Latest / The Story of Armenia: Survival Through Empires and Genocide — Fexingo History / Armenia Under Soviet Rule: The Dark Years of Stalin and Beyond
Transcript
- Lucas: So we've talked about the genocide, the fedayee, the kingdoms — but there's a whole century we've barely touched: Armenia under Soviet rule. I think a lot of people assume that joining the USSR was a straightforward disaster, but the reality is more complicated. It was both a cage and a shield. Luna: A shield? Against who? Lucas: Against Turkey, mostly. After the genocide and the collapse of the First Republic in 1920, Armenia was in a terrible position. The Treaty of Kars in 1921 gave huge chunks of territory — like Mount Ararat itself — to Turkey. But Soviet protection meant that Turkey couldn't push further east. Without Moscow, there might not be any Armenian state left at all. Luna: So the Soviets were the lesser evil in that moment? Lucas: Exactly. And that's the tragedy. The Armenian Revolutionary Federation — the Dashnaks — fought tooth and nail against the Bolsheviks. In February 1921, they even led a successful uprising and held Yerevan for a few months. But the Red Army crushed it, and by July the Soviet Armenian Socialist Republic was firmly in control. The price of survival was submission. Lucas: Now, one key figure in this transition was Anastas Mikoyan. He was an old Bolshevik, born in the Armenian village of Sanahin, and he rose incredibly high in the Soviet hierarchy — under Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev. He was one of the very few top Soviet leaders who was openly Armenian, and he walked a tightrope. Luna: Did he help Armenia or just serve Moscow? Lucas: Both, in a way. He helped secure resources for Armenia, promoted Armenian communists, and even shielded some cultural figures. But he also participated in Stalin's purges and signed off on deportations. He's a deeply controversial figure — a survivor who played the game. Lucas: And then there were the intellectuals who couldn't play the game. Yeghishe Charents, Armenia's greatest poet of the early 20th century, initially celebrated the revolution. But by the 1930s, his work was deemed 'nationalist' and 'counter-revolutionary.' He was arrested in 1937 and died in a Yerevan prison — probably executed, though the records are murky. Luna: That's the Great Purge hitting Armenia directly. Lucas: Exactly. And Charents was far from alone. The entire Armenian intelligentsia was decimated. Writers, historians, musicians — hundreds were arrested, shot, or sent to the gulags. Soviet policy was to suppress any expression of national identity that didn't fit the 'socialist in content, national in form' line. But that line was a trap. Lucas: Take the Armenian Apostolic Church. Under the Soviets, it was heavily persecuted. Etchmiadzin was turned into a puppet institution — the Catholicos could only be chosen with Kremlin approval. But at the same time, the church was allowed to exist as a symbol for the diaspora, a way to draw in sympathizers abroad. So it was both a prison and a stage. Luna: That's so cynical. Use the church to control people here and look good to Armenians abroad. Lucas: Exactly. And this dual-use approach applied to the Nagorno-Karabakh issue too. The Soviet Union created the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast in 1923, putting an Armenian-majority region inside Soviet Azerbaijan. Stalin probably did that to keep both groups divided and dependent on Moscow. That decision is still causing wars today. Luna: So the Soviet era actually planted the mines for modern conflicts. Lucas: It did. And that's one reason understanding this period is so important. But there's also a human story of everyday survival. For ordinary Armenians, the Soviet system brought education, industrialization, and infrastructure — Yerevan was transformed from a dusty provincial town into a modern city. But it came at a cost: loss of freedom, Russification, and constant fear. Lucas: If you've been coming along with us through these conversations — about the Caucasus, about how empires swallow cultures — you know that these episodes take a lot of time to research and produce. We don't run ads, and we don't have a network behind us. So if today's episode was worth a coffee to you, there's a link: buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Just saying — it helps keep this project going. Luna: Yeah, it's a small thing that makes a big difference. Lucas: So back to the Soviet story: one of the most poignant episodes is the fate of the Armenian diaspora's hopes. After World War II, Stalin briefly hinted at reclaiming Armenian lands from Turkey — the so-called 'Armenian Question' revival. He even set up a repatriation campaign, urging Armenians abroad to return to the homeland. And thousands did — from France, Syria, Lebanon, the US. Luna: And then Stalin dropped it. Lucas: He dropped it. Once the Cold War started, he needed Turkey as a NATO ally more than he needed to please Armenians. The repatriates were left stranded — many were arrested as spies, or sent to Siberia. It was a cruel bait and switch. The Soviet Union used Armenian national sentiment when convenient, and crushed it when not. Luna: That must have created so much bitterness. Lucas: It did. And it's still felt. The Soviet era is a wound that hasn't healed. For some, it was a time of stability and progress. For others, it was an occupation. The truth is somewhere in between, but the scars are real. And understanding that helps explain why post-Soviet Armenia has struggled to find its footing — caught between Russia, Turkey, and its own past.