CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Birmingham Research Archive, E-theses Repository Political Protest and Dissent in the Khrushchev Era Robert Hornsby A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Russian and East European Studies European Research Institute The University of Birmingham December 2008 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This thesis addresses the subject of political dissent during the Khrushchev era. It examines the kinds of protest behaviours that individuals and groups engaged in and the way that the Soviet authorities responded to them. The findings show that dissenting activity was more frequent and more diverse during the Khrushchev period than has previously been supposed and that there were a number of significant continuities in the forms of dissent, and the authorities’ responses to these acts, across the eras of Stalin, Khrushchev and Brezhnev. In the early Khrushchev years a large proportion of the political protest and criticism that took place remained essentially loyal to the regime and Marxist-Leninist in outlook, though this declined in later years as communist utopianism and respect for the ruling authorities seem to have significantly diminished. In place of mass terror, the authorities increasingly moved toward more rationalised and targeted practices of social control, seeking to ‘manage’ dissent rather than to eradicate it either by persuasion or by force. All of this was reflective of the fact that the relationship between state and society was undergoing a vital transitional stage during the Khrushchev years, as both parties began to establish for themselves what had and had not changed since Stalin’s death. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr Jeremy Smith, Dr Melanie Ilič and Dr Alex Titov. All three have been remarkably generous with their time, advice and encouragement. Other members of CREES who have proved a great help over the past three years include Mike Berry, Nigel Hardware, Marea Arries and Patricia Carr. All of my postgraduate colleagues have contributed in some way toward making my studies more enjoyable and productive, though Sean Roberts and Ulrike Ziemer deserve special mention, not least for providing me with a place to stay on my last few visits to Birmingham. All of my interviewees gave their time generously and contributed a great deal to the project and I am very grateful to all of them Long periods of archival research in Moscow were made all the more enjoyable by the presence of fellow researchers Bob Henderson and Siobhan Peeling. Mila and Galina Kosterina were particularly generous in their hospitality during my final trip to Russia. Outside of academia I have also benefited from the support of many people whilst researching and writing this thesis. Among those who have kept me from becoming entirely consumed by my work are Kevin Leedham, James Glossop and Stephen Taylor. In particular, I owe a large debt of gratitude to Thetis Abela and Lyndon Gallagher for all the help they have provided over the past few years. Most importantly, I would like to thank my parents John and Norma Hornsby for their never-ending support and encouragement. Finally, I would like to thank the Arts and Humanities Research Board for their financial support that made the whole project possible. iii CONTENTS List of Tables ix Transliteration x Glossary xi INTRODUCTION 1 0.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 4 0.2 DEFINITION OF TERMS 11 0.3 PARAMETERS OF THE STUDY 17 0.4 SOURCES AND METHODOLOGY 21 0.5 STRUCTURE OF THESIS 28 CHAPTER 1 PROTEST AND DISSENT, 1956-1958 31 1.1 DISSENT PRIOR TO THE SECRET SPEECH 33 1.1.1 The Stalin Years 34 1.1.2 The Collective Leadership 36 1.2 THE XX CONGRESS AND ITS AFTERMATH 38 1.2.1 Discussions of the Secret Speech 39 1.2.2 The Thermo-Technical Institute 44 1.2.3 Marxism-Leninism 48 1.2.4 Pro-Stalin Dissent 50 1.3 AMNESTIES AND PRISONERS 52 1.3.1 Released Prisoners 53 1.3.2 The Influence of Returnees 55 1.3.3 Serving Prisoners 59 iv 1.4 THE HUNGARIAN RISING 62 1.4.1 Student Protest 64 1.4.2 Open Criticism Within the CPSU 67 1.4.3 Dissent in the Komsomol 69 1.4.4 Forms of Dissenting Activity 73 1.4.5 Spontaneous Outbursts 75 1.5 UNDERGROUND DISSENTING ACTIVITY 80 1.5.1 Anti-Soviet Leaflets 81 1.5.2 Anonymous Letters 83 1.5.3 Underground Groups 87 1.6 CONCLUSIONS 92 CHAPTER 2 OFFICIAL RESPONSES TO DISSENT, 1956-1958 95 RESPONSES TO DISSENT PRIOR TO THE XX CONGRESS 98 2.1.1 The Public Face of Political Persecution 98 2.1.2 From the Revolution to the Secret Speech 100 2.2 AFTER THE XX CONGRESS 104 2.2.1 Responding to Discussions of the Secret Speech 105 2.2.2 The Thermo-Technical Institute: Revisited 108 2.2.3 The Boundaries of Permissible and Impermissible 111 2.2.4 Restoring Discipline in the Party 114 2.2.5 Restoring Discipline in the Komsomol 117 2.3 THE DECEMBER LETTER 123 2.3.1 Fears over Hungary 124 2.3.2 Formulating the Letter 127 2.3.3 The Final Text 129 v 2.4 THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST DISSENT 132 2.4.1 Convictions under Article 58-10 133 2.4.2 Grounds for Arrest and Conviction 135 2.4.3 Legal Processes 141 2.5 WINDING DOWN THE CAMPAIGN 147 2.5.1 The Procurator Review 149 2.5.2 The Supreme Court 151 2.6 CONCLUSIONS 154 CHAPTER 3 PROTEST AND DISSENT, 1959-1964 157 3.1 OPPOSITION TO KHRUSHCHEV 160 3.1.1 Early Attacks on Khrushchev 161 3.1.2 ‘Bringing Disgrace Upon the Country’ 162 3.1.3 The Khrushchev Cult 167 3.1.4 Khrushchev’s Character 170 3.1.5 Legitimacy 173 3.2 THE OUTSIDE WORLD 176 3.2.1 Living Standards 177 3.2.2 Western Radio Broadcasts 180 3.2.3 NTS 182 3.2.4 Communicating with the West 185 3.2.5 Chinese Anti-Soviet Agitation 187 3.3 UNDERGROUND ACTIVITY IN THE EARLY 1960s 190 3.3.1 Growing Disillusionment 191 3.3.2 1962-1963 196 vi 3.4 MASS DISORDERS 199 3.4.1 Disturbances in the Late 1950s 201 3.4.2 Disturbances in the Early 1960s 202 3.4.3 Novocherkassk 204 3.5 A PRECURSOR TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS MOVEMENT 208 3.5.1 Mayakovsky Square 209 3.5.2 Samizdat 213 3.5.3 The Legalist Approach 214 3.5.4 Khrushchev and the Liberal Intelligentsia 217 3.5.5 Joseph Brodsky, Andrei Sinyavsky and Yuli Daniel 220 3.6 CONCLUSIONS 223 CHAPTER 4 OFFICIAL RESPONSES TO DISSENT, 1959-1964. 226 4.1 POLICING DISSENT 227 4.1.1 The Leadership 228 4.1.2 The Work of the KGB 232 4.1.3 Centralisation 236 4.1.4 Policing the Mayakovsky Square Meetings 240 4.2 PROPHYLAXIS 243 4.2.1 Media Attacks on Dissenters 245 4.2.2 The Role of Society 252 4.2.3 Preventing Future Uprisings 254 4.2.4 The Prophylactic Chat 256 4.3 CAMPS AND PRISONS 261 4.3.1 The Legal System 261 4.3.2 Deteriorating Conditions 266 vii 4.3.3 Rehabilitation 269 4.4 PUNITIVE PSYCHIATRY 275 4.4.1 The Party Leadership and Punitive Psychiatry 277 4.4.2 Processes and Conditions 281 4.5 CONCLUSIONS 287 CONCLUSION 290 5.1 KHRUSHCHEV AND THE KHRUSHCHEV ERA 291 5.2 STATE AND SOCIETY 298 5.3 CHANGE AND CONTINUITY 303 5.4 FUTURE RESEARCH 308 APPENDICES Appendix 1: Annual Convictions for Political Crimes 310 Appendix 2: List of Interviewees 312 BIBLIOGRAPHY Unpublished Primary Sources 314 Published Primary Sources 315 Newspapers 319 Published Secondary Sources 320 viii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Annual expulsions from the Ukrainian Komsomol, 1956-1958. Table 2.2 Annual expulsions from the Kazakh and Uzbek Komsomol organisations, 1955-1957. Table 2.3 Annual sentences for anti-Soviet activity and propaganda, 1956-1964. Table 2.4 Distribution of sentences for anti-Soviet activity and propaganda by union republic in 1957. Table 2.5 Length of sentences for anti-Soviet activity and propaganda in the period 1956-1957 ix TRANSLITERATION The British Standard system of transliteration has been used throughout this work, but with some exceptions in regard to place names and people whose names have an ‘accepted’ English spelling. For example, the text refers to Ludmilla Alexeyeva rather than Lyudmilla Alekseeva on the basis that it is the former spelling under which her works have been published in the English language. Where there has been any uncertainty in regard to what is ‘accepted’ I have employed the British Standard system. x GLOSSARY Aktiv – Communist Party activists ASSR – Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic CPSU – The Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Kommunisticheskaya partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza) Gorkom – City Party Committee KGB – The State Security Committee (Komitet gosudarstvennoi bezopasnosti) Kolkhoz – A collective farm Komsomol – The Communist Youth League Memorial – a Russian charitable organisation that investigates and publicises abuses of human rights under the Soviet regime and since.