BUKHARIAN TERRITORY AS A LABORATORY OF POLITICAL TRANSFORMATIONS: ELITE ADAPTATION STRATEGIES IN COLONIAL CONDITIONS (PERIODS 1896-1938)

Аннотация

This article examines the complex strategies of political adaptation employed by Central Asian elites during the early Soviet period, focusing on the paradigmatic case of Fayzulla Khodzhaev (1896–1938). Combining postcolonial theory, sociology of power, and historical institutionalism, the article proposes the original concept of "positive mimicry"—a framework that transcends Homi Bhabha’s classical notion of colonial mimicry by emphasizing agency, capital conversion, and narrative entrepreneurship among Indigenous actors. Keywords: Soviet Uzbekistan, Political Mimicry, Jadidism, Elite Adaptation, Fayzulla Khodzhaev, National Delimitation, strategic position Introduction. The phenomenon of political mimicry in Soviet Central Asia presents a compelling case study for examining the complex interplay between colonial structures, revolutionary transformations, and indigenous responses. This paper employs an interdisciplinary framework combining postcolonial theory, sociology of power, and historical institutionalism to analyze the strategic adaptations of Central Asian elites during the formative years of Soviet rule. Focusing on the paradigmatic case of Fayzulla Khodzhaev (1896-1938), we investigate how traditional elites navigated the dual pressures of maintaining local legitimacy while accommodating Soviet modernization imperatives. The study's significance lies in its contribution to three scholarly discourses: first, it expands our understanding of decolonization processes in non-Western contexts; second, it illuminates the mechanisms of Soviet nation- building in Central Asia; third, it offers new perspectives on elite survival strategies during revolutionary transitions. Drawing on previously underutilized archival materials and recent scholarship, we propose the concept of "positive mimicry" as an analytical tool for understanding these complex historical dynamics. 1. Theoretical Framework: Beyond Colonial Mimicry Our conceptual approach builds upon but significantly modifies Homi Bhabha's notion of colonial mimicry. While Bhabha's framework (1994) emphasizes the subversive potential of partial imitation by colonized subjects, 63 ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE International scientific-online conference the Soviet Central Asian context requires a more nuanced model that accounts for: Strategic agency - The conscious deployment of Soviet discourse for local elite empowerment; Capital conversion - Transformation of traditional status into revolutionary credentials; Narrative entrepreneurship - Active construction of historical legitimacy; Khodzhaev's political trajectory exemplifies what we term "positive mimicry" - a deliberate performance of Soviet identity that simultaneously preserved elements of traditional authority. This differed fundamentally from the coerced imitation characteristic of classical colonial situations (Khalid, 2015, pp. 213-217). The model accounts for three distinct but interrelated dimensions: Table 1: Dimensions of Positive Mimicry Manifestations in Khodzhaev's Dimension Characteristics Case Discursive Mastery of Bolshevik rhetoric Public speeches, political writings Participation in Soviet power Government positions, party Institutional structures membership Cultivation of revolutionary Autobiographical narratives, Symbolic image iconography Manifestations in Khodzhaev's Dimension Characteristics Case Discursive Mastery of Bolshevik rhetoric Public speeches, political writings Participation in Soviet power Government positions, party Institutional structures membership Cultivation of revolutionary Autobiographical narratives, Symbolic image iconography 2. Historical Context: Jadidism and Elite Transformation The examination of Khodzhaev's political evolution must begin with the Jadid movement, which emerged in late 19th century Central Asia as both a cultural renaissance and proto-nationalist awakening. Unlike traditional scholarship that treats Jadidism monolithically, our analysis reveals its internal stratification: 2.1.Social Foundations Khodzhaev's privileged background as scion of a karakul trading dynasty (family wealth estimated at $15-20 million in contemporary values) positioned him uniquely within Jadid circles. His Moscow education (1907-1911) at the prestigious K.P. Voskresensky Gymnasium equipped him with: 64 ACADEMIC RESEARCH IN MODERN SCIENCE International scientific-online conference Fluency in Russian administrative culture Familiarity with European political thought Networks within Russian progressive circles This contrasted sharply with traditional madrasa-educated Jadids like Ayni, creating enduring tensions within the movement (3.Alimova, 1999, pp. 44-48). 2.2. Political Radicalization The 1917 revolutions catalyzed the transformation of Jadidism from a cultural movement to a political force. Khodzhaev's faction distinguished itself through: Institutionalization - Creation of the Young Bukharan movement (1916); Militarization - Formation of armed units