THE SOVIET HISTORIOGRAPHY AND THE QUESTION OF KAZAKHSTAN’S HISTORY

THE QUESTION OF KAZAKHSTAN’S HISTORY 151
Ivanova, and suggested to take under Russia’s nationality all Kazakhs
living under khan’s control. This means that instead of using word
auspices it was used word nationality. In 1731 Anna Ivanova send to
Ebu’l Hayr Han a decree informing him that all Kazakhs living under
his control are taken under Russia nationality. Muhammed Tevkelev
was sent as a envoy to Ebu’l Hayr Han to formalize this decision. 253
After meeting with Russia’s envoy Tevkelev, Ebu’l Hayr Han stated
that he took the Russia’s decision of asking for auspices, but also
stated that he didn’t take confirmation from other chieftains and
sultans. In October 1831, all chieftains and sultans participated on
Khan’s Council and they heavily criticize Ebu’l Hayr Khan’s decision
of asking to participate to Russia which is taken by himself before
asking council. The council as a result decided that “We want to live in
peace with Russia but not under their nationality.” In the council only
Ebu’l Hayr Han with three other persons near him accepted Russia’s
auspices and they took an oath. 254
This event that happened in process of annexation of Kazakhstan
to Russia in publications in Soviet period constituted a base for Kazakhstan
voluntarily participation to Russia. Russia’s establishment
of fortification on north of Kazakh’s land in Turkestan, and therefore
becoming neighbor to Kazakhs, Russian officers’ undertakings to take
Kazakhs under Russia’s influence, Kazakhs’ fear of Dzungar, Ebu’l Hayr
Han and few other Kazakh chieftains’ asking for Russia’s auspices and
similar reasons does not mean that Kazakhs are voluntarily Russia’s
community and part of state. Tsar Petro’s East policies should be
remembered to understand that here Kazakhstan was not voluntarily
annexed to Russia. Petro’s following words are helping us to understand
Russia’s ambitions over Kazakhstan: “Kazakh is a gate and key
to all Asia countries there. That’s why we should absolutely take them
under Russia auspices” 255 Thus after Russian occupation they fought
very much to protect their liberty and against Russian influence. Riots
leaded by Syrym Batur, Jolaman Tilenshi, Isatay Tayman, Sultan
Kenesari couldn’t be overlooked neither by Tsardom historians nor by
Soviet historians. This struggles for liberty are showing that Russia’s
annexation of Kazakhstan was not voluntarily participation, but it
was a occupation.
In the Soviet period in a name of building a Soviet nation histo-
253 Hayit, B., Sovyetler Birliği’nde Türklüğün ve İslam’ın Bazı Meseleleri, İstanbul, 1987, pp.
132-133.
254 Ibid, p. 134.
255 Hayit, B., Türkistan Devletlerinin Milli Mücadele Tarihi, Ankara, 1995, p. 49