The general perception of Western analysts and observers is that the nation-states created as a result of the breakup of the Soviet Union all treat the memory of the dark, repressive aspects of the Stalinist regime in public spaces as a symbolic element in the creation of a new post-Soviet identity [Denison, Michael. 2009. “The Art of the Impossible: Political Symbolism, and the Creation of National Identity and Collective Memory in Post-Soviet Turkmenistan.”Europe-Asia Studies61 (7): 1167–1187]. We argue that the government of Kazakhstan employs non-nationalistic discourse in its treatment of Stalinist victims’ commemoration in a variety of forms, through the creation of modern memorial complexes at the sites of horrific Soviet activity (mass burial places, labor camps, and detention centers), purpose-built museum exhibitions, and the commemorative speeches of its president and other officials. Kazakhstan's strategy in commemorating its Soviet past is designed to highlight the inclusiveness of repression on all peoples living in its territory at that time, not just Kazakhs, thereby assisting in bringing together its multinational and multiethnic society. Thus, the official stance treats this discourse as an important symbolic source of shaping the collective memory of the nation, based on “a general civil identity without prioritizing one ethnic group over another — a national unity, founded on the recognition of a common system of values and principles for all citizens” [Shakirova, Svetlana. 2012. “Letters to Nazarbaev: Kazakhstan's Intellectuals Debate National Identity.” February 7. Accessed July 28, 2015.http://postsovietpost.stanford.edu/discussion/letters-nazarbaev-kazakhstans-intellectuals-debate-national-identity].

This paper examines how, under the control of strong censorship, some of Gabit Musrepov's literary works were published despite their seditious nature. The authors argue that although G. Musrepov was a reputable Soviet writer, the materials presented in the article prove that he worked at the meeting point of resistance and subjugation: resistance to ideology, subjugation to language. The literary analysis of Musrepov's three short stories shows that under the strictest control and actively expressed interest of the authorities in the writer's creative activities, the latter's mastery and the incompetence of censors allowed him to avoid the prohibition of his works.

Introduction. The article based on Michael Adas’s analytical category “avoidance protest” presented by Paul W. Werth examines the view of the Kalmyk khan on the activities of the Russians to strengthen positions on the Volga-Caspian frontier, when V. Tatishchev was the head of the Kalmyk Commission and Astrakhan Governor, between 1741 and 1745. Methods and materials. Whereas previous studies considered only the Russian view on the politics toward the region and determined the attitudes of nomadic elites in terms of absolute compliance or violent opposition. However, in practice the relations between Russian authorities and indigenous people’s elite were much more complex.Using as primary sources the letters of Donduk-Dashi to V. Tatishchеv of the period between 1741 and 1745 from the National Archive of the Kalmyk Republic published by prof. D. Suseeva gives us an opportunity to examine the situation from below. Analysis and Results. We argue that although Donduk-Dashi was quite embedded within the Russian system, we cannot claim about his unconditional subordination. First, speculating on general Tarakanov’s misstep, Donduk-Dashi evaded investigations regarding the plans to relocate to the protectionof Persian shah. The second argument was built around his alleged unawareness about theposition of Russian authorities regarding the Kazakh-Kalmyk relations and entreaties to provide with guns as an attempt to divert attention away from current problems on the relations with the Kazakhs. The formal notification of the forthcoming marriage of the Kalmyk nobleman with Kazakh princess and about non-sanctioned contacts with Kazakh Middle zhuz khan demonstrates that nomad’s relations went beyond the line prescribed by the government.