Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Commemoration and Nationalizing the Cult of World War II in Kazakhstan

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Post-Colonial Approaches in Kazakhstan and Beyond

Part of the book series: The Steppe and Beyond: Studies on Central Asia ((SBSCA))

  • 61 Accesses

Abstract

The Kazakhstani state has faced the challenge of replacing or reimagining symbols and monuments commemorating Soviet ideologies, Soviet public memories, and Sovietized public figures with symbolism, monuments, museums, and exhibits that support and reinforce the nationalizing ideology of a sovereign state. This chapter provides an overview of some of the ways in which the collective memory of the Second World War has been renegotiated and instrumentalized in independent Kazakhstan as a tool of sovereign nation-building and framed as an important identity marker for Kazakhstanis today, irrespective of ethnicity. It then presents a brief case study appraising how ordinary citizens perceive contemporary memorializations of Soviet-era figures in the city of Aktobe in Kazakhstan’s northwest. In doing so, the chapter illustrates some of the ways in which the nationalizing memory regime of the Kazakhstani state has decolonized these figures and commemorative sites. The chapter concludes by arguing that the processes of decolonization and of establishing a new memory regime that are considered evidence strategies of deliberate ambiguity that likely increase citizen buy-in to Kazakhstan’s sovereign nationalizing projects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Kassymbekova and Chokobaeva (2021) for interpretations of the imperializing and racializing frameworks employed by Soviet leadership in Soviet Central Asia and other regions and constituent republics of the Soviet Union.

  2. 2.

    E.g. Strategiya Kazakhstan 2050 (https://akorda.kz/ru/official_documents/strategies_and_programs), 2012; Tokayev, State of the Nation Address, September 1, 2021, http://president.kz/ru/poslanie-glavy-gosudarstva-kasym-zhomarta-tokaeva-narodu-kazahstana-183048 etc.

  3. 3.

    For an overview of some of the ways that the Tokayev-era Kazakhstani state produces discourses that use rhetoric of participatory government and citizen consent to maintain control of event narratives, see Karibayeva, Akbota, and Edward Lemon. 2023. “From Qandy Qantar to Tragic January: State Framing of the January Events.” In A Revolt in the Steppe: Understanding Kazakhstan’s January Events of 2022, pp. 53–78. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.

  4. 4.

    Arthur Danto distinguishes monuments from memorials, writing that “monuments commemorate the memorable and embody the myths of beginnings. Memorials ritualize remembrance and mark the reality of ends” (1985, 152). In other words, a monument might be built to remember a war victory, whereas a memorial might be installed in order to remember those who died in war. Commemorative installations and sites dedicated to the Second World War and the Heroes of the Second World War in Kazakhstan tend to combine commemorative and memorial aspects, minimizing the importance of the distinction. Throughout the chapter the commemorative sites of focus tend to be referred to as monuments, but it is important to note that they are equally memorial sites.

  5. 5.

    Evidence of this rhetorical shift can be found in school textbooks. For example, the 2013 edition of the 9th grade Qazaqstan tarikhi, by Qozybaev, Nurpeis, and Zhukeshev only refers to the Second World War as the Uly otan sogysy (Great patriotic war, consistent with the Russian, Velikaya Otechestvennaya voina) whereas the 2019 edition of the 9th grade Qazaqstan tarikhi, by Qabyldinov, Shaimerdenova, and Kurkeev, though still titling the section on the Second World War as “Qazaqstan Uly Otan soghysy zhyldarynda” (Kazakhstan during the years of the Great Patriotic war) alternates between referring to the war as the Uly Otan soghys and the Ekinshi duniezhuzilik soghys (Second World War), and encourages students to critically reflect on why the war was called the Great patriotic war.

  6. 6.

    See Isabayeva, Saule. 2023. “Proshloe ne otpuskaet…Kto i zachem politiziruet Den’ Pobedy v Kazakhstane.” QMonitor, May 8. https://qmonitor.kz/politics/5323.

  7. 7.

    E.g. Qairatuly, B. 2022. “Qazaqtyñ batyr qyzy Mänşük Mämetova jaily jazbalardy oqyğanda.” Egemen Qazaqstan, March 9. https://egemen.kz/article/306236-qazaqtynh-batyr-qyzy-manshuk-mametova-dgayly-dgazbalardy-oqyghanda; “Qazaqtyñ batyr qyzy Mänşük Mämetova.” 2015. e-history.kz, February 2. https://e-history.kz/kz/news/show/122/.

  8. 8.

    Interview conducted by the author with Galymzhan Baiderbes, 23 July 2017.

  9. 9.

    The author of the chapter is exceptionally grateful for the support provided by the research assistant and their family, who wished to remain anonymous. The interview methodology and interview guides were reviewed and approved as exempt by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board on June 21, 2016, protocol #1606097260.

  10. 10.

    According to government data from January 2020 (https://www.stat.gov.kz/api/getFile/?docId=ESTAT355258).

  11. 11.

    Respondents were asked the question “If asked to describe your identity, how would you do so? What are the most important parts of your identity?”

  12. 12.

    The same question was asked in the interviews that informed (Rees and Burkhanov 2018), and all participants described their identity framed in ethnonational or civic-national terms. However, participants in those interviews, conducted in 2014, explained their identity either in ethnonational or civic-national terms. This is likely due to interviewer effects: the 2014 interviews were conducted by the author, a foreigner and political scientist, so participants were likely expecting questions of political identity.

  13. 13.

    Interviewee #1 and #7, respectively.

  14. 14.

    Interviewee #7.

  15. 15.

    Interviewee #6; interestingly, in a 2020 interview with the Russian TV channel Mir, Tokayev, as president of Kazakhstan, remarked that “Nine out of ten bullets [for the war effort] were cast from Kazakhstani lead” (https://mirtv.ru/video/65936/).

  16. 16.

    Interviewees #1, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12.

  17. 17.

    The question that elicited mention of the Alley of Heroes was “Are you familiar with any monuments to Kazakhstan’s WWII heroes, such as Aliya Moldagulova, Manshuk Mametova, Baurzhan Momyshuly or others, in your city or in Kazakhstan as a whole? Can you identify and describe them?”

  18. 18.

    Interviewees #2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 12.

  19. 19.

    Interviewee #2.

  20. 20.

    Interviewee #6.

  21. 21.

    Interviewee #7.

  22. 22.

    Interviewee #3.

  23. 23.

    O gosudarstvennyh nagradah Respubliki Kazahstan: https://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/Z950002676_.

References

  • Adams, L. 2011. “Culture, Colonialism and Sovereignty in Central Asia.” In Sovereignty After Empire: Comparing the Middle East and Central Asia, edited by S. Cummings and R. Hinnebusch, 199–221. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Akorda. 2017. “Memleket basshysynyń «Bolashaqqa baǵdar: rýhanı jańǵyrý» atty maqalasy” [Course Towards the Future: Modernization of Kazakhstan’s Identity]. April 12. https://www.akorda.kz/kz/events/akorda_news/press_conferences/memleket-basshysynyn-bolashakka-bagdar-ruhani-zhangyru-atty-makalasy.

  • Azaryahu, M. 2011. “The Critical Turn and Beyond: The Case of Commemorative Street Naming.” ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies 10 (1): 28–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baigarin, M. 2014. “Vklad Kazaxstana V Pobedu: V Velikoj Otechestvennoj vojne uchastvovalo okolo 20 procentov naselenija respubliki.” KazInform, May 5. https://www.inform.kz/ru/vkladkazahstana-v-pobedu-v-velikoy-otechestvennoy-voyne-uchastvovalo-okolo-20-procentov-naseleniya-respubliki_a2655463.

  • Bekus, N. 2021. “Symbolic Capital of the Memory of Communism. The Quest for International Recognition in Kazakhstan.” Theory and Society I: 627–655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09425-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, M. H., and J. Kubik. 2016. “A Theory of the Politics of Memory.” In Twenty Years After Communism: The Politics of Memory and Commemoration, edited by M. H. Bernhard and J. Kubik, 7–34. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhabha, H. 1984. “Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse.” October 28: 125–133. https://doi.org/10.2307/778467.

  • Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, D. 2016. The Social Process of Globalization Return Migration and Cultural Change in Kazakhstan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunstedt, J. 2021. The Soviet Myth of World War II: Patriotic Memory and the Russian Question in the USSR. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burck, C. 2005. “Comparing Qualitative Research Methodologies for Systemic Research: The Use of Grounded Theory, Discourse Analysis and Narrative Analysis.” Journal of Family Therapy 27 (3): 237–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, S. 2018. The Hungry Steppe: Famine, Violence, and the Making of Soviet Kazakhstan. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carmack, R. J. 2019. Kazakhstan in World War II: Mobilization and Ethnicity in the Soviet Empire. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A. J. 2020. War Monuments, Public Patriotism, and Bereavement in Russia, 1905–2015. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danto, A. 1985. “The Vietnam Veterans Memorial.” The Nation, August 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, V. 2017. Myth Making in the Soviet Union and Modern Russia: Remembering World War II in Brezhnev’s Hero City. New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Tona, C. 2006. “But What Is Interesting Is the Story of Why and How Migration Happened.” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 7 (3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-7.3.143.

