History / 1. National History

Shpak Denis

PhD in history

Black Sea State University named after P. Mohyla

(Mykolayiv, Ukraine)

 

Social climate of Ukrainian SSR Mykolayiv Region during the «Prague Spring» events in 1968 according to the special service reports.

Political reforms of O. Dubchek and his companions-in-political parties (O. Shyk, I. Pelikan, Z. Mlynarzh and others) didn’t represent full breakaway from the former political line like it was in Hungary in 1956, but they were considered by the authorities of USSR and other socialistic countries (GDR, Poland, Bulgaria) as the threat to the party-administrative system of the Soviet Union and countries of Western and Central Europe as well as to the «soviet block» entirety and safety. Soviet troops invasion on the territory of Czechoslovakia caused negative reaction. Mykolayiv region population reacted ambiguously to the events taking place in Czechoslovakian SR. If the events in Hungary of 1956 caused single and unorganized outbreaks of protest, the numerous protest movement opposed the invasion of the soviet troops to Czechoslovakia in August, 1968. Czechoslovakia seizure by the troops of the Warsaw agreement countries took the last hope away from those, who had expected the democratization of the soviet society, propagated ideas of «socialism with a human face». The inspector of the plant named by the 25th October anniversary in the city of Pervomaysk A. Stoliarov, being at the meeting of labor collective, said: «Everything is clear, but how all the world will look at us. Everyone will say it is a direct aggression. It turns out to implement democracy with bayonets» [1]. Also a senior nurse of the 1st city hospital in Mykolayiv M. Shkreba told about the negative influence of Czech events on the world image of the USSR as a peaceful country: «In tsarist times Russia was fairly considered to be «a world gendarme». Don’t the authorities of the country notice that trying to establish order in the neighbouring fraternal country with the help of weapons, we turn to this «world gendarme» in the world’s eyes. Maybe, let people in Czechoslovakia choose themselves what socialism they want to build. Do we have to implement our peaceful USSR policy in such a way? » [2]. The craftsman of the corps-shipbuilding section of the Mykolayiv plant named by I. Nosenko D. Avakumov, talking to the workmen of the section, also doubted the USSR external policy peacefulness. He said: «Soviet people had millions of victims in the struggle against fascism. So why should we again get foot into a military conflict? Why should we frighten all world with weapon clanking? Mybe it will be better for working people, if our authorities doesn’t press our neighbours using weapons and instead will fill the shelves of the shops with products? » [3].

In August, 1968 during the repair of V. Mozharovsky’s flat Mykolayiv workmen of ferroconcrete plant ¹2 of the trust «mykolayivzhetlobud» P. Saranchuk and V. Ivkov, discussing the events in Prague claimed that «USSR intruded in the politics of Hungary and Czechoslovakia, strangles their freedom and doesn’t let these countries solve their inner problems themselves». The display of freethinking in December, 18, 1970 were judged by the Mykolayiv judicial board of criminal cases, which sentenced P. Saranchuk and V. Ivkov to eight and three years of imprisonment accordingly [4].

The soviet troops invasion to Czechoslovakia were judged by the Mykolayiv region pensioners Mezhyrytsky, Levin and Berchansky. On their opinion «it’s not worth pointing the other country how it should live». Also they evaluated the situation in Czechoslovakia as an opportunity for Israel to strengthen their own positions in the Near East, because the USSR being busy with Czech events, wouldn’t be able to support Arabic countries. «Primary party organizations took measures to strengthen explanatory works and used social preventative measures» concerning the people who misinterpreted the events in Czechoslovakia [5].

The people of Czechoslovakia didn’t stay aside and tried to highlight the events in their country to the people of Mykolayiv region. An open letter published in periodical paper «Nitrianskij hlas» from the Slovakian city Nitra was sent to the people of Voznesensk and all Mykolayiv region, published in the newspaper «Radianska Pravda». There was a call to understand the truth about the Czech events there. It is clear that this letter wasn’t published in the newspaper «Radianska Pravda», it was sent with the explanatory note to the ideological department of the Communistic party regional committee [6].

All above mentioned facts show that despite the obstacles in Ukraine you could find objective information about the events in Czechoslovakia, which caused oppositional climate among different social classes, caused discontent with the policy of the USSR high authorities, which refused to give the right for the independent and democratic development to even the closest alliance partners [7].

The influence of «Czechoslovakian events» could be felt after their ending. The physician from Odessa P. Butov was sentenced to five years of imprisonment in the correctional-labor colony with future two-year exile just for preserving the brochure «X Anniversary of invasion to Czechoslovakia», in which there libel about fraternal help to Czechoslovakian people by the countries of the fraternity in the struggle against contrrevolution» [8]. In 1967-1971 in Ukraine there were 137 citizens (among them 14 people from Mykolayiv region) who were convicted for the anti-Soviet movement according to article 187-1 of the Ukrainian SR Criminal code [9].

Thus, despite the efforts of the soviet propagandist machine, not all people of the Mykolayiv region accepted stereotypes made by the ideological machine of the Soviet Union Communistic Party about the events of the «Prague Spring». Understanding of the USSR actions criminality, necessity of socialistic democracy new model creation in the Czechoslovakian SR got the feedback among people of the Ukrainian SR, made an active part of the citizens struggle for the ideas of freedom and independence in their own countries.

 

 

 

 

References:

1.     Äåðæàâíèé àðõ³â Ìèêîëà¿âñüêî¿ îáëàñò³ / State Archive of Mykolayiv region (äàë³ – ÄÀÌÎ). – Ô. Ï.7. – Îï. 12. – Ñïð.569. – Àðê. 48.

2.     ÄÀÌÎ. – Ô. Ï.7. – Îï. 12. – Ñïð.569. – Àðê. 53.

3.     ÄÀÌÎ. – Ô. Ï.7. – Îï. 12. – Ñïð.569. – Àðê. 60.

4.     Äìèòðóê Â. Íåçãîäí³: ïî䳿 1968 ð. â ×åõîñëîâà÷÷èí³ êð³çü ïðèçìó àðõ³âíî-ñë³ä÷èõ ñïðàâ ÊÄÁ ÓÐÑÐ / Âîëîäèìèð Äìèòðóê // ²ñòîð³ÿ Óêðà¿íè: Ìàëîâ³äîì³ ³ìåíà, ïî䳿, ôàêòè. Çá. ñòàòåé. – Ê. : ²í-ò ³ñòî𳿠Óêðà¿íè ÍÀÍ Óêðà¿íè, 2007. – Âèïóñê 34; Çàéöåâ Þ. Ç â³ðîþ ó ìàéáóòíº Óêðà¿íè / Þð³é Çàéöåâ // Ðåàá³ë³òîâàí³ ³ñòîð³ºþ. Ìèêîëà¿âñüêà îáëàñòü. – Ê. – Ìèêîëà¿â : Ñâ³òîãëÿä, 2007. – Êí. 3. – 655 ñ.

5.     ÄÀÌÎ. – Ô. Ï.7. – Îï. 12. – Ñïð.569. – Àðê. 61.

6.     ÄÀÌÎ. – Ô. Ï.7. – Îï. 12. – Ñïð.579. – Àðê. 83-86.

7.     Äìèòðóê Â. Íåëåãàëüíà ³íôîðìàö³éíà ìåðåæà â ×åõîñëîâà÷÷èí³ òà ¿¿ âïëèâ íà ôîðìóâàííÿ îïîçèö³éíèõ íàñòðî¿â â Óêðà¿í³ (ê³íåöü 60-õ – ïî÷àòîê 70-õ ðð.) / Âîëîäèìèð Äìèòðóê // Ç àðõ³â³â ÂÓ×Ê-ÃÏÓ-ÍÊÂÄ-ÊÃÁ. – 2000. – ¹ 2/4. – Ñ. 531–532.

8.     Äìèòðóê Â. Íåçãîäí³: ïî䳿 1968 ð. â ×åõîñëîâà÷÷èí³ êð³çü ïðèçìó àðõ³âíî-ñë³ä÷èõ ñïðàâ ÊÄÁ ÓÐÑÐ / Âîëîäèìèð Äìèòðóê // ²ñòîð³ÿ Óêðà¿íè: Ìàëîâ³äîì³ ³ìåíà, ïî䳿, ôàêòè. Çá. ñòàòåé. – Ê. : ²í-ò ³ñòî𳿠Óêðà¿íè ÍÀÍ Óêðà¿íè, 2007. – Âèïóñê 34. – Ñ. 304–305.

9.     Öåíòðàëüíèé äåðæàâíèé àðõ³â ãðîìàäñüêèõ îá’ºäíàíü Óêðà¿íè / Central State Archive of Public Organizations of Ukraine. – Ô. 1. – Îï. 25. – Ñïð. 546. – Àðê. 78.