Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-npj9w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T17:28:15.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Remembering and forgetting: the state policy of memorializing Stalin's repression in post-Soviet Kazakhstan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Zhanat Kundakbayeva*
Affiliation:
History, Archeology and Ethnology Department, Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
Didar Kassymova
Affiliation:
Department of International Relations, KIMEP University, Almaty, Kazakhstan
*
∗ Corresponding author. Email: janbekkun@mail.ru
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

The general perception of Western analysts and observers is that the nation-states created as a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union all treat the memory of the dark, repressive aspects of the Stalinist regime in public spaces as a symbolic element in the creation of a new post-Soviet identity [Denison, Michael. 2009. “The Art of the Impossible: Political Symbolism, and the Creation of National Identity and Collective Memory in Post-Soviet Turkmenistan.” Europe-Asia Studies 61 (7): 1167–1187]. We argue that the government of Kazakhstan employs non-nationalistic discourse in its treatment of Stalinist victims’ commemoration in a variety of forms, through the creation of modern memorial complexes at the sites of horrific Soviet activity (mass burial places, labor camps, and detention centers), purpose-built museum exhibitions, and the commemorative speeches of its president and other officials. Kazakhstan's strategy in commemorating its Soviet past is designed to highlight the inclusiveness of repression on all peoples living in its territory at that time, not just Kazakhs, thereby assisting in bringing together its multinational and multiethnic society. Thus, the official stance treats this discourse as an important symbolic source of shaping the collective memory of the nation, based on “a general civil identity without prioritizing one ethnic group over another — a national unity, founded on the recognition of a common system of values and principles for all citizens” [Shakirova, Svetlana. 2012. “Letters to Nazarbaev: Kazakhstan's Intellectuals Debate National Identity.” February 7. Accessed July 28, 2015. http://postsovietpost.stanford.edu/discussion/letters-nazarbaev-kazakhstans-intellectuals-debate-national-identity].

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Association for the Study of Nationalities