Phone Interview with Hiroaki Kuromiya
Professor of History at Indiana University
Author of Stalin: Profiles in Power and The Voices of the Dead: Stalin's Great Terror in the 1930s
March 31, 2015
What conditions were prevalent in the leadership of Czar Nicholas II that led to widespread dissent and the resulting revolution? How did Joseph Stalin seek to change or improve such conditions during his leadership?
First of all, the Russian Empire was an autocracy, which was forced to make some concessions after 1905, but the czar stuck to his god-given divine autocratic power, which he wanted to hand down to his heir. This suddenly restricted the Russian autocratic power, and that certainly was not something that could accommodate a power as big as Russia. Almost all the other major powers had to transition to a more democratic power. Russia, and perhaps Turkey, remained very autocratic, and that made everything particularly difficult for the czar to manage. The Russian autocracy was replaced by Stalin’s one-party dictatorship. The same question, the same problem, remained. But certainly, the Soviet Union was not backward-looking; it looked forward to take advantage of industrial technological achievements of the day and that certainly helped Moscow to govern the Soviet Union.
How was Joseph Stalin able to achieve and maintain full control over the Soviet Union during his leadership? How was he capable of acquiring and developing an unassailable power base that effectively protected him from any possible opposition?
Unlike the czar, Stalin was a very capable manager. He was not bound by the tradition of autocratic power: he was bound by Marxism. He was a superb politician who knew how to manage things- how to choose the right person for the right position. He was not always constrained by vanity and other ambitions. He was focused, and was able to manage the country quite skillfully. He certainly had very good eyes for individuals, and that helped him.
What role do you believe the cult of personality and various forms of propaganda played in the maintenance of Joseph Stalin’s supreme control?
He understood that the Soviet Union needed a new czar, which was, certainly, Stalin, So in that sense, yes, the cult of personality probably mattered, and Stalin understood it. But the way that he consciously promoted it, for his own sake, was necessary for maintaining stability in the Soviet Union.
What factors caused the Ukrainian famine of 1932-33? How did this famine impact Ukraine and the Soviet Union as a whole?
Certainly one of the most important reasons was that the government was bent on taking grain from the peasants— as much grain as possible— and did not care about the lives of the peasants, and that is probably the most important reason. There are many other reasons, international circumstances, and climatic factors. Certainly another important factor was that Moscow refused to admit that there was famine, which prevented them from asking for international assistance. They also continued to export grain when the country needed grain, and the imports did not go to the famished areas; they went elsewhere. Many people believed that Stalin’s anti-Ukrainian political color contributed to great famine in Ukraine. Therefore, Ukrainians call it ‘Holodomor’- it means ‘death by hunger’. All of these factors impacted Ukraine and the Soviet Union as a whole; the famine led the deaths of millions of people in peacetime, which could have been prevented if Stalin had been honest; if he had made the feeding of the populace his first priority, probably, he would have saved the lives of the several million people who died. So in that sense, it was very important that Stalin showed his brutal policy and demonstrated that Moscow really did not care about the loss of millions of people. That certainly impacted the Soviet Union and the outside world’s depiction of the Soviet Union.
How was Joseph Stalin’s leadership significant on a global scale?
Without Stalin, the twentieth century would have been completely different. Certainly, he stayed in power for a long time. He shaped the region of the world from the 1920s to the 1950s. He lasted for a long time, and we can probably say that he is still there. He is one of the two or three most significant political figures of the twentieth century. And in that sense, we can say that Stalin’s presence impacted the world enormously.
What was the most important thing you learned from viewing the Soviet Secret Police archives and creating your book, The Voices of the Dead: Stalin’s Great Terror in the 1930s?
The most important thing I learned is that the Soviet Union is difficult to study; there are so many hidden aspects; there are so many documents ever hidden; there are so many secrets which they do not want to disclose; there are multiple things we simply do not know, and clearly, they relate to secret police and military intelligence operations. Stalin engaged in dirty politics all the time. He was certainly cold-blooded, and engaged in dirty business very calmly. Stalin said, ‘those who do not want to dirty their hands should not be in politics.’ That was the most important thing that I’ve learned from working with Soviet Secret Police archives.
