There is a law in the State Duma’s agenda that actually prohibits criticizing the actions of the Soviet Army during World War II. The problem, of course, is complex and multi-layered. For decades in the West and in the Soviet Union after 1985 and then in the post-Soviet countries in 90s some drew too much direct parallels between fascism and communism, Hitler and Stalin, special divisions of the Soviet troops and ‘Nazi’. Certainly there are some similarities, but matching the two systems with one another, I think, is wrong, even because the ideology of one was official based on racism, xenophobia, and the other’s vice versa equality of nations based on unfair or fair thesis. But that does not mean that, for example, the Red Army did not commit atrocities during the war towards the citizens of as the Soviet Union, so as of other countries. Even not mentioning about the fact that the “genius” Stalin based on his so-and-so calculations, was raising such issues before the army that were achievable in a much smaller loss of victims.
But let us leave the diverse folds of these issues to the historians. The State Duma’s bill has much more fundamental drawback: it is recommended to prohibit criticizing anything. That reminds me of March 1 to 20, 2008, when by the order of the President addressed to the media it was prohibited to disseminate any information about the internal political life that might contradict the official view. The authorities of different countries guided by a so-called “supreme national interests” tend to inhibit publication of any opinion or viewpoint that it did not like. In this case, the efforts of leaders of Russia to justify and to “whitewash” what is related to Stalinism, repression and the rest, fits in the search of Putin administration of the “national ideology”. It’s their business, let them search.
Here it is interesting that the integral part of the “national ideology” is that “my nation, my state, my army, in all cases, was always correct in the whole history of mankind.” In my perception it is sick psychology, because there is no individual, nation or state, which, in all cases, is true. Even if there is, then it has no right to prohibit any criticism to its address. It neither makes the person, group or state strong, it does not contribute to the upbringing of the younger generation, nor increases the resistance of the system. It is, by and large, just a fad of the authorities.
If our National Assembly adopts such a law on the history of Armenia, the works of Leo in Armenia will be banned.
Read also
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
