was the establishment by municipalities of the Congress of Municipal Entities of the Russian Federation to coordinate the efforts of local governments in defending their interests before regional and central authorities.

Thus, in the 90s. in Russia, a legitimate basis for Russian statehood was created, built on democratic principles, and a new system of relations between the Center and the regions was tested.

Historical experience interethnic relations in the USSR, Russian Federation (1953-2003) ">

480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Dissertation - 480 RUR, delivery 10 minutes, around the clock, seven days a week and holidays

240 rub. | 75 UAH | $3.75 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Abstract - 240 rubles, delivery 1-3 hours, from 10-19 (Moscow time), except Sunday

Tsai Vladimir Ilyich. Historical experience of interethnic relations in the USSR, Russian Federation (1953-2003): Dis. ... Dr. Ist. Sciences: 07.00.02: Moscow, 2004 352 p. RSL OD, 71:05-7/59

Introduction

Section I. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND FOR THE FORMATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN PRE-LUCTION RUSSIA AND THE USSR 18

Section II. THE ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF PERSONNEL POTENTIAL IN DECISIONING NATIONAL POLITICS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 61

Section III. NATIONAL-CULTURAL POLICY OF THE PARTY AND THE STATE IN RELATION TO THE PEOPLES OF THE USSR AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 115

Section IV. FEATURES OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS ON THE TERRITORY OF THE USSR AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 167

Section V. STATE OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AFTER THE COLLAPSE OF THE USSR 263

CONCLUSION 313

NOTES 326

LIST OF SOURCES AND REFERENCES USED 342

Introduction to the work

Relevance research topics. Problems associated with the management and functioning of the state in ethnically divided societies are the subject of special attention of modern scientists and politicians. Therefore, the issues of improving international relations, creating a culture of communication, establishing the values ​​of internationalism and friendship of peoples were relevant in all multinational states.

These questions have been and remain the most pressing for Russian society. The Russian Federation, as the successor to the USSR, is known to be one of the world's largest multinational states, home to more than 150 nations and nationalities. Each of them has its own specifics - in number, socio-professional structure, type of economic and cultural activity, language, features of material and spiritual culture. The boundaries of the settlement of peoples, as a rule, do not coincide with the boundaries of republics, territories, regions and districts. The number and nature of their settlement in various regions of the Russian Federation is particularly affected by the intensity of migration processes. The overwhelming majority of ethnic communities have evolved over centuries and in this sense are indigenous. Hence their historical role in the formation of Russian statehood and claims to independent national-territorial or, at least, national-cultural entities.

The dramatic collisions of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the aggravation of interethnic relations in almost the entire post-Soviet space dictate the need to study and rethink

experience of national political processes. This is due, first of all, to the fact that in modern conditions the problem of preserving the unity of the Russian Federation is one of the most important and pressing. The experience of the recent Soviet past teaches that underestimating the role of the ethnic factor and errors in assessing its real role lead to the accumulation of its enormous conflict potential, which can serve as a threat to the integrity of a multinational state. The recent collapse of the USSR also shows how important it is to build a national policy and interethnic relations on a scientific basis.

Therefore, according to the doctoral student, the urgent problem of modern Russia is the problem of preserving the political, economic, cultural and historical unity of Russian society, the integrity of the territory, and the revival on this basis of truly strong, mutually beneficial, extremely necessary interethnic relations.

Therefore, without a thorough study of the rich Soviet experience of national movements and drawing those historical lessons, an objective picture of modern national relations in Russia is impossible. All this emphasizes the need to study the causes and main stages national policy and interethnic relations. This is necessary for the formation of a national policy in the country that would lead to a more complete development of the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation.

A study of the problems of interethnic relations in the USSR and the Russian Federation, in particular, shows that their analysis in relation to different stages historical development society

is marked both by its characteristics arising from specific goals and objectives, and by the forms of their resolution.

In this regard, it must be admitted that during the years of socialist construction, interest in the problems of interethnic relations increased noticeably. This became especially noticeable in the 60-70s. Much attention was paid to covering the activities of the party and the state in implementing interethnic policies, i.e. practical side this problem. It is to this period that the appearance of generalizing monographs in the field of national politics and interethnic relations dates back to 1.

Naturally, in these works the specifics of national policy and
interethnic relations in the USSR, the role of the national program
CPSU in the conditions of building a socialist society

were considered exclusively on the basis of the Marxist-Leninist methodology of approaching the problem as an integral part general issue about social revolution.

Degree of scientific study of the problem shows that the problem of national policy and interethnic relations in the years under review, due to the specifics of the study, began to be studied by domestic historical science relatively recently, and therefore the specific historical picture of the formation of national policy and interethnic relations remains far from complete and unevenly studied. Conceptual framework all Soviet historiography

Gardanov V.K., Dolgikh B. O., Zhdanko T.A. The main directions of ethnic processes among the peoples of the USSR.// Sov. Ethnography. 1961.No.4; Groshev I.I. Historical experience of the CPSU in the implementation of Leninist national policy. -M., 1967; Brus SI. Ethnodemographic processes in the USSR (based on the 1970 census materials) // Sov. Ethnography. 1971.№4; Sherstobitov V.P. Education of the USSR and historical objects of our country // History of the USSR.1971.No.3; Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development; Malanchuk V.E. Historical experience of the CPSU in resolving the national question and developing national relations in the USSR.-M., 1972, etc.

national policy and interethnic relations constituted theses about the complete and final victory of socialism in the USSR and the beginning of the transition from socialism to communism. In the 1960s, the previously existing ideological framework of scientific work on national issues was supplemented by the concept of developed socialism, the main emphasis of which was placed on the ideas of achieving social and national homogeneity of society.

State leaders of the USSR declared the “monolithic unity” of the Soviet people and that the national question in the USSR had been “successfully resolved.” Hence all the literature of this time is in rainbow colors. painted a cloudless picture of national and interethnic relations in the USSR. Secondly, an analysis of the historiography of this period shows that “in the USSR there is, on the one hand, the flourishing of all nations, on the other hand, their rapprochement,” which was first voiced at the XXII Congress of the CPSU in the report “On the Program of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.” They tried not to notice the inconsistency and multidirectionality of these statements.

A number of works by Soviet scientists of this period were aimed at considering the main directions of criticism of the bourgeois “falsifications” of the development of national and interethnic relations in the USSR. The authors of these works, although they pointed out the persistence of remnants of chauvinism and nationalism in the Soviet Union, at the same time explained this by backward cultural and religious traditions, the weakness of atheistic and international education, as well as anti-Soviet propaganda.

"Groshev I.I., Chechenkina O.I. Criticism of bourgeois falsifications of the national policy of the CPSU. - M, 1974; Bagramov E.A. The national question in the struggle of ideas. - M., 1982; Bourgeois historiography of the formation and development of the USSR. - M., 1983; Criticism of falsifications of national relations in the USSR. -M., 1983, etc.

A number of studies in the 60-70s were devoted to the general achievements of national policy in the USSR. Despite the fact that the name of such a theorist of national relations as Stalin was not mentioned in scientific works. The literature rehabilitated the Stalinist model of building socialism in previously backward national republics; 3 covered ethnic processes in the USSR - internationalization, assimilation, the emergence and formation of a new historical community “Soviet people”; 4, thoughts were expressed about the dialectic of national and international in the development of Soviet society in the process of rapprochement and integration of the peoples of the USSR. 5 At the same time, firstly,

"Sherstobitov V.P. Education of the USSR and historical subjects of the peoples of our country // History of the USSR. 1972. No. 3. Kukushkin Y.S. Problems of studying the history of creation // History of the USSR. 1972. No. 6.; Gardanov V.K., Dolgikh B. .O., Zhdanko T.A. Main directions of ethnic processes among the peoples of the USSR. // Soviet ethnography. ] 961 No. 4, Brook S. I. Ethnodemographic processes in the USSR (based on the 1970 census materials). // Soviet ethnography. 1971 No. 4.; Groshev I.I. Historical experience of the CPSU in implementing Leninist national policy. - M., 1967.; Kulichenko M. I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development; Malanchuk V. E. Historical experience of the CPSU in resolving the national question and the development of national relations in the USSR. - M., 1972.

