History

The Distorted Mirror

When I think about the term "distorted mirror," it often comes to mind as I read international press reports or watch foreign television, including some of our own. The portrayal of Russia as an occupier, aggressor, or enemy leaves me perplexed about what's happening in the world. I want to tell these critics that Russia deserves prayers, not condemnation. We should wish Russia well, hope for its prosperity, success, and strength. However, to truly understand this, one must study the history of the Russian people and Russia seriously—not through the lens of Solzhenitsyn and others like him. Unfortunately, there are far too many so-called historians whose main goal is to tarnish and vilify Russia and the Russian people to please Russia's true enemies. And yes, Russia does have many enemies, diverse and numerous.

Russia's Role in History

What's particularly strange is that those whom Russia has saved from complete destruction often turn out to be its fiercest adversaries. I won't delve into the depths of history to prove this point. Instead, I'll highlight some surface-level historical facts.

The peoples of Europe should be eternally grateful to Russia because it was the Russian people who bore the brunt of the brutal and relentless Mongol-Tatar invasion, absorbing their full military might. One can only imagine what would have happened to a flourishing Europe if the Russian people hadn't been able to stop them. Russia saved Europe from Napoleon's domination. What would have happened to Europe if the Russian people hadn't defeated Napoleon? And he was still relatively young—who knows what more he might have done to Europe? Russia provided military assistance to several Balkan countries in their liberation from Turkish rule. Russia pulled the peoples of Central Asia out of the medieval era and introduced them to Russian and European culture. Russia saved the peoples of the Caucasus from Turkish and Persian domination. If it weren't for Russian soldiers, they would now be northern provinces of Iran and Turkey, with no high culture in Azerbaijan, Armenia, or Georgia.

Misunderstanding Russia's Intentions

Today, when various types of Russophobes raise their voices in these so-called independent republics, they should read the history of their peoples. Without Russia and the Russian people, they would have no statehood at all. Hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers and officers died defending the peoples of the Caucasus from Persians and Turks, and their sacrifices are now unjustly forgotten. If I had the power, I would erect a monument to them in Georgievsk. Historians know why Georgievsk is significant.

The accusations that Russia is an occupier are both absurd and offensive. I'm in my nineties, having lived 69 years among Russians, and served 31 years in the Soviet, or rather, Russian army. I am a historian who graduated from a Georgian university with honors. Based on my extensive life experience with the Russian people, I can confidently say that Russians don't know how to be occupiers. It's not in their nature. I spent a year as a soldier in Tbilisi and then two years as an officer in Batumi. I've served in other Soviet republics as well. The Soviet armed forces always behaved with utmost restraint, so what occupation are we talking about?

The Reality of Soviet Georgia

I was born and raised in Georgia, a Soviet republic. I studied in a Georgian school where there was no forced Russification. We studied Georgian culture, Georgian history, and the history of the USSR, with a focus on Georgian literature. Russian language classes were just one hour, twice a week. So, despite graduating with honors, I could barely speak Russian. That was the extent of Russification in Georgia. Later, I studied part-time at Tbilisi State University, where 35 of my classmates were Georgians holding official positions. And yet, none of these officials could understand textbooks written in Russian—they always asked me to translate for them, which I did. What kind of occupation or Russification is this when the so-called occupier's language is not even known by the local officials?

Western Hypocrisy

In Georgia, all key positions—factory directors, school principals, university heads, administrative and party roles—were held by Georgians. Even the regular policemen were mostly Ossetians, while officers were exclusively Georgian. Georgian was the dominant language in all public and administrative interactions. Georgian youth studied in Russian universities as equal citizens of the Soviet Union. Georgian artists regularly performed and showcased their high-level artistry in Moscow and other Soviet republics. So what colonial policy are they talking about? These people are clearly confusing Russians with Anglo-Saxons, who, during their rule, exterminated up to 40 million indigenous people in India alone. On the American continent, they killed up to 15 million indigenous people and forced the survivors into reservations. I won't even mention what they did to African slaves, whom they treated as mere commodities. Read at least Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin.

Russophobia and Historical Revisionism

Those who now tempt us with slogans of democracy and human rights are descendants of those who mercilessly exterminated entire nations. I fully agree with the well-known historian Spitsyn E.Y., who writes about the status of peoples who became part of the Russian Empire: "In all these territories, the Russian government did not pursue a conscious policy of violent Russification. It preserved the traditional way of life, customs, and beliefs of the numerous peoples and ethnic groups" (The Russian Empire in the 19th and Early 20th Centuries, Book 2, p. 212). So, there's no need to attribute all sorts of slanders to the Russian people.

The Ukrainians have particularly distinguished themselves in spreading falsehoods, such as the term "Holodomor." This is beyond any fantasy and shows a complete misunderstanding of communist ideology. The foundation of communist ideology is internationalism, which opposes fascist nationalism. Internationalism is about friendship among peoples, not hostility. The country was building socialism, and every person was valuable. The friendship of peoples was the foundation of socialist society, not the so-called Holodomor. Yes, there was indeed a famine in the early 1930s. My mother told me that bread ration cards in Tbilisi were only canceled in 1934. The causes of the famine are many, and I don't have the space to detail them all here. But the famine was not deliberately created by the Russian people against the Ukrainian people. Many regions of Russia and Kazakhstan also suffered from famine, and blaming the Russian people for this is absolute nonsense and a malicious fabrication against them.

I had never heard of the term "Holodomor" until the relationship between Ukraine and Russia began to deteriorate. The Ukrainian elite needed a reason to justify their leaning toward the West. They needed to find a point of contention to alienate the Ukrainian people from Russia, and they found it by exploiting this tragic event in Soviet history against the Russian people. The baseness of this act is hard to describe. It is particularly shameful that the person who initiated this slander against the Russian people should have been working to strengthen relations with the great Russian nation that gave statehood to the Ukrainian people.

Concluding Thoughts on International Relations

As a military man, I am deeply dissatisfied with Russia's soft policy toward the "Former" Soviet republics. The Ukrainian president calls us aggressors from the UN podium, yet we continue to supply them with gas and even pay for their pipelines. We are accused of being aggressors and occupiers, while the Ukrainian president asks for more sanctions against Russia and weapons to kill more Russians. Weapons are not asked for to grill kebabs. Despite all this, we continue to maintain some sort of relationship with them. If I were president, I would have severed all relations and diplomatic ties with Ukraine until they issued a full apology to my country.

Yes, we would have suffered economically due to the pipeline, but I am confident that, in time, Europe would have forced Ukraine to apologize to Russia. The costs of American gas would have significantly increased the price of European goods, making them less competitive. We are also too lenient with Georgia. If they want to join NATO, let them. If we are aggressors, cut off all ties with the aggressor and see who suffers more. Unfortunately, Russophobia in Georgia has deep roots, going back almost to the time of its annexation by Russia.

The works of the prominent Georgian writer Kazbegi (Chopikashvili) are very popular in Georgia. He writes with great talent, but his works are filled with Russophobia and anti-Ossetian sentiment. As an Ossetian, I was forced to study this writer in school and even admire his work. Russia became an aggressor in the Georgian mind because it did not allow Georgian fascists to annihilate a small nation. Enlightened Europe, by supporting Georgia, considers saving peoples to be aggression.

The political situation in Europe today is somewhat reminiscent of the 1930s. Fascist ideology began to take root in a humiliated Germany, and Europe watched calmly, even encouraging Hitler's expansionist policies. The Munich Agreement was a clear example. The main goal of European countries was to direct Hitler's military power against the USSR. So, it’s not entirely accurate to say that Germany attacked us. What is happening now? There is NATO, a military-political organization created in 1949 to destroy the USSR. At that time, NATO had 14 member states. Today, NATO has about 30 states, with several more candidates, all of whom direct their policies against Russia, the successor to the USSR.

In the countries liberated by the Red Army at great cost, monuments are being taken down, and the graves of those who gave their lives to free these nations from the fascist plague are desecrated. I was 14-15 years old when newsreels showed the real scenes of how the people of the countries

liberated from fascism greeted the Red Army soldiers with widespread joy, flowers, tears of happiness, and hugs. It was impossible to watch without tears. So what happened? Where did that joy go? How did the Red Army soldier, who gave everything he had for Bulgaria, Estonia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and all those who dreamed of liberation from fascism, turn into an occupier whose defenseless grave is now insulted?

A Call to Action

I have a question for my government: Why aren’t demands made to these countries' governments to stop this attitude toward the monuments and graves of our soldiers, who were forced by our government to liberate the accomplices of fascism and whose remains are now forever abroad, where their families cannot always visit to shed tears on their graves? The problem of the resurgence of fascism in these countries should be brought up for discussion at the UN. It's time for us to demand reimbursement for the expenses the USSR incurred in liberating them from fascism. We should also demand that the former Soviet republics repay the USSR's investments in their industry, agriculture, city construction, roads, and more. I personally saw the city of Sumgait, a major industrial center near Baku. The city of Rustavi near Tbilisi is another example. Similar cities were built in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and during the Virgin Lands Campaign. The USSR did a lot for these former republics. Let them repay their debts, especially since they have declared the successor of the USSR their enemy.

How Will We Live Together?

I am a colonel, an Ossetian born in 1930. I want to address the sensible part of the Georgian people. I specifically mentioned my year of birth because during my childhood, youth, and even maturity, it never occurred to me that we, the Ossetians, were enemies of Georgia. Nor did I ever think that Georgia was an enemy of Ossetia. I am a historian. I graduated from the history faculty of Tbilisi University with honors, and in all my studies of Georgian history, I never came across any mention of Ossetians and Georgians being hostile towards each other. On the contrary, I read that Ossetians repeatedly joined forces with Georgians to defend Georgia from numerous enemies.

Shared History and Culture

The famous Georgian Queen Tamar was married to the Ossetian David Soslan, under whose rule Georgia reached the peak of its power in the Caucasus. Every summer, I would travel to my native Ossetian village in South Ossetia, which was surrounded by Georgian villages. I vividly remember how Georgian peasants would come to help us harvest grain in the mountains because it had to be done before the frost, which arrived much earlier in the mountains than in the lowlands where the Georgians lived.

I grew up on Georgian literature and culture. My first language was Georgian, and to this day, I consider it my native language. I fondly remember my Georgian teachers who not only gave me knowledge but also instilled in me high moral values. If I have any good qualities, they were instilled in me by the Georgian people, for which I am deeply grateful.

A Confusing Enmity

I cannot understand why my former classmates—Ushangi Lomidze, Otari Gotsiridze, Otari Maisuradze, and Gurami Bilanishvili—are now considered my enemies. Is it simply because they are Georgian and I am Ossetian? Does this mean that my many Georgian relatives are also my enemies because of their nationality? Something doesn't add up here. The entire history of the Georgian and Ossetian peoples proves that the enemies of Georgia were also the enemies of the Ossetians, and the friends of the Georgians were the friends of the Ossetians.

Close Ties and Interwoven Lives

There are more mixed marriages between Georgians and Ossetians than between Georgians and any other people in the Caucasus. There are more villages where Georgians and Ossetians live together than there are Georgian villages mixed with other nationalities. There is no other people with such close, familial, neighborly, and friendly relations with the Georgian people as the Ossetians. At least, this was the case until, in a time of social and political chaos, leaders driven by the ancient Roman principle of "divide and conquer" successfully implemented and continue to implement this strategy.

The Future: A Question of Coexistence

Today, history has posed a serious question to both the Georgian and Ossetian peoples: How will we live together in the future? We will have to live side by side, separated by barbed wire. I am more than certain that this barbed wire is not acceptable to either the Georgian or Ossetian peoples. I believe that thousands of Georgian refugees dream of returning to their native lands in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. I emphasize South Ossetia, not "Shida Kartli" or "Samachablo." They will return, but how? Will South Ossetia or Abkhazia willingly return to the embrace of the Georgian government? The answer, after all the bloodshed, especially after August 8, 2008, is a definite NO.

The Only Path Forward

The only option left is to recognize the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, establish good economic and cultural relations, and create a visa-free regime between our peoples. We must stop digging into who owes whom and how much, and then the idea expressed in the play at the Marjanishvili Theater, "I Will Return," might come true. The alternative is to continue looking at each other through barbed wire, feeling mutual hostility, forgetting the good and noble deeds our ancestors did for each other, and living in a constant state of danger.

A Call to the Georgian People

The choice is yours, my dear Georgians. The choice is yours because it was not Ossetia that attacked Georgia, but the rulers of Georgia who incited their people against the Ossetians. We must once and for all forget the myth that Ossetians are guests in Georgia and should return to their historical homeland in the North Caucasus. The question of where someone's historical homeland lies is a contentious one. No one can prove that the Georgians themselves did not come from somewhere else, and that their historical homeland is not somewhere in the Near East. A people who have lived on this land for several centuries, cultivating it, shedding sweat and blood on it, defending it together with the Georgians from external enemies, are no longer guests but rightful owners.

A Historical Perspective

This is an unpleasant truth for some ultra-patriots of Georgia, but it must be accepted. Otherwise, according to the "guest" theory, today’s Americans should have been expelled from America long ago. European colonization of that continent began in the 17th century, while the Ossetians have been in the South Caucasus for several centuries longer, even with the help of the Georgian king David the Builder.

I love Georgia no less than any Georgian because I grew up there, and I became a man there. In terms of culture and upbringing, I am more Georgian than Ossetian. My wife is Georgian. I love and respect my people. I sincerely want only good for both Georgia and Ossetia. The decisive word in this matter belongs to the Georgian people, not the Georgian government. Unfortunately, for the Georgian government and ultra-patriots, South Ossetia as a country or republic does not exist. For them, South Ossetia is "Samachablo," the domain of the bloodthirsty enemy of the Ossetians, Prince Machabeli, who aimed to destroy the Ossetians as a people, as an ethnic group.

A Call for Wisdom

But still, I believe in the wisdom of the Georgian people. In a Georgian folk song, there are words: "What is destroyed by enmity is restored by love." Isn't it time to restore what has been destroyed? The Georgian people themselves must solve this very difficult problem for Georgia. A great politician once said, "Better a bad peace than a good war." We simply need to foresee the future. And the question arises: How will we live? What will we leave for our descendants? Barbed wire? Guns aimed at each other? A constant threat of war? Hatred and enmity between our peoples? And all this, for the sake of satisfying political ambitions and pleasing a so-called overseas "friend"?

A Warning About Foreign Influences

In 1962-63, I had to serve in Cuba. I saw with my own eyes the results of this "friendship." God forbid anyone to have such a friend. Georgians need to think carefully. Why has America suddenly developed such a strong affection for this small people hidden in the Caucasus mountains? If they are so kind-hearted, why do they treat their own indigenous people so cruelly? Do some research into what the "democratic and humane" Americans did to the native inhabitants of that continent! Tens of millions were destroyed, and the survivors were driven into reservations. What makes Georgians so precious to America? The answer is simple: Russophobia. Once the need for Russophobia disappears, they will forget you forever. Although it seems you have already fulfilled your purpose. Think about it. Americans do not love anyone for free.

Reflecting on Georgian-Russian Relations

As for Georgia’s relations with Russia, I will not try to prove what Russia has meant for Georgia. Instead, I will refer to the testament of the king of Western Georgia, Solomon, to his son Alexander in the second half of the 18th century: "Here is my testament to you: Whatever happens, however wounded or offended you may be, do not turn away from Russia, for we have no other path. Only in unity with Russia is the salvation of our homeland, our people, and truly, the one who will lead Georgia and the Christian faith to ruin is the king who, driven by petty greed, deviates from this path."

Let me remind those Georgians who do not know the history of Georgia that such a united Georgia was created by the Russians in the 19th century. Before that, all of Georgia was fragmented into small kingdoms and principalities, whose rulers’ favorite pastime was weaving intrigues and betrayals against each other with the help of the Persian shah or the Turkish sultan, before whom they groveled like prayer rugs.

And one more thing: we must not forget that the entire southern part of Georgia, including Adjara, was returned to Georgia by Russian soldiers. Russian soldiers shielded Georgia from fascist invaders with their chests when they came close to Georgia's borders in the summer of 1942, of course, together with the sons of Georgia. History must be read carefully. Meanwhile, our beloved friend America has not shed a single drop of blood for the freedom of the Georgian people.

A Question of Identity

I would like to say a few words off-topic. As I mentioned, I am a historian. I graduated from the history faculty at Tbilisi University. While reading historical literature and documents, I never encountered any records where Georgia was called "Georgia" (as in "Georgia" in English). Everywhere I read "Sakartvelo," "Kakheti," "Kartli," "Imereti," and so on. Where

this "Georgia" came from, I do not understand. And if Georgia is now "Georgia," then what do we call individual Georgians? It seems this label was introduced to please our overseas friend.

Here, I can recall a wise Georgian proverb: "No matter how much you wash a crow, it won't become white." And another important piece of wisdom: "Don't lose the old road, or the old friend."

I am a Сomrade Сolonel, born in 1930, and I grew up in Tbilisi. I graduated from the 20th Men’s School with honors and later from Tbilisi State University in 1966 with a degree in history, earning a red diploma. I mention this not to boast but because it relates directly to the relationships between Ossetians and Georgians. It’s worth noting that I was nominated for a gold medal by Nelli Kuparadze, a wonderful person whose brother commanded the Georgian division in Batumi. The red diploma was awarded after the university rector reviewed my thesis on the relationships between Ossetia and Russia in the second half of the 18th century.

The Example of My Life

Through my life, I want to show how these almost related peoples can live together peacefully and respectfully. My first teacher, Lena Ugrekhelidze, loved me like her own child. I was christened by the Karumidze family from Khashmi. The Georgian people have done much good for the Ossetians. Despite its flaws, the Soviet government did not allow hostility between nations. I never paid attention to the fact that I was Ossetian, and all my friends in school were Georgians. Of course, not everything was perfect under Soviet rule, but it was not hostile. There was unofficial discrimination, for example, with most ordinary police officers being Ossetians while only Georgians could be officers. It was impossible to advance in your career with an Ossetian surname. Many Ossetians changed their surnames to sound more Georgian, as did Greeks, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, and others.

Observations on the Dialogue Between an Ossetian and a Georgian

On November 24, I listened to a dialogue between an Ossetian and a Georgian. I hadn’t heard such a calm, almost friendly conversation between them in a long time. I liked much of what Kuparadze and his companion said, but I disagree with some points, particularly their assessment of U.S. policy. The U.S. may not be seizing foreign lands now, but they have a history of wars in Latin America and horrific crimes in Japan. I served in Cuba in 1962-63 and saw the results of American "care" for the Cubans—poverty and humiliation. And what about Guantanamo? Isn’t it Cuban territory? Why doesn’t America return Guantanamo to Cuba? There’s no need to seize a country when you can simply buy off its loudest leaders.

The Influence of the U.S. on Georgia and Ukraine

Isn’t Georgia under U.S. influence? The U.S. armed Georgia for its war against South Ossetia, encouraging them to kill each other, offering more weapons. Isn’t Ukraine under U.S. control? Why conquer what willingly falls under their boot? Georgia has been under Western and U.S. influence for 30 years. Has the Georgian people’s quality of life improved compared to their time with Russia? I know well how life was in Soviet Georgia. Today’s modern patriots shout about 200 years of occupation, but these false patriots never experienced the occupation that Russia saved Georgia from.

Reflection on Georgia's History and Current Situation

In "occupied" Georgia, there was a highly developed industry, agriculture, healthcare, culture, and education. Compare today’s Georgia with the Soviet era. Is Russia the enemy, as the slogans of the so-called patriots claim? About a million Georgians live, work, and hold respectable positions in Russia, and no one calls them enemies. Compare this with the situation of Russians in Georgia. Before 1991, there were 460,000 Russians in Georgia; now, perhaps around 50,000 remain.

In Soviet Georgia, all leadership positions, from village council chairpersons to large enterprises, from party committee secretaries to the first secretary of the Central Committee, were held by Georgians or those with Georgian surnames. Georgians even held leadership roles in the Soviet Union. So, who occupied you? You were occupied by your own corrupt leaders who became secret millionaires.

The Challenge of Georgian-Ossetian Relations

The relationship with Ossetians is complex. I recommend starting by reading the works of historian Dr. Max (Mark) Bliyev on Georgian-Ossetian relations, including figures like Machabeli, Amilakhvari, and Nugzar Eristavi. These Georgian princes, whom Russia preserved with all their privileges, used the Russian army to conquer Ossetia, resettling part of the population from South Ossetia to other regions to make it easier to destroy those left behind. Georgian nobles like Valiko Jugeli also committed atrocities against Ossetians, including the brutal killing of pregnant women. Georgians should at least apologize to the Ossetian people for the genocide they perpetrated over the centuries.

On NATO Membership and Georgia's Future

Regarding your potential NATO membership, of course, it’s your decision to join whatever you choose. But beware of cutting off your nose to spite your face. As a military man who served 30 years in air defense forces, including three years in Georgia, I can tell you that Georgia’s missile defense system won’t protect the country from an attack. However, no attack will occur unless NATO military facilities are stationed there. And if NATO defends you and destroys Russia with nuclear weapons, what will happen to Georgia when a nuclear-devastated Russia is your neighbor? Think about this before joining any alliance.

The best solution for preserving the people is military neutrality. But ultimately, the choice is yours. I’m just expressing my opinion as someone with certain knowledge about Russia’s missile and nuclear weapons.

"How wonderful it is for those who give grand names to their trivial activities and even their petty passions, presenting them to humanity as grand feats in the name of its benefit and prosperity." — Goethe, The Sorrows of Young Werther

The Proposal for a New National Idea

WE NEED TO REVIVE THE RUSSIAN IDEA A proposal to create such an idea comes from Igor Chubais, Doctor of Philosophy, author of many scholarly and journalistic works, and initiator of the introduction of a new subject, "Russia Studies," into the Russian education system. This was reported in "World of News," pages 20-21, at the end of December. It’s undeniably a great idea. As far as I understand, this subject will cover everything about Russia: history, linguistics, landscape, geography, culture, and more. I believe introducing such a subject into the education system is a good idea. People should know the history of their country. The only question is how truthful and objective the textbooks for "Russia Studies" will be.

The Challenge of Objectivity in History

It seems to me that for the next 30-40 years, it will be impossible to create a textbook where the history of the country is presented impartially, without the influence of "Reds," "Whites," and other perspectives. For now, some historians cannot free themselves from Marxism-Leninism, while others see the Soviet period only in dark colors. I’ve heard that, at the request of Solzhenitsyn’s widow, his novel One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich was introduced into the educational system as a history textbook of our recent past. It's an interesting novel. For us Soviet people of the 1950s, it was intriguing because many of us didn't know what was happening in the camps and prisons of the country. I read it in 1964, and it certainly made an impression on us. During those years, many stories and novellas on this topic appeared. Personally, I was more struck by a novella—I can't remember which magazine—called The Bas-Relief on the Cliff. In Siberia, on a huge cliff near Baikal, a bas-relief of Stalin had to be carved so that passengers on passing trains could see the "father of the people" from the train windows. A sculptor, who was a prisoner, did this work and froze to death on that cliff while carving the bas-relief. After reading that story, I couldn’t shake it for a long time. Khrushchev proposed that One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich should be nominated for the Lenin Prize, but public opposition was strong, and Khrushchev's proposal failed.

