THE RUSSIAN FRONT

What’s the golden brain?  The name I heard applied in Moscow to the Russian Academy of Sciences building.
The good folks at RFE/RL have gotten ahold of a document that suggests what the campaign against falsification really means (thanks to Brian Whitmore at the Power Vertical).  They present a letter from Valerii Tishkov, head of the history section of the History-Philology Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in which Tishkov requests his subordinates to provide lists of falsifiers in their various fields of expertise, as well as to report on what they’ve been doing to combat falsification.

Evidently Tishkov is claiming the letter is only a draft.  Of course, the very need to compose such a draft is in itself instructive.  A couple things I would point out (scan of Russian original available here)

First, Tishkov gives his people three days to come up with their lists of falsifiers.  Clearly this is not a matter for careful weighing and sifting of archival evidence.

Second, and more significantly, Tishkov’s letter significantly broadens the scope of what Medvedev’s commission is formally charged with doing.  Medvedev’s commission’s title seeks out “attempts at falsifying history in harm to the interests of Russia.”  Tishkov’s version asks the Russian Academy of Sciences to find “falsifications AND historical-cultural concepts, damaging to the interests of Russia [emphasis added].”  What’s the difference?  Tishkov wants to know about historical ideas that are damaging to Russia, whether or not they’re false.

Perhaps I’m reading too much into a single word.  If I’ve mistaken Tishkov’s intent, I look forward to hearing his clarification.

Sometime back, we introduced readers of The Russian Front to a new scholarly initiative aimed at re-examining Russia’s central role in shaping modern history. “Russia’s Great War & Revolution, 1917-1922: The Centennial Re-Appraisal” is an international project comprised of forty leading historians from Russia, North America, Europe, and Japan. They are working to develop a more complete understanding of how Eurasia’s “continuum of crisis” marked by war, revolution, and civil war transformed history and laid the foundations of the twentieth century.

The project’s ultimate contribution will be a series of peer-reviewed volumes expected to be published (both in analog and digital formats) during 2014-2017 — in time to commemorate the 100th anniversary of Russia’s world-altering events. Additional outcomes, including an interactive website containing images, maps, digitized texts, and audio-visual resources designed for the general public and public school teachers, are also in the works.

Professional historians and advanced graduate students whose research focuses on any aspect of the Russian past from 1914 to the early 1920s are urged to contact series editors.

Followed the highlighted link to make you way to the official Call for Papers.

And tell ‘em The Russian Front sent you.

Soviet naval buffs may have seen this before, but it was new to me when a dear friend emailed me the link. These are photographs from a group of tourists that went inside a Typhoon-class ballistic missile submarine. I originally saw the photographs here, but it looks like the original is here.

Neither one has a precise indication of location, except for the photograph of the sign reading Nerpich’ya, which is a base at Zapadnaia Litsa in Murmansk oblast in the Russian far north. A little satellite browsing suggests to that the location is here–note the little green-roofed structure you can see at the end of the pier in an early shot and in the satellite image.

View Larger Map

Since I’m not a naval or submarine buff, I can’t say much about lots of the internal systems shown. What jumps out at me is the typical Soviet construction–lots of very heavy duty equipment, and lots of rust.

Scrolling down to the end reveals a slice of life and the creature comforts, so to speak, enjoyed by Soviet / Russian submariners. The exercise room, pool, video game, and most unspeakably the toilet (unitaz in Russian, with detailed instructions) give a nice picture of an existence most of us don’t get to experience. The signs are priceless; they promise horrible punishment for those who are careless or sloppy in their toilet use or manners. In particular, there’s a request to close the door in courtesy to those who live in the compartment. In fairness, American submarines aren’t especially comfortable either–the premium on space in a submarine is going to make waste disposal an unpleasant experience regardless.

The American Historical Association has written an open letter to Russian President Dmitrii Medvedev protesting state intervention in the determination of historical truth.

I cannot resist pointing that we are dealing with the AHA, so the letter doesn’t use the phrase “historical truth” as part of the AHA’s position. The closest the letter gets is the “reality of the past.” It instead uses the word “truth” in scare quotes and has “historical truth” only as part of a quotation from the organization “Liberte pour L’Histoire.” They’re French, so that must make it OK.

I do have a serious point here, as opposed to simply taking pot shots at the AHA. If there is no historical truth because everything is tainted beyond redemption by politics and bias, then it’s tough to get mad at Medvedev. After all, what would make his bias and politicization worse than anybody else’s?

Of course, in actual practice, regardless of their theoretical stance, most historians do all they can to control and reduce bias and get as close as they can to objectivity. That means, among other things, careful use of evidence. It’s one of the reasons I’d like to know who Medvedev thinks the falsifiers are. If they’re cooking their evidence, I have a professional obligation to call them on it.

Russian President Dmitrii Medvedev’s Chief of Staff Sergei Naryshkin spoke on June 17 in Irkutsk in connection with the ongoing saga of the fight for historical truth against unnamed falsifiers. His statement shows masterful use of the Russian language’s enormous capacity for the passive voice and concealment of agency:

“Some people warn us against the politicising of history. The commission will never do it. Unfortunately, another process is going on: the falsified history is being politicised in the offices of top officials of some countries. Problems of practical policy in relations with Russia are being substituted by discussions about the past. Territorial and material claims to Russia are being formed, and questions on some compensations are being raised on the basis of pseudo-historic materials.”

Which people? Which officials? Which countries? Which claims? Which questions?

I can name one example of history falsified in the name of scoring political points: S. N. Kovalyov’s article on Poland’s responsibility for World War II. Sadly, he works for the Russian government.

Source: Itar-Tass, via Johnson’s Russia List.