4 The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. - Proceedings of the interuniversity scientific concept (October 15-19, 1969). - Volgograd, 1969; Kaltakhchyan SR. Leninism is about the essence of the nation and the path to the formation of an international community of people. M., 1976; Kim M P The Soviet people are a new historical community of people. - M, 1972. "Abd>latipov R.G., Burmistrov T.Yu. Lenin's policy of internationalism in the USSR: history and modernity - M., 1982; Bagramov E.A. Lenin's national policy of achievements and prospects. - M., 1977; Burmistrov T.Yu. Patterns and features of the development of socialist nations in the conditions of the construction of communism.

L. 1974, Dialectics of the international and national in a socialist society, - M, 1981; Drobizheva L.M. The spiritual community of the peoples of the USSR: a historical and sociological essay on interethnic relations. - M, 1981; Kaltakhchyan SR. Marxist-Leninist theory of the nation and modernity. - M., 1983; Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development. - M., 1972; His own. The flourishing and rapprochement of socialist nations in the USSR. - M, 1981; Metelitsa L.V. The flourishing and rapprochement of socialist nations. - M, 1978; National relations in a developed socialist society. - M., 1977; Likholat A.V., Patijulaska V.F. In a single family of nations. - M, 19789; Rosenko M.N. Patriotism and national pride of the Soviet people. -L., 1977; Sulzhenko V.K. Internationalism at the stage of developed socialism - the implementation of the Leninist national policy of the CPSU in Ukraine - Lvov, 1981; Tzameryan I.P. Nations and national relations in a developed socialist society. - M., 1979, etc.

the objective nature of the formation and development of a “new interethnic community” - the “Soviet people” was emphasized on the basis of a common economic space and the Russian language as the language of all-Union communication, 6 secondly, the dialectic of national and international in the development of Soviet society was often considered through the prism of the formula “interpenetration and the mutual enrichment of the two tendencies of socialism in the development of nations and national relations - the flourishing and rapprochement of nations.” Obviously, such a limitation of this problem did not reveal in its entirety and complexity the dynamics of the development of this most important task of society. Some researchers have consistently emphasized that history does not provide us with convincing material for concluding that nations are dying out. The problem of dialectical contradictions in the national sphere of the USSR was not only not considered by many authors, but even the term “contradiction” itself was not even mentioned in many publications. 7

Works on national politics in the USSR, published in the 70s and 80s, acquire a new quality. In a number of these works, national

6 Kulichenko M.I. National relations in the USSR and trends in their development. - M., 1972; Kim M.P. The relationship between the national and the international in the life of peoples: its typology. // Fraternal unity of the peoples of the USSR. - M., 1976; Drobizheva L.M. Spiritual community of the peoples of the USSR (Historical and sociological essay on interethnic relations). - M., 1981; Development of national relations in the USSR.-M., 1986, etc.

B>rmistrova T.Yu. National policy of the CPSU in conditions of mature socialism. - In the book: National Policy of the CPSU. -M., 1981; Burmistrova T.Yu., Dmitriev O.L. United by friendship: the culture of interethnic communication in the USSR. - M., 1986, etc.

Modern ethnic processes in the USSR. M. 1977; The main directions of studying national relations in the USSR. - M., 1979; Social policy and national relations (based on the materials of the all-Union scientific and practical conference “Development of national relations in the conditions of mature socialism.” - M., 1982; “Experience and problems of patriotic and international education.” - Riga, July 28-30, 1982; Problems of perestroika : social aspect. - M., 1984; Semenov V.S., Jordan M.V., Babakov V.G., Samsonov V.A. Interethnic contradictions and conflicts in the USSR. - M., 1991; Kukushkin B.S., Barsenov A. K. On the question of the concept of national policy of the Russian Federation. - Ethnopolis. // Ethnopolitical Bulletin of Russia. -

relations and national politics are considered in a generalized form, attempts are made to highlight key points in them in order to get closer to understanding the origins and causes of the collapse of the USSR and modern national problems of Russia and do not affect the problems we are studying.

In the 90s, researchers were faced with the task of rethinking all the accumulated experience in the field of interethnic relations. During these years, many works were published on this issue 9, which covered the problems of interethnic relations between the peoples of Russia, the war in Chechnya, the problems of the Russian-speaking population who, through no fault of their own, found themselves abroad as small peoples in newly formed national states in the near abroad.

In general, it should be noted that these works raise the question of the relationship between national and international factors; the question of the general culture of our thinking in

M, 1992, No. 1.; Will Russia share the fate of the USSR? The crisis of interethnic relations and federal policy - M, 1993; Mikhalin V.A. National policy as a factor in state building. - M, 1995; Kalinina K.V. National minorities in Russia - M., 1993; Bugai N.F., Mekulov D. X. People power “Socialist experiment”, Maykop, 1994, etc.

Yu Boroday. From ethnic diversity to national unity // Russia on a new frontier. -M., - 1991; A.I. Vdovin. Features of ethnopolitical relations and the formation of a new statehood in Russia (historical and conceptual aspects) - M., - 1993; M.N. G>boglo. Protection and self-defense of nationalities // Ethnopolitical Bulletin. -M., - 1995. -No. 4; A.I. Doronchenkov. Interethnic relations and national politics in Russia: actual problems. -M., -1995; L M Drobizheva. Nationalism, ethnic identity and conflicts in a transforming society: main approaches to the study // National consciousness and nationalism in the Russian Federation in the early 1990s. -M., -1994; A.G. Zdravomyslov. Diversity of interests and institutions of power. -M., -1994; V.Yu. Zorin. National policy- legal basis// National politics of Russia: history and modernity. - M., -1997; K.V. Kalinina. Institutions of state power are regulators of interethnic relations. - M., -1995; L. M. Karapetyan. Borders of sovereignty and self-determination of peoples // State and law. - 1993 - No. 1; N I Medvedev National policy of Russia. From unitarianism to federalism. -M„ -1993. Interethnic relations in the regions of the Russian Federation. -M., -1992; Interethnic relations in the Russian Federation//Annual report of the IEARAN. -M., -1998; V.I.Tsai. Interethnic relations in the USSR and the Russian Federation. -M., - 2004 and DR-

national issue, without which it would be difficult to count on making a real contribution to solving the problems of national and interethnic relations, taking into account the pressing problems here. In this regard, the book “National Policy of Russia. History and modernity" (Kuleshov S., Amanzholova D.A., Volobuev O.V., Mikhailov V.A.), which represents the first study in domestic national policy at all its stages and in the interrelation

theoretical designs with practical implementation.

Many issues of the ethnological situation in the USSR and in its individual regions are reflected in the collection of articles “National Processes in the USSR”, written by scientists from the N.N. Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology. Miklouho-Maclay and the Center for the Study of Interethnic Relations of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The articles by V. Muntyan, V. Tishkov, S. Cheshko attract attention, in which a new level of understanding of the most characteristic tasks in the development of national relations is visible, their typological groups are highlighted, and the policies of M. Gorbachev during the years of perestroika are illuminated through the prism of critical analysis. eleven

The monograph by scientists F. Gorovsky and Yu. Rymanenko, published in 1991, deserves special attention. Of main interest to us is chapter two, “Results of the path traveled: successes and deformations.” The authors, without detracting from what has been done in the interethnic sphere, noting how the level of socio-economic development, education, culture of the union and autonomous republics has risen during the years of Soviet power, emphasizing that deep, progressive changes have occurred in the life of every nation and nationality,

National policy of Russia. History and modernity. - M., 1997. 1 National processes in the USSR: collection of articles. - M., 1991.

Gorovsky F.Ya., Rymanenko Yu.I. The national question and socialist practice: experience of historical and theoretical analysis. - Kyiv: Vishcha School, 1991. - 225 p.

paid considerable attention to the analysis of problems, errors, miscalculations in
national policy. The source base of the monograph consists of
various publications, archival sources were not used.
Let us next turn to works written and published after
Belovezhsky meeting. The monograph is of significant interest
^ historian-researchers A.I. Zalessky and P.N. Kobrinets, in which

Along with great achievements in economic and cultural construction, errors and miscalculations are analyzed, especially in the field of language construction. The authors deeply and convincingly expose modern falsifiers of the history of national relations in the USSR.

Based on the above, and also from the fact that interethnic
the problem is one of the most complex and acute problems of any state,
4fc requires a special approach and daily attention, in

The dissertation aims to reveal the most pressing tasks of national policy and interethnic relations, their effectiveness, problems and contradictions in 1953-2003.

In connection with this goal, as well as relying on accumulated research experience, widely drawing on the results of existing publications in the field of interethnic relations, new documentary and archival materials, the author decides the following tasks:

reveal the historical background of the formation
interethnic relations in pre-revolutionary Russia and the USSR;

explore the role and significance of human resources in solving
f|i national and interethnic relations;

Zalessky A.I., Kobrinets P.N. On national relations in Soviet Belarus: historical essays. - Grodno: State University, 1992. - 192 p.

analyze the national-cultural policy of the party and the state in the system of interethnic relations between the peoples of the USSR and the Russian Federation;

show the features of interethnic conflicts on the territory of the USSR, the Russian Federation,

summarize the state of interethnic relations in the Russian Federation after the collapse THE USSR.

Subject of research are national politics and interethnic relations in Soviet and Russian societies in 1953-2003.

Defining chronological framework research (1953-2003), the author proceeded from the fact that in these years, along with the painful manifestations of the echoes of unjustified repression of national personnel, especially leaders and intelligentsia in the 30s - early 50s, there was an active renewal process that affected after the death of I. Stalin all spheres public life, including national public policy. The atmosphere of democratization created by the 20th Congress of the CPSU gave a powerful impetus social progress, inspired the country. The flow of scientific discoveries was carried out precisely soviet man, the first to pave the way into space. The standard of living, education and culture of the masses grew. In national literatures there is a fireworks display of bright poetic names. Along with this, the moral and political unity of the nations and nationalities of the country strengthened.

In subsequent years, the active development of nations continued, the processes of democratization of the most important sphere of life of the Soviet state - national personnel policy - deepened, and the training of specialists in economics, science, culture, management, and military affairs from representatives of all nations and nationalities was widely deployed

USSR, national culture and art reached a high level, much was done to develop national languages, national literature, national traditions, etc.

At the same time, the national factor was sometimes underestimated; it was not always taken into account that national relations retain their specificity and relative independence and develop according to their own special laws. The scope of use of the national languages ​​of some republics of the USSR has narrowed. During the reforms of the second half of the 80s, existing contradictions in the national sphere still remained.

The 90s of the last century, which laid the foundation for the formation of the Russian state. During these years, the Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted (December 12, 1993), agreements “On the delimitation of jurisdiction and mutual delegation of powers between state authorities of the Russian Federation and state authorities of the subject” were signed, the strengthening of the vertical of power began, etc.

At the same time, during this period, the concept of national policy was adopted, as well as federal laws, influencing the solution of the interethnic issue and national statehood: on national and cultural autonomy of May 22, 1996; on guarantees of the rights of indigenous peoples of the Russian Federation dated April 16, 1999; about general principles organizations of legislative (representative) and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation dated September 22, 1999, etc. At the regional level, a lot of work is also being done to improve national policy and interethnic relations. It has become especially active in the 21st century.

The source base of the dissertation consisted of published and unpublished materials. The published materials are mainly the service records and nationality of members of the leaders of party and government bodies, the army, public organizations, etc. Periodicals were used to cover almost all the problems studied in the dissertation.

The dissertation also uses unpublished documents identified by the author in the archives of the city. Moscow, Minsk, Kyiv. In particular, empirical material was obtained from the following state archives: 1) state archive of the Russian Federation. - F. 5508; 2) Russian State Historical Archive. - F. 776; 3)Storage center for special documentation. - F. 5, 89; 4) Central State Archive of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 1; 5) National Archives of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 4, 74, 974; 6) Archive of the information center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Belarus. - F. 23; 7) Archive of the Main Information Bureau of Ukraine. - F. 4; 8) Central State Archives of Government and Administration of Ukraine. - F. 288.

Valuable materials reflecting the implementation of national policy are concentrated in the funds of the Union and republican ministries and departments, in particular, the State Planning Committees of the Central Statistical Office, Culture, Education and others. Various aspects of the problem under consideration are covered in certificates, information, and reports sent by ministries and departments of the republics to party and higher government bodies. Of great importance for penetration into the topic are the internal memos (for internal, official use) of the heads of departments of party committees at various levels and the Affairs Directorates of the Councils of Ministers of the Union Republics,

addressed to the secretariats of regional committees, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the union republics, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Councils of Ministers of the republics of the USSR on various issues of economic, cultural and national construction.

Materials from party and state statistics and periodicals were of great importance for writing the work. The study also used articles, speeches, speeches by leaders of the USSR, RSFSR, Ukrainian SSR, Belarusian SSR and other regions of the country, as well as the Russian Federation, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, etc.

When assessing the entire array of sources, it should be noted that they do not always provide an adequate picture of the problem under study. Because of this, the necessary verification (re-verification) of them was carried out in order to confirm the stated facts. In addition, many questions in the sources are focused only on positive data and are interpreted one-sidedly, sometimes schematically. This state of the sources was taken into account, and their data was critically interpreted during the study.

At the same time, the analysis of historical sources, published documents and archival materials made it possible to consider the problem objectively, over the course of almost forty years, a very controversial and dramatic period, to reveal those problems and issues that were not previously the subject of special study. The author believes that this study will help to better understand and comprehend many pages of recent history in the field of national politics and interethnic relations.

Scientific novelty of the research is as follows: 1. First of all, a wide range of documents and materials have been identified that make it possible to reveal the content of national policy and interethnic

relations in the period we are studying, many of the documents are being introduced into scientific circulation for the first time; 2. The prerequisites and reasons for the aggravation of contradictions are revealed, the role and place of government authorities in resolving existing conflicts and mitigating tensions in interethnic relations is shown; 3. Based on the collected and generalized, previously unstudied documentary material, new historical material on the problems of national politics and interethnic relations of the Soviet society of the Russian Federation, in the years 1953-2003, is harmoniously introduced into the fabric of the study; 4. The mechanism of collusion in the signing of the Belovezhskaya agreements on the collapse of the USSR is studied, a complex of negative circumstances of both internal and external order is shown, which, in the author’s opinion, played a significant role in the collapse of the Soviet Union, which caused dire consequences in the sphere of national, economic and other areas development of the former republics of the USSR; 5. A mechanism for the formation of a new concept of national policy and interethnic relations in the regions of Russia is proposed, taking into account the current state of the Russian Federation.

Practical significance of the study lies, first of all, in the fact that its provisions and conclusions, as well as the documentary material on national politics and interethnic relations introduced into scientific circulation for the first time, can be used by specialists in solving problems related to national and interethnic processes, as well as scientists and university teachers , school teachers in the preparation of general works on national issues and special courses on the history of Russia, diploma and coursework for students of history departments of universities, etc.

Approbation of work. The main content of the research is reflected in the monograph, textbooks, articles, collections of scientific papers,

The structure of the work is determined by the objectives of the study. It consists of an introduction, five sections, a conclusion, a list of sources and literature.

historical background for the formation of interethnic relations in pre-revolutionary Russia and the USSR

Exploring the problem, we note that already by the beginning of the 19th century. Russia was a huge continental country that occupied a vast area of ​​Eastern Europe, Northern Asia and part of North America (Alaska and the Aleutian Islands). For the first half of XIX century, its territory increased from 16 to 18 million square meters. km due to the annexation of Finland, the Kingdom of Poland, Bessarabia, the Caucasus, Transcaucasia and Kazakhstan. According to the first revision (1719), there were 15.6 million people of both sexes in Russia, according to the fifth (1795) - 7.4 million, and according to the tenth (1857) - 59.3 million (excluding Finland and the kingdom Polish). Natural population growth in the first half of the 19th century. was about 1% per year, and the average life expectancy was 27.3 years,1 which was generally typical, as foreign demographic calculations show, for the “countries of pre-industrial Europe.” Low life expectancy rates were due to high infant mortality and periodic epidemics.

Besides this, there were other reasons for these disasters. In particular, more than 9/10 of the Russian population lived in rural areas. According to the 1811 census, the urban population numbered 2,765 thousand people, and according to the 1863 census - already 6,105 thousand, that is, over half a century it increased 2.2 times. However, its share in relation to the entire population increased slightly during this time - only from 6.5 to 8%. The number of cities themselves increased over half a century from 630 to 1032. However, small cities predominated among them: at the beginning of the 19th century. out of 630 cities, 500 had less than 5 thousand each and only 19-over 20 thousand inhabitants. This ratio between small and large cities practically remained the same by the early 60s of the 19th century. The largest cities were both “capitals” - St. Petersburg and Moscow. The population of St. Petersburg in the first half of the 19th century. increased from 336 to 540 thousand, and Moscow - from 275 to 462 thousand people.3 Many cities were actually large villages, whose residents were engaged in agriculture on the lands allocated to the cities, partly in trade and small crafts. At this time, the official division of settlements into cities and villages was carried out along administrative lines. Therefore, there were many large commercial and industrial settlements, which, due to the nature of the inhabitants’ occupations and even according to appearance were real cities (such as, for example, the large factory village of Ivanovo, which surpassed even the provincial city of Vladimir in the number of inhabitants). Such industrial villages were Pavlovo, Kimry, Gorodets, Vichuga, Mstera. However, they continued to remain in the status of villages, for most of them belonged to large landowners-magnates - the Sheremetevs, Panins, Golitsyns, Yusupovs, Vorontsovs. The right of landowners to own such villages slowed down the process of city formation. Thus, the village of Ivanovo received city status only in 1871, when it was finally freed from all its obligations towards its former owner, Count Sheremetev.

Administratively, the European part of Russia was divided into 47 provinces and 5 regions (Astrakhan, Tauride, Caucasus, the land of the Don Army and the land of the Black Sea Army). Subsequently, the number of provinces increased due to the division of some of them and the annexation of new territories. The Astrakhan and Tauride regions received the status of provinces. According to the administrative division of 1822, Siberia was divided into Tobolsk, Tomsk, Omsk, Irkutsk, Yenisei provinces and the Yakutsk region. In the 50s of the XIX century. Kamchatka, Transbaikal, Primorsk and Amur regions were also formed.5

The role and importance of human resources in solving national politics and interethnic relations

The study of this problem has shown that in its positive solution, human resources play an extremely important role, that is, those workers who are directly involved in the development and stabilization of national and interethnic relations.

In this regard, a priority role belongs to the selection of management personnel for business qualities, and not according to national characteristics, which in any state was and is considered a special definition of its high morality. In the republics, territories and regions of the former USSR, they tried to adhere to the principle of selecting and appointing leading personnel in all areas of the national economy, party, Soviet and other public bodies, taking into account a healthy combination of their nationalities. This process was controlled by both party and Soviet authorities.

In the process of working on this problem, we examined in detail several of the largest republics of the former USSR within the framework of our period - 1953-2003. For example, in the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Belarus, among the heads of departments, in addition to Belarusians and Russians, Ukrainians also worked in some periods. Thus, on January 1, 1960, there were 4 Belarusians (50 percent), 3 Russians (37.5 percent), and 1 Ukrainians (12.5 percent).1 The proportion of Belarusians in this job group tended to increase. On January 1, 1975, there were 8 Belarusians (61.5%), Russians 5 (38.5%). Belarusians were in charge of departments of science and educational institutions, culture, heavy industry and transport, chemical and light industry, construction and urban services, Food Industry, administrative bodies, organizational and party work. Russians - departments of propaganda and agitation, foreign relations, Agriculture, trade and consumer services, general.2 As of January 1, 1985, Belarusians were in charge of 10 departments (62.5%), Russians 6 (37.5%).3

Among the secretaries of the regional party committees of Ukraine (as of January 1, 1960 - 114 people, as of January 1, 1985 - 126 people), in addition to Ukrainians and Russians, statistics recorded Belarusians (as of January 1 of the corresponding year: 1980 - 1; 1985 . - 2).4 In the 60s, among the secretaries of the regional party committees of Ukraine, Ukrainians were from 78 to 82 percent, in the 70s - from 82 to 85 (and on January 1, 1975 - 87 percent). On January 1, 1985, this figure dropped to 78.5 percent. But the share of secretaries of regional committees of the titular nation was significantly higher than its share in the Communist Party.5 The share of first secretaries of regional committees - Ukrainians during the period under study was even higher than secretaries in general. It did not fall below 84 percent, and on January 1, 1970 there were 88 percent, on January 1, 1980 - 92 percent.6 Thus, the proportion of first secretaries of regional party committees - Ukrainians was 20 percent, in some periods 26 percent higher the share of Ukrainians in the Communist Party of Ukraine. This is important to note, since it was these 21-23 people who ruled the republic. Among the secretaries, including the first ones, of the regional committees of the Communist Party of Ukraine, as we see, only the Slavic superethnos was represented.

National-cultural policy of the party and state in relation to the peoples of the USSR and the Russian Federation

When studying this problem, first of all, it should be noted that in the conditions of economic and cultural development of nations, there is a certain inequality in the system of international relations. When developing an economic strategy, it is important to take into account natural features and production infrastructure. For example, the Republic of Belarus lags behind its neighbors in economic development several times, but its natural conditions are favorable for the light and food industries, forestry and wood processing industries, tourism, etc. Disproportion in the development of infrastructure in the republics, violation of the principles of social justice in relations within national entities and between them, national consciousness worries, often lead it to a partial connection with religious and patriarchal-tribal traditions, to the emergence of national isolation. There were gross violations of the sovereign rights of the union republics, the lack of rights of autonomous entities, a lag in the development of national cultures, a crisis or pre-crisis state of many forms of cultural development and enrichment of the peoples of the USSR, and in particular, the peoples of Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia.

Among the many forms of national cultural policy of the state are monuments of architecture and art. Therefore, organizing the protection of architectural and art monuments is the most important component of national and interethnic relations in the USSR during the period under study. In this regard, on January 23, 1963, Minister of Culture Furtseva sent a note to the CPSU Central Committee on the state of protection of monuments in the country, their propaganda and study. At the same time, she emphasized that there were the most serious shortcomings in this matter. Among them, E. Furtseva named the main and most serious one as departmental disunity in the system of protection of cultural monuments. As a consequence of this, in a number of union republics (Ukrainian SSR, BSSR, Armenian SSR, Lithuanian SSR, etc.), the protection of monuments is under the jurisdiction of the State Construction Committee of the republics (architectural monuments) and the Ministry of Culture (art monuments), no unified system subordination and in the network of restoration workshops.

Considering this situation, the USSR Minister of Culture informed the CPSU Central Committee about cases of extremely irresponsible attitude of local bodies for the protection of valuable cultural monuments and executive committees of the Soviets of Working People's Deputies towards their preservation. Thus, the Council of Ministers of Belarus, on the proposal of the executive committee of the Vitebsk City Council on September 23, 1961, decided to exclude from the lists of monuments accepted for state protection the most valuable work of ancient Russian architecture of the 12th century, a monument of national significance - the former Church of the Annunciation. In December 1961, by order of the city executive committee, the monument was destroyed almost to the ground. Rubble from the 12th century walls was used to build roads. On January 8, 1962, the Council of Ministers of the Republic revised its decision and restored the monument to the lists, from which only part of the walls remained.

Launch of the first artificial Earth satellite into orbit. The launch date is considered the beginning of the space age of mankind.


Launch of the world's first spacecraft with a person on board. The first person to go into space was Yuri Gagarin. Yuri Gagarin's flight became the most important achievement of Soviet science and space industry. The USSR became the undisputed leader in space exploration for several years. Russian word“satellite” has entered many European languages. The name Gagarin became known to millions of people. Many pinned hopes on the USSR for a bright future, when the development of science would lead to the establishment of social justice and peace throughout the world.

The entry of Warsaw Pact troops (except Romania) into Czechoslovakia, putting an end to the reforms of the Prague Spring. The largest contingent of troops was allocated from the USSR. The political goal of the operation was to change the political leadership of the country and establish a regime loyal to the USSR in Czechoslovakia. Citizens of Czechoslovakia demanded the withdrawal of foreign troops and the return of party and government leaders taken to the USSR. At the beginning of September, troops were withdrawn from many cities and towns of Czechoslovakia to specially designated locations. Soviet tanks left Prague on September 11, 1968. On October 16, 1968, an agreement was signed between the governments of the USSR and Czechoslovakia on the conditions for the temporary presence of Soviet troops on the territory of Czechoslovakia, according to which part of the Soviet troops remained on the territory of Czechoslovakia “in order to ensure the security of the socialist commonwealth.” These events had a great impact on both domestic policy USSR, and on the atmosphere in society. It became obvious that the Soviet authorities had finally chosen a hard line of government. The hopes of a significant part of the population for the possibility of reforming socialism, which arose during the Khrushchev “thaw”, have faded.


01 Sep 1969

Publication in the West of the book by the famous dissident Andrei Amalrik, “Will the Soviet Union Exist Until 1984?” A. Amalrik was one of the first to predict the imminent collapse of the USSR. The end of the 60s and the beginning of the 70s were a time of stable economic growth and an increase in the standard of living of the population in the USSR, as well as a time of easing international tension. Most Soviet people believed that they would always live under Soviet rule. Some were delighted by this, others were horrified, others simply got used to this idea. Western Sovietologists also did not foresee the collapse of the USSR. Only a few were able to see behind the façade of relative prosperity the signs of an inevitably approaching crisis. (From the book by A. Amalrik “Will the Soviet Union Exist until 1984?” and From the book by A. Gurevich “The History of a Historian”).

02 Sep 1972

The beginning of a super series of eight ice hockey matches between the USSR and Canada national teams. The USSR was a great sports power. The leadership of the USSR saw sports victories as a means of ensuring the prestige of the country, which was supposed to be the first in everything. This was achieved better in sports than in economics. In particular, Soviet hockey players almost always won world championships. However, these competitions did not include hockey players from professional clubs in Canada and the United States, whom many considered the best in the world. The 1972 Super Series was watched by millions of television viewers around the world. In the first match, the USSR national team achieved a convincing victory with a score of 7:3. In general, the series ended almost in a draw: the Canadian team won 4 matches, the USSR team - 3, but in terms of the number of goals scored, the Soviet athletes were ahead of the Canadians (32:31).

Publication in Paris of Alexander Solzhenitsyn's book "The Gulag Archipelago" - an artistic study of Stalinist repressions and Soviet society as a whole. The book was based on the personal testimonies of many hundreds of former prisoners who spoke in detail about their experiences of encountering the machine of state terror to A. Solzhenitsyn, who himself went through Stalin’s camps. Translated into many languages, the book made a strong impression on readers, showing a wide panorama of crimes committed by the Soviet regime against the population of the country. "The Gulag Archipelago" is one of those books that changed the world. A. Solzhenitsyn’s most important idea was that terror was not an accident, but a natural result of the establishment of the communist regime. The book dealt a blow to the international prestige of the USSR and contributed to the disillusionment of the Western “left” with Soviet-style socialism.


Signing of the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Signed in Helsinki (therefore often called the Helsinki Agreement) by representatives of 35 states, including the USSR, this treaty became the high point of the detente of international tension that began in the late 60s. The treaty established the principle of the inviolability of post-war borders in Europe and the non-interference of the countries that signed it in each other’s internal affairs, and proclaimed the need for international cooperation and respect for human rights. However, the USSR was not going to respect the political and civil rights of its citizens. The persecution of dissidents continued. The Helsinki Agreement became a trap for the USSR: it made it possible to accuse the communist regime of violating international obligations and contributed to the development of the human rights movement. In 1976, the first Russian human rights organization was created - the Moscow Helsinki Group, the first chairman of which was Yuri Orlov.


Assault on the palace of Amin (the leader of Afghanistan) in Kabul. Soviet troops, under the pretext of supporting the democratic revolution, invaded Afghanistan and established a pro-communist puppet regime. The response was a massive movement of the Mujahideen - guerrillas who spoke under the slogans of independence and religious (Islamic) slogans, supported by Pakistan and the United States. A long war began, during which the USSR was forced to maintain the so-called “ limited contingent"(from 80 thousand to 120 thousand military personnel in different years), who, however, were never able to take control of this mountainous country. The war led to a new confrontation with the West, a further decline in the international prestige of the USSR and unaffordable military expenses. It cost the lives of many thousands of Soviet soldiers, and as a result of military operations and punitive expeditions against partisans, hundreds of thousands of Afghan civilians died (there are no exact data). The war ended in 1989 with the virtual defeat of the USSR. It became a difficult moral and psychological experience for the Soviet people, and above all for the “Afghans”, i.e. military personnel who went through the war. Some developed “Afghan syndrome,” a form of mental disorder born of experiences of fear and cruelty. During the years of perestroika, rumors circulated in society about special forces made up of “Afghans” and ready to drown the democratic movement in blood.


Holding the XXII Olympic Games in Moscow. The USSR national team won the unofficial team competition, receiving 80 gold, 69 silver and 46 bronze awards. However, due to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, many foreign athletes refused to attend the Moscow Olympics. The USA also boycotted the Olympics, which, of course, reduced the value of victory Soviet team.


Funeral of Vladimir Vysotsky, an outstanding artist and singer-songwriter who enjoyed enormous popularity of songs. Tens of thousands of fans of his talent came to the Taganka Theater to say goodbye to their beloved singer, and they came against the will of the authorities, who did everything to silence the fact of the artist’s death, which occurred during the Moscow Olympics. The funeral of V. Vysotsky became the same mass demonstration of opposition sentiments as the farewells of A. Suvorov (1800) or L. Tolstoy (1910) were in their time - public funerals of great people for whom the ruling elite did not want to give an honorary state funeral.

07 Mar 1981

On March 7, 1981, a “rock session” permitted by the authorities took place in the Leningrad Inter-Union House of Amateur Arts at 13 Rubinshteina Str.