Balancing the Narrative of Soviet History

Of course, all this happened, and the next generation needs to know the dark sides of our life. I grew up in that era and know all the "delights" of the "dictatorship of the proletariat" period firsthand. But who said the country's past should only be shown in a negative light? Was there nothing bright? Yes, there was Ivan Denisovich, but there was also engineer Krivonosov, the girl from Uzbekistan, Mamlatkat, who set a record for picking cotton. There was Chkalov, Stakhanov, the Papanin expedition, and heroic polar aviators. The Soviet people, in unbelievably difficult social and living conditions, in the hungry years of the first five-year plans, built the industrial base of our state, which enabled the country to produce enough weapons for the front during the tough years of the Great Patriotic War. In the end, there was also the mass heroism of Soviet people on the battlefield, without which victory would have been impossible.

Critique of Igor Chubais’ Proposal

However, Mr. Chubais suggests removing the Soviet years from Russia's history. An interesting idea, but first of all, you cannot erase anything from history because it's simply impossible. There was such an attempt in Egyptian history, but it was unsuccessful. It's also a bit strange to hear such proposals from a 15-year veteran of the Communist Party. After all, he graduated from a Soviet educational institution with a degree in philosophy, a component of Marxism-Leninism theory. And he received his academic degrees in this field. So by rejecting Soviet power, he would have to renounce his higher education and degrees! Yet he claims to be a Doctor of Philosophy. There seems to be a contradiction. He even received a scholarship from the Soviet government he now despises. As a historian, I sometimes don’t understand why some scholars believe Tsarist Russia was a paradise for our people. I won't argue whether that was entirely true, but I would advise these ultra-patriots to read the classic literature of the 19th century more carefully. Everything they wrote was about real life. None of them were communists like Chubais. By reading Gogol, Chekhov, Kuprin, and Leskov, among others, one can see that life wasn't that sweet for many, especially for serfs who were freed without land and fell into bondage again. By the way, lieutenant or cornet Obolensky was not a serf; such titles were not given to serfs in blessed Tsarist Russia.

Historical Context and Lessons

I would remind these defenders of the Tsarist regime of Lermontov's words: "Farewell, unwashed Russia, the land of lords, the land of slaves. And you, blue uniforms, and you, obedient people." I believe no further comment is needed. The simplest truth is this: a well-fed, clothed, and satisfied people will not revolt. This is a fact. In 1991, Soviet power collapsed because it couldn’t provide food, clothes, shoes, and appliances to the people. Everything boils down to one question: how am I living? If I live well, I love the government; if I live poorly, I hate it. Therefore, instead of erasing the Soviet period from history, we should study it thoroughly. During those times, we lived, worked, defended our homeland, and made breakthroughs in space, and our country was not considered a third-world country like it is now. Therefore, we should not just present Ivan Denisovich to our children but also the positive, patriotic, and progressive achievements of the Soviet years, so the next generation can be proud of their people's past. They should be proud of their fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers and not call them "sovoks" (a derogatory term for Soviet people). This is the basis of patriotic education. We should speak of them in such a way that descendants can be proud of their forebears who built an industrial nation. Ivan Denisovich’s story should not overshadow the heroic labor of our ancestors. As for Ivan Denisovich, if Mr. Solzhenitsyn were serving his sentence today in our detention centers and colonies, the conditions Ivan Denisovich faced would seem like a holiday home.

On Patriotism and National Identity

Mr. Chubais asserts that you cannot be a patriot of both North and South Korea, even though as a people, they are united. Using this logic, he concludes that you cannot be a patriot of both Russia and the USSR. Perhaps Mr. Chubais doesn't understand that one cannot be born and raised in both North and South Korea simultaneously. This is a common tactic of those skilled in sophistry. I can say that I have loved my homeland since childhood and still love it today. I love my homeland, not the political system. And if needed, I am ready to serve my homeland just as faithfully as I did during the Soviet era. I repeat, especially for those who don’t quite get it: I serve my homeland, not the political system. Love for one’s people and country should be the guiding principle of all our actions and our national idea.

Just watched this and thought it was dope. I especially liked the Roman buffets and Foreman grills.

Reflections on Culture and National Identity

Recently, I happened to hear a respected lady, a State Duma deputy from the Communist Party (KPRF), who seems to be an actress, discussing the topic of culture on TV. She claimed that nowadays, there is culture for the rich and culture for the poor. I believe that when we discuss cultural issues, we need to be more attentive.

The Soviet Approach to National Identity and Culture

In Soviet times, we agreed that nationality did not matter in the Soviet Union; we were all Soviet. Our culture was socialist in content. The moral, ethical norms, language, religion, and spiritual world that each nation had developed over centuries were considered irrelevant to the Soviet system. This disregard for national cultures brought about severe consequences after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I was born and grew up under Soviet rule, and it really seemed to us that nationality, customs, and traditions were relics of the past. We were all one Soviet people. The Communist Party, at its 22nd Congress, set the task of educating a new generation of people who would live in communism, free from national traits, culture, and traditions, with a communist culture and Marxist-Leninist ideology.

Lessons from the 1990s

The 1990s opened my eyes to many things. Our dismissive attitude towards the national cultures of the Soviet Union’s peoples, our lack of understanding of the spiritual world of Uzbeks, Kyrgyz, Balts, Caucasians, and others, resulted in significant strife and animosity among the nations. The turmoil of the 1990s saw many Russians in the Soviet republics and even autonomous regions of the RSFSR forced to leave Russia. This was due to the fact that many Russians, having lived in these republics for decades, did not know the local languages. Soviet rule did not emphasize learning local languages or cultures, as Russian was the state language across all republics.

Consider Soviet history textbooks. They are called "History of the USSR," yet they barely cover the history of the union republics, sometimes only a few lines in small print. We lived together, fought together in WWII, and built grand communist projects, yet we knew little about each other. Central television and radio broadcasts rarely featured content about the national cultures of the Soviet republics. Only during cultural weeks dedicated to these republics did such content appear, and in the later years, even that practice ceased.

The Current Media Landscape

Today, television is dominated by figures like Pugacheva and her family, and a few others who claim to be stars, though their light is rather dim. If only Yeltsin had studied the history and culture of the Chechens before making his disastrous decision to send tanks to Grozny, he might not have taken such a reckless step that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands and severe hardship for millions. I recommend that those dealing with the North Caucasus study the works of the Russian military historian Potto V.A., as they offer many answers to today’s questions.

The current terrorist attacks in our metro are a continuation of the same war that began in 1994. The responsibility for these inhumane attacks lies with those buried with great honors in Novodevichy Cemetery. I understand the anxiety of Moscow residents and others about what the future holds. Can one safely take the metro to work or school tomorrow? The way out is to respect other people's cultures. Instead of always showcasing celebrities like Galikin, central television could feature the lives and cultures of people from the Caucasus. We should highlight their culture, including their writers, musicians, and artists, and present their way of life and ethnography. The Caucasians have made many positive contributions to Russia, yet we hear only negativity.

Bridging Cultural Gaps

We should show performances from dancers in Chechnya, Kabardino-Balkaria, Dagestan, and Ossetia on central television. By showcasing their culture to all of Russia, perhaps even those who resort to extremism might reconsider their actions. While it is true that Caucasians sometimes act inappropriately, this often stems from a defensive reaction due to feeling unappreciated and disrespected. They should also learn the language and culture of the people they live among. Mass media plays a significant role here. Xenophobia leads to bloodshed and destruction; it is an axiom.

Personal Reflection

I am also a Highlander, an Ossetian. I have lived among Russians for over 60 years and have never felt that I was treated unfairly. I converse with Russians as equals because I know Russian culture as well as any Russian. Russian writers have greatly expanded my worldview and improved my understanding of the environment. I have always admired Russian classical and folk music, and nothing compares to Russian painting. But what is most important is that the Russian people, by protecting my people, saved them from complete annihilation. To understand how deeply connected we are, one must know the history of Russia and their own people. The best way to get to know each other is through increased cultural exchange. This is the key to overcoming hostile relations.

Yes, I am a veteran of the Soviet Army. I'm in my ninety-fourth year, a retired colonel. In 1966, I graduated with a red diploma in history from Tbilisi University by correspondence. I mention this not to boast, but so that those reading my work know who is writing. Having lived through the Great Patriotic War as a child and teenager, and having served throughout the Cold War in uniform, I believe I have the right to assess the current political situation of the country I defended—not from an office, but on the front lines. I was an air defense officer and a participant in the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962-63. Readers of my work can likely imagine the moral, political, ethical, psychological, and economic challenges I've faced over my long life.

Reflections on Leadership and Democracy

I have outlived all the leaders of the Soviet Union and Russia except for Lenin and the current leader of Russia, who clings to power like a tick and refuses to give it up. I probably won't outlive him. He is an interesting personality, born in 1952, and grew up during the flourishing of Khrushchev's era. I remember this period well—a decade when the country was led by an utterly illiterate and uncultured person, who was later replaced by a land surveyor by profession. And then, who hasn't led the Soviet Union and Russia? Even a person heavily afflicted by alcoholism was elected by Russians—quite democratically!

I envy Americans when I watch their elections unfold, a real contest among candidates for the presidency. They try to speak in every state, persuading voters that their program is better than their competitor's. As for this one, I never once heard his campaign speeches. He's elected by decree from above. The State Duma is a puppet organization for him. The presidential term was extended to six years, and the constitution was changed so he could remain president for life. This begs the question: Is it a coincidence that such an element became the head of the state? Would someone else be better? No! It could have been even worse. And it's not just about him personally.

Education and Upbringing in the Soviet Era

In the Soviet Union, people's upbringing was conducted within the framework of Marxist-Leninist theory. I'm not saying whether this theory was good or bad—any theory has its flaws. But there was some foundation for an educational theory. The Great Patriotic War proved the effectiveness of such upbringing. It's no coincidence they said that our tenth graders won the war. I remember well the love for the Motherland among Soviet people. I myself wanted to go to the front. I was 11 years old when the war began.

However, from the late fifties, this once powerful educational tool began to fade. Attempts to introduce something fresh, new, and wise from the world's great minds were suppressed as anti-Soviet and bourgeois. This work doesn't allow for a detailed exposition of all that negatively impacted the upbringing of the youth. I can only say that, overall, the upbringing of youth from the fifties onwards got worse and worse, as we clearly saw from the late eighties. This is clear evidence of how our youth were raised in the latter half of the twentieth century.

Reflections on the Past

We all went through the tumultuous nineties—youth nurtured since the fifties. When the CPSU at congresses solemnly declared the complete victory of socialism, Khrushchev was already starting to build communism in our country. Meanwhile, people asked, "Why do we, the victors over fascism, live worse than the former fascists?" There was no answer. This led to the tragic collapse of such a vast state, in which our Soviet youth, born in the latter half of the past century, played a decisive role. I remember the second half of the last century well, having served in the Soviet army from 1950 to 1981.

In this candid narrative, the author shares personal memories of life in the Soviet Union, starting from a poor childhood in the 1930s and reflecting on the country's dissolution in 1991. He recounts how his worldview was shaped by Soviet ideology, the heroes of that era, and the events of the Great Patriotic War. Reflecting on the hardships and joys, the author considers the role of the Communist Party and leaders like Stalin, and their impact on the lives of ordinary people. This text provides an invaluable insider’s perspective on an era that left an indelible mark on history and the lives of millions.

Having lived many years in this world, I can't help but compare different periods of my life. My generation has witnessed many turbulent political and economic events. Each era provided its own spiritual nourishment and shaped our worldview. I believe that a person's worldview is mainly formed by the prevailing ideology in society during their most active years of learning about the world. From personal experience, I think that a person's views on life, their relationships with the world, and their key character traits are formed by the age of twenty. Of course, changes in views can happen later, but only under significant pressure from circumstances. My reflections here are based on personal experience, so they are not absolute truths.

I was born into a very poor family. My mother was a maid in a wealthy household, and my father was a chimney sweep. When I was born, my father was sent into exile for seven years, so I first saw him at the age of seven. Unfortunately, he made my childhood the hardest period of my life, which also influenced my character development. I remember my childhood from the age of four. We lived in a semi-basement room: my mother, my brother, who was two years older than me, and I. The two-story house stood isolated from other houses. The only neighbor was a small house nearby, where a caretaker, Uncle Viktor, lived with his daughter, who was my age and my playmate.

Uncle Viktor taught me to read early on, and by the age of four, I could read, forming some kind of worldview. I would go upstairs, see empty rooms, and scattered pages of books on the floor. I remember a hardcover book with torn pages and a very small font, or perhaps it was in Russian, which I couldn't read, but the portraits were smeared with ink. I was puzzled by why the ink was spilled in the book. I read a book in a soft cover with large print called "How Our Grandfathers Lived and Fought." This memory also stuck with me and possibly began shaping my pro-Soviet worldview.

In the 1930s, families like ours didn't subscribe to any periodicals, and not every place had a radio, but we still knew what was happening in the country. We knew about polar explorers, pilots, the border guard Karatsupa and his dog, and more. We were proud of them. There was no mention of the repressions, but there was great love for Stalin, Beria, Voroshilov, and others. In my imagination, Stalin was an old and very kind grandfather, while Voroshilov was a strong, athletic young man, the best marksman. Our country was the best in the world, with no "Mr. Twisters." We loved black people, while others did not. We protected the children of Spain while others killed them. We had the strongest army, with the kindest and bravest soldiers. We also had the kindest man in the world, Grandpa Lenin. Our country was the largest and most beautiful. We all adored Chapaev, always hoping he'd make it to the shore in the movies. The villains who didn't love us or our country had to be defeated. This was the spiritual nourishment that shaped our worldview.

Naturally, we loved the Soviet government and homeland, which led to the heroic deeds of Soviet people during the Great Patriotic War. This kind of spiritual nourishment didn't affect everyone equally, but tens of millions experienced the reality of building socialism based on internal resources, mainly at the expense of agriculture. The war clearly showed this too.

As for me, I belonged to the majority who believed in what was written in the press and said on the radio. We lived very poorly, but we were promised a bright future, and we believed in it. I believed in Stalin, who was, for me, the wisest and kindest person. I had doubts about his military genius only when the Germans reached Stalingrad. Until then, I justified our retreat as a strategy to lure the Germans in. But Stalingrad was something different. The victory there erased all my doubts, and Stalin was once again my genius leader.

I celebrated Victory Day in the center of Tbilisi, walking along Rustaveli Avenue with a classmate, discussing the future. At almost 15 years old, I was optimistic about a freer and happier life post-war. This discussion later made me wonder why I emphasized future freedom so much, perhaps sensing that our life wasn't truly free.

In the summer of 1945, we were asked to leave the school where we had lived for about two years and moved to Vladikavkaz for better living conditions. It wasn't easy, and Stalin's praise was widespread, especially in Georgia. When the Germans approached the Caucasus Mountains, Georgians called Stalin a "bastard Ossetian," but after the victory, he became the great son of Georgia again. Films were released, portraying Stalin as the mastermind behind the October Revolution, with Lenin merely present. Victories in the Civil War and against foreign interventionists were attributed to Stalin's leadership.

In the late 1940s, the fight against cosmopolitanism began. It was forbidden to mention foreign pioneers in physics or chemistry lessons without first acknowledging our scientists. People began doubting socialism after seeing how others lived under "decaying" capitalism. This restrictive atmosphere stifled free thought. Although I remained a Leninist and Stalinist, doubt started creeping in. The film "The Fall of Berlin," which deified Stalin, particularly disturbed me. The final scenes showed the country venerating Stalin to an extreme level. This made me realize the extent of sycophancy, which later generations criticized.

Despite everything, I maintained my belief that the Soviet government was the best in the world and respected the Communist Party. I thought individuals could make mistakes, but the party never did. All our achievements were credited to the party. When I joined the army, I applied to join the party. Although initially unsuccessful, I later became a candidate member in 1956 and a full member in 1957. My faith in the party persisted for a long time, but from the late 1970s, I started having significant doubts.

By the 1950s, my admiration for Stalin had faded. Reading his works on linguistics and economics didn't impress me, even though we were made to admire and summarize them. I couldn't see the genius in them, unlike others. In Marxism-Leninism classes, we had to praise his works, but I felt that long-serving leaders became a hindrance to the country's progress. This view was repeatedly confirmed in practice.

For instance, Putin, with all his experience, has become an obstacle to further development. Wise people set term limits for leadership to prevent dictatorial tendencies. Since 1996, there haven't been genuine elections in our country. I envy how "decaying" America conducts elections, whereas we have candidates like Sobchak from a reality show, which is embarrassing.

Eventually, everyone dies, including Stalin. With no suitable successor, power struggles ensued, often won by the most cunning and unscrupulous individuals. This happened in our country, leading to a leader with minimal education ruling a nuclear-powered nation.

The 1950s marked the beginning of the Soviet Union's decline, though the signs were not yet visible. Fear, a powerful tool for the country's construction, began to fade. The 20th Party Congress shook the foundations of Marxism-Leninism. Before the Congress, Stalin was seen as the sole correct interpreter of Marxism-Leninism, but he was revealed to be a criminal. This caused a serious split in the understanding of socialism.

This ideological shift also affected me. Although I remained loyal to the party and socialism, the criticism of Stalin felt personal, as he was my fellow countryman. Even now, I find it unpleasant to hear criticisms of Stalin, despite their validity. The power struggles of the late 1950s showed me that the top leaders were ordinary people, not semi-gods.

As a political worker, I read a lot of party literature, repeatedly going through Lenin's works. I admired Lenin's logical reasoning but noticed he could logically refute his own arguments in different writings. I remained a Marxist because, as a political worker in the Soviet Army, it was my duty to uphold socialism.

However, discrepancies between our teachings and reality became evident. Literature criticizing Stalinism often veiled anti-Soviet ideology, which I had to analyze. After the 20th Congress, my firm belief in Marxist-Leninist theory wavered. Later, I concluded that the 20th Congress initiated the collapse of the Soviet Union. Living under socialism for 61 years, I don't believe it was entirely a bad system. At least, it didn't allow for the blatant exploitation seen today.

Our leadership lacked economic knowledge and international trade expertise. We isolated ourselves ideologically and didn't learn from capitalists. Khrushchev's ambitious goals to surpass America by 1970 were unrealistic. By 1970, we hadn't achieved much, and Brezhnev's leadership further disillusioned me with its stagnation and corruption.

The worsening economic situation, empty stores, and unfulfilled promises made it hard to believe in building communism. After retiring from the army, I saw the gap between our ideology and practical life, leading to the events of 1991.

This article delves into the complex historical and contemporary relationships between Russia and the former Soviet republics. It reflects on the impact of the Soviet Union's collapse, the rise of nationalism, and the resulting tensions and conflicts. The author, a retired colonel, emphasizes the importance of understanding historical ties, addressing national issues with respect, and fostering diplomatic efforts to rebuild and strengthen friendships.

The end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century were filled with events that could have severe consequences for the peoples of the former Soviet Union. Undoubtedly, the collapse of the Soviet Union was a tragedy for tens of millions of people who had to drastically change their way of life, becoming refugees, victims of national conflicts, and losing loved ones.

The Collapse of the Soviet Union

I will not discuss whether the collapse of such a vast and powerful country was objectively justified. Perhaps the union republics needed to become independent. After all, they had the right to do so. But why couldn't this be done in a civilized, respectful manner, honoring the dignity of all peoples involved? We built this country together with great effort. We shed blood together defending the country and liberating the peoples of Eastern Europe from fascism. No nationality or people living in the former Soviet Union has sons who did not lie on the battlefield, defending the honor and dignity of our Motherland.

The Lost Friendship

Respecting the blood shed together by the older generation of our peoples, we should have maintained friendship and mutual respect among the citizens of the former great country. But where has the friendship of the peoples of the USSR gone, the source of our victories and might? Why is there now national discord, enmity, hatred, and bloody conflicts instead of friendship? A normal Soviet person could never have imagined that a time would come when a Georgian would shoot at a Russian, and vice versa! That Ukrainian Slavs would shoot down Russian planes over the Caucasus with missiles. I am not even talking about the Georgian-Ossetian conflict.

A Historian's Perspective

Where did all this come from? How did we come to a point where a museum of Russian occupation was created in Tbilisi, Georgia? It is said that Russia occupied Georgia for 200 years. I cannot comprehend this. I am an Ossetian who grew up in Tbilisi. I graduated from a Georgian school and then from the history department at Tbilisi University. As a historian, I have read and know under what circumstances Georgia joined Russia and who initiated this act. I would recommend that those who organized this so-called museum reread the history of Georgia, especially the conditions of the second half of the 18th century. It would not hurt these "patriots" to remember what happened in Tbilisi in 1795 and what Aga Mohammad Khan did, and what condition all of Eastern Georgia was in. Tbilisi was burned and destroyed, and the same fate befell all of Eastern Georgia. King Erekle II hid in the mountains. It would not hurt these gentlemen to remember who saved Georgia from complete destruction by the wild horde of Omar Khan in 1800. A small Russian force under the command of General Lazarev defeated the 20,000-strong detachment of Omar Khan, which was on its way to destroy Tbilisi. In 1803, the Queen of Georgia killed General Lazarev, the savior of Georgia, with a dagger. Perhaps these "patriots" should remember who shed blood to return the beautiful region of Adjara to Georgia. Was it the Americans, whom the Georgian elite now so love? No, it was the Russian soldier who returned Adjara to Georgia. I had the opportunity to serve in Adjara. An interesting fact is that the Adjarians have Georgian surnames but Muslim names. The population is half Christian and half Muslim. If Russia had not taken Georgia under its protectorate, Georgia would likely not have remained Georgia. Those who run the country should at least know the history of this country and draw the right conclusions from it.

Misunderstanding Occupation

Of course, it cannot be said that everything went smoothly and without any excesses. There were those who were dissatisfied with being subordinated to Tsarist Russia. Such a complex process could not have passed without pain. But the main thing was done: the people, who have a rich culture and have given the world Shota Rustaveli, Yakob Tsurtaveli, Sulkhan-Saba Orbeliani, Akaki Tsereteli, and Vakhtang Chabukiani, among others, preserved their dignity and made a worthy contribution to world culture.

As for the "occupation" of Georgia by Russia, our country, unfortunately, knows all too well what occupation is. Therefore, to use such terms towards Russia is both offensive to Russia and shows that the person using such a term has never experienced real occupation. Moreover, it indicates a complete lack of knowledge of Russian history. Throughout its existence, Russia has never occupied any country. However, Russia has had to liberate other countries from foreign occupation multiple times.

Personal Experiences

As an officer in the Soviet Army, I have been to different corners of our vast country and seen firsthand how our Soviet people lived. I served in Tiksi, Krasnoyarsk, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and so on. I remember very well that in Krasnoyarsk and Novosibirsk, by the late 1960s, there were difficulties with meat products. From 1970, I served in the Moscow region and saw how all of central Russia traveled to Moscow for meat products. Once, on a business trip to Borovsk, Kaluga Oblast, I entered a store and saw only sprats in tomato sauce. That was all the food available. At that time, I regularly went on leave to my relatives in Tbilisi every year. The situation was entirely different there, with plenty of meat products. In Tbilisi, for a Georgian to buy frozen meat was considered bad form. Meat had to be fresh and from Russia. After all, Georgia never provided for itself with food products. Meat, dairy products, cereals—all came from Russia. Remarkable! What kind of "occupiers" are these who take from their own people and send to the "occupied"? It would be good to have more such "occupiers." Now, there are no "occupiers" there. Instead, "kind uncles," the Americans, have arrived. What do we see? My relatives, pensioners, receive a pension of 75-80 lari, which is about 35-40 dollars. A kilogram of meat costs 13-14 lari. Undoubtedly, during Soviet times, Georgians, especially Georgian peasants, lived ten times better and wealthier than a peasant in the Tambov region. In 1989, I attended a wedding in a Georgian peasant family. It is unlikely that any Russian peasant could set such a table.

National Questions Ignored

And yet, where does such malice and enmity towards everything Russian in Georgia come from? Unfortunately, practice shows that this is not only the case in Georgia. One of the main reasons for such a state of affairs, in my opinion, is that during Soviet times, not enough attention was paid to national issues. We convinced ourselves too strongly that we had unbreakable friendship among nations. We stopped thinking about the fact that each people has some unique qualities inherent only to them, developed by their history. We began to say that in the era of "developed socialism," the national question lost its relevance altogether. We were all Soviet people, and our nationality was Soviet. We reached such absurdity in our patriotic slogans and political speeches. In reality, this political blindness regarding national issues had severe consequences. I will give an example from Georgia. In February 1956, the famous 20th Congress of the CPSU took place, where Khrushchev exposed the cult of Stalin's personality. On March 5, almost immediately after the congress, on the day of Stalin's death, the Central Committee of the CPSU sent instructions to all republics, prohibiting the population from visiting Stalin's monuments and laying flowers on the day of his death. Such instructions were sent to all educational institutions, enterprises, and organizations in Georgia. A more foolish and provocative instruction for Georgia was hard to imagine. Maybe in the Vologda region, such a document could have been perceived more or less neutrally, but sending it to Georgia was akin to detonating an atomic bomb. Perhaps no one planned to visit Stalin's monument on his death anniversary, but this document caused a storm of indignation in Georgia, especially in Tbilisi. On March 5, the entire population of Tbilisi, from young to old, with flowers and wreaths, went to Stalin's monument on the embankment of the Kura River. A spontaneous rally emerged. Anti-Russian and anti-Soviet banners appeared. The crowd surged to Rustaveli Avenue to seize the central telegraph and radio stations. The "Action Committee" was formed from the rally's activists. The "Action Committee" declared the main demands to the Soviet Government at the rally:

• Abolish the Communist Party of Georgia
• Georgia withdraws from the Soviet Union
• Remove Soviet Armed Forces from Georgia
• Georgia becomes an allied state with Turkey
• Georgia joins NATO They say the Kura River turned red from these demands. All of this was told to me by my Georgian friends when I visited them on leave in 1956, and they advised me not to walk around in military uniform. One of the active members of this "Action Committee" was the 17-year-old son of the famous Georgian writer Konstantine Gamsakhurdia, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, who had a pathological hatred for everything Soviet, Russian, and Ossetian.

Rise of Nationalism

In the 1960s, he became a human rights activist, which in those years was synonymous with anti-Sovietism. In the 1970s, he was imprisoned for his active anti-Soviet activities but was released early under the pressure of the Georgian artistic community. I watched his speech on central television, where he acknowledged his political errors and promised not to engage in anti-Soviet activities anymore. However, the wolf swore off sheep-stealing. In April 1989, he organized an anti-Soviet rally in Tbilisi, during which 18 women were trampled to death. Later, a commission led by the "democrat" Sobchak blamed our soldiers for this tragedy. I served in our army for 31 years and I know our soldiers well. I will never believe that our soldier could beat a woman with a shovel. If they were to beat someone, they would target those who attacked and mocked them. But the soldiers did not respond to the provocative actions of the Georgians.

Georgia in the Hands of Nationalists

In August 1989, I visited my relatives in Tbilisi. Having some free time, I decided to take a walk around Tbilisi. Near Rustaveli Avenue, there is a small park. The entire park was plastered with "dazibao" (big-character posters) in Georgian. When I started reading these proclamations, my hair stood on end. As a political worker by profession, the goals and tasks of those who composed and posted these papers were clear to me. But I was surprised that these anti-Soviet, anti-Russian posters were freely displayed all over Tbilisi, and no one was removing them. And what about the posters? I read the Georgian press. The entire press, both official and yellow, was thoroughly imbued with anti-Soviet and anti-Russian sentiment. And this was still during Soviet power and the existence of the Soviet Union! By 1989, all actual power in Georgia was in the hands of Zviad Gamsakhurdia. Officially, he held no state position, but all government bodies followed his orders. His main task, as we saw in 1956, was to separate Georgia from Russia, to withdraw from the Soviet Union. All anti-Soviet and anti-Russian propaganda in the press was based on a distorted and false presentation of the events of April 9, which he himself had organized. Using the fact of the death of 18 women during the dispersal of the rally on April 9, Gamsakhurdia organized an election campaign and in 1990 became the first president of much-suffering Georgia. He became president, but besides criticizing everything Soviet, he knew nothing else. It so happened that in 1990 and 1991, my wife and I went to Tsqaltubo for the waters, and I had the opportunity to observe political events in Georgia.

Leadership Challenges

Who was Gamsakhurdia? A philologist. Did he know anything about how to govern a state, especially in such a difficult period? Of course not. Did he have a well-founded economic program for further developing Georgia? No. He replaced his incompetence in state governance with "patriotic" slogans. Someone said that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. This was precisely the case. When Hitler came to power, within two years he declared Jews a second-class people. Gamsakhurdia didn't wait that long. He immediately divided the population of Georgia into those deprived of all civil and political rights. The category of "non-Georgians" first included Russians and Ossetians. Ascending the throne, Gamsakhurdia first abolished the South Ossetian Autonomous Region by his decree in 1990, even before the collapse of the Soviet Union. In November 1989, Gamsakhurdia organized a march of Georgian nationalists to Tskhinvali with a 50,000-strong contingent. Soviet Armed Forces and Ossetian militias blocked their way before they reached the city. They were not allowed to pass. It is frightening to imagine what would have happened in Tskhinvali if the 50,000-strong frenzied crowd of fanatics had entered the city, whose population barely reached 40,000 at the time.

Georgian-Ossetian Conflict

I have a document. This document was created when the Georgian fanatics' crowd couldn't break into Tskhinvali. It is called "The Appeal of the Headquarters of National Security of Georgia to the Ossetians Living in Tskhinvali," signed, of course, by Gamsakhurdia. A more disgusting and insulting document for the Ossetian people is hard to imagine. The problem is that this ideology of Georgian fascism, expressed in this appeal, finds quite broad support among the ruling elite of Georgia and gradually penetrates all layers of Georgian society. I will allow myself to quote an excerpt from this "appeal" to the Ossetians living in Tskhinvali: "You must appreciate the kindness of the Georgians. You do not live in Ossetia, but in Shida Kartli. There is only one Ossetia in the world, and it is beyond the Caucasus ridge. Do not believe the illusions created by the Bolsheviks that there is a so-called South Ossetian Autonomous Region. Look ahead, evaluate your future. Live today so that you have the right to live in Shida Kartli tomorrow. You must condemn and expel the Ossetian separatists from Georgia, abolish 'Adamont Nykhas'. Why do you need this organization that supposedly protects you from Georgians? Have Georgians ever offended you? On the contrary, you have repeatedly had the audacity to try and offend the Georgians, but in the end, you were punished and quite rightly so. Remember history and be convinced that Ossetian arrogance in Georgia always ended badly for the Ossetians. And now it will be the same because we Georgians have always been right before you, and now we are right, and therefore God is with us."

The Threat of Nationalism

What can one say about this? It's the conversation of a master with a serf: "If you don't behave as I want, I'll whip you, I'll expel you." This happened when there was still Soviet power and Georgia was part of the Soviet Union. What happened to Ossetia after the collapse of the Soviet Union and what is happening now we have seen and continue to see. If not for Great Russia, there would simply be no South Ossetia. Remember August 2008, and everything will be clear.

Perhaps I have delved too deeply into the events in Georgia and South Ossetia. I wanted to show what happens to peoples when the state does not develop a correct national policy. Why did some former Soviet republics become so unfriendly towards Russia? In my opinion, it is primarily because they equate Soviet power with Russia and attribute all the sins of the Soviet government to Russia. But no one bothers to say that this is completely untrue. Has anyone analyzed the harm the Soviet government inflicted specifically on Russia? No. Has anyone considered how hard it was to feed a number of republics almost for free? Certainly not. How much effort did Russia put into the economic, industrial, and cultural development of the union republics? There is no answer. But our scholars, historians, economists, and political scientists should analyze the enormous contribution Russia made to the development and preservation of the peoples living in the former Russian Empire. Maybe then, in these republics, there would be no museums of Russian occupation, but museums of how Russia helped them live and develop. By the way, isn't it time to create museums in Russian cities to show how Russia helped the peoples of the Soviet Union? Perhaps we should introduce special programs on central television channels that objectively cover the history of the peoples of the former USSR and their relations with Russia.

Today's Challenges

We are indeed at a dangerous borderline. Efforts by short-sighted politicians, or rather those hostile to Russia, are destroying historical ties between Russia and the peoples for whom Russia was a friendly and brotherly country.

To be fair, it must be said that sometimes the leaders of our country also behave, to put it mildly, not very wisely and not very respectfully towards the leaders of other nations, and we get the corresponding results. I remember very well how many times Dzhokhar Dudayev asked Yeltsin to invite him for negotiations. The Chechen people were not in favor of leaving the Russian Federation. If there had been respectful relations towards the leadership of Chechnya and the Chechen people, there would not have been this bloody war, hundreds of thousands of victims, and terrible destruction. Yet we re-elected Yeltsin as president. In his first presidential term, he drank and squandered the country, and in the second term, he was treated for his alcoholism while the country was left to its own devices.

We are still conducting incorrect policies with our neighbors. Fine, we have cut off all ties with Georgia! To whom have we handed Georgia? America? Western Europe? This is exactly what they wanted. We should give every opportunity for the Georgian peasant to sell his goods in our market. We should create as many joint ventures as possible. Let the diplomats wage their war, but the people should communicate with each other. Then our influence will increase. The task of diplomacy is to turn enemies into friends, but we are doing the opposite. The danger is that the young generation of our neighbors is being brought up in a spirit of hostility and hatred towards us, towards Russia. What kind of fruits this upbringing will bear in 50 or 100 years can only be guessed. This is something today's leaders of the former Soviet Union countries need to think about. Yes, we are now experiencing a very critical and dangerous historical juncture. While those who worked hard to create a great and mighty country are still alive, while those who defended our great Motherland in a bloody battle with fascism are still alive, while the memory of those who defended the freedom and independence of the great country at the cost of their lives is still alive, there remains an opportunity to revive and strengthen the friendship between the republics of the former Soviet Union. If we let this opportunity slip away now, I fear that Russia will find itself surrounded not just by unfriendly countries but by outright hostile ones. The signs are already there: the Baltic states, Moldova, Georgia, some Central Asian republics, and even our allied Belarus are not entirely satisfied with us. Unfortunately, we do not pay enough attention to the fact that in some former union republics, young people are being raised in a spirit of fascism and chauvinism. These young people will eventually come to power in their countries. They will be the future ministers of defense in their republics, and where they will direct the barrels of their guns with such upbringing is a big question. All of this personally causes me great concern. I may not live to see such a situation, but I have grandchildren and great-grandchildren, and the kind of neighbors they will have to live with worries me.

The Role of Diplomacy

Diplomacy should aim to turn enemies into friends, but our current approach seems to be doing the opposite. We must change our policies and work towards rebuilding the bonds that once held the peoples of the Soviet Union together. By focusing on mutual respect, economic cooperation, and cultural exchange, we can hope to mend the fractured relationships and prevent the spread of hostility.

A Call for Unity

In conclusion, it is crucial for the current and future leaders of Russia and the former Soviet republics to recognize the importance of unity and cooperation. We need to learn from our history and avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. Only by working together can we ensure a peaceful and prosperous future for all our peoples.

As the year 2010 quietly slips away, leaving behind its echoes and memories, we find ourselves in a moment of reflection. Journalists and reporters have painted a vivid tapestry of the year’s notable events: the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the ravaging summer fires, and the heart-wrenching episodes of violence. Yet, amidst these chronicles, one momentous occasion seems to have faded into the shadows — the 65th anniversary of our triumph in the Great Patriotic War.

The Overlooked Significance of 2010

I had imagined, perhaps with naive optimism, that this significant anniversary would shine as the year’s most important event. This victory over the scourge of fascist Germany, a victory that carved our history, should have been enshrined in our collective consciousness. Instead, it appears that the memory of this great triumph is waning in the hearts of the younger generation.

The Risk of Forgetting

Is this glorious victory losing its significance for our youth? If so, what does this imply for our collective memory in the decades and centuries to come? Will future generations forget the sacrifices, the bloodshed, and the unyielding spirit that secured their very existence and freedom?

The victory in the Great Patriotic War was not merely a military success; it was a testament to the resilience and indomitable spirit of our people. The soldiers who valiantly fought and the civilians who supported them on the home front forged a legacy that demands our remembrance. If we allow these memories to slip away, how can we preserve them for the future?

Reflecting on World War II

The year 2010 also marked the 65th anniversary of the end of World War II. Our victory over Japan, culminating in the defeat of the Kwantung Army and the reclamation of the Kuril Islands, went largely unmentioned. These territories, lost during the humiliating defeat in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904, were reclaimed through sheer determination and sacrifice — a significant military achievement that deserves recognition.

Soviet Remembrance

In the days of the Soviet Union, the 7th of November was venerated as the day of the Great October Revolution. Even today, the older generation holds this date in high regard. This contrast underscores a broader societal issue — our propensity to forget the past all too quickly.

The Importance of June 22, 1941

As we step into 2011, another pivotal anniversary looms before us: 70 years since the most harrowing date in our nation’s history, June 22, 1941. This date marked the onset of the Great Patriotic War, altering the course of our lives irrevocably. The life that followed was starkly different from what had preceded it, a reality that no words can fully capture.

Children, robbed of their childhoods, and women, the elderly, and the young bore the brunt of supporting the frontlines. They labored tirelessly, driven by the rallying cry, “Everything for the front, everything for victory.” This was not mere rhetoric but a lived reality fulfilled with unwavering dedication. To forget this, to diminish its significance, is an affront to those who endured and survived the war.

Reflecting on Independence

In 2011, as various former Soviet republics celebrate their independence, it is essential to ponder the true implications of this newfound sovereignty. Many of these nations face economic challenges that compel their citizens to seek opportunities back in the country from which they declared independence. This irony calls for a deeper conversation about our interconnected histories and futures.

June 22, 1941, stands as a poignant reminder of our shared past and the unity forged in adversity. This date should not be relegated to obscurity. Instead, it should be a cornerstone of our collective memory, symbolizing our resilience and solidarity.

Conclusion

Let us not forget the sacrifices of those who came before us. Let us honor their memory by ensuring their stories are told and their legacy preserved for generations to come.

January 16, 2011

The piloted glider would be dropped from a bomber and shed its tail to expose 3 solid rocket engines. The entire front was warhead to pierce the hull of a battleship from just above the water line then explode.

In other words, which POTUS elections did the (a) general American public at the time see as all candidates being poor options, and (b) do current historians and political scientists generally agree as them having poor candidates?