"RED RUSSIANS IN TURKESTAN" PUBLICATION BY AHMAD NAIM

Аннотация

This thesis examines the publication by Ahmad Naim titled "Red Russians in Turkestan." Key words and phrases: Turkestan National Unity, Soviet press, criticism, Jadids, dictatorship, nation, economic discrimination, bolsheviks, liberation. After Uzbekistan gained independence, new opportunities opened up for domestic historians to objectively and comprehensively reinterpret the events that took place in Central Asia in the early XX century. With the removal of ideological restrictions, scholars gained access to previously unavailable foreign sources — newspapers, magazines, memoirs, and academic works published outside the former Soviet Union — in order to reconstruct the true history of their homeland. Among such sources, the journal New Turkestan, published in Istanbul with its first issue released in June 1927, holds particular significance. This publication became an important platform for members of the “Turkestan National Unity” (TNU) organization, which voiced strong criticism of Soviet power and defended the idea of an independent Turkestan. The TNU included prominent emigres from Central Asia: Mustafa Chokay, Zeki Velidi Togan, Usmonkhoja Polatkhojaev, Ahmed Naim, Abdulqadir Inon, Abullazoda Tavakkul, and other figures whose names are now attracting the close attention of researchers . In this work, I would like to focus on the article by Ahmed Naim titled Red Russians in Turkestan, published in the September–October issue of Yeni Türkistan (New Turkestan) in 1928, as a valuable historical document reflecting the Turkestani emigre position toward Bolshevik policy in the region. In his article, Ahmed Naim attempts to expose the essence of Soviet power in Central Asia, portraying it as a continuation of Russian colonial domination under a new ideological guise. Ahmed Naim begins with a critique of the Soviet press, which he characterizes as the main instrument of Bolshevik influence not only within the country but also on the international stage. According to him, despite the Soviet newspapers’ constant attempts to expose the political flaws of other countries, there is no freedom of speech within the Soviet Union itself, and any criticism of the party and government is strictly suppressed. The author emphasizes: “The 13 THEORETICAL ASPECTS IN THE FORMATION OF PEDAGOGICAL SCIENCES International scientific-online conference Red Russians do not even allow a discussion of their own mistakes, yet they eagerly attack other political systems.” He notes the obvious contradiction: if the USSR considers itself entitled to criticize others, it must also be prepared to accept criticism in return — which, as we know, did not happen. Ahmed Naim pays particular attention to how Soviet propaganda portrays its achievements. According to his account, the recent Bolshevik anniversary celebrations were presented as a “triumph of the East” and even of the global proletariat. This narrative, he says, was especially pushed in Turkestan, where the festivities were depicted as nationwide rejoicing. However, the author asserts that behind these celebratory slogans lies the reality of oppression and violence that has continued for more than a decade. In his words, those who truly understand the nature of Soviet policy cannot be deceived by this façade. The central thesis of the article is the exposure of Soviet federalism. Naim claims that after the formation of the Soviet Union, some observers hoped for decentralization of power and increased autonomy for the republics. However, in practice, the author argues, it was merely the reinforcement of the old imperial mechanism under a new name. He writes that under the banner of the “Central Asian Bureau” lies the same Russian control, and that Turkestan remains, in fact, a colony. For this reason, Naim believes, the Turkestani intelligentsia began a struggle against Red colonialism — a struggle that has reached a level which even Moscow can no longer ignore. The author provides examples of repression against those Turkestanis who tried to defend their people’s interests even within the Communist Party framework. He points to the expulsion of many figures from the party and quotes a statement by Zelinsky, the head of Turkestan, who openly opposed national self-determination. These words, Naim writes, reveal the true nature of Soviet policy: “All Republics are subordinate colonies of Moscow.” Special attention is paid to the case of Inamov — the Uzbek minister who was removed from office for publicly stating that Uzbekistan did not wish to remain a Russian colony . He also mentions the persecution of Kazakh nationalists and the open calls for a “party purge” of Jadids, mullahs, and reformers — which, in his view, demonstrates the strength of nationalist tendencies within the system itself . A particularly striking example, according to the author, was the action of a Samarkand student, Ekber Mirza Rahim, who publicly left the party, calling it an instrument of Moscow’s dictatorship