scholarly journals NORTH OSSETIA IN THE SYSTEM OF THE SOVIET STATEHOOD: THE CONSTITUTION OF THE NOASSR OF 1978

Kavkaz-forum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Е.И. КОБАХИДЗЕ

В статье предлагается анализ Конституции Северо-Осетинской АССР 1978 г., отразившей этап развития ее государственности в советский период. Научное осмысление правовых аспектов истории Северной Осетии в статусе автономной республики, анализ ее места и роли в системе советской государственности во многом объясняет противоречия в реализации органами государственной власти республики функций политического самоуправления в эпоху «застоя» и «кризиса социализма». Анализ показывает, что декретированный ранней советской властью национальный суверенитет народов, населяющих советскую Россию, не нашел правового подтверждения в Конституции СССР 1977 г., на основе и в соответствии с которой были разработаны и приняты Конституции РСФСР и входящих в нее автономных республик, в том числе и СОАССР. Фиксация статуса автономной республики в качестве государственного образования без признания ее государственного суверенитета ограничивало пределы компетенции республиканских органов власти и управления и ставило их в фактическую зависимость от вышестоящих властно-управленческих структур даже в решении вопросов, отнесенных к ведению автономной республики. Все это вместе взятое превращало автономную республику в «квазигосударственное образование», высшие государственные органы которой действовали в режиме «местной власти». Противоречивые конституционные положения 1977-1978 гг., закрепленные в Основных законах СССР, РСФСР и СОАССР, стали одним из факторов деструкции советской власти и социалистической системы и последующего затем «парада суверенитетов» бывших автономных образований в пределах РСФСР. The article analyzes the 1978 Constitution of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which reflected the stage of development of its statehood relevant to the Soviet period. Scientific comprehension of the legal aspects of the history of North Ossetia in the status of an autonomous republic, an analysis of its place and role within the system of the Soviet statehood largely accounts for the contradictions in the implementation by the republican state institutions of the functions of political self-government in the era of "stagnation" and "crisis of socialism". Analysis shows that the national sovereignty of the peoples inhabiting Soviet Russia, that was decreed by the early Soviet government, did not find legal confirmation in the USSR Constitution of 1977, on the basis and in accordance with which the Constitution of the RSFSR and its autonomous republics, including NOASSR, were elaborated and adopted. Fixing the status of the autonomous republic as a state entity without recognizing its state sovereignty limited the competence of the republican authorities and made them in fact dependent on the higher power structures even in resolving issues attributed to the jurisdiction of the autonomous republic. All this taken together turned the autonomous republic into a "quasi-state entity", the highest state bodies of which operated in the regime of "local power". Contradictory constitutional provisions of 1977-1978, enshrined in the Fundamental Laws of the USSR, RSFSR and NOASSR, became one of the factors of the destruction of the Soviet power and the socialist system and the subsequent “parade of sovereignties” of the former autonomous entities within the RSFSR.

2021 ◽  
pp. 156-177
Author(s):  
Е.И. КОБАХИДЗЕ

В статье анализируется Конституция СОАССР 1937 г. как один из важнейших документов по Новейшей истории Северной Осетии, впервые определивший ее самостоятельный государственно-политический статус в качестве советской автономной республики в составе РСФСР. В поиске форм национального самоопределения Северная Осетия несколько раз меняла свой статус: будучи рядовой территориально-административной единицей в административной системе позднеимперской России, Осетия и после утверждения советской власти оказалась включена в окружную модель территориального устройства Горской АССР. Лишь после упразднения Горской республики Северной Осетии был придан статус автономной области в составе России с несколько расширенной административной самостоятельностью, хотя и довольно ограниченным объемом полномочий, распространявшихся преимущественно на хозяйственно-культурную сферу. Однако именно тогда Северная Осетия впервые сформировала собственные устойчивые и жизнеспособные органы власти и управления, деятельность которых регулировалась союзным и республиканским (РСФСР) законодательством. Новый этап развития североосетинской государственности пришелся на вторую половину 1930-х гг., когда новая Конституция СССР объявила ряд бывших национальных автономных областей, в том числе и Северо-Осетинскую АО, автономными республиками и предоставила им правовые основания для принятия собственных конституций, наделив их таким образом государственно-политическим статусом. Сравнительный анализ конституций СССР, РСФСР и СОАССР показывает, что организационно-правовые основы национальной государственности, закрепленные в конституции СОАССР, формулировались исходя из приоритета общесоюзной и российской конституций, хотя и с учетом местных особенностей. В то же время первая советская конституция Северной Осетии, принятая ее собственным законодательным органом и определяющая правовые основы политической автономии, ознаменовала завершение процесса становления национальной государственности Северной Осетии и открыла новую страницу ее социально-политической истории. The article analyzes the Constitution of the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of 1937 as one of the most important documents on the recent history of North Ossetia, which firstly defined its independent state-political status as a Soviet autonomous republic within the RSFSR. In the search for forms of national self-determination, North Ossetia changed its status several times: being an ordinary territorial-administrative unit in the administrative system of late imperial Russia, Ossetia, even after the approval of Soviet power, was included in the district model of the territorial structure of the Mountain ASSR. Only after the abolition of the Mountain Republic, North Ossetia has got the status of an autonomous region within Russia with somewhat expanded administrative self-dependence, albeit with a rather limited scope of powers that extended mainly to the economic and cultural sphere. However, just then North Ossetia for the first time formed its stable and viable power and administrative institutions, the activities of which were regulated by union and republican (RSFSR) legislation. A new stage in the development of North Ossetian statehood fell on the second half of the 1930s, when the new Constitution of the USSR declared the granting of the status of autonomous republics to the former national autonomous regions, including the North Ossetian Autonomous Region, and provided them with legal grounds for adopting their own constitutions, and so endowed them of state and political status. A comparative analysis of the constitutions of the USSR, RSFSR and NOASSR shows that the organizational and legal foundations of national statehood, enshrined in the Constitution of the NOASSR, were formulated based on the priority of the all-Union and Russian constitutions, albeit taking into account local specifics. At the same time, the first Soviet constitution of North Ossetia, adopted by its legislative institution and defining the legal foundations of political autonomy, marked the end of the process of formation of the national statehood of North Ossetia and opened a new page in its socio-political history.


Author(s):  
Yuriy Maksimenko

oday, as a result of the reform of decentralization and administrative-territorial organization, actually a new administrative-territorialunit is being established in Ukraine – a united community. But the basis and at the same time the reason for the joint of communitieswere first of all the most numerous local and at the same time the smallest administrative-territorial units in Ukraine – villagecouncils, inherited by Ukraine since Soviet times.Historically, the state and municipal system of modern Ukraine did not arise by itself, but was built on the “foundation” of theSoviet era, because Ukraine as an independent state is the successor of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR), which, in turn –the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic (USSR), founded 100 years ago – in 1919. The smallest local authority in Soviet times and afterthe declaration of independence in Ukraine was the village council, which for a hundred years of its existence evolved from a componentof the mechanism of state governance at places to the basic level of local self-government.The article presents the result of historical and legal study of the establishment and development of the structural organization oflocal administrative bodies in Ukraine during the Soviet era on the example of village councils, their legal status, structure, main powersand tasks done by these bodies and the status of their members and officials. Village councils became the basic bodies of local managementof Soviet Ukraine and its smallest administrative-territorial units. On the basis of the organization of the activities of Sovietvillage councils with certain evolutionary changes, local self-governing bodies – village councils of independent Ukraine – still functiontoday. Investigation of formation and development of these bodies in the Soviet period of the history of the state and law of Ukrainedeserves the attention of legal science, including in the current reform of decentralization and administrative-territorial organization.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-45
Author(s):  
A. A. Arabaev

The article is devoted to the research of forming constitutional legislation of Republic of Kyrgyzstan, that originates from the moment of acceptance of the first constitutional acts as a Autonomous Republic in the composition of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic. The author of the article researches law and political specifications of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, that has been accepted in 1929 by the all-Kyrgyz congress of Soviets. One of the features of that Constitution was a determination of the status of Kyrgyzstan as a part of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic. The author comes to the conclusion that as a fact Soviet Kyrgyzstan as a part of Russian Soviet Federal Socialist Republic in spite of having a constitution and the higher authority and other state elements as a territory, nationality, language, symbols most likely represented not an autonomous state, but the administrative unit with some state elements, forming a part of Russian State. In the article the author concludes that in spite of the fact, that the Kyrgyz Constitution of 1929 wasnt adopted by the All-Russian Central Executive Committee and All-Russian congress of Soviets as it was determined, that Constitution was valid and formed the national statement of Kyrgyzstan in such a period of time.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3/2) ◽  
pp. 125-135
Author(s):  
D. Sh. RAMAZANOVA

Being the part of Russia throughout different periods Daghestan had  various administrative and political status (as an oblast being the  part of the empire) an autonomous Republic of the RSFSR (USSR),  as a Republic of the Russian Federation. Upon that, the borders of  Russia as a state were set without regard for the interests of the  nationalities, populating it, but taking into account the interests of  the state exclusively. In the XIX century this policy gave birth to the problem of separation among daghestani nationalities (the  Lezgins, the Tsakhurs, the Avars, the Kumyks) and the Nogais as  well as in 1922-1923 their territory was included on the list of  nationalities – the members of the Daghestan Autonomous Soviet  Socialist Republic, but later it was the issue of exchanges between  the RSFSR subjects. If the problem under discussion was topical  within administrative and territorial borders of the Russian State,  then, by the end of the 20th century it had the status of interstate  problem – the first 3 of the enumerated nationalities were separated  by state borders with the neighboring states of Azerbaijan and the  Republic of Georgia. With the reference to the literary sources and  the results of the demographic census, the author of the article  shows the population changes and the settlement of the Lezgins, the Tsakhurs and the Avars in the Caucasian region in the end of the  20th the beginning of the 21st centuries, continuing the article  serves on the problem of separation among Daghestan nationalities.  In 2011 the problems of the Avars from the Kvarelski region in  Georgia were discussed in the article published in “Izvestya Daghestanskogo Pedagogicheskogo universiteta”, where as  in 2018 the problems of the Nogais, separated by administrative  borders of the Russian Federation subjects on the North Caucasus  were discussed on the pages of the magazine “Society: philosophy,  history, culture”. All the above mentioned ethnic communities are  officially labeled as “title (subject-forming) nationalities” in the  contemporary Republic of Daghestan.


Author(s):  
E.P. Martynova

Modern approach to the study of ethnicity implies examination of its variability (drift, shifts and procedurality). This paper aims at the analysis of manifestations of ethnicity amongst the Ob-Ugrians in different historical peri-ods (traditional society, Soviet modernization and post-Soviet democracy). The author draws attention to explain-ing dominant role of one or another manifestation of ethnicity. The work is based on author’s observations made during the expeditions in the Khanty-Mansiysk Okrug (1980s-2000s) and publications by other researchers. Prior to the 1930s, the Ob-Ugric population was represented by a family of related languages and local ethnic groups with close cultures. The main factor of their self-identity was local ethnicity – names by a river. ‘People of the same river’ were bound by commercial, exchange and cultural-ritual bonds. In the official records, the Russian government registered, in the first place, social status of the indigenous population, calling its people ‘inorodtsy’ (‘non-Russians’) and ‘yasashnye’ (‘tributary’). Socialist transformations in the socio-economical, cultural and ideo-logical spheres marked the beginning of the assimilation policy with respect to the peoples of the North. As the all-Soviet standards of living were adopted, and social (including ethnocultural) uniformity achieved, ethnicity of the Ob-Ugrians continuously leveled out. At the same time, their ethnic identity was largely influenced by recording their nationality in the passports – Khanty and Mansy, coincident with the name of the okrug. In the post-Soviet period, ethnicity of the Khanty and Mansy, ‘hibernated’ during the Soviet time, ‘woke up’ suddenly and loudly turn-ing into a powerful creational factor. The ethnic mobilization unwrapped by the initiative of ethnic leaders signifi-cantly raised the status of the ethnic culture and people themselves. As a result, three levels of identity emerged. The first level is trans-ethnicity of ‘natives’ or ‘aborigines’, which is an important political instrument. The second level is official ethnic identity, which is reflected in the ethnonyms ‘Khanty’, ‘Mansy’ and ‘Nentsy’. Its representation in the ethnocultural politics of the okrug (organizing celebrations and festivals, folk group activities etc.) is given a high attention. Lastly, the third level is the traditional local ethnicity.


Author(s):  
S.Sh. Kaziyev ◽  
E.N. Burdina

The article is devoted to nation-building in Kazakhstan in the first years of Soviet power. It is noted that significant attention in this process was given to the languages of the titular nations as official languages. The authors made an attempt to present the formation of legal guarantees for the functioning of the Kazakh and Russian languages of the Kazakh Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic and their use in the state apparatus of the republic. The study is based on legislative acts and documents of 1917-1924 with the involvement of archival materials. The authors examined practical steps of korenization (nativization) with respect to party and Soviet administrative structures and transition to paperwork in two state languages in the KASSR. The article reflects the main problems of the implementation of language legislation and percentage korenization as a policy aimed at the formation of national management personnel and solving the problems of serving the population of Kazakhstan in their native language. The problems of introducing office work in the language of the titular nation of material, personnel, mental and other nature are investigated. The authors drew attention to the failure of the attempts of the Soviet state to quickly create an administrative apparatus in the KASSR from national personnel and introduce paperwork in the Kazakh language, as well as to the fact that the Soviet leadership understood this. The study shows the reasons for a significant revision of the korenization policy in the USSR and Soviet Kazakhstan, as well as the introduction of office work in the national language since 1926. Among the positive achievements of the Soviet regime, the creation of strong legal guarantees for the functioning of the Kazakh and Russian languages as the state languages of Kazakhstan of the studied period, as well as the partial korenization of the administrative apparatus of Kazakhstan as a result of targeted and progressive steps of the Soviet state to create national personnel, were noted.


2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 222-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Liutauras Nekrošius

The trends in Palanga architecture of the second half of the 19th – first half of the 20th century are represented in the National Cultural Heritage List by 10 villas, 14 residential houses, two hotels (Kurhauses of Nemirseta and Palanga), a pharmacy, a spa building, a ship rescue station and a bus station. But such heritage objects reflect the stages in the town development only partially. If the cultural heritage list of Palanga town is treated as a coherent and continuous collection reflecting different stages in architecture and culture of this town (as it should be), it would be relevant to add a few more samples of the mid and second half of the 20th century architecture to the list. Taking into consideration the presence of exclusive Soviet period architectural objects on the list (made according to recommendations of different professional and social communities), and recommendations of the list founders, the following two educational institutions realized less than 50 years ago that these may as well be enrolled as examples of specific historic period and acknowledged artistic style or trend, and as most progressive and/or artistic architectural solutions of the time, to be protected for public information and use purposes: the music school designed by architect I. Likšienė,1981, (Maironio St.8; see Fig. 1) and former Pioneers’ Palace designed by I. Likšienė and G. P. Likša,1985, (now the elementary school, at the address Virbališkės Takas 4; see Fig. 2). These buildings are distinctive examples of contemporary architecture development. At present managed by the local municipality, they are in good physical state, with retained initial qualities of space and volume structure, use of materials, environment and purpose. In the category of accommodation buildings the following may be marked out: the early architectural design works by A. Lėckas, namely, the Žilvinas hotel (Kęstučio St. 34; see Fig. 4, a.), designed and implemented in 1968 as a rest house for 45 guests (21 apartment) on commission of the Council of Ministers of the Soviet Socialist Republic of Lithuania and the Žilvinėlis apartment building for 24 guests implemented in 1970 (Birutės al. 44; see Fig. 4, b.). These objects still owned by the state have been prepared for privatization. Before privatization it is suggested to enroll them on the Cultural Heritage List, identify their valuable qualities, character and level of significance and perform any other required procedures. It is also recommended to make agreements for protection of cultural heritage objects with the new owners of such buildings. The initial protection is also needed for the Rąžė book shop and café building (Vytauto St.84; see Fig. 5) designed by R. V. Kraniauskas in 1967 and considered mature in the artistic sense. The building has retained its small scale, which is characteristic for the resort town, and thus enriches the spatial perspective of the street. Considering its physical shape, functional and aesthetical qualities and the use character, it is also highly recommended to grant the heritage protection status to the administration building Komprojektas (Gintaro St.30,30A; see Fig. 6) designed by G. P. and I. Likša in 1988. The collection of Palanga architecture may also be enriched by the conserved pavilions of the summer reading hall of the National Martynas Mažvydas Library (Vytauto St.72, (1968); see Fig. 7) and Kupeta (S.Daukanto/ S.Dariaus and S.Girėno St., (1969); see Fig. 8) designed by architect A. Čepys; an example of the original concrete plastics, the coffee shop Banga (J. Basanavičius St. 2; see Fig. 10) designed by G. J. Telksnys in 1976–77 and realized in 1979. The present shape and use character of these buildings cause serious threat to their preservation. There is little probability that within the context of the on-going reconstructions traditional acts for enrollment on the heritage list could somehow contribute to the conservation of values of the Vanagupė resort center, the laureate (1984) of prestigious prize by the USSR Council of Ministers (architects A. Lėckas, S. Šarkinas and L. Merkinas; see Fig. 3); the resthouse Guboja implemented only partially in 1976 (in Šventoji, Jūros St 65A., architect. R. Buivydas); resthouse Auska (presently, hotel, Vytauto St.11; architect J. Šipalis, 1977); and the resthouse Šiaulių Tauras (Vytauto St.116, architect G. P. Likša,1983). Nevertheless, the identified architectural, urban, landscape and engineering values of objects and analyzed possible forms for their conservation (ex-situ and in-situ) could become a basis for scientific study of contemporary architecture and urban planning in Palanga resort. Based on their design material, the initial concepts of such objects should be identified and their present as well planned for the future transformations should be analyzed. Such study to be presented publicly (for example, on the National Cultural Heritage List database) could ensure conditions for better understanding of past and present values of the objects, for both, specialists and public at large, and be a highly valuable source of information describing the architecture of the time to be used for information, scientific and professional purposes. Such study may also become a stimulus for preparation of complex regeneration design projects of objects and landscapes, which would comprise the conservation and development needs and add new artistic values. Santrauka Dėl pakitusių politinių, ekonominių ir kultūrinių sąlygų XX a. II pusės architektūros ir urbanistikos kūriniai dažnai nebeatitinka šiandienos naudotojų poreikių ir keliamų reikalavimų. Todėl apleidžiami, griaunami ar reikšmingai kinta. Dėl to ryškėja iniciatyvos siūlyti į KVR įtraukti kuo daugiau šio laikmečio kūrinių. Tačiau XX a. IX dešimtmetyje kultūros paminklais tapę naujosios architektūros kūriniai dėl neraiškios saugojimo strategijos, žmogiškųjų ir finansinių išteklių tvarkybai stokos vis tiek nyksta. Todėl kyla abejonių ar registro plėtra bus veiksminga. Straipsnyje Palangos miesto pavyzdžiu nagrinėjamos galimybės sudaryti vėlyvojo modernizmo architektūros kolekciją. Manoma, kad sistemingas kultūriškai vertingų architektūros objektų rinkinys formuojamas apjungiant skirtingus saugojimo metodus gali paskatinti atsakingas institucijas, vietos ir profesines bendruomenes susitelkti atsakingam architektūros paveldo puoselėjimo ir tvaraus naudojimo procesui.


2016 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 25-88
Author(s):  
Łarysa Briuchowecka

POLAND IN UKRAINIAN CINEMAMultinational Ukraine in the time of Ukrainization conducted a policy which was supportive of the national identity, allowed the possibility of the cultural development of, among others, Jews, Crimean Tatars, and Poles. Cinema was exemplary of such policy, in 1925 through to the 1930s a number of films on Jewish and Crimean Tatar topics were released by Odessa and Yalta Film Studios. However, the Polish topic, which enjoyed most attention, was heavily politicized due to tensions between the USSR and the Second Commonwealth of Poland; the Soviet government could not forgive Poland the refusal to follow the Bolshevik path. The Polish topic was particularly painful for the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic due to the fact that the Western fringe of Ukrainian lands became a part of Poland according to the Treaty of Riga which was signed between Poland and Soviet Russia. This explains why Polish society was constantly denounced in the Ukrainian Soviet films The Shadows of Belvedere, 1927, Behind the Wall, 1928. Particular propagandistic significance in this case was allotted to the film PKP Piłsudski Kupyv Petliuru, Piłsudski Bought Petliura, 1926, which showed Poland subverting the stability of the Ukrainian SSR and reconstructed the episode of joint battles of Ukrainians and Poles against the Bolsheviks in the summer of 1920 as well as the Winter Campaign. The episodes of Ukrainian history were also shown on the screen during this favorable for cinema time, particularly in films Zvenyhora 1927 by Oleksandr Dovzhenko and a historical epopee Taras Triasylo 1927. The 1930s totalitarian cinema presented human being as an ideological construct. Dovzhenko strived to oppose this tendency in Shchors 1939 where head of the division Mykola Shchors is shown as a successor of Ivan Bohun, specifically in the scene set in the castle in which he fights with Polish warriors. Dovzhenko was also assigned by Soviet power to document the events of the autumn of 1939, when Soviet troops invaded Poland and annexed Western Ukraine. The episodes of “popular dedications” such as demonstrations, meetings, and elections constituted his journalistic documentary film Liberation 1940. A Russian filmmaker Abram Room while working in Kyiv Film Studios on the film Wind from the East 1941 did not spare on dark tones to denunciate Polish “exploiters” impersonated by countess Janina Pszezynska in her relation to Ukrainian peasant Khoma Habrys. Ihor Savchenko interpreted events of the 17th century according to the topic of that time in his historical film Bohdan Khmelnitsky 1941 where Poles and their acolytes were depicted as cruel and irreconcilable enemies of Ukrainian people both in terms of story and visual language, so that the national liberation war lead by Khmelnytsky appeared as a revenge against the oppressors. The Polish topic virtually disappeared from Ukrainian cinema from the post-war time up until the collapse of the Soviet Union. The minor exclusions from this tendency are Zigmund Kolossovsky, a film about a brave Polish secret service agent shot during the evacuation in 1945 and the later time adaptations of the theatre pieces The Morality of Mrs Dulska 1956 and Cracovians and Highlanders 1976. Filmmakers were able to return to the common Polish-Ukrainian history during the time of independence despite the economic decline of film production. A historical film Bohdan Zinoviy Khmelnitsky by Mykola Mashchenko was released in 2008. It follows the line of interpretation given to Khmelnitsky’s struggle with Polish powers by Norman Davies, according to whom the cause of this appraisal was the peasant fury combined with the actual social, political and religious injustices to Eastern provinces. The film shows how Khmelnitsky was able to win the battles but failed to govern and protect the independence of Hetmanate which he had founded. The tragedies experienced by Poland and Ukraine during the Second World War were shown in a feature film Iron Hundred 2004 by Oles Yanchuk based on the memoirs of Yuri Borets UPA in a Swirl of Struggle as well as in documentaries Bereza Kartuzka 2007, Volyn. The Sign of Disaster 2003 among others.Translated by Larisa Briuchowecka


2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-373
Author(s):  
Ruslan G. Bimbasov

This author examines the activities of Soviet party-state bodies in the field of propaganda among the population in the North Ossetian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (North Ossetia) during the Great Patriotic War. Propaganda is effective when its message is deeply rooted in the consciousness of the population group to which it is addressed. For this reason the media and the organizations of oral propaganda of North Ossetia sought to get the most accurate information on the particular group that was called upon to fulfill wartime tasks. The author used various types of sources, including documents from the Central State Archive of the Republic of North Ossetia that are here first introduced into scientific circulation. The paper identifies the directions of party-state bodies in organizing propaganda on the territory of the republic in 1941-1945, and it assesses the degree of their effectiveness. While the outbreak of the war led to an expansion of propaganda, there was an acute shortage of specialists in various fields of life, including in propaganda work among the civilian population. The paper reveals the main methods of forming the image of the enemy by propaganda bodies and the media. The author concludes that the activities of the propaganda apparatus in the republic during the War had a direct impact on public consciousness and contributed to the consolidation of the region's population in the fight against the enemy, and to overcoming the difficulties of the War years.


Author(s):  
V. V. Kharabuga ◽  
V. A. Afanasyev

For a long time, Crimea has been the place of a permanent ethnopolitical political conflict controlled from the outside, one of the components of which is the confrontation between the Russians, as an ethnic group and the other Slavic population of Crimea, on the one hand, and the Tatars of Crimea, on behalf of whom the extremist banned in Russia is trying to speak structure «kurultai-mejlis». The argumentation of the hypothesis designed to confirm the myth about the national (Tatar) character of the Crimean ASSR is presented. The analysis of argumentation suggests that the hypothesis is not supported by convincing evidence. More weighty should be considered the point of view that the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic in 1921–1945. was multinational-territorial autonomy. The discussion in Ukraine of the topic of changing the status of Crimea, turning it into national Tatar autonomy is carried out by the leaders and functionaries of the extremist organization «kurultai-mejlis» in the framework of the anti-Russian propaganda flow controlled from abroad and exploits the analyzed myth as the historical basis of its claims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document