History textbook sent from the Caucasus

Public figures in the North Caucasus criticized the new textbook on Russian history for high school. The reason was a paragraph about Stalin’s deportations of peoples who were mentioned immediately after the “Vlasovites” and “Banderaites.” Although the authors stipulated that as a result of the deportation of entire nations, “many innocent people were repressed,” a number of organizations demanded that the textbook be banned or at least rewritten. The Ministry of Education has not yet commented on the scandal, but the speaker of the Chechen parliament, Magomed Daudov, said: the department promised him to rewrite the chapter on deported peoples.

As Kommersant previously reported, on September 1, all high school students in Russia began studying using a new history textbook. The first volume—for 10th grade—talks about the events of 1914–1945; in the 11th grade they will study the period from 1945 to the present, including the situation with the Northern Military District. The authors of the textbook are the Chairman of the Russian Military Historical Society, former Minister of Culture, Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Medinsky and Rector of MGIMO Anatoly Torkunov. The textbook previously attracted critical reviews from a number of historians and human rights activists, who accused the authors of bias. But the first public scandal in connection with the book arose only after the North Caucasus drew attention to the passage “Accomplices of the Occupiers” about collaborators during the Great Patriotic War.

“Based on the facts of cooperation with the occupiers of the Karachais, Kalmyks, Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, Crimean Tatars of the State Defense Committee (State Defense Committee.— “Kommersant”) in 1943–1944 decided to liquidate the state formations of these peoples within the USSR and subject them to collective punishment – forcible relocation (deportation) to the eastern regions of the country,” the textbook says. “As a result, not only bandits and collaborators of the enemy were repressed, but also many innocent people. The settlers had to endure many troubles and hardships. Justice was restored to them after 1953.”

The mention of “facts of cooperation with the occupiers” caused indignation among a number of representatives of the repressed peoples. Thus, the head of the Russian Congress of the Peoples of the Caucasus (RCNK), Aliy Totorkulov, considered that “the release of a textbook with the old slander of Stalin’s times caused another insult to millions of Russian citizens.” He told Kommersant that he intended to appeal “to all possible authorities” to ban the textbook “in this form.” Ingush politician Beslan Tsechoev told Kommersant that he had prepared a legal basis for rewriting the textbook and would send it “to the authorities right up to the court.” In his opinion, the topic of deportation of peoples requires extreme caution and accuracy: “Instead, we see inappropriate labels and slander against our peoples that has already been refuted many times. Ministerial offices do not always understand what kind of reaction such formulations can cause.” Mr. Tsechoev hopes that the wording can be changed.

The Congress of the Karachay People sent an appeal to the speakers of the State Duma and the Federation Council. “In the context in which the actions of the “Vlasovites” and “Banderaites” are described, entire nations are mentioned: Karachais, Balkars, Ingush, Chechens, Crimean Tatars and Kalmyks. Of course, this cannot but insult the representatives of the deported peoples of the USSR, since the sons of these peoples fought bravely for the multinational Soviet people and the integrity of its territory,” the organization says. They also do not agree with the statement that “the authorities of the Central Asian republics made every effort to establish food and living conditions for the deportees,” and object to the statement that “in January 1957, the national statehood of the Balkar, Kalmyk, Karachay, Chechen and Ingush peoples”: according to the authors of the appeal, “for the majority of these peoples, national statehood was not restored due to territorial disputes that arose after the forced deportation.” Congress demands “withdrawal of the textbook… until the above errors are eliminated and appropriate changes are made with the participation of representatives of the forcibly deported peoples of the USSR.”

Kommersant has not yet been able to obtain comments regarding the claims regarding the content of the textbook from its authors, as well as from the Ministry of Education. Meanwhile, the speaker of the parliament of the Chechen Republic, Magomed Daudov, wrote on social networks that he contacted the head of the Ministry of Education, Sergei Kravtsov, and the co-author of the textbook, Vladimir Medinsky. According to Mr. Daudov, it turned out that “this chapter was taken without changes from previous editions,” and the author “assured his readiness to put it in order.” “For everyone who was worried about this topic, I want to inform you that a working group has been created from among the heads of the regions whose peoples were repressed, and proposals for inclusion in the specified chapter of the textbook will be agreed upon,” said Magomed Daudov. The original publication also reported that “the entire circulation of the textbook I’m talking about is in our republic on behalf of Ramzan Akhmatovich (Kadyrov.— “Kommersant”) removed from schools,” but the sentence was later removed.

History teacher Leonid Katsva believes that the wording about the deportation of peoples in the new textbook “is poorly written at best, and deliberately admitted at worst.” In his opinion, silence or similar formulations in relation to the history of repressions “provoke a scandal” – as was the case, in particular, in 2010 with the university textbook “History of Russia. 1917–2009” by professors Alexander Vdovin and Alexander Barsenkov. It contained a statement that during the Great Patriotic War, 63% of Chechen conscripts deserted. After the indignation of the Chechen public, the expert commission of the academic council of the history department of Moscow State University recognized the use of the textbook as “inappropriate.” It will be possible to make corrections only in new editions of the history textbook for grades 10-11, since the manual has already “went to schools,” notes Mr. Katsva.

“The page about deportation, recognized as erroneous, will obviously be removed from the history textbook, this problem should probably be considered solved,” believes journalist Oleg Kashin (included in the register of foreign agents). “But another page rhymes with this page, from the same textbook – where We are talking about the decision in 1955 to declare an amnesty for Soviet citizens of all nationalities who were exiled or sent to camps for collaborating with the German occupiers, that is, for any work in the occupied territory. The decision on amnesty in the textbook is called ill-conceived, since it allegedly led to the later revenge of neo-Nazis, including in the Baltic states and Western Ukraine. No one is going to remove this passage about family members of many modern schoolchildren from the textbook.”

Polina Yachmennikova, Alexander Chernykh