It's beta of the site. Let us know your opinion.
Weather       +5 °C
Currency:  1USD  7.7  1EUR 10.27
Search:  
 
 Sign In   Register

Opinion

Genocide or not, Stalin starved millions to death and Soviet regime concealed for 54 years

26 November 2008, 19:42 | David Marples, Special to Kyiv Post
Highly politicized Holodomor doesn’t hide the fact that ethnic Ukrainian dimension was present

This month marks the 75th anniversary of the Ukrainian famine, known as the Holodomor, or death by hunger. [In Ukraine, the official annual commemoration is the fourth Saturday in November]. Many governments, including those of Canada and the United States, have recognized the famine as an act of genocide by Stalin’s regime against Ukrainians.

Ukrainian president Victor Yushchenko has issued a bill that would make it a criminal offense to deny that the famine was genocide. After 75 years, we know much about this tragedy, but the academic community has yet to reach a consensus on the issue. A majority of Western scholars -- at least judging from published articles and books -- denies that Stalin’s intention was to kill Ukrainians, per se, and maintains that he targeted the Soviet peasantry as a whole. Thus they deny an ethnic dimension.

For example, in his acclaimed 2007 book on life under Stalin, The Whisperers, British historian Orlando Figes writes that the Soviet regime “was undoubtedly to blame for the famine. But its policies did not amount to a campaign of ‘terror-famine,’ let alone of genocide ... ” Harvard University’s Terry Martin and the University of Amsterdam’s Michael Ellman have expressed the same opinion.

We may never know how many died of starvation in 1932-33. Yushchenko and others speak of 10 million, or about a third of the population of Ukraine. However, more reliable estimates in Ukraine and elsewhere suggest that the death toll was three to five million, still a truly staggering figure.

It is problematic for scholars when issues become heavily politicized before definitive conclusions have been reached. The Soviet regime denied the existence of the famine for 54 years. Communists in Ukraine reject the notion that Moscow turned on Ukrainians, as do Russia and several western countries.

However, Yushchenko has made the Holodomor the central event in the history of modern Ukraine. It is a divisive one because of the association of the U.S.S.R. with modern Russia. Implicitly, it is alleged that Russia is responsible for the deaths of millions of Ukrainians. Russian president Dmitry Medvedev demurs, and the late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn argued that famine occurred also in Russia as well as among ethnic Russians, Jews and Germans resident in Ukraine.

However, archival evidence suggests that the ethnic dimension of the famine was always present. Soviet Ukraine in the 1920s had been allowed to develop its own culture and institutions under a policy known as “indigenization.” By the early 1930s, the Soviet authorities were very concerned by the results. Led by the commissar of education and former colleague of Lenin, Mykola Skrypnyk, the republic was distancing itself from Russia.

National “deviationism” in Ukraine was linked by Stalin with the danger of new intervention from Poland, regarded as a hostile neighbor since the war of 1919-20. He wrote in a letter to his colleague Lazar Kaganovich, party leader of Ukraine in the 1920s, that he feared that “we might lose Ukraine” and that Polish leader Josef Pilsudski would exploit dissatisfaction in the republic.

Added to these volatile elements, the Soviet regime began rapidly to collectivize farms starting in 1929. Ukraine was among the first republics to be collectivized. In Kazakhstan, a third of the peasantry (about one million people) died by 1931. Stalin’s goal was “to liquidate the kulaks (rich peasants) as a class.” Many so designated destroyed their livestock rather than give it up to the new collective farms. The countryside became a war zone in which millions were dispossessed, with many deported to Siberia or the Far North.

After collectivization, state grain quotas were imposed on the farms. Grain was taken before the farmers could feed themselves and their families, and quotas were raised sharply in Ukraine, despite a poor harvest in 1931 in particular. Stalin, who used the grain to feed the growing urban population as well as the Red Army, appointed Extraordinary Grain Commissions in several regions. Vyacheslav Molotov led the one in Ukraine. When the grain ran out, Molotov demanded that the commissions take all food from the villages, which were stripped bare as though a plague of locusts had descended on them.

Peasants could not travel to towns or cross borders to obtain food after 1932, as they were not assigned passports like the rest of the population. In January 1933, Ukraine’s border with North Caucasus was closed. Ukraine’s leadership in Kharkiv, the capital at the time, was distraught. Most Ukrainian Communists blamed “kulaks” and nationalists for the starvation in villages. Stalin then sent his own plenipotentiary, Pavel Postyshev, to Kharkiv to purge the dithering leaders. Later all these figures either died during the purges or, like Skrypnyk, took their own lives.

The mass deaths of peasants were concealed from the public with the collusion of some western journalists and diplomats. Many prominent figures – including George Bernard Shaw, and Sidney and Beatrice Webb – reported that this ravaged land was in fact a Communist utopia. Walter Duranty of The New York Times lied systematically to Americans about the situation in the Soviet countryside.

The link between the Ukrainian famine and external events is clear. In January 1933, Hitler had come to power in Germany, adding another dire threat to Stalin’s regime. Ukrainian nationalists, Poles, Hitler and Stalin’s chief enemy, Leon Trotsky, all feature in Stalin’s correspondence and party documents as threats to Soviet security.

Whether or not this catastrophe was premeditated – and we may never find a “smoking gun’’ – Stalin, Molotov and other Soviet leaders deliberately starved their own people and then concealed this atrocity from the outside world.

David Marples is a professor of history at the University of Alberta in Canada. This story is reprinted with his permission. The article was also published in the Edmonton Journal on Nov. 22.

  Comments (5)
Add your comment
Left 1000 symbols
.
elmer  (Guest) | 02.12.2008, 17:15
In fact, you might take a look at the Yulia Latynina article for a discussion of \"diviseness\" and who has a bug up their butt about the Famine. Yushchenko has done the right thing, and he\'s not doing it for political points, or to \"divide\" anyone. The \"divisiveness\" is comnig from kremlin hysteria, which seeks to continue acting like sovoks instead of like human beings. Here\'s the link to the article:
http://larussophobe.wor dpress.com/2008/11/26/another-ori ginal-lr-translation-latynina-on- goldomor-via-essel/#more-10913. Here\'s another link to the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1 22757088058354659.html To quote, in part; Ahead of the official commemoration this past weekend, President Dmitry Medvedev accused Ukraine of seeking to achieve \"opportunistic political goals\" based on \"manipulations and distortions, falsification of facts about the number of dead.\" As in Stalin\'s day, Ukraine\'s independent identity and nationhood stands in the way.....
Answer  
Guest  (Guest) | 03.12.2008, 12:41
Russophobe.... Wall Street Journal....

Kasparov is a contributing editor to the Wall Street. Kasparov is a friend of Cheney, sucks dicks at the American Enterprize Institute (one of the Neocons archtitects of US domination).
Answer  
elmer  (Guest) | 02.12.2008, 17:07
The only ones for whom the Famine is a \"divisive\" factor are - kremlinites, who become absolutely furious when any former sovok republic or satellite tries to figure out its factual history without distortion through a sovok-kremlin prism. This was evidenced recently on the Savik Shuster show, where kremlinites thundered that there was no Holodomor, that Americans were to blame, or that \"everyone\" suffered. As Yulia Latynina said recently: Of note is the fact that the Russophile guests of various stripes all had one thing in common: the ability to perceive as facts things that are simply not true. They called against “driving wedges between…”, against “distorting history.” Yet their opponents were not trying to drive wedges between anyone and not distorting history in any way. Ex-president Kravchuk (who was constantly interrupted by a yelping Markov) calmly described how is uncle was shot merely for reading in barracks a letter about victims of the famine.
Answer  
Guest  (Guest) | 01.12.2008, 22:35
This is one of the most balanced and normal pieces that I have read on the Holodomor. There is no doubt that the Holodomor was a tragedy of drastic proportions. There is no doubt that it was orchestrated by Stalin and his henchmen. I think that if Yuschenko was really interested in uniting the country around the Holodomor as a defining moment in Ukrainian history, he could have done so by leaving out the word genocide. Not because it was or was not genocide. Only because that has become a divisive factor rather than a unifying one. On another point, I wonder, do Medvedev and Putin see themselves as the continuation of Stalin? Would it really be so hard for them to repudiate what Stalin did to all the nations livinig in the USSR? I would think that that would be the easiest part of the equation! But as we are wont to say \"You never know\"!
Answer  
elmer  (Guest) | 01.12.2008, 18:56
II don\'t see how this catastrophe was NOT premeditated. It was. And Ukrainians were targeted specifically not only because they were \"enemies of the state\" (a word in the sovok lexicon - practically everyone was an \"enemy of the state\") but also because they did exercise their own \"nationalism\" - a dirty word in the sovok system, and one which people were conditioned against, like Pavlovian dogs. Stalin saw \"nationalism,\" especially in Ukraine, as a threat to his rule from Moscow. Even today, the word \"nationalism\" is hurled around like an epithet by faithful sovoks. This Famine was indeed terror. After all the grain and livestock were taken away, people were shot on the spot for even attempting to scrounge any sort of kernel in the fields. And the fact that even today, the Kremlin won\'t open archives is sickening.
Answer  
Advertising

MOST POPULAR OPINIONS: