PDF Summary:Red Famine, by Anne Applebaum

Anne Applebaum's Red Famine provides a harrowing account of the Soviet Union's campaign to quell Ukrainian independence and eliminate Ukraine's cultural identity. The book details the intentional deprivation of food and repression of intellectual voices in Ukraine that led to the catastrophic Holodomor famine in the 1930s.

Applebaum examines the political, economic, and social forces that fueled the famine, including Stalin's drive for industrialization, the Bolsheviks' disdain for Ukrainian nationalism, and fierce resistance against mandatory collectivization. As suppressed history comes to light, Applebaum reveals the Soviet regime's systematic efforts to conceal the famine while rationalizing its atrocities.

(continued)...

The success of Ukrainization depended on the strategic placement of individuals fluent in Ukrainian within the essential roles of the Ukrainian party's hierarchy and its administrative bodies. Educational establishments, performance halls, and entities promoting Ukrainian culture also required monetary assistance and formal acknowledgment. The Russian government also publicly endorsed the action. A fleeting moment of optimism arose when it seemed that the Soviet regime had halted their early efforts to utterly obliterate Ukraine's unique cultural identity.

The return of Mykhailo Hrushevsky to Ukraine in 1924, as a result of the new, more liberal atmosphere that followed the famine and truce with Poland

The period described by Applebaum as a cultural renaissance was indeed authentic. In 1924, the esteemed historian and former leader of the Central Rada, Mykhailo Hrushevsky, chose to return and live within the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic's territory. He began his work on the comprehensive series titled History of Ukraine-Rus following his induction into the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences. A similar surge in empowerment was also felt by a broad spectrum of Ukrainian society, including intellectuals and artists. Publications such as newspapers began to emerge. Ukrainian scholars led the charge in creating and standardizing a national language, incorporating contributions from Ukrainian speakers globally.

Despite the political police's vigilant surveillance and anticipation of strict actions, and notwithstanding the inherent flaws within these expansive policies, this era of fervent and dynamic cultural creation would have a lasting impact on the cultural heritage of Ukraine.

Context

• Prodrazvyorstka was a policy in the Soviet Union that involved the mandatory requisitioning of grain from peasants by the government. Komnezamy were local officials responsible for implementing and overseeing the collection of grain under the prodrazvyorstka policy. These officials played a crucial role in enforcing the grain quotas set by the Soviet authorities during times of food scarcity. The combination of prodrazvyorstka and the actions of komnezamy significantly impacted the agricultural sector and the livelihoods of peasants in Ukraine and other regions of the Soviet Union.
• Pogroms against Jews were violent riots, often incited by authorities or anti-Semitic groups, targeting Jewish communities. These attacks involved looting, destruction of property, and physical harm inflicted on Jewish individuals. Pogroms were fueled by deep-seated prejudices and were prevalent in Eastern Europe, particularly during times of political unrest or economic hardship. The term "pogrom" originated in Russia and is associated with organized violence against Jews.
• The Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC) was an Eastern Orthodox church in Ukraine that sought independence from the Moscow Patriarchate. It was part of the Ukrainian independence movement and aimed to restore the Ukrainian Orthodox Church's autonomy. The UAOC was re-established in 1921 and played a significant role in Ukrainian religious history until its merger with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church – Kyiv Patriarchate in 2018 to form the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU).
• The Borotbysts were members of the Ukrainian Socialist Revolutionary Party who advocated for socialist and nationalist ideals in Ukraine during the early 20th century. They were known for their efforts to promote Ukrainian independence and cultural identity within the broader context of socialist principles. The Borotbysts played a significant role in Ukrainian political and social movements, particularly during the tumultuous period of the Russian Revolution and the subsequent establishment of Soviet rule in Ukraine. Their activities often focused on agrarian reform, national self-determination, and the empowerment of the Ukrainian peasantry.
• The Central Rada was the All-Ukrainian council that served as the revolutionary parliament in Ukraine from 1917 to 1918. It played a crucial role in directing the Ukrainian national movement and guiding the country towards autonomy and sovereignty. Led by figures like Mykhailo Hrushevsky, it laid the groundwork for Ukrainian independence and parliamentary democracy.
• The "History of Ukraine-Rus" is a significant 10-volume series by Mykhailo Hrushevsky, covering Ukraine's history from ancient times to the 17th century. It is considered a foundational work in Ukrainian historiography, detailing socio-economic, political, and cultural aspects of Ukraine's past. Hrushevsky wrote this monumental series between 1895 and 1933, providing a comprehensive account of Ukraine's historical development. The series delves into various periods, including the Kyiv state, Galicia, Volhynia, and the Ukrainian lands' interactions with neighboring powers like Lithuania and Poland.

During the early 1930s, the mandatory collectivization of agriculture was met with significant resistance from rural communities, which precipitated the catastrophic famine referred to as the Holodomor.

The "scissors crisis" emerged due to the inability of the New Economic Policy to maintain a steady supply of food to the Soviet Union's urban areas.

The government imposed unreasonably lofty quotas for grain collection and subsequently punished the farmers for privately retaining any surplus.

The fundamental disagreements regarding agricultural and economic policies in the Soviet Union, although there was a brief period of calm in the mid-1920s, eventually led to a major crisis. Between 1921 and 1929, the New Economic Policy effectively rejuvenated and improved agricultural output following the ruinous civil conflict, despite being founded on the incorrect assumption that a capitalist market-driven economy could be steered and stimulated by a communist government. The Soviet Union's authorities often manipulated the agricultural sector by enforcing regulatory price limits at different levels.

In the final years of the 1920s, urban areas within the Soviet Union once again faced a deficit of supplies, an issue known as the "scissors crisis," characterized by contemporary charts that illustrated a significant difference between the prices of agricultural goods and industrial products. In response, the authorities held responsible various groups, such as those thought to be hoarding grain instead of selling it, individuals identified as "kulaks" who were seen as taking advantage of increasing market prices, and the wider peasant community who were accused of secretly keeping grain for animal feed or deliberately burning it.

During Stalin's rise to power, the government employed coercion and disinformation to enforce controversial measures across the Soviet Union's countryside.

The period of 1927-1928, characterized by a lack of food and economic instability, followed a decade of considerable changes in power and was portrayed by Applebaum as a time rife with upheaval, hostility, and fear. As the 1920s drew to a close, the Georgian, infamous for orchestrating bank robberies, had yet to consolidate his grip on the reins of power in the Soviet Union. Although he had successfully used terror to defeat his main opponent, Leon Trotsky, several other members of the leadership, most notably Nikolai Bukharin, still posed a threat.

Stalin had knowledge of the circumstances. He also understood that economic instability might provoke political upheaval; a society filled with rage has the capacity to be stirred into rebellion, evoking memories of the turmoil seen in 1917. Confronted by the less-than-expected grain yields of 1927-1928, he utilized a mix of coercion and propaganda to suppress the growing unrest. Under his command, the OGPU commenced investigations into alleged conspiracies held responsible for the scarcity of food, concurrently with the commencement of the party's dissemination of propaganda that pointed fingers at convenient culprits.

The push for collectivization in Ukraine resulted in a complete disintegration of the rural social, economic, and moral frameworks.

The "Twenty-Five Thousanders," urban working-class enforcers of collectivization, encountered resistance due to the ingrained customs and lifestyle prevalent in the Ukrainian countryside.

Applebaum explores the tactical methods characteristic of Stalin's governance, particularly those he employed in response to the "scissors crisis." Stalin concluded that mandatory collectivization was the only answer to the Soviet Union's agricultural issues after witnessing the insufficient productivity of small-scale farms on his journey through Siberia.

Applebaum notes that although this strategy was utilized to some extent, it was largely discontinued by the year 1919. Stalin, however, stood firm in his resolve to execute the plan this time. He was strongly convinced of its potential for success. He also seemed to have formed the belief, influenced by Balytsky and others, that Ukraine was not politically dependable. Stalin's drive for swift industrialization in the Soviet Union intensified the burden on peasant populations, who were still reeling from the famine that occurred between 1921 and 1923.

In 1929, the "Twenty-Five Thousanders," a contingent of city dwellers comprising workers and Komsomol members inexperienced in agriculture, were dispatched to rural areas to elucidate the new collectivization policy to doubtful peasant farmers. The ideological clash is underscored by the contrast between the agricultural setting and the conviction held by Marxists-Leninists that the forefront of the revolution ought to be made up of urban industrial workers, who, ironically, had scant understanding of agricultural methods.

Stalin depicted collectivization as a voluntarily adopted strategy, but despite his counsel against using force, young activists often employed severe measures. They acknowledged the responsibility to guarantee the policy's effective execution. The repercussions of the Shakhty trial instilled an atmosphere of dread and mistrust throughout Soviet society, enveloping them as well. The government harbored mistrust towards rural inhabitants, convinced that these people, pejoratively termed "kulaks," were hiding their grain and colluding with enemies of the revolution.

The policy of "de-kulakization" was employed as a form of political coercion, targeting not only kulaks but also those moderately wealthy farmers and individuals who resisted collectivization and opted out of joining collective agricultural endeavors.

The writer details the combination of enforced collectivization with a severe initiative aimed at affluent farmers, referred to as "de-kulakization." The term "Kulaks" branded these individuals as adversaries and betrayers of the state. They had to abandon their homes and were stripped of their belongings, which included all their tools and animals. Regional political factions frequently provoked villagers to not only engage in public humiliation but also to commit acts of violence against the individuals, as well as their spouses and children. In the dead of night, families were uprooted against their will and taken to locations that were not disclosed.

The term "kulak" lacked a concrete and consistent application in practice. The definition expanded to encompass not only individuals who defied government orders but also those perceived as politically unreliable or who simply had more assets than others.

The campaign for collectivization aimed not only at eradicating rural traditions and customs but also at deliberately undermining the religious observances, particularly those linked to the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church.

The mandatory collectivization of agriculture coerced the peasantry into assimilating with the Soviet framework. Applebaum depicts the concurrent advancement of collectivization alongside a deliberate assault on the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. The entities tasked with the creation of collective farms in Ukraine also played a role in demolishing religious symbols, seizing church bells, and burning down worship sites. The educational system of the Soviet Union required the teaching of atheism, replaced traditional celebrations with government-sanctioned events, and promoted participation in Komsomol activities over attendance at religious ceremonies. The rural communities of Ukraine, with their religious ceremonies that featured customary songs, food, attire, and unique vocal expressions, were abruptly interrupted, putting an end to traditions and rituals that had been firmly established for generations.

Lenin previously contended that measures should be taken against the Church to completely eliminate its sway. Before initiating the push towards collectivized agriculture, he emphasized his directives with notably strong wording. He advocated for the disbandment of religious institutions and the appropriation of their assets by the party. He declared the need for exceptional actions and emphasized the uncompromising stance against clergy who resisted the initiative.

As a result of increasing resistance from rural areas against imposed collectivization, Ukraine witnessed an intensification of harsh repressive measures.

In 1930, various forms of defiance against the government emerged, including revolts led by women, widespread riots, numerous escapes, attacks on property and officials, and organized opposition to proponents of collectivization.

Applebaum notes that the immediate and unexpected result of the collectivization drive was a new round of peasant rebellions, known at the time as "March fever," riots and protests, which broke out all across Ukraine in 1930, including attacks on the "Twenty-Five Thousanders" and other local party figures. In regions with a history of rebellion, such as Pavlohrad, Kryvyi Rih, and Tulchyn, previously compliant peasants took up arms against the authorities, resulting in the deaths of many komnezamy members. The same rationale that once led individuals to impose suffering, displacement, or forced relocation on their neighbors now turned against them, subjecting them to comparable tactics.

The clandestine law enforcement agency of the Soviet Union acted swiftly. Applebaum demonstrates that the OGPU associated the increase in violent resistance with the conviction held by high-ranking members of the Soviet Communist Party that there were "internal enemies."

The instigators of the Pavlohrad insurrection, as well as other uprisings, who were veterans of the 1919 peasant uprising, demanded a halt to the collectivization process and the reestablishment of Ukraine's autonomy.

The 1930 agricultural uprisings stood out from earlier peasant rebellions in a significant way. The most notorious and intense insurrection occurred in the Pavlohrad district near Dnipropetrovsk, led by veterans of the 1918-1920 conflicts who had previously fought at times for the creation of an independent Ukrainian state or a distinct Cossack territory. The battle against collectivization grew fiercer due to memories of previous autonomy, turning a dispute about land possession into a struggle for the nation's independence.

The Red Army and the OGPU quelled the Pavlohrad insurrection after two days of clashes, leading to the execution of its leaders and the dispersion of their followers; nonetheless, further insurgencies continued into the next year and occurred intermittently in the one after that. The insurgents were without logistical support, means of communication, or any form of leadership hierarchy, echoing the characteristics of past rebellions. Moscow blamed their defiance on supposed saboteurs and wealthy agriculturists, as well as provocateurs charged with collaboration with Poland, a country believed to be filled with agents aiming to undermine the authority of the USSR.

The authorities of the Soviet Union utilized force, spread propaganda, and characterized 'internal enemies' to rationalize the suppression of the rebellion and to administer punishment to those involved.

The author emphasizes that the idea of Ukrainian peasants' behavior being directed by a foreign enemy was baseless from the start. The Soviet leadership was deeply troubled by the revival of strong resistance, leading them to determine that a broader approach was necessary to address the challenge posed by the nationalistic sentiment in Ukraine.

Context

• The "scissors crisis" in the Soviet Union during the 1920s referred to the significant disparity between the prices of agricultural goods and industrial products. This economic imbalance created challenges in maintaining a stable food supply for urban areas. The crisis highlighted the difficulties in balancing the needs of the agricultural sector with those of the industrial sector. The government's response to this crisis included imposing high quotas for grain collection and targeting individuals perceived as hindering economic stability.
• "Kulaks" were prosperous peasants in the Soviet Union who were seen as class enemies by the Communist regime. "De-kulakization" was a policy implemented by the Soviet government to eliminate the kulaks as a social class by seizing their property, exiling them to remote areas, or even executing them. This policy aimed to collectivize agriculture and remove perceived obstacles to the Soviet state's control over the economy. The term "kulak" was used broadly and often applied to any peasant who resisted collectivization or was deemed politically unreliable by the authorities.
• The "Twenty-Five Thousanders" were urban workers and Komsomol members sent to rural areas in the Soviet Union to promote collectivization. They were tasked with explaining and enforcing the new agricultural policies to skeptical peasant farmers. These individuals often lacked agricultural experience but were fervent supporters of the communist ideology. The "Twenty-Five Thousanders" played a crucial role in the implementation of collectivization and encountered resistance due to their unfamiliarity with rural customs and practices.
• The Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church was an independent Orthodox Christian church in Ukraine. It had a separate hierarchy from the Russian Orthodox Church and sought autonomy from Moscow. During the collectivization period in the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church faced suppression and persecution by the authorities. The Soviet government targeted religious institutions, including the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church, as part of its efforts to promote atheism and eliminate religious influence. The church's practices and traditions clashed with the Soviet regime's goals of consolidating power and control over all aspects of society.
• The Pavlohrad insurrection was a significant uprising in Ukraine in 1930 led by veterans of earlier conflicts. The insurgents demanded a halt to collectivization and the restoration of Ukraine's autonomy. The rebellion was quelled by the Red Army and the OGPU after two days of clashes, leading to the execution of its leaders. The conflict escalated due to historical aspirations for independence and autonomy in the region.
• In the context of Soviet suppression efforts, the term 'internal enemies' referred to individuals or groups within the Soviet Union perceived as threats to the government or its policies. These perceived enemies were often targeted for their opposition to or defiance of the ruling regime, leading to punitive measures such as arrests, imprisonment, or even executions. The Soviet leadership used the concept of 'internal enemies' to justify crackdowns on dissent and resistance, portraying these individuals as traitors or saboteurs working against the state. This notion played a significant role in shaping the repressive tactics employed by the Soviet authorities to maintain control and quash opposition.

The rise of Stalin's regime and the Soviet Union's intentional actions to suppress and manipulate the release of information about the Holodomor occurred amid a period of political and economic instability.

Collectivization led to a significant decline in agricultural production, which in turn caused pervasive starvation and an intense famine across the Soviet Union.

The government's rigidity worsened the crisis, as it continued to enforce unrealistic agricultural strategies without adapting to the drought and reduced harvests, while also grappling with the consequences of the 1930 peasant revolt.

Applebaum depicts the complete disaster that ensued from the Soviet Union's enforcement of mandatory collective farming. The crisis worsened when efforts to increase cereal output led to the creation of large-scale communal farms, the seizure of property from successful farmers, and the disruption of traditional market activities.

In 1930, authorities announced that the implementation of communal agriculture had exceeded anticipated targets, with doubters conceding its success, although the reality was significantly at odds with these claims. By 1931, a considerable segment of the Soviet Union's countryside inhabitants had been forced into a communal agricultural system, which faced considerable resistance. The most experienced farmers, deeply connected to their soil and owning beasts of burden, had no choice but to abandon their harvests, confronting the grim prospects of imprisonment or banishment.

The farmlands lacked the necessary experienced personnel for their management, consisting instead of unseasoned young activists. The farm laborers, now paid by the day, found little reason to apply themselves for a regime that failed to appreciate or suitably compensate their hard work. They engaged in theft and showed a lack of efficiency while part of the communal farm. Agricultural practices were poor, with insufficient attention given to the crops from the initial planting through to the completion of the harvest. Agriculturalists who succeeded in cultivating some crops endeavored to conceal their harvest from the requisition teams, using it to nourish their children or to barter in the underground economy.

The uppermost levels of authority held Ukrainian "nationalism" accountable for the shortfall in grain output and chastised Ukrainian communists who had the audacity to disclose the actual magnitude of the famine.

The author emphasizes the Soviet state's refusal to acknowledge its deficiencies. The leadership of the Party consistently blamed hidden enemies in Ukraine, such as "kulaks," "saboteurs," and newly labeled "Ukrainian nationalists," for economic difficulties, rather than admitting to the shortcomings of their own policies. These groups were charged with attempting to sabotage the country's agricultural framework, with backing from international forces, especially "imperialists" in Poland, who had drawn the scrutiny of Moscow due to their desires for Ukrainian independence. The burgeoning food scarcities and the shortfall in grain procurement in Russia and Ukraine were attributed by the Soviet regime to convenient scapegoats, effectively diverting responsibility away from Stalin.

The intentional measures intensified the food scarcity in Ukraine through the seizure of all accessible sustenance from the countryside and by forbidding the starving citizens from leaving the republic.

Regions that failed to meet the prescribed grain production quotas faced harsh penalties, which significantly hindered their capacity to grow, obtain, or exchange food products.

In the autumn and winter of 1932, Soviet officials implemented deadly policies to force peasants in Ukraine and the North Caucasus to hand over more of their produce, while at the same time, the OGPU, the Soviet secret police, was eliminating Ukrainian intellectuals.

The Soviet regime implemented harsh grain confiscations in Ukraine and the North Caucasus, which led to the appropriation of any residual food resources from collective farms that did not fulfill their assigned production targets. Units with a particular objective, echoing the prior komnezamy initiatives, conducted comprehensive searches of homes, confiscating not just cereal crops but also frequently appropriating meat, tubers, and at times, domestic animals like cows that a number of families had acquired by 1930. The administration of the Soviet Union reinstated and formalized its policy of blacklisting.

Applebaum describes how agricultural communities and villages that did not achieve their grain production targets were designated as "chorna doshka," or "black board," a label that led to a ban on obtaining any industrial goods for the residents, including everything from tools and clothing to necessities such as shoes, medical supplies, and kerosene, crucial for cooking. Ultimately, individuals who did not achieve the required grain production levels were consequently denied access to salt.

The implementation of the border closure between Ukraine and Russia aimed to ensure Ukrainian peasants remained laboring and to prevent the famine from extending.

During that period, the Soviet Union's ruling figures made an extraordinary choice. Facing a mass exodus of starving peasants across the borders into Russia, it issued a secret directive, in January, to close Ukraine's border with Russia. Should a Ukrainian villager be found trying to exit the republic, they would be confronted with the choice of being forcibly sent back to their home village or collective, or facing the possibility of being detained and sent to a labor camp, regardless of their mode of travel. In Ukraine, secret police units worked in unison with community leaders, youth communist league members, and a range of other enforcement personnel across the nation.

Applebaum emphasizes the creation of an internal documentation system and the concurrent closure of Ukraine's frontiers, which in turn prevented rural residents from obtaining the necessary permits to reside in cities. Stalin's administration effectively imposed a new type of servitude on farm laborers by banning their relocation without direct permission from the government.

The strategic political maneuver designed to weaken Ukrainian identity involved the active repression of their language and the deliberate removal of Ukrainian intellectuals to promote conformity.

The decrees not only determined the destiny of rural residents in Ukraine but also initiated an extensive crackdown on the growing movement for Ukrainian nationalism, which had been gaining momentum since the early 20th century. In December 1932, after a sequence of attacks on Ukrainian thinkers and amid a climate of fear in Ukraine exacerbated by Stalin's severe response to the March 1930 revolts, the Soviet Communist Party passed a secret resolution that put an end to its former policy of encouraging the growth of Ukrainian language and culture. The shortcomings in grain procurement were ascribed by the party's highest-ranking members to individuals they perceived as having Ukrainian nationalist inclinations. The architects of the decree were of the opinion that Ukrainization had not been pursued with enough intensity and had not adequately emphasized political indoctrination. The mistakes allowed groups labeled as counter-revolutionaries to take over key institutions in Ukraine.

As Applebaum notes, at their most benign, these allegations represented a significant error in judgment. The campaign, sanctioned by the party, targeted a broad swath of the intellectual community. The edict resulted in the extensive exile of a varied assembly comprising writers, poets, musicians, scholars, artists, and educators, in addition to every proponent of the Ukrainian language. The Soviet state's backing, which had bolstered the communist national movement from 1923, was completely dismantled in a matter of months by 1932.

The pervasive silence surrounding the famine not only hid it from the local population but also kept it concealed from the global community.

The Ukrainian Communist Party and intelligentsia encountered severe restrictions on official documents and records, including mortality statistics and death certificates, as well as suppression of dissent, all part of a concerted effort to obscure the true extent and consequences of the famine.

Applebaum demonstrates that the Soviet state deliberately obscured the catastrophe, restricted information about it, and hindered discussions surrounding it, with the famine occurring from 1932 to 1933 being a consequence of deliberate Soviet policies. The Soviet government sought help from other countries due to the intense discussions about the prevalent food shortages that occurred from 1921 to 1923, both domestically and on the global stage. The story had shifted significantly by the year 1933. The Soviet authorities were unable to openly admit their involvement in the famine due to the harsh grain requisition policies, the brutal methods of enforcement, and the specific decrees and emergency measures directed at Ukraine that year. As a result, the authorities adopted measures to conceal the true state of affairs.

The approach taken by those in power involved obstructing entry to regional record-keeping centers, steering discussions within the political party and public meetings, and manipulating numerical information. The directive given to the officers was to halt the recording of their observations in written form and to solely provide reports through verbal means. The use of the word "famine" was forbidden. Anyone who openly utilized it risked being branded an enemy of the people, with potential consequences including job termination, eviction, or exile, or even imprisonment in a labor camp; Ukrainian communists who voiced objections to the grain collection policies were apprehended and imprisoned.

Context

• The Holodomor, also known as the Ukrainian Famine, was a man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932 to 1933 that killed millions of Ukrainians. It was part of the wider Soviet famine of 1930–1933. The causes of the famine are debated, with some attributing it to deliberate actions by Joseph Stalin to quell Ukrainian nationalism, while others see it as a consequence of Soviet policies like collectivization and industrialization. The death toll estimates vary, with figures ranging from 3.5 to 10 million victims.
• Collectivization is the process of consolidating individual farms into collective or state-run farms, often seen in countries like the Soviet Union, China, and Vietnam. It involves farmers working together on shared land and resources under a centralized agricultural system. This approach aims to increase efficiency, promote uniformity in production, and align farming practices with government policies. The Soviet Union, for example, had both cooperative-run farms (kolkhozy) and state-run farms (sovkhozy) as part of its collectivization efforts.
• Kulaks were prosperous peasants in Russia who owned larger plots of land. They were seen as class enemies by the Soviet government, especially during Stalin's regime. The term was used to describe peasants who resisted collectivization and were targeted for persecution and forced labor camps. Kulaks were subjected to harsh policies like dekulakization, where their property was seized and many were killed or deported.
• The OGPU, or Joint State Political Directorate, was a Soviet secret police agency that existed in the early years of the Soviet Union, responsible for internal security and intelligence operations. It was a predecessor to the more well-known KGB, which took over its functions later on. The OGPU played a significant role in enforcing Soviet policies, including collectivization and suppressing dissent. It was eventually absorbed into the NKVD, another Soviet security agency.
• Ukrainian nationalism is the advocacy for the unity and identity of Ukrainians as a distinct people and the promotion of Ukraine as a nation-state. It draws upon cultural, ethnic, linguistic, historical, and political aspects to foster a sense of national identity. The origins of modern Ukrainian nationalism can be traced back to historical events such as the Cossack uprisings against external powers like the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Tsardom of Russia. Ukrainian nationalism aims to preserve and strengthen the unique identity and sovereignty of Ukraine as a nation.
• "Chorna doshka" translates to "black board" in English. In the context of the Holodomor, it referred to a designation given to regions or communities that failed to meet grain production quotas in Ukraine. Being labeled as "chorna doshka" resulted in severe penalties, including bans on obtaining essential goods like tools, clothing, shoes, medical supplies, and even salt, creating additional hardships for the affected residents. This term symbolized the punitive measures imposed by the Soviet regime on areas that did not fulfill their agricultural targets during the famine. The designation reflected a systematic approach to punish and control communities that struggled to meet the unrealistic grain production quotas set by the authorities.
• Ukrainization is a policy aimed at promoting Ukrainian language and culture in various aspects of public life, such as education and government. It involves efforts to increase the use of the Ukrainian language and to assimilate non-Ukrainians or Russian-speaking Ukrainians into Ukrainian culture. The process of Ukrainization has historical roots dating back to the 17th century, with varying degrees of implementation over time. It has been a significant factor in shaping Ukrainian national identity and preserving cultural heritage.
• Duranty was an Anglo-American journalist who served as the Moscow bureau chief of The New York Times. He received a Pulitzer Prize for his reports on the Soviet Union but faced criticism for denying the widespread famine in the USSR, particularly the Holodomor. There were later calls to revoke his Pulitzer Prize due to his controversial reporting on the famine.