  • Denzin, N. K. 1997. Interpretive Ethnography: Ethnographic Practices for the 21st Century. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fauve, A. 2015. “Global Astana: Nation Branding as a Legitimization Tool for Authoritarian Regimes.” Central Asian Survey 34 (1): 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2015.1016799

  • Forest, B., and J. Johnson. 2002. “Unraveling the Threads of History: Soviet–Era Monuments and Post–Soviet National Identity in Moscow.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 92 (3): 524–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorshenina, S. 2014. “Samarkand and Its Cultural Heritage: Perceptions and Persistence of the Russian Colonial Construction of Monuments.” Central Asian Survey 33 (2): 246–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartog, E. 2023. “How Vladimir Putin Sells His War Against ‘the West’.” Politico, February 21. https://www.politico.eu/article/siege-stalingrad-battle-bucha-vladimir-putin-russia-war-against-west/.

  • Hirsch, Francine. 2022. “Putin’s Memory Laws Set the Stage for His War in Ukraine.” Just Security, February 28. https://www.justsecurity.org/80599/how-the-soviet-union-helped-establish-the-crime-of-aggressive-war/.

  • Holmes, C. E., and M. Loehwing. 2016. “Icons of the Old Regime: Challenging South African Public Memory Strategies in #RhodesMustFall.” Journal of Southern African Studies 42 (6): 1207–1223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Insebayeva, S., and N. Insebayeva. 2022. “The Power of Ambiguity: National Symbols, Nation-Building and Political Legitimacy in Kazakhstan.” Europe-Asia Studies 74 (4): 660–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, R. J. 1995. “Nationalizing the Work Force: Ethnic Restratification in the Newly Independent States.” Post-Soviet Geography 36 (2): 87–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaşikçi, M. V. 2019. “The Soviet and the Post-Soviet: Street Names and National Discourse in Almaty.” Europe-Asia Studies 71 (8): 1345–1366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassymbekova, B., and A. Chokobaeva. 2021. “On Writing Soviet History of Central Asia: Frameworks, Challenges, Prospects.” Central Asian Survey 40 (4): 483–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • “KazInform anons na 7–9 Maia.” 2010. KazInform, May 7. https://www.inform.kz/ru/kazinform-anons-na-7-9-maya_a2265901.

  • Kikimbayev, M., and D. Tolgambayeva. 2016. “Identichnost’ v potoke.” In Praktiki i mesta pamyati v Kazakhstane, edited by K. Medeuova. Astana: ENU im L. N. Gumileva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krivosheev, G. F. 2001. Rossija i SSSR v voĭnakh KHKH veka: Poteri vooruzhennykh sil. Statisticheskoe issledovanie. Moscow: OLMA-Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kudaibergenova, D. T. 2016. “The Use and Abuse of Postcolonial Discourses in Post-independent Kazakhstan.” Europe-Asia Studies 68 (5): 917–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/09668136.2016.1194967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laszczkowski, M. 2014. “State Building(s): Built Forms, Materiality, and the State in Astana.” In Ethnographies of the state in Central Asia: Performing Politics, edited by M. Reeves, J. Rasanayagam, and J. Beyer, 149–172. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laszczkowski, M. 2016. ‘City of the Future’: Built Space, Modernity and Urban Change in Astana. New York: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. 1992. The production of space. 1st ed. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeuova, K. 2020. “Zatjanuvshajasja ‘sovetskostʹ’ i transformacii kollektivnoj pamjati: sovetskie i postsovetskie memorial’nye kompleksy v Kazakhstane.” Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie 161: 256–274. http://ww.nlobooks.ru/magazines/novoe_literaturnoe_obozrenie/161_nlo_1_2020/article/21982/.

  • Morris, J., and A. Polese. 2013. “Introduction: Informality—Enduring Practices, Entwined Livelihoods.” In The Informal Post-socialist Economy, edited by J. Morris and A. Polese, 1–18. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nora, P. 1989. “Between Memory and History: Les lieux de mémoire.” Representations 26: 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ó Beacháin, D., and R. Kevlihan. 2013. “Threading a Needle: Kazakhstan Between Civic and Ethno‐Nationalist State‐Building.” Nations and Nationalism 19 (2): 337–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • “Ob utverzhdenii Gosudarstvennogo spiska pamyatnikov istorii i kul’tury mestnogo znacheniya Aktyubinskoy oblasti” [On the Approval of the State List of Historical and Cultural Monuments of Local Importance to the Aktyubinsk Oblast]. 2010. http://adilet.zan.kz/rus/docs/V10C0003337.

  • “Oblastnoi memorial’nii muzei Geroya Sovetskogo Soyuza Alii Moldagulovoi.” n.d. Geroi Aktobe [pamphlet].

    Google Scholar 

  • “Obnovlen spisok sakralnyh obektov Kazakhstana.” 2017. KazInform, November 10. https://www.inform.kz/ru/obnovlen-spisok-sakral-nyh-ob-ektov-kazahstana_a3084017.

  • “Oni srazhalis’ za Rodinu.” 2013. Aktiubinski Vestnik, May 8. https://avestnik.kz/oni-srazhalis-za-rodinu/.

  • Oryngaliuly, A. 2010. “Batyrlar alleiasy.” Aqtobe Gazeti, May 17. https://aqtobegazeti.kz/?p=6582.

  • Owen, C., J. Heathershaw, and I. Savin. 2018. “How Postcolonial Is Post-Western IR? Mimicry and Mētis in the international Politics of Russia and Central Asia.” Review of International Studies 44 (2): 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210517000523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palonen, E. 2008. “The City-Text in Post-communist Budapest: Street Names, Memorials, and the Politics of Commemoration.” GeoJournal 73 (3): 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieterse, J. N. 2001. “Hybridity, so What?” Theory, Culture & Society 18 (2–3): 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, K. M. 2020. “Recasting the Nation: Transforming Heroes of the Soviet Union into Symbols of Kazakhstani Patriotism.” Central Asian Survey 39 (4): 445–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/02634937.2020.1803213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, K., and A. Burkhanov. 2018. “Constituting the Kazakhstani Nation: Rhetorical Transformation of National Belonging.” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 24 (4): 433–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, A. 2022. “Putin’s War on History: The Thousand-Year Struggle over Ukraine.” Foreign Affairs 101 (3): 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sci, Susan A. 2009. “(Re)Thinking the Memorial as a Place of Aesthetic Negotiation.” Culture, Theory and Critique 50 (1): 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735780802696351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharipova, D., Burkhanov, A., and A. Alpeissova. 2017. “The Determinants of Civic and Ethnic Nationalisms in Kazakhstan: Evidence from the Grass-Roots Level.” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 23 (2): 203–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soss, J. 2006. “Talking Our Way to Meaningful Explanations: A Practice-Centered View of Interviewing for Interpretive Research.” In Interpretation and Method, 161–182. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolts, M. 2006. “Ethnic Composition of Kazakhstan on the Eve of the Second World War: Re-evaluation of the 1939 Soviet Census Results.” Central Asian Survey 25 (1–2): 143–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsyrempilov, N., U. Bigozhin, and B. Zhumabayev. 2022. “A Nation’s Holy Land: Kazakhstan’s Large-Scale National Project to Map Its Sacred Geography.” Nationalities Papers 50 (4): 704–721. https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2021.22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urkumbayeva, D. 2018. “Mnogo shuma nadelal snos pamiatnika Levonu Mirzoianu v Aktobe.” KTK, May 18. https://www.ktk.kz/ru/news/video/2018/05/18/95967/.

  • Wedeen, L. 2015. Ambiguities of Domination: Politics, Rhetoric, and Symbols in Contemporary Syria. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yusupova, G., and A. Pfoser. 2023. “Tourism, Memory Production and Contested Ethnic Hierarchies in Post-Soviet Almaty.” Europe-Asia Studies 75 (3): 491–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhomart, N. 2022. “«Kösemderdıñ» tas müsınderınen arylatyn boldyq.” Zhas Alash, March 31. https://zhasalash.kz/ruhaniyat/kosemderdin-tas-musinderinen-arylatyn-boldyq-20075.html.

  • Zhursin, Zh. 2018. “V Aktobe demontirovali pamiatnik Levonu Mirzoianu.” Radio Azattyq, May 18. https://rus.azattyq.org/a/29235665.html.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

    Kristoffer Michael Rees

Authors
  1. Kristoffer Michael Rees
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kristoffer Michael Rees .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Public Policy, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan

    Dina Sharipova

  2. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan

    Alima Bissenova

  3. Graduate School of Public Policy, Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan

    Aziz Burkhanov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rees, K.M. (2024). Public Commemoration and Nationalizing the Cult of World War II in Kazakhstan. In: Sharipova, D., Bissenova, A., Burkhanov, A. (eds) Post-Colonial Approaches in Kazakhstan and Beyond. The Steppe and Beyond: Studies on Central Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8262-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation