Academician Chubaryan. “Pandora’s Box”: what is Academician Chubaryan afraid of? Social and scientific activities

Academician Alexander Chubaryan, director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences

STATEHOOD IS A COMMON FEATURE OF ALL REGIMES IN RUSSIA

Question: Alexander Oganovich, this summer they talked a lot about the Russian Academy of Sciences, but not in connection with scientific research; this, unfortunately, does not concern the general public. A letter from ten academicians about the danger of clericalism in society aroused scandalous interest. As far as I know, you were also offered to sign the letter, but you chose not to do so. By occupation, among all the academicians, you are closest to the highest hierarchs of the Church and met not only with the Patriarch, but also with the Pope. Why didn't you sign the letter?

Answer: It seems to me that my signature on any letter that concerns the problems of the coexistence of science and religion would not be very ethical. The President of the Russian Academy of Sciences entrusted our institute and me personally with responsibility for relations with the Patriarchate. We have already held several conferences in which representatives of the Vatican also participated. At the last conference “Christianity and the role of moral and ethical values in history and culture,” even I, an academician in history, was very interested in the reports of Metropolitan Kirill and Cardinal Poupard. In addition, I am on the editorial board of the Orthodox Encyclopedia and on the editorial board of the Catholic Encyclopedia. Recently, under my editorship, it was published tutorial"Religions of the World". All this limits my participation in any petitions on this issue.

Question: And yet, how do you feel about the thoughts expressed in the letter of your colleagues regarding the excessive influence of the church on secular life?

Answer: It doesn’t seem to me that society is sinking into clericalism. Although moral problems We have plenty. The Church can usefully participate in the revival of moral and ethical values, and this corresponds to the expectations of society. Despite strong polarization, the masses welcome the idea. I don’t see anything wrong with the fact that the Church, as Metropolitan Kirill said, does not want to be outside society and is looking for its own “niche.”

At the same time, the whole world history has many examples of complex and often very contradictory relations between the church and the authorities, between the church and various layers of society, which also influenced political life, and on the mood in society. Harmony in relations between secular authorities and the church should not be violated. The main thing is to follow the Constitution, according to which the church is separated from the state. At the same time, we must not forget that the morality of society strongly depends on the morality of the authorities.

Question: For some reason, it seems to me that morality depends much more strongly on the degree of development of civil society than on the depth of understanding of religious doctrines. After all, the Bible is already two thousand years old, and morality has always been different. What seemed normal in the time of Ivan the Terrible now looks wild, although the church canon has not changed.

Answer: Of course, morality is a historical category, but still there are some generally accepted unchanging principles that are named in the Bible. The main ones are rejection of violence, love of one’s neighbor, respect for other people’s opinions, which is now called tolerance. And, ideally, all this should concern not only private life, but also politics. For me, in this regard, the pacifism movement is of great importance. I dealt with this issue many years ago and even published an article - “Morality and Politics.” And the slogan “the end justifies the means” too often led to violations of ethics and morality, human rights and entire peoples, to repressive and punitive measures.

Question: How, in this case, should we deal, for example, with terrorists who take hostages and offer to exchange their lives for their demands? After all, life is the highest value, it is absolute, and morality has no quantitative expression.

Answer: No, I’m not a Tolstoyan, and when violence is committed, you have to respond to it with violence.

Question: There were periods in the history of Russia when power was moral?

Answer: It's hard to imagine. All Russian history, and world history too, is filled with wars, and a short peace is just a respite between wars. And history usually glorifies those who fought wars and achieved victories, although I am sure that young people should also be shown those who thought about peace. But do we remember such figures or politicians? Sakharov or Mother Teresa were highly moral people, but had no power. Maybe Confucius and Gandhi? Or philosophers Ancient Greece? Here is a little-known historical example: The Hague Convention of 1907, which became the basis of international law, was adopted on the initiative of Nicholas II.

Question: Sometimes it seems that it would be better if our last king looked back at morality less often. In the theory of self-organization of complex systems, there is a term “bifurcation point”, when the system reaches a state in which its basic properties change qualitatively and irreversibly. In Russian history, what moments would you call a bifurcation point?

Answer: 1917 and 1991. At those moments, Russia was faced with a choice that had not been made before. Peter, Elizabeth, and Catherine also faced the problem of choosing a path, but for many reasons it was easier for them to make this choice. Even the revolution of 1917 took place gradually, stretching along with the Civil War for several years. But in 1991 it was all about quick solutions. But choosing a path does not mean choosing the conditions for implementation. The best intentions can be spoiled by the way they are executed. Which is exactly what happened. The biggest mistake of reformers is neglecting the social factor, although there is plenty of world experience in this area. There is even a term that was introduced for the transition from totalitarianism to democracy - “social depreciation.” In many former socialist countries, such social stratification did not arise as in modern Russia.

I remember meