Process of Ukraine returning to the peace life, begun at once on the released east areas and proceeded in extreme severe conditions. The war with its «accompanying elements», walked twice along its territory as the destruction wave. As a terrible wave of a tsunami, at first it came on the east, then, in the opposite direction. Every sixth inhabitant of republic was lost, and the most efficient population, men, were on fronts. According to the statistical researches which still were under the signature stamp "confidentially", more than ten millions of people, occupying Ukraine, were dishomed, because invaders destroyed and burnt 714 cities and settlements, more than 28 thousand villages, more than 16 thousand industrial enterprises, almost 33 thousand schools, technical schools and high schools. After liberation there was only the fifth part of pre-war number of the industrial enterprises, that urgently needed repairing in the republic . About 30 thousand collective farms, state farms, MTS stopped their existence. The total sum of the damage put to the population and national economy of Ukraine, made almost 1,2 trillion roubles at the rate of 1941. But there was one more question - of the definitive association of all Ukrainian lands that was fixed in the decisions of the Crimean (Yalta) conference.
Nevertheless, by 1950 the first military parade took place on a Kreschatik in the restored Kyiv. That event became the beginning of the new epoch in Ukraine - from ruin to fulfillments.
The monument to Bogdan Khmelnitsky in Kyiv - January, 1944
The same time the process of the West Ukrainian lands industrialisation which industry wasn't developed in the east, and didn't receive such catastrophic destructions. The development of the western areas of Ukraine in the post-war years differed by the number of features. The Soviet system that was actually the new system, because the population hadn't had time to "be reconstructed" for one and a half year (from November of 1939 to June, 22nd of 1941), faced the hostile relation of Greek-Catholic church, strong influence of the nationalism ideas among the population, strongly negative attitude to collectivisation by the majority of peasantry, and as the result the armed actions from underground OUN- UPA. Nevertheless, in the new areas of the Western Ukraine industrialisation took place all the same. By 1951 the industrial production had grown to 230 % in comparison with 1945 (Poland hadn't manufactures in its interests) and made 10 % of the industrial production of the whole Ukraine. The collective-farm peasantry, working class, and the new concept for the population of the western areas was generated. There appeared an intelligency, not creative which always was in Galichina, by technical that also became the opening for the Western Ukraine. Some of my colleagues reproach the Soviet power that it violently sent the West Ukrainian young men and girls to study in Kyiv, Kharkov, Stalino, Zaporizhzhia, Dnepropetrovsk. But, pardon me, whence the West Ukrainian power, mountain engineers, metallurgists, manufacture technologists, experts of the average industry could come from. Already in due course, i.e. in 1951, the high schools in Lvov, Stanislav, Drogobych, Chernovtsy, Tarnopol were opened. But, it is necessary not to forget that all those transformations and improvement of simple people's life on the West Ukrainian lands occured in terms of fierce collisions. On the one hand the bodies of People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs during the struggle against gangsterism (so the struggle with OUN-UPA was estimated) really applied reprisals and unreasonable charges of fair workers in nationalism, deportation of more than 200 thousand people to eastern areas of the country. On the other hand, OUN-UPA destroyed all who came to help people: doctors, teachers, average heads, Soviet and party workers, frontier guards protecting the border, admitted by the whole world .
Nevertheless, despite the difficult post-war years, noted by wearisome work and material difficulties, to the beginning of 50th Ukraine had reached the pre-war level of economic development.
March 5th, 1953 became the events of the end of Stalinism epoch. Namely Stalinism, instead of Stalin epoch, because the victory has a lot of relatives and the troubles - are orphan. Not only the «leader of all times and people» is guilty in the troubles of all Soviet people, and Ukrainian people, in particular. The events of today's history are the evidence of that, when all together go on the Maidan , and go alone on the history court. There's no such thing as: to know everyone by name or not to speak about the cult of personality, forgetting about other, not less significant persons, who if the victory happens say "hurrah" if the loss - «I was against», but only «silently and inwardly» ...
Later Stalin epoch was connected with the name of Russia and Ukraine native Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev (as he called himself). Well, as to the persons carrying patronymic Sergeevich, we are short of luck, because there were either corn experiments, or "reorganizations". Another matter Leonidovichs - quiet, with the feeling, arrangement, certain stability, though with the elements of «Pripyat bogs». Well, that is the lyrical-historical deviation.
The things that were made during that period:
- «Khrushchev's thaw», including Ukrainian intelligency;
- Experiments in agriculture on all open spaces of USSR, including Ukraine;
- Participation of Ukraine in virgin lands lifting though the own lands weren't mastered properly (by the way, why abusing Khrushchev, we should better walk along the fields of modern Ukraine);
- Introduction of new system of crop rotations, i.e. by the command and under the schedule;
- Firstly creation, and then MTS liquidation, at the initiative of Ukraine;
- Decision of village personnel problems by Khrushchev's type as if «I've said so»;
- The decision of liquidation of the branch ministries and introduction of national economy councils;
- Increase in release of consumer goods (the first refrigerators, washing machines, automobiles "Moscvich" and "Gorbatiy", baby carriages, modern and accessible furniture);
- The decision of housing problem as a whole, who doesn't trust, means that he didn't live in "Khrushevka" (five-storied apartment block);
- Serious development of science, but not culture, in the sense of its "pluralism" (if the woman should have a plait and should be dressed in the skirt, so and in no other way);
- Carrying out of currency reform by 1961;
- The further expansion of communications with the foreign countries, both «national democracy», and «sharks of capitalism»;
- Opening of borders for an «exchange of experience», but only not air (as the well-known air scout Powers);
- Administrative-political reform according to which Crimea was a part of Ukraine (I'm not the supporter of of this theme consideration as, according to one modern ex-politician words «we have, what we have», and if it have fallen to you, take it, otherwise, you will lose);
- Development of social sphere and increase of the standard of life, growth of workers' incomes, including Ukraine, etc.
Though Khruschev's reforms also contained the positive moments, but owing to their incompleteness and inconsistency (they did not touch the bases of command-management system, the economic transformations were not supplemented with the deep democratisation of a society and etc.) there were no cardinal changes in the economy and other spheres of public life. It is possible to argue with this postulate from encyclopaedia. The national economy continued to develop in extensive way, but it DID DEVELOPED.
March 6 - 12 , 2009 #9 (459)
Sergey SMOLIANNIKOV, Victor MIKHAILOV
The son also responded his mother with fidelity and love similar to deification. In 1932 he took away the parents to Moscow. If Sergey Nikanorovich after miner's life couldn't find himself in the capital, in the "House on the quay" the mother, as they say, got in sphere. Practically all the days she together with her neighbour and mothers of the same party functionaries, stayed on the small bench near the entrance and talked about her son and his first children. The mother loved her son not only as the native child, but also as the "great person". Thus, as all other members of the household remembered, the mother at once had taken a dislike to Nina Petrovna Kukharchuk as she considered that Efrosinya Ivanovna - Frosya, the mother of Lena and Yulya was the best Nikita's wife (the first wife died of typhus in 1919). The second wife, Marusya, under the memoirs, was simply made things warm from the house. Both the last daughter-in-law and grandsons gave such characteristic to Ksenia Ivanovna: "Khrushchev's mother - broad-faced, severe, with hair smoothly combed back, was the strong woman. Ksenia was not simply smart, but rather wise woman. If she had obtained the higher education- she would have been something ". In 1938 Sergey Nikanorovich who was buried not on prestigious, but on Moscow cemetery nearest to the house (most likely, on Vagankovsky) died of tuberculosis. After father's funeral neither Nikita Sergeevich, nor Ksenia Ivanovna had ever been on his tomb which for today is not found ... Then 1938 came, the year of the beginning of the Ukrainian stage in Nikita Sergeevich's life and his big family. He couldn't live in loneliness, without his wife, children and, certainly, mother. In the square on the Herzen Street Khrushchev's private residence, as well as his guest small house in Mezhigorye remained till now. With the Great Patriotic War beginning all Khrushchev's family, except the young pilot Leonid Khrushchev and Nikita Sergeevich went on evacuation to Kuibyshev. After the war Khrushchev came back to Kyiv on the post of the first secretary of Central Committee of Communist Party of Ukraine. But in September 1944, he returned his family to native Kyiv, and then lodged in Mezhigorye. He was again in the high orbit of the power, the country and the republic which up to the end hadn't been liberated from German-Romanian invaders was proud of it. The same time the nice date came to the life of any politician - 50th anniversary. As usual, they waited for any special "goodwill" of the leader Stalin. But the life, alas, introduced the corrective amendments: on February, 29th, 1944 Nikolay Vatutin got heavy, but yet nonfatal wound from the bullets of Bandera's following. The self-confident Nikita Sergeevich convinced Moscow that Kyiv doctors would not only rescue the legendary commander, but also put him on feet. However in such cases the delay is the death similarity: Gangrene, and on April, 15th the heart of the talented commander and the favourite of armies and people stopped. On April, 17th, in the day of his semicentenial anniversary, instead of the holiday in his honour Khruschev waited a funeral of general Vatutin ... Ksenia Ivanovna, with her parent scent, worried concerning the fact, the death of one of Stalin's favourite generals could shoot down on the son's further career. If Georgy Zhukov played along with Nikita Sergeevich, that after Vatutin's death he became the 1st Ukrainian ordering under whose guidance he had taken Berlin and supported Khruschev's version that Vatutin's wound was deadly, the mother couldn't stand that stress. The anxiety at such age (after all she was 73 year old woman) affected her health, and literally in half a year after her moving to Kyiv, she died. She was buried on Lukyanovsky cemetery, on the central avenue. Being already the head of the state, Nikita Sergeevich visited the native tomb very often. Remembering his proletarian origin, he forbade to put the monument on her tomb. Today the tomb of Khruschev's mother was brought in the register of Kyiv history monuments. It is also necessary to notice that two persons are buried in one tomb: Khruschev's mother and his son-in-law - Victor Gontar, the husband of oldest daughter Yulia, the former director of Kyiv opera. ... we do not know, how "Khruschev's followings" of Ukraine will remember Nikita Sergeevich's name but if to speak about him and his affairs it is necessary to tell some words about his mother ...
- «Politicians are identical everywhere: they promise to construct the bridge, where there is also no the river»;
- «We shall never accept Adenauera as the representative of Germany. If to take off his trousers and to look at his bum you can convince that Germany is divided. And if to look in front of him you can convince that Germany will never rise»;
«Are you men or damned faggots, how can you write such things?».