The Russian nationalists' confrontation with the communist power
In December 1976, I moved from Saaremaa Island
to Tartu. Soon I found a professional engagement as an architectural technician
in the Tartu Group of the Republican Restoration Office. Through Lagle Parek, my
colleague, I became involved in the resistance movement. Initially, the
involvement consisted of the reproduction and distribution of the literature
banned by the authorities. Later, I began editing an underground chronicle of
the resistance movement, the Lisandusi mõtete ja uudiste vabale levikule Eestis
(the Additions to Free Circulation of Ideas and News in Estonia), and
participate in the actions of the collective protest letters.
At
that time, the informal and ideologue leader of the resistance movement was Enn
Tarto. Having been twice in the prison camps on charges of anti-Soviet
activities, he had made the “political education” of his younger associates a
matter of his heart. Based in particular on his prison camp experience, he made
clear to us in wooden and red the basic wisdom of the resistance movement: how
to detect covert pursuit, what security measures are necessary for dealing with
the samizdat[1] material, how to
behave in contacts with the KGB, and so on. The additional knowledge we gained
from samizdat and tamizdat[2]
literature and foreign radio broadcasts addressed the Soviet Union.
Besides
the practical teachings, Tarto was especially happy to share his prison camp
recollections. Once he told about a peculiar Russian he had encountered during
his first imprisonment, who had advocated an outrageous thing: Russia itself
had to leave the Soviet Union! For Tarto and all other non-Russians imprisoned
for their nationalist activities, this seemed like a complete curiosity. The
Russians were, of course, considered the leading nation of the Soviet Union,
with whose support the prison of the nations remained together. However, in its
imperialist and land-gathering ambitions, the Soviet Union did not differ much
from the Russian Empire.
I
too had a chance to meet a such kind of Russian nationalist. On December 4,
1980, I was arrested and sentenced to 2 years in a strict regime prison camp
for anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, which was followed by a 2-year
internal exile. While being in the prison camp for the especially dangerous
state criminals No BC 389-36 of the village of Kuchino,
Chussovoi district, Perm region, there I met someone Vladimir Balakhonov.
Balakhonov, born in 1935, was sentenced to 12 years for high treason. Working
as a translator and editor of the Soviet delegation to the UN Metrology
Commission in Switzerland, he decided not to return to the Soviet Union. Later,
however, longing for his family, he changed his mind and returned to Moscow on
December 1, 1972. Although the Soviet consul had confirmed that he would not be
punished, a month later he found himself behind the bars and abandoned by his
wife. While in a prison camp, the loyal Soviet subordinate became an acute
critic of the regime and a fighter for the rights of prisoners, actively
participating in all camp activities (refusal of forced labor, hunger strikes,
collective protest letters, struggle for political prisoner status, etc.). Like
the nameless Russian mentioned by Tarto, Balakhonov had an opinion that the
Soviet Union, as the embodiment of historical injustice and the oppressor of
other nations, must be disbanded. He considered Russia's withdrawal from the Soviet
Union would be the most appropriate method. It should be noted, that his views
were not understood in the slightest by imprisoned Russian human rights
activists (dissidents). However, these views were especially popular among
Ukrainians (who were the majority in the camp) and other non-Russians.
As
it is known, the ideas of the nameless Russian and Balakhonov turned out to be
prophetic. Just thanks to Russia's independence, which was a tactical tool used
by Boris Yeltsin to oust Mikhail Gorbachev, the President of the Soviet Union,
the Evil Empire collapsed. Of course, Yeltsin could not foresee such a
development. He thought, that probably the separated parts, perhaps except the
Baltic states, would return to the metropolis for economic reasons. But when he
had set the fire to a hut, he suddenly discovered that he had burned down the
whole village.
The
history of the opposition movement in the Soviet Union shows that the Russian
nationalists were not very frequent inhabitants of the prison camps for
especially dangerous state criminals (political prison camps), where those
convicted for anti-Soviet activities, espionage, high treason, terrorism, and
similar crimes, were detained. The vast majority of the contingents in these
camps were non-Russian nationalists, mainly Ukrainians, and Lithuanians. Of
course, the human rights activists-dissidents were also represented, but they
were predominantly the assimilated Jews. Unlike their nationalistic
compatriots, they did not long to emigrate to the Holy Land. Of course, the
dissidents wanted to emigrate as well, however, not to Israel, but to Western
Europe or the United States. A few purebred Russians were largely convicted for
espionage (mainly persons, who tried to sell professional secrets to foreigners
at international exhibitions in Moscow or former soldiers, who attempted to
trade with military secrets) or betrayal of their homeland (who tried to escape
abroad, stayed there and returned for the “longing of birches”).
Of
course, the Russian nationalists had a place among the diverse opposition
movements of the Soviet Union. However, compared to other movements, they were
much less likely to be repressed and relatively few of them were in political
prison camps. Moreover, their activities were overshadowed by the “mainstream”
opposition in the Soviet Union, the
human rights protection movement (dissent). While a lot of research studies
have been written about the activities of the human rights activists, only a
few written works we can read about the activities of the Russian nationalists.
The memories of those, who took part in these movements, have the same
proportions.The following lines are an attempt
to give a birds-eye overview of the opposition activities of the Russian
nationalists. The article is limited in time from the late 1950s to the
mid-1980s and is based on the research by the authors cited in the footnotes.
[1] Samizdat
– a form of activity used
by dissidents and national resistance movements all over the Soviet bloc, in
which individuals compiled reproduced and distributed underground publications.
Etymologically, the word samizdat derives from the words sam
(Russian: сам – self, by oneself) and izdat (Russian: издат,
an abbreviation of издательство – publishing house), and thus means
„self-published”. The techniques used to reproduce these forbidden texts
varied. Mainly the texts were made in a typewriter. Books
and other larger texts were multiplied using the photocopying method.
The Wall-breakers
The tale of the Estonian Group for the Disclosure of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and the Estonian National Independence Party
Foreword
The Russian nationalists' confrontation with the communist power
In December 1976, I moved from Saaremaa Island to Tartu. Soon I found a professional engagement as an architectural technician in the Tartu Group of the Republican Restoration Office. Through Lagle Parek, my colleague, I became involved in the resistance movement. Initially, the involvement consisted of the reproduction and distribution of the literature banned by the authorities. Later, I began editing an underground chronicle of the resistance movement, the Lisandusi mõtete ja uudiste vabale levikule Eestis (the Additions to Free Circulation of Ideas and News in Estonia), and participate in the actions of the collective protest letters.
At
that time, the informal and ideologue leader of the resistance movement was Enn
Tarto. Having been twice in the prison camps on charges of anti-Soviet
activities, he had made the “political education” of his younger associates a
matter of his heart. Based in particular on his prison camp experience, he made
clear to us in wooden and red the basic wisdom of the resistance movement: how
to detect covert pursuit, what security measures are necessary for dealing with
the samizdat[1] material, how to
behave in contacts with the KGB, and so on. The additional knowledge we gained
from samizdat and tamizdat[2]
literature and foreign radio broadcasts addressed the Soviet Union.
Besides the practical teachings, Tarto was especially happy to share his prison camp recollections. Once he told about a peculiar Russian he had encountered during his first imprisonment, who had advocated an outrageous thing: Russia itself had to leave the Soviet Union! For Tarto and all other non-Russians imprisoned for their nationalist activities, this seemed like a complete curiosity. The Russians were, of course, considered the leading nation of the Soviet Union, with whose support the prison of the nations remained together. However, in its imperialist and land-gathering ambitions, the Soviet Union did not differ much from the Russian Empire.
I too had a chance to meet a such kind of Russian nationalist. On December 4, 1980, I was arrested and sentenced to 2 years in a strict regime prison camp for anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda, which was followed by a 2-year internal exile. While being in the prison camp for the especially dangerous state criminals No BC 389-36 of the village of Kuchino, Chussovoi district, Perm region, there I met someone Vladimir Balakhonov. Balakhonov, born in 1935, was sentenced to 12 years for high treason. Working as a translator and editor of the Soviet delegation to the UN Metrology Commission in Switzerland, he decided not to return to the Soviet Union. Later, however, longing for his family, he changed his mind and returned to Moscow on December 1, 1972. Although the Soviet consul had confirmed that he would not be punished, a month later he found himself behind the bars and abandoned by his wife. While in a prison camp, the loyal Soviet subordinate became an acute critic of the regime and a fighter for the rights of prisoners, actively participating in all camp activities (refusal of forced labor, hunger strikes, collective protest letters, struggle for political prisoner status, etc.). Like the nameless Russian mentioned by Tarto, Balakhonov had an opinion that the Soviet Union, as the embodiment of historical injustice and the oppressor of other nations, must be disbanded. He considered Russia's withdrawal from the Soviet Union would be the most appropriate method. It should be noted, that his views were not understood in the slightest by imprisoned Russian human rights activists (dissidents). However, these views were especially popular among Ukrainians (who were the majority in the camp) and other non-Russians.
As
it is known, the ideas of the nameless Russian and Balakhonov turned out to be
prophetic. Just thanks to Russia's independence, which was a tactical tool used
by Boris Yeltsin to oust Mikhail Gorbachev, the President of the Soviet Union,
the Evil Empire collapsed. Of course, Yeltsin could not foresee such a
development. He thought, that probably the separated parts, perhaps except the
Baltic states, would return to the metropolis for economic reasons. But when he
had set the fire to a hut, he suddenly discovered that he had burned down the
whole village.
The
history of the opposition movement in the Soviet Union shows that the Russian
nationalists were not very frequent inhabitants of the prison camps for
especially dangerous state criminals (political prison camps), where those
convicted for anti-Soviet activities, espionage, high treason, terrorism, and
similar crimes, were detained. The vast majority of the contingents in these
camps were non-Russian nationalists, mainly Ukrainians, and Lithuanians. Of
course, the human rights activists-dissidents were also represented, but they
were predominantly the assimilated Jews. Unlike their nationalistic
compatriots, they did not long to emigrate to the Holy Land. Of course, the
dissidents wanted to emigrate as well, however, not to Israel, but to Western
Europe or the United States. A few purebred Russians were largely convicted for
espionage (mainly persons, who tried to sell professional secrets to foreigners
at international exhibitions in Moscow or former soldiers, who attempted to
trade with military secrets) or betrayal of their homeland (who tried to escape
abroad, stayed there and returned for the “longing of birches”).
Of course, the Russian nationalists had a place among the diverse opposition movements of the Soviet Union. However, compared to other movements, they were much less likely to be repressed and relatively few of them were in political prison camps. Moreover, their activities were overshadowed by the “mainstream” opposition in the Soviet Union, the human rights protection movement (dissent). While a lot of research studies have been written about the activities of the human rights activists, only a few written works we can read about the activities of the Russian nationalists. The memories of those, who took part in these movements, have the same proportions.The following lines are an attempt to give a birds-eye overview of the opposition activities of the Russian nationalists. The article is limited in time from the late 1950s to the mid-1980s and is based on the research by the authors cited in the footnotes.
[1] Samizdat
– a form of activity used
by dissidents and national resistance movements all over the Soviet bloc, in
which individuals compiled reproduced and distributed underground publications.
Etymologically, the word samizdat derives from the words sam
(Russian: сам – self, by oneself) and izdat (Russian: издат,
an abbreviation of издательство – publishing house), and thus means
„self-published”. The techniques used to reproduce these forbidden texts
varied. Mainly the texts were made in a typewriter. Books
and other larger texts were multiplied using the photocopying method.
Kommentaare ei ole:
Postita kommentaar