False

Death of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Leonid Brezhnev, who ruled the country after Nikita Khrushchev was removed from power in 1964. The reign of L. Brezhnev is divided into two stages. At its beginning, there were attempts at economic reforms, the rise of the Soviet economy and the growth of the international influence of the USSR, which achieved nuclear parity with the United States. However, fear of the “erosion” of socialism, intensified by the events of 1968 in Czechoslovakia, led to the curtailment of reforms. The country's leadership chose a conservative strategy of maintaining the status quo (the current state of affairs). In conditions of relatively high energy prices, this made it possible to maintain the illusion of growth for several years, but in the 70s the country entered a period called stagnation. The crisis of the Soviet economy was accompanied by a new confrontation with the West, which especially intensified with the outbreak of the war in Afghanistan, a catastrophic decline in the prestige of power and mass disappointment of the Soviet people in socialist values.

09 Feb 1984

Death of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Yuri Andropov, elected to this post after the death of L. Brezhnev. The middle-aged and seriously ill Yu. Andropov, long years being the chairman of the KGB, he had extensive information about the situation in the country. He understood the urgent need for reforms, but was afraid of even the slightest manifestations of liberalization. Therefore, the reform attempts he made mainly boiled down to “restoring order,” i.e. to investigate corruption in the highest echelons of power and improve labor discipline through police raids on stores and cinemas, where they tried to catch people skipping work.

29 Sep 1984

The “golden” junction of two segments of the Baikal-Amur Mainline under construction - the famous BAM, the last “great construction site of socialism”. The docking took place at the Balbukhta crossing in the Kalarsky district of the Chita region, where two groups of builders met, moving towards each other for ten years.

10 Mar 1985

Death of the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Konstantin Chernenko, who became the leader of the party and state after the death of Yu. Andropov. K. Chernenko belonged to the same generation of Soviet leaders as L. Brezhnev and Yu. Andropov. An even more cautious and conservative politician than Yuri Andropov, he tried to return to the practice of the Brezhnev leadership. The obvious ineffectiveness of his activities prompted the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee to choose a representative of the next generation, Mikhail Gorbachev, as its new general secretary.


11 Mar 1985

Election of Mikhail Gorbachev as General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. The coming to power of a relatively young (fifty-four-year-old) leader raised optimistic expectations in Soviet society for long-overdue reforms. M. Gorbachev, as General Secretary, had enormous power. Having created his team of liberal-minded party and government figures of the new generation, he began reforms. However, it soon became clear that the new leadership did not have a specific program. M. Gorbachev and his team moved forward intuitively, overcoming the resistance of the conservative wing of the leadership and adapting to changing conditions.

The adoption of the resolution of the CPSU Central Committee “On measures to overcome drunkenness and alcoholism”, followed by a wide anti-alcohol campaign, conceived under Yuri Andropov. Restrictions were introduced on the sale of alcoholic beverages, administrative penalties for drunkenness were strengthened, and tens of thousands of hectares of unique vineyards were cut down in Crimea, Moldova and other areas of the country. The result of the thoughtlessly carried out campaign was not so much a decrease in alcohol consumption, but a reduction in budget revenues (which depended on income from the wine trade) and the widespread spread of moonshine. The campaign damaged the reputation of the new leadership. The nickname “mineral secretary” stuck to M. Gorbachev for a long time.

27 Sep 1985

Appointment of Nikolai Ryzhkov as head of the Soviet government - chairman of the Council of Ministers. Engineer by training, former CEO one of the largest industrial enterprises USSR - Uralmash (Ural Machine-Building Plant), N. Ryzhkov was appointed Secretary of the Central Committee for Economics in 1982 and joined the team created by Yu. Andropov to implement economic reforms. N. Ryzhkov became one of the main associates of M. Gorbachev. However, his knowledge and experience (in particular in the field of economics) were insufficient to lead the reforms, which became clear as the economic crisis grew in the country.

The accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is the largest accident in the history of nuclear energy. During a scheduled test, a powerful explosion occurred in the fourth power unit, accompanied by the release of radioactive substances into the atmosphere. The Soviet leadership tried to first hush up the disaster and then downplay its scale (for example, despite the danger of mass infection, the May Day demonstration in Kyiv was not cancelled). The resettlement of residents from the 30-kilometer zone around the station began with great delay. About a hundred people died during the accident and from its consequences, and more than 115 thousand people were evicted from the disaster area. More than 600 thousand people took part in eliminating the consequences of the accident (which are still felt in Belarus and Ukraine). The Chernobyl accident dealt a blow to the prestige of the USSR, showing the unreliability of Soviet technology and the irresponsibility of the Soviet leadership.

Soviet-American summit in Reykjavik. M. Gorbachev and US President R. Reagan reached an understanding on the issue of eliminating medium- and shorter-range missiles and beginning to reduce nuclear stockpiles. Both countries were experiencing financial difficulties and had to limit the arms race. The corresponding agreement was signed on December 8, 1987. However, the unwillingness of the United States to abandon the development of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), colloquially called the " star wars” (i.e. launching nuclear strikes from space), did not allow agreement on more radical nuclear disarmament.

German amateur pilot Matthias Rust landing near the Kremlin. Taking off from Helsinki, the 18-year-old pilot turned off his instruments and crossed the Soviet border undetected. After that, he was detected several times by the air defense service, but he again disappeared from radar and evaded pursuit. M. Rust himself claimed that his flight was a call for friendship between peoples, but many Soviet military and intelligence officers saw this as a provocation of Western intelligence services. M. Rust's flight was used by M. Gorbachev to update the leadership of the Ministry of Defense. The new minister was Dmitry Yazov, who was then a supporter of M. Gorbachev, but later supported the State Emergency Committee.

The first episode of the most popular television program of the 90s, “Vzglyad,” aired. This program of Central Television (later ORT) was created on the initiative of A. Yakovlev as an information and entertainment youth program by a group of young journalists (in particular, Vlad Listyev and Alexander Lyubimov). The program was broadcast live, which was new for Soviet viewers. This largely ensured the popularity of Vzglyad, since previously only sports matches and the first minutes of the General Secretary’s speech at congresses of the CPSU could be seen live.In December 1990, at a time of extreme aggravation of the political struggle, “Vzglyad” was banned for several months, but soon again became the main political program supporting Boris Yeltsin’s democratic reforms. However, many Vzglyad journalists, including A. Lyubimov, did not support the president at the decisive moment of the conflict with the Supreme Council - on the night of October 3-4, 1993, calling on Muscovites to refrain from participating in the demonstration organized by E. Gaidar.Since 1994, the program began to be published as an information and analytical program. Closed in 2001 (see articles "" and "").

Publication in the Pravda newspaper of an article about the “cotton case” - an investigation into theft in Uzbekistan, in which representatives of the republic’s top leadership were involved. This article served as a signal for a broad campaign of exposure of corruption in the party and state apparatus.

• Investigators Telman Gdlyan and Nikolai Ivanov investigated one of the most high-profile criminal cases of the 80s - the “cotton case”
• One of the defendants in the “cotton case”, former first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Uzbekistan Sharaf Rashidov and Nikita Khrushchev

27 Feb 1988

Armenian pogrom in Sumgait (Azerbaijan). Several dozen people were killed and several hundred were injured. This was the first case of mass violence motivated by ethno-national hatred during the years of perestroika. The reason for the pogrom was the conflict surrounding the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Okrug, populated predominantly by Armenians, within the Azerbaijan SSR. Both the Armenian majority in this district and the leadership of Armenia demanded that Karabakh be transferred to this republic, while the leadership of Azerbaijan categorically objected. Demonstrations began in Karabakh in the summer, and in the fall and winter the conflict continued to worsen, accompanied by mass rallies and armed clashes. The intervention of the union leadership, which called for calm, but generally supported the principle of the immutability of borders, i.e. Azerbaijan's position did not lead to normalization of the situation. Mass emigration of Armenians from Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis from Armenia began, murders motivated by ethno-national hatred took place in both republics, and new pogroms occurred in November-December ( ).

13 Mar 1988

Publication in " Soviet Russia”(newspaper of a sovereign-patriotic orientation) article by Nina Andreeva, a teacher at the Technological Institute in Leningrad, “I Can’t Give Up Principles,” which condemned “excesses” in the criticism of Stalinism. The author contrasted his position with both “left-liberals”, i.e. pro-Western intelligentsia and nationalists. The article aroused public concern: is it a signal that perestroika is over? Under pressure from M. Gorbachev, the Politburo decided to condemn N. Andreeva’s article.

On April 5, the main party newspaper Pravda published the article “Principles of Perestroika: Revolutionary Thinking and Action” by Alexander Yakovlev, in which the course towards democratization of public life was confirmed, and N. Andreeva’s article was characterized as a manifesto of anti-perestroika forces ( see articles "", "").

16 Sep 1988

Premiere of the film “Igla” in Almaty (film studio “Kazakhfilm”, director Rashid Nugmanov, starring famous rock musicians Viktor Tsoi and Pyotr Mamonov). The film, dedicated to the problem of youth drug addiction, quickly became a cult classic.

A powerful earthquake in the northwestern regions of Armenia (with a magnitude of 7.2 on the Richter scale), affecting about 40% of the territory of the republic. The city of Spitak was completely destroyed, Leninakan and hundreds of other settlements were partially destroyed. At least 25 thousand people were killed and about half a million were made homeless as a result of the earthquake. For the first time since cold war Soviet authorities officially requested assistance from other countries, which readily provided humanitarian and technical support to combat the consequences of the earthquake. Thousands of volunteers arrived at the scene of the tragedy to provide all possible assistance to the victims: people brought food, water and clothing, donated blood, searched for survivors under the rubble, and evacuated the population in their cars.

26 Mar 1989

Elections of the Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR. These were the first partially free elections in the history of the USSR, when in most districts there were alternative candidates with different programs. Despite the fact that the law established numerous “filters” that allowed the authorities to weed out undesirable candidates, many democratically minded public figures were still elected. The elections were a triumph for Boris Yeltsin, who received more than 90% of the votes in Moscow (with a turnout of almost 90%). This is how the future president of Russia returned to politics. On the contrary, many local party leaders lost the elections. A number of democratic candidates became deputies from public organizations. But in general, the majority of deputies were controlled by the party apparatus and took moderate or openly conservative positions.

The First Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR was held in Moscow, the broadcast of the meetings of which was watched by tens of millions of television viewers. At the congress, a sharp struggle unfolded between democratically minded deputies and the “aggressively obedient majority,” as historian Yuri Afanasyev, one of the opposition leaders, called it. Conservative deputies “slammed” democratic speakers (with applause and noise they did not allow them to speak and were driven from the podium), such as Academician A. Sakharov. M. Gorbachev at the congress relied on the majority, while trying not to alienate the democratic opposition. The congress elected the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and appointed M. Gorbachev as its chairman. B. Yeltsin also got into the Supreme Council - he lacked one vote to be elected, and then one of the elected deputies abandoned his mandate, thus giving way to Yeltsin. During the congress, the organizational formation of the democratic opposition - the Interregional Deputy Group - took place.

Death of A. Sakharov, an outstanding Soviet scientist and public figure, one of the creators hydrogen bomb, leader of the human rights movement in the USSR, laureate Nobel Prize peace (1975). Tens of thousands of Muscovites took part in the funeral of A. Sakharov.

The fall of Nicolae Ceausescu's regime - the most authoritarian of the communist regimes in Eastern Europe - after weeks of mass demonstrations and a failed attempt to suppress them with military force. On December 25, after a short trial, N. Ceausescu and his wife (who took an active part in organizing reprisals against opponents of the regime) were shot.

Opening of the first restaurant in the USSR in Moscow fast food McDonald's. On Pushkinskaya Square there were hours-long queues of people wanting to try the classic American food- hamburgers. McDonald's amazed us with its unusual cleanliness - even in the winter slush, its floors were always perfectly washed. The service staff - young men and women - were unusually diligent and helpful, trying to reproduce in their behavior the ideal image of the West, which was opposed to the Soviet (“Soviet”, as they said then) way of life.

04 Feb 1990

Holding a demonstration in Moscow, in which more than 200 thousand people took part, demanding the deepening of democratic reforms and the abolition of Article 6 of the USSR Constitution, which established the leading role of the CPSU in Soviet society. On February 7, the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee voted to abolish Article 6. M. Gorbachev managed to convince the party that it would be able to maintain a leading role under a multi-party system.

Election by the Local Council of the Russian Orthodox Church Metropolitan Alexy of Leningrad and Novgorod (1929-2008) head of the Russian Orthodox Church - Patriarch of Moscow. Alexy II replaced Patriarch Pimen in this post who died in May. The period of the patriarchate of Alexy II was marked by decisive changes in the life of the country, a crisis of communist ideology, the end of the persecution of citizens for religious beliefs and the growth of religious sentiment in society. Under the leadership of the Patriarch, the Russian Orthodox Church made attempts to establish control over various spheres of public life and culture ( see article "").

Death in a car accident of Viktor Tsoi, the leader of the Kino group and the brightest figure of the Leningrad rock club. Tsoi belonged to the “generation of janitors and watchmen,” as another famous musician, Boris Grebenshchikov, called representatives of the forbidden culture (“underground”) of the 70s and 80s. This generation blossomed brightly during the years of perestroika. V. Tsoi's albums and films with his participation were extremely popular. V. Tsoi’s song “We are waiting for change” became one of the symbols of perestroika: “Change! - our hearts demand. // Change! - our eyes demand.” The death of an idol at the peak of fame caused an extraordinary resonance among young people. In many cities, “Tsoi walls” appeared, covered with words from songs and statements “Tsoi is alive.” V. Tsoi's former place of work - a boiler room in St. Petersburg - has become a place of pilgrimage for fans of his work. Later, in 2003, the V. Tsoi club-museum opened there.

17 Mar 1991

Conducting a union referendum on the issue of preserving the USSR, as well as a Russian referendum on the introduction of the post of president of the RSFSR. 79.5% of citizens who had the right to vote took part in the union referendum, and 76.4% of them were in favor of preserving the USSR (Results in the union republics that supported the referendum on preserving the USSR on March 17, 1991). The Union leadership wanted to use the victory in the referendum to prevent the collapse of the Union and force the republics to sign a new Union Treaty. However, six union republics (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova) boycotted the referendum on the grounds that they had already made decisions on secession from the USSR. True, in Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia (which sought to separate from Moldova and Georgia, respectively), the majority of citizens took part in the vote and spoke out in favor of preserving the USSR, which meant an increase in internal conflict in these republics. 71.3% of participants in the Russian referendum were in favor of creating the post of president.

Election of Boris Yeltsin as President of the RSFSR. He won in the first round, ahead of the communist and nationalist candidates who opposed him. At the same time as B. Yeltsin, Alexander Rutskoi, an aviation general and one of the leaders of democratically minded communist deputies, was elected vice president. On the same day, the first direct elections of regional heads took place. Mintimer Shaimiev was elected President of Tatarstan, and the chairmen of the democratic Moscow City Council and Leningrad City Council, Gavriil Popov and Anatoly Sobchak, were elected mayors of Moscow and St. Petersburg.

On July 4, 1991, Chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR Boris Yeltsin signed the law “On the privatization of housing stock in the RSFSR”

False

On November 18, 1991, the Mexican television series “The Rich Also Cry” was released on USSR television screens. It became the second “soap opera” shown on our television, after the huge success “Slave Isaura”.

False

On December 25, 1991, USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev announced the termination of his activities in this post “for reasons of principle.”

Statement by USSR President M. Gorbachev about his resignation and the transfer to President of the RSFSR B. Yeltsin of the so-called “nuclear suitcase”, with the help of which the head of state has the ability to control the use of nuclear weapons. From that day on, the RSFSR became officially known as the Russian Federation. Instead of the Soviet red flag, the tricolor Russian flag was raised over the Kremlin.

On January 2, 1992, prices were liberalized in Russia, marking the beginning of large-scale market reforms carried out by the government of Yegor Gaidar.

23 Feb 1992

From February 8 to February 23, 1992, the XVI Winter Olympic Games were held in Albertville, France. They became the third in the history of France - the first were in Chamonix in 1924, the second in Grenoble in 1968.

March 31, 1992

On March 31, 1992, the Federative Treaty, one of the main sources of constitutional law of the Russian Federation in the field of regulation of federal relations, was signed in the Kremlin.

On April 6, 1992, the VI Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation opened. It witnessed the first sharp confrontation between the legislative and executive branches of government on two main issues - the course of economic reform and about the draft of the new Constitution.

On August 14, 1992, Boris Yeltsin signed a decree “On the introduction of a system of privatization checks in the Russian Federation,” which launched check privatization in Russia.

07 Sep 1992

On October 1, 1992, Russia began issuing privatization checks, which were popularly called vouchers.

False

The president was supported in the referendum by the majority of Russians, who expressed confidence in the president (58.7%) and approved of his socio-economic policies (53%). Despite Boris Yeltsin's moral victory, the constitutional crisis was not overcome.

23 Sep 1993

Holding the X Extraordinary (Extraordinary) Congress of People's Deputies of the Russian Federation in connection with B. Yeltsin's decree No. 1400. On the very first day of work, the congress decided to depose B. Yeltsin. Vice-President A. Rutskoy, who, along with the Chairman of the Supreme Council R. Khasbulatov, was the leader of the opposition, was appointed acting president. The White House - the meeting place of the Supreme Council, around which the events of the August putsch unfolded - was cordoned off by the police. As in August 1991, the White House was surrounded by barricades. Nationalist militants hastily flocked to Moscow to defend the Supreme Soviet.

The capture of the White House by troops loyal to the president. During this operation, the tanks, having warned about the opening of fire, fired several shots (not with live shells, but with training blanks) at upper floors The White House, where, as was known in advance, there was not a single person. During the day, units loyal to the government occupied the White House and arrested the organizers of the coup. As a result of these events, there were no deaths, which, unfortunately, cannot be said about armed clashes on the street: from September 21 to October 4, from 141 (data from the Prosecutor General’s Office) to 160 (data from a special parliamentary commission) people died. This was a tragic consequence of the October conflict, but it was precisely this that made it possible to avoid an even more terrible development of events - a repetition civil war, when more than 10 million people died.

Elections to the State Duma and referendum on the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

Yegor Gaidar's resignation from the post of First Deputy Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation, to which he was appointed on September 18, 1993 - on the eve of decisive events related to the struggle between the President and the Supreme Council. On the night of October 3-4, when militants of the Supreme Council tried to seize the Ostankino television center, E. Gaidar’s televised appeal to Muscovites calling on them to gather at the Moscow City Council building and express support for the president helped turn the situation in favor of B. Yeltsin. However, the electoral bloc “Russia's Choice” created by E. Gaidar failed to obtain a majority in the Duma in the elections in December 1993, which could have allowed the continuation of radical market reforms. It became obvious that the government of V. Chernomyrdin would be forced to pursue the previous policy of compromise. Under these conditions, E. Gaidar left the government and focused on working as the leader of the Duma faction “Russia’s Choice”. E. Gaidar no longer worked in the government ( see articles "", "" and "").

Return to Russia of Alexander Solzhenitsyn. On this day, the writer flew to Magadan from the USA, where he had lived since 1974 after being expelled from the USSR. The writer, universally greeted as a triumphant, made a long trip around the country.

01 Mar 1995

Holding a military parade in Moscow in honor of the 50th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany. The parade consisted of two parts - historical and modern. The historical part took place on Red Square. It was attended by veterans of the Great Patriotic War marched across Red Square in columns of war-era fronts, with front banners in front; as well as military personnel dressed in the uniform of the Red Army of the 40s. The modern part of the parade took place on Poklonnaya Hill, where parts of Russian army and modern military equipment. The reason for this division was the condemnation by the leaders of other countries of military actions on the territory of the Chechen Republic. They refused to attend the parade of troops participating in these events, and it was for this reason that only the historical part of the parade was held on Red Square.

Article. "Interethnic relations in modern Russia: reflections on"

Completed by: 2nd year student of State Budgetary Educational Institution “Balakhna Technical College”

Borisova Nadezhda

Head: teacher of history and social studies GBPOU "BTT"

Odintsova Galina Nikolaevna

What is the national question?..

To paraphrase the classic, this is “the most painful, most burning issue of our time.” And this, in reality, is a given of the modern multinational world (after all, most modern states are multinational in composition). And at the heart of, if not all, then most of the tragic events of today’s world are relations between nations and, as a rule, different national confessions. After all, national and religious backgrounds often overlap. And that’s why the Middle East and some regions of Africa are still bleeding, modern Ukraine appears so terrible in its incomprehensibility and unpredictability, and huge migration flows of refugees to Europe...

For Russia, the national issue has also always been relevant. Russia was originally and always multinational, always: Kievan Rus, Russia, Russian empire, USSR, Russian Federation.

And who else but us understands how fragile an issue that has a national overtones is!

At the end of the 20th century, we lost a country that, for all its greatness and seemingly power, was unable to maintain unity and ceased to exist. And this is an absolute tragedy - our memory of past friendship, unity and, at the same time, a reminder of how important it is to value national interests, national traditions, national principles...

I believe that the loss of the USSR is the greatest tragedy of all times, of all countries and peoples.

And what modern Russia, is everything okay with her now?

Russia is still multinational. Thank God it is! We were able to maintain the unity of Russia despite all the difficulties that we had to go through.

But is everything going well in the relations between us, representatives of different nations and nationalities, small and large? Do we always understand each other, are we always ready to meet each other halfway?

When I think about this question, I see in front of me the body of a little Tajik girl killed by skinheads in Moscow; a young Spartak fan who died at the hands of “Caucasians” due to “differences in culture”;

the wild massacre carried out in the synagogue; mass fights on ethnic grounds in Moscow, Nalchik, Kondopoga, Arzamas... I see in front of me some carriers of “Caucasian nationality” running wild and presumptuous, often in their impunity, ready to easily start a showdown at the slightest provocation, grab a weapon, arrange “wedding shooters” “... At the same time, I hear calls “Russia for Russians”, “Russia is not the Caucasus”...

All this, of course, is clear evidence serious problems in interethnic relations in Russia and the lack of necessary tolerance and understanding. Understanding the reasons is a thankless task and, probably, in no way leading to unity. This means that it is more important to answer not the question “Who is to blame?”, but “What to do?”

What to do to stop all these “hate crimes”, to uproot the thistles of hostility.

Probably, the solution to these problems, first of all, depends on the thoughtfulness and reasonableness of the state national policy, on the activity and effectiveness of Russian civil society, and tolerance towards the “others” of each of us.

And when, for the second year on May 9th, I see how the “Immortal Regiment” is marching along the streets of our big and small cities, where we are all together, I believe that everything is possible!!!