Telling it Like it Was

As Central Asian historians come together to write a history textbook for use in all five republics, commentators in Kazakstan say everything depends on whether the authors can put aside national pride and prejudices and devise a narrative acceptable to all these countries.



At a conference on Central Asian education held in Tashkent on December 4, it was announced that the textbook would be published as soon as the middle of next year. It will be written by a group of historians and orientalists from Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan.



When they became independent in 1991, each of the five Central Asian countries embarked on a search for statehood and identity, and began writing its own history. This has led to a situation where the history books written in one country directly contradict those published in another.



According to Seidahmet Kuttykaddam, a political scientist and editor of the Mysl journal in Kazakstan, “Each country wants to portray itself as an ancient, powerful entity that influenced the whole region. Yet in reality, the history and cultures of the region are inseparable. So if academics from these countries succeed in shaping a common history that does not exaggerate anyone’s role, they will have achieved a great and important thing.”



Professor Jaken Taimagambetov, head of the history department at Kazakstan’s Al-Farabi University, welcomes the ambition to create a shared textbook that will influence the way future generations view their own national identity.



“History is taught in a disjointed way. We always imagined that history was just as it was presented to us in the Soviet Union,” he said. “If academics from these three countries get to grips with the task, I think they arrive at the truth and we will discover many interesting facts that were previously hidden.”



NBCentralAsia commentators say the historians will have to overcome narrow political and national prejudices, and the desire of political elites in their countries to record their own ancient history and statehood – even if it is fictitious.



Kuttykadam thinks serious western academics are amused by the process of re-interpreting the past that is now going on in Kazakstan. Instead of this, he argues that Kazakstan's citizens should be encouraged to develop the kind of patriotism that is based on a clear-headed and unadorned view of the past, and a region-wide textbook could help achieve this.



One difficulty is that the separate historical narratives have already become entrenched in people’s minds. As Taimagambetov put it, “An Uzbek cannot know the history of the Kazaks, and Kazak cannot know that of the Kyrgyz people.”



(News Briefing Central Asia draws comment and analysis from a broad range of political observers across the region.)