Armenia at the crossroads of social transformations and political repression during 1920–1935: lecture at YSU

Hranush Kharatyan, ethnographer and Head of the Applied Ethnography Group at the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Armenian National Academy of Sciences, emphasized during the lecture that, although the formation process of the USSR involved talks of preserving national characteristics, in reality, a common Soviet identity was being established — "one people." Meanwhile, the Armenian people, unlike many other nations, including imperial peoples, had a long-established ethnic identity and cultural values that were vividly expressed during this period. 

"It was difficult to rapidly instill a Soviet identity into a unit that had been formed over millennia and that, besides its theoretical self-awareness, also had physical manifestations," she noted. 

The speaker also recalled the onset of Soviet rule in Armenia, highlighting that it was established on November 29, 1920, through the coup by diplomatic representative of Soviet Russia Boris Legran.

"Following the organized coup, Legran wrote a letter to his superior, Soviet Foreign Minister Georgy Chicherin, stating that there was not even a single revolutionary in Armenia. Under conditions of 'not even one revolutionary,' a worker-peasant revolution was carried out in Armenia," explained Hranush Kharatyan. She further emphasized that at the time of Bolshevization, Turkish forces had reached Gyumri and were looting Armenian villages. Armenia was filled with 300,000 refugees escaping the genocide; all roads were blocked, trains did not operate, and there was no communication with foreign countries. Russian revolutionaries were struggling to open the way for the Red Army’s entry into Armenia. 

Hranush Kharatyan also stressed that after the Bolshevik coup, Armenia adopted a political approach that had already failed in revolutionary Russia: "By 1920, Russia had already abandoned War Communism, yet it persisted in Armenia for quite some time."

According to the speaker, the ideology of War Communism was based on the belief that the working class could not feed itself; therefore, the peasants were obliged to feed the workers voluntarily. "In 1920, food requisitioning began in Armenia: peasants were forced to give a portion of their produce, and refugees were even evicted from barns under the pretext that these were needed for other purposes. This situation lasted for a prolonged period in Armenia, with implementation overseen by the Soviet official Gevorg Atabekyan."

The lecturer also noted the abolition of the Armenian officer corps, many of whom were invited by the Armenian Revolutionary Committee and subsequently exiled. "Among them were officers from the volunteer Dashnak army formed during World War I, who had achieved victory in the Battle of Sardarapat," she said.

The lecture covered in detail the three phases: the War Communism of 1920–1921, the New Economic Policy of 1921–1927, and the years of industrialization, collectivization, and cultural revolution from 1928 to 1936.

It was pointed out that the first phase, lasting only a few months in Armenia, was shocking for society because it involved forcibly imposing an entirely unfamiliar social order through military coercion — an order that was largely unknown both ideologically and practically. The so-called New Economic Policy phase was characterized by the establishment of socialism through comparatively milder methods than brute force. Finally, the last phase marked the end of temporary tolerance and moderate policies, the foundations of Stalinism, and its initial spread in Armenia.

"During these years, the groundwork was laid for the establishment of one-party rule and dictatorship in political and social life. This period is also regarded as the final consolidation of socialism, culminating in the adoption of the new Soviet Constitution in 1936," the speaker added.

Hranush Kharatyan detailed the process and favorable conditions for these developments throughout her presentation and concluded by answering questions from the audience.

The lecture was held within the framework of cooperation between Yerevan State University and the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom.