THE GULAG AND SOVIET SOCIETY IN WESTERN SIBERIA, 1929-1953 by Wilson T. Bell A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of History University of Toronto © Copyright by Wilson T. Bell (2011) Abstract “The Gulag and Soviet Society in Western Siberia, 1929-1953” Doctor of Philosophy 2011 Wilson T. Bell Graduate Department of History University of Toronto “The Gulag and Soviet Society in Western Siberia, 1929-1953” examines the history of forced labour during the Stalin era in Western Siberia, or present-day Novosibirsk, Tomsk and Kemerovo Provinces. The region was a key site of Stalin-era repression, as it was home to numerous Gulag camps including Siblag, one of the longest lasting and most economically diversified of the many prison-labour camps scattered throughout the former Soviet Union. Western Siberia was also one of the main areas of exile for peasants and, later, displaced ethnic groups. The dissertation traces the seeming contradictions in the development of the Gulag by juxtaposing the very modern, bureaucratic “Gulag” as it appeared on paper, with the “Gulag” on the ground that relied heavily on informal practices, data falsification, and personal connections. The Gulag is thus emblematic of the “neo-traditional” modernization of the Soviet Union under Stalin. The dissertation also examines points of illicit and condoned interaction between the Gulag and surrounding population centres, thus challenging Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s seminal and enduring depiction of the Gulag as an isolated archipelago of concentration camps. Illicit interaction included widespread black-market activity, the smuggling of correspondence, sexual affairs, and, surprisingly, even instances of locals sneaking into the camps to use camp facilities. Condoned interaction took place at the level of local economic planning (the transfer of prisoners for help with specific projects), a striking overlap in cultural and propaganda campaigns, the ii contracting out of prisoners to local enterprises, and the granting of unescorted status to large numbers of prisoners, who thus had the right to move outside of the camp zones without guard. Because many of Western Siberia’s camps were located in and around major urban centres, including Novosibirsk and Tomsk, the region is important for examining issues of interaction. The dissertation draws extensively on sources from four archives in Moscow and four archives in Siberia, as well as Gulag newspapers, published and unpublished memoirs, document collections, and archival collections available in the United States. Many of these sources are under-utilized, including Communist Party documents from the local camp administrations, personal files of prisoners, and NKVD operational orders. iii Preface The West Siberian Plain bursts with life in the spring and summer, its rich green colours compensating for the long, cold winter. The plain is a swampy, forested lowland, cut dramatically by large, north-flowing rivers. The Ob’ River and its tributaries constitute the sixth largest drainage area in the world, and the Ob’ itself is one of the world’s longest rivers. Even hundreds of kilometres south of the frigid Ob’ Gulf, the plain rises barely a few hundred metres above sea level until it finally gives way to the foothills of the Altai Mountains. To the west, the rolling hills of the Ural Mountains divide the plain from European Russia; in the east, the land, as it approaches the Enisei River, gradually transforms from plain into the higher ground of the Central Siberian Plateau. Novosibirsk Province in Western Siberia is today home to Siberia’s largest city, Novosibirsk, a thriving metropolis of over two million inhabitants that matured as a city during the Stalin era. Novosibirsk is a key transit hub as the junction of the Trans- Siberian Railway and the Turksib Railway, connecting Siberia with Central Asia. The mighty Ob’ river dissects the city and is today a major source of hydropower. One can cross the river via several bridges, even while riding the city’s subway system. Although its extremely wide central boulevards and austere architecture owe their existence to Soviet urban planning, the city now boasts a smattering of gleaming office towers, rising up in tribute to Russia and Siberia’s early-twenty-first-century economic boom: banking, oil and natural gas. Tomsk Province, to the north, was a crucial region for early Russian iv expansion through Siberia, as its many fur-trading outposts dotted the numerous river routes. Tomsk as a city is today a pleasant university town, and wears its past more comfortably than many other former Soviet cities: monuments to the “victims of Stalinism” stand in the city’s centre, in a small park directly across from city hall. The park overlooks the Tom’ river, a meandering tributary of the Ob’. Both rivers had been key to the Russians’ rapid expansion across the Eurasian continent, centuries earlier. Kemerovo Province is today the most industrial and densely populated region of Siberia. It includes the key Kuznetsk Basin, an area with massive coal deposits that was crucial for Stalin-era industrial development. All three of these provinces were home to special settlers and Gulag prisoners during the Stalin era. Choosing a region of the former Soviet Union for an examination of the Gulag is not easy, given that there were Gulag camps in almost every republic, province, and territory of the union. Gulag camp subdivisions were even located within the city limits of almost every major city. However, a strong case can be made for the importance of a study of the Western Siberian Gulag. The regime sent both prisoners and special settlers here in large numbers, and forced labour was a component of every major industry in the region, from coal mining to forestry to agriculture to defence. The region’s main camp, Siblag, was one of the longest lasting and most economically diversified camps of the entire Gulag, but it was also never a priority camp, and the day-to-day operations and lived experiences were thus not that different from most Gulag camps. Some of its subdivisions were in remote, rural areas, while others were in the heart of the region’s urban centres; prisoners worked in a wide range of economic activities, many under contract from non- Gulag, non-NKVD enterprises. v “Western Siberia” itself is difficult to define. Siblag, the main camp in the region, initially administered camp subdivisions stretching from Omsk to Krasnoiarsk, essentially the entirety of the enormous West Siberian Plain. Gradually, however, Siblag shed subdivisions to other jurisdictions, and came to be located in the urban and agricultural areas of present-day Novosibirsk, Tomsk and Kemerovo Provinces. For the purposes of the present study, then, “Western Siberia” will refer to these three provinces, unless otherwise specifically noted. It is here that one can explore issues of interaction—both illicit and condoned— between the Gulag and Soviet society. It is this type of local history that can allow one to ask questions about the day-to-day operations of the system, the motivations of the camp personnel, and the lived experiences of the prisoners. And it is here that one can explore the seemingly inherent contradictions in the system: the tensions between the centre and the periphery, the political and economic motivations underlying the system’s operations, and the widespread prevalence of informal practices in what was supposed to be a highly bureaucratic, modern and efficient system. Any such exploration, of course, requires the assistance of too many individuals and organizations to count, and I am profoundly grateful to everyone who aided me on this journey. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my thesis advisor, Lynne Viola, who read and commented on numerous chapter and dissertation drafts, whose contacts in Russia proved invaluable, and whose generosity and kindness have been truly inspiring. My other committee members, Robert Johnson and Thomas Lahusen, have been instrumental in pushing me to look at the Soviet period in new ways. Alison Smith has also provided valuable advice concerning portions of the dissertation and conference papers, and I am vi grateful for her role as the “internal” external reader. Kate Brown, as the external reader, has not only provided important feedback for improving the dissertation itself, but has pushed me to explore intellectually stimulating directions for developing this research, further. Other professors have influenced my thinking on Russia and on history, and I thank especially Rick Halpern, Janet Hyer, Norman Pereira, Peter Solomon, Jr., Susan Solomon, Lawrence Stokes, and Ieva Vitins. At conferences and through correspondence and conversations I have also gratefully received help and insight from Golfo Alexopoulos, Alan Barenberg, Steve Barnes, Olga Cooke, William Chase, Michael David-Fox, Miriam Dobson, Heather DeHaan, Marc Elie, Simon Ertz, Sheila Fitzpatrick, Jehanne Gheith, Wendy Goldman, Bruce Grant, Patricia Grimsted, Jeff Hardy, Cynthia Hooper, Denis Kozlov, Jean Levesque, Cynthia Ruder, and many others. In Russia, Sergei Krasil’nikov aided my research in Siberia in countless ways, but I am perhaps most grateful for his unflagging generosity, kindness and optimism. Several other Russian scholars helped me with aspects of my research, and I am grateful to Simeon Vilensky, Oleg Khlevniuk, Boris Trenin, Leonid Trus’ and Vasilii Khanevich, the director of the Tomsk “Memorial”