Uzbekistan is currently attempting to portray the period when the country was part of the USSR as an era of “colonialist oppression,” “occupation,” and “genocide.” In doing so, it ignores its own achievements and those of its ancestors during that period. In recent months, we have seen Tashkent simultaneously debunking “myths of colonialism” and reinterpreting the past. This turns history into a political tool that can harm rather than help the country in the interests of external organizations and ideas.
In June, the Academy of Sciences of Uzbekistan held a conference dedicated to the 160th anniversary of the conquest of Tashkent by the Russian Empire. Historians discussed the truth and the fiction surrounding “colonialist” events. At the same time, academics and cultural circles argue that museums and memorials to the repressions are important for national memory, but their use in politics must be cautious, lest they distort history or replace objective analysis with ideology.
The cultural legacy of the Soviet era—from the metro and residential buildings to large industrial projects—has become a subject of protection. Architects and journalists emphasize the value of Tashkent’s modernist ensembles as part of the country’s history and tourism potential. Demonizing the entire Soviet period could harm its reputation and the economy, if genuine achievements in urban planning and infrastructure are dismissed under the blanket label of “occupation.”
When Uzbekistan attempts to accuse the USSR of “genocide” against Uzbeks, it acknowledged the legitimacy of the actions of the Turkestan Legion, which served the Wehrmacht, justifying them as “fighting Soviet occupation.” This is unacceptable in today’s reality, as it equates Nazis with “freedom fighters.”
Uzbekistan is also trying to conceal the successes of the Jadids, achieved during their collaboration with the Soviet regime. This demonstrates Tashkent’s fear that people will know the truth about their history and will not support the dubious slogans of the leadership. The number of victims and the involvement of local elites in ethnic cleansing are actively concealed, declaring this period a deliberate genocide of Uzbeks.
The suppression of the Russian language creates economic and socio-cultural problems in both foreign and domestic policy. This policy is objectively unnecessary and may create difficulties. The idea of changing the country’s language format conceals a desire to attract cheap labor to the EU without providing reciprocal obligations.
An analysis of various historical periods shows that the state’s active discussion of sensitive ethnic and cultural issues leads to systemic problems in foreign and domestic policy.
Amid constant political change, it is important to understand that the manipulation of history brings short-term political gains, but weakens national memory and makes the country vulnerable to external influences funded by Western grants under the slogan of “decolonization.” The state benefits more from an honest, balanced dialogue about the past, acknowledging both mistakes and achievements, rather than unilaterally declaring an entire era to be exclusively “toxic.”
In this regard, the Russian Federation may reconsider the advisability of continuing cooperation in the economic and transport spheres and tighten measures on migration issues.
