Moscow and the Ukraine 1918-1953 : a study of Russian Bolshevik nationality policy

292 Pages·1956·6.699 MB·English

by  Dmytryshyn, Basil

Moscow and the Ukraine
1918-1 953
Moscow and
BASIL DMYTRYSHYN
t h e Ukraine
A STUDY OF RUSSIAN BOLSHEVIK
NATIONALITY POLICY
B O O K M A N A S S O C I A T E S
New York
Copyright, 1956, by Basil Dmytryshyn
MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
PRINTED BY RECORD PRESS, NEW YORK
Preface
The overwhelming majority of Westernem think of the Soviet
Union as one economic, political, and cultural entity. Compara-
tively few know that this "monolith" consists of sixteen union
republics, several autonomous republics, a number of autonomous
regions, and various other political units. Still fewer realize that
each of these units is inhabited by people who differ in language,
custom, tradition, history, etc. Viewed from this standpoint, the
Soviet Union represents not a monolith, but a polyglot state welded
together and maintained by force. Of the over 200,000,000 popu-
lation of the Soviet Union, the Russians comprise over half, the
Ukrainians about a fifth, and the remainder is divided among more
than a hundred other nationalities.
In this, what is doubtless one of the most variegated nationality
patchworks of the world, the Ukrainians occupy a vital place. In
addition to being the second largest ethnic group, they inhabit a
territory which, although comprising only about 2% of the entire
Soviet Union, has been of paramount importance both economi-
cally and strategically. The Ukraine's fertile soil and abundance of
natural resources (coal, iron, manganese, etc.) have played a sig-
nificant part in the industrialization of the Soviet Union, while its
geographic location has been quite instrumental in Moscow's acqui-
sition of a firmer hold on the Balkans. Furthermore, the Ukraine
has been used as a laboratory for many national, social, and eco-
nomic experiments. Aware of its strong potential role, the Ukraine
has tended to act as one of the most powerful centrifugal forces
within the Soviet Union. That role, however, has been obscured
by works which have attempted either to minimize or to exaggerate
its importance.
6 PREFACE
The object of this study, which originally was submitted as a
doctoral dissertation at the Institute of Slavic Studies, University of
California, Berkeley, is to provide a comprehensive treatment of the
Russian Bolshevik nationality policy in the Ukraine from 1918 to
the death of Stalin in March, 1953. This inquiry is based primarily
on documentary evidence-stenographic reports of Party Congresses,
Plenums of the Central Committees, resolutions, directives, govern-
ment laws and decrees, and speeches and pronouncements of re-
sponsible Party and government spokesmen. This information, in
turn, has been supplemented by semi-official publications and other
studies pertinent to the problem. To avoid hopeless entanglement
in the various versions produced by the notorious practice of "doc-
toring" evidence to fit the changing Party line, it was felt advisable
to use the wording of many documents as they were originally
reported in official newspaper and other accounts.
Though treated as one unit, this study can be said to consist
of two parts. The first, and the main part, which includes Chapters
I through VI, traces chronologically and analyzes the political side
of the Russian Bolshevik nationality policy in the Ukraine. The
second part, which includes Chapters V11 through IX, plays a sup-
porting role. Chapter V11 evaluates the role of the Ukrainian econ-
omv in the economy of the USSR, and its influence on policy
making. Chapter V111 treats the development of federal relations
between the UkSSR and the USSR as reflected in their constitu-
tions. Chapter IX traces the evolution of the national and social
of the membership of the CPU.
The author desires to acknowledge hi5 great indebtedness to
Professor Robert J. Kerner, Director of the Institute of Slavic
Studies at the University of California, Berkeley, who suggested
the subject of the study, guided its completion, and contributed
trenchant counsel and sustained encouragement.
The author wishes to express his deep appreciation to Professor
John M. Letiche, Department of Economics, Univenitv of Cali-
fornia, for his stimulating and invaluable advice on varied problems.
H e is likewise grateful to Professon Rayrnond H. Fisher, Depm-
merit of History, University of California at Los Angeles, and
PREFACE 7
Julian Towster, Department of Political Science, University of
California, Berkeley; Mr. George C. Guins, formerly of the Depart-
ment of Political Science, University of California; and Professors
Charles Jelavich and the late George V. Lantzeff, Department of
History, University of California, for the generous contributions
of their knowledge and experience. The author alone, however,
assumes full responsibility for the views expressed.
His thanks are extended to the Inter-Library Loan staff of the
University of California Library for its helpful service. He is
grateful to the staff of the Hoover War Memorial Library, Stan-
ford, California, and in particular to Mr. Witold S. Sworakowski.
He is also thankful to the Slavonic Room of the Library of Con-
gress, the Columbia University Library, and the Slavonic Room of
the New York Public Library for extending to him their excellent
research facilities.
The author is deeply indebted to his wife, whose patience, under-
standing, and devoted assistance not only made this study possible,
but also contributed to the shaping of every paragraph.
Basil Dmytryshy n
Portland State College, Oregon
Summer, 1956