First of all, the Russian Empire was an autocracy, which was forced to make some concessions after 1905, but the czar stuck to his god-given divine autocratic power, which he wanted to hand down to his heir. This suddenly restricted the Russian autocratic power, and that certainly was not something that could accommodate a power as big as Russia. Almost all the other major powers had to transition to a more democratic power. Russia, and perhaps Turkey, remained very autocratic, and that made everything particularly difficult for the czar to manage. The Russian autocracy was replaced by Stalin’s one-party dictatorship. The same question, the same problem, remained. But certainly, the Soviet Union was not backward-looking; it looked forward to take advantage of industrial technological achievements of the day and that certainly helped Moscow to govern the Soviet Union.
How was Joseph Stalin able to achieve and maintain full control over the Soviet Union during his leadership? How was he capable of acquiring and developing an unassailable power base that effectively protected him from any possible opposition?
Unlike the czar, Stalin was a very capable manager. He was not bound by the tradition of autocratic power: he was bound by Marxism. He was a superb politician who knew how to manage things- how to choose the right person for the right position. He was not always constrained by vanity and other ambitions. He was focused, and was able to manage the country quite skillfully. He certainly had very good eyes for individuals, and that helped him.
What role do you believe the cult of personality and various forms of propaganda played in the maintenance of Joseph Stalin’s supreme control?
He understood that the Soviet Union needed a new czar, which was, certainly, Stalin, So in that sense, yes, the cult of personality probably mattered, and Stalin understood it. But the way that he consciously promoted it, for his own sake, was necessary for maintaining stability in the Soviet Union.
What factors caused the Ukrainian famine of 1932-33? How did this famine impact Ukraine and the Soviet Union as a whole?
Certainly one of the most important reasons was that the government was bent on taking grain from the peasants— as much grain as possible— and did not care about the lives of the peasants, and that is probably the most important reason. There are many other reasons, international circumstances, and climatic factors. Certainly another important factor was that Moscow refused to admit that there was famine, which prevented them from asking for international assistance. They also continued to export grain when the country needed grain, and the imports did not go to the famished areas; they went elsewhere. Many people believed that Stalin’s anti-Ukrainian political color contributed to great famine in Ukraine. Therefore, Ukrainians call it ‘Holodomor’- it means ‘death by hunger’. All of these factors impacted Ukraine and the Soviet Union as a whole; the famine led the deaths of millions of people in peacetime, which could have been prevented if Stalin had been honest; if he had made the feeding of the populace his first priority, probably, he would have saved the lives of the several million people who died. So in that sense, it was very important that Stalin showed his brutal policy and demonstrated that Moscow really did not care about the loss of millions of people. That certainly impacted the Soviet Union and the outside world’s depiction of the Soviet Union.
How was Joseph Stalin’s leadership significant on a global scale?
Without Stalin, the twentieth century would have been completely different. Certainly, he stayed in power for a long time. He shaped the region of the world from the 1920s to the 1950s. He lasted for a long time, and we can probably say that he is still there. He is one of the two or three most significant political figures of the twentieth century. And in that sense, we can say that Stalin’s presence impacted the world enormously.
What was the most important thing you learned from viewing the Soviet Secret Police archives and creating your book, The Voices of the Dead: Stalin’s Great Terror in the 1930s?
The most important thing I learned is that the Soviet Union is difficult to study; there are so many hidden aspects; there are so many documents ever hidden; there are so many secrets which they do not want to disclose; there are multiple things we simply do not know, and clearly, they relate to secret police and military intelligence operations. Stalin engaged in dirty politics all the time. He was certainly cold-blooded, and engaged in dirty business very calmly. Stalin said, ‘those who do not want to dirty their hands should not be in politics.’ That was the most important thing that I’ve learned from working with Soviet Secret Police archives.