From Russia to the special operation – Newspaper Kommersant No. 187 (7388) of 10/10/2022

The Russian Historical Society has prepared a draft concept for a university course in the history of Russia for all students, regardless of their specialization. It covers the period from Ancient Russia to modern Russia and ends with the expansion of NATO, the entry of Russian troops into the territory of Ukraine and the announcement of Western sanctions. As conceived by the authors, such a concept should form in students the ideas of citizenship, patriotism and all-Russian unity. Teachers are advised to “avoid negative bias and slander” when talking about the problems and contradictions of Russian history.

A team of experts from the Russian Historical Society (RIO), led by Yuri Petrov, director of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, has developed a project for a unified concept of teaching Russian history for non-historical faculties. Recall that earlier the Ministry of Education and Science proposed to increase the volume of classes in this subject. The department intends to introduce at least 144 compulsory academic hours of studying national history for all students, regardless of their specialization. And the same RIO explained that now only 0.4% of Russian students receive a professional historical education, and 99.6% “should study it, but in fact they don’t do it enough.”

Now universities have the right to determine the content of the subject, its chronological and geographical scope, as well as methodological aspects. As a result, “conflict persists and even deepens in approaches to the selection of content, in interpretations and concepts in relation to both the history of Russia as a whole and many topical problems of the past,” the concept says. According to the authors’ plans, it should ensure the unity of “historical education at the country’s universities” and is aimed “at the formation of a common civic identity of Russian society.”

“Revealing the problems and contradictions of national history, university teachers need to avoid negative bias and “slandering”, remaining on the positions of objectivity and historicism, to note primarily the creative nature of the activities of the Russian state and the peoples inhabiting it in the economic development of vast territories, achievements in the field of culture and science “The focus of the course on the formation of Russian patriotism is ensured by priority attention to the heroic pages of Russia’s struggle for freedom and independence against foreign invaders, for ensuring national interests and security.”

The concept is chronologically “determined by the main stages in the development of Russian statehood.” They, according to the authors, look like this: Russia in the 9th-first third of the 13th centuries, Russian lands from the middle of the 13th to the end of the 15th centuries, the Russian (Moscow) state in the 16th-17th centuries, the Russian Empire, the Soviet era, the modern Russian Federation.

The latest history of Russia is defined in the concept, including through foreign policy events. Students will learn about the expansion of NATO and its military infrastructure to the east, as well as the withdrawal of “the United States and its allies … from the basic agreements with Russia on the limitation and reduction of weapons that have kept the world from global conflict for decades.”

The concept states that in 2008 “the armed forces of Georgia, trained and encouraged by NATO, carried out a military provocation in South Ossetia, attacking the Russian peacekeeping contingent stationed here and then on Tskhinval.” After that, “Russia defended South Ossetia and, despite the protests of the West, recognized its independence. The independence of another former Georgian autonomy, Abkhazia, was also recognized.”

The “anti-constitutional coup in Kyiv” in 2014 and the circumstances of the annexation of the Crimean peninsula are also mentioned. Here, the relevant appeals of President Vladimir Putin are almost directly quoted: “The situation in Ukraine, whose leadership turned it into “anti-Russia” and, with the help of NATO, was preparing for the “return of Crimea and Donbass”, led to the inevitability of a special military operation by Russia in 2022” , the concept says.

The authors also mention “attempts at “color revolutions” in Belarus and Kazakhstan and their role in the policy of creating a” belt of instability” around Russia.” In addition, from the concept you can learn about “sustainable economic growth” in Russia, the fight against terrorism and coronavirus infection, “Russia’s departure from a one-sided orientation towards Western countries”, the Chinese and Latin American vectors of Russia’s foreign policy, and so on.

The last block of the concept at the moment begins with “the refusal of the United States, NATO and the EU to discuss threats to Russia’s national security.” Further, according to the authors, “armed provocations and preparations by the Ukrainian regime for the forcible seizure of the republics of Donbass” followed. Finally, students will be told about the recognition of the independence of the Luhansk and Donetsk People’s Republics, the reasons for declaring a special military operation, sanctions pressure from Western countries and “attempts to isolate Russia from the rest of the world.”

Candidate of Historical Sciences, Dean of the Faculty of History of the European University Amiran Urushadze notes: the authors of the course, which will be taught in all universities of the country, focus on “the historical experience of building the Russian statehood at all its stages.” Thus, the “main object of attention” of the students will be the state, “therefore, the Russian classical historians Nikolai Karamzin, Sergei Solovyov, Vasily Klyuchevsky would probably be satisfied with the draft concept.” Mr. Urushadze calls the concept a “rather conservative document”. At the same time, he draws attention to the “widest” range of topics that are planned to be discussed: “I have previously noted more than once that some important events in Russian history were simply ignored in such documents.” He cites the example of the Caucasian War – “the longest military conflict in the history of Russia.” Now the concept outlines the problems of the policy of the Russian Empire in the Caucasus, as well as the place and importance of the Caucasian governorship in the imperial system of administrative management. “This cannot but rejoice,” says Mr. Urushadze. “But there are also risks associated with the difficulties of a full-fledged conversation with students on all the announced topics. Some of them are impossible to pass on top, and understatement is dangerous.

The scientist “is alarmed by the disproportionate attention to the events of post-Soviet and modern history” – they, in his impression, occupied more space in the text of the concept than the history of the 16th-17th centuries. “Both for studying and teaching history, the “sanitary corridor” of time is very important (a pause between an event and its display in textbooks.— “b”). Without it, the risks of arbitrary politicization increase,” says Amiran Urushadze. “There are also quite practical obstacles—the lack of serious historiography on the topics identified. A number of contemporary events have yet to be comprehended, not even by historical, but by political science. So far, only political journalism is at the disposal of the teacher – not the most reliable source of information. As an example, he cites the section of the concept on the conflict in Chechnya: “In the 1990s, Chechnya became a haven for international terrorism and crime; Russian laws did not apply in it. This became the basis for several military operations to normalize life and restore the constitutional order.” According to the dean, the authors “extremely debatable” interpreted the causes of the conflict: “There is not a word about the de facto national revolution in Chechnya in 1991, about the reasons for the Dudayev government’s refusal to sign the federal treaty.”

Candidate of Historical Sciences, teacher of the Tyumen State University Alexander Fokin directly calls “propaganda” that part of the concept, which describes the latest events: “It is clear that they (the authors of the concept.— “b”) it is necessary to show that we have been developing, and here we are faced with villains who interfere with development. But it is difficult to assess the present from the point of view of a historical view. We do not have access to archives, current materials. We, as historians, cannot say anything about it.” At the same time, in the remaining sections of the concept, Mr. Fokin did not notice a distortion of facts: “If you look at the history of the twentieth century, then repressions and the Great Terror are mentioned there, among other things.” At the same time, Mr. Fokin believes that the developers of the concept think in terms of the 20th century models: “It seems to them that if a teacher at a university begins to bend a certain line, then students will believe it as the truth. But the big question is how modern students will relate to the words of the teacher in the presence of many sources of information.

“The authors of the project rightly pointed out the inconsistency of Russian historical experience, the intertwining of the heroic and the tragic in Russian history. But where and how the line between the objective coverage of the controversial pages of history and “slandering” will be drawn, the text predictably does not explain, Amiran Urushadze agrees with him. I, in his writings supported unlimited autocracy and ridiculed opponents of power.— “b”)”.

“I would like to believe that the discussion of the draft concept will go beyond the RIO and its regional branches,” Amiran Urushadze told Kommersant. “This will help mitigate the risks described.” So far, the concept has been sent to the Ministry of Education and Science and presented on Friday at the forum of history teachers in Tobolsk. There, RIO representatives promised that the document would undergo a broad public discussion.

Anna Vasilyeva