Crimean Tatars: to the question of the events of 1944

After the end of the cold war, the collapse of the socialist camp and the formation of many new independent states, the tendency to revise history began to gain momentum. This was expressed not only in the reassessment of any historical facts, but also in the writing of a new national history in a number of states.

In young, newly formed states, many of which are not yet able to give their society all social benefits, with the goal of creating a monolithic society at the governmental level, problems related to national issues, tragic pages of the past, and so on are raised. In particular, in several countries of the former socialist camp, the problem of genocide became topical. Indeed, playing on the patriotic feelings of millions of people (and in the case of such a sensitive issue as genocide, they take place) is a strong foundation for the creation of a common national idea. However, there is a downside to the coin. The accusation of such a grave crime as genocide is very serious, and taking it on faith without any reliable evidence is fundamentally wrong. Nevertheless, this does not prevent many peoples from appealing to this term.

One of the most controversial and controversial issues in this vein is the deportation of Crimean Tatars in the Great Patriotic War. It is known that the Crimea now, as an autonomous republic, is part of Ukraine, nevertheless even this status allows propaganda of the idea of the genocide of the Crimean Tatar people. How legitimate are the claims of the indigenous inhabitants of the peninsula of Ukraine to the recognition of deportation as an act of genocide?

From the very beginning of the Great Patriotic War, Crimea was considered one of the most important facilities needed by the Wehrmacht for a successful offensive deep into the country. First of all, this, of course, was explained by the presence here of the Navy bases: the seizure of the peninsula actually meant the undivided power of Germany in the north of the Black Sea basin.

The offensive on the peninsula began with the forces of the South Army in October 1941, and it is fair to say that the activation of the Germans in this direction immediately provoked a mass desertion of the Tatars from the Red Army.
History already knew examples of how during the fighting the indigenous inhabitants of the island took the side of the interventionists. Thus, the Crimean Tatars in the Crimean War of 1853-1856. Actively involved in the actions on the side of the Franco-Anglo-Turkish coalition.

Anyway, without departing from the main topic, it should be said that by the beginning of the war in the Crimea, 4 divisions were formed, practically all of them could not show high fighting qualities. Of course, the divisions were not fully staffed by the Crimean Tatars, nevertheless the fact remains. Moreover, the absence of a militant mood was not the main problem: mass desertion began soon among the Tatars.

In addition, the Crimean Tatars also actively left partisan detachments, created almost immediately with the outbreak of the war. This fact greatly simplified the Germans management over the occupied territory.

The loyal attitude of the Tatars to the invaders was also demonstrated in the manifestation of personal respect. Thus, General Manstein wrote that the Tatar delegation honored him with gifts for the commander-in-chief of the German troops.

Eventually, the Crimean Tatars experienced the established "warm relations" when the Nazis created 8 Crimean-Tatar battalions. Under the control of the Germans began to be formed and armed detachments of "self-defense." Many Tatars were used as conductors against partisan detachments. Loyal to the Germans were peaceful Crimean Tatars.

All these facts could not be ignored by the government of the USSR. The liberation of the Crimea in 1944 caused retaliation against the local population. May 18, 1944 the deportation of the Crimean Tatars began. Just two days from here, about 200 thousand people were evicted to Central Asia, mainly to Uzbekistan. According to different estimates, during the resettlement and in the first years after it perished from 10 to 50% of immigrants. It is these events that the Crimean Tatars regard as genocide of their people.

However, is this interpretation legitimate, given the facts of the collaborationism of the Tatars? The revision of the deportation events was held back in Soviet times, and to the credit of the leaders of the Soviet Union, it must be said that the mass eviction of the Tatars from the Crimea was recognized as a disproportionate and unjustified decision, especially since most of the collaborators left for the West with the retreating parts of the Wehrmacht. Thus, the decision on resettlement was already recognized not entirely appropriate, but at the same time, it would be incorrect to qualify these events as genocide. For this definition provides for the purposeful extermination of the people, sanctioned by the state. There are no documents confirming the decision on the total extermination of Tatars on national soil.

This brings us to the conclusion that the claims of the Tatars to the recognition of deportation as an act of genocide are unfounded, but it is obvious that the Crimean Tatars themselves will not back down from their positions. The solution of this issue today requires in-depth analysis, its imprint is also imposed by political orientation, the supporters of the USSR and a return to the past will never condemn the events of 1944. Thus, it is likely that this issue will remain controversial for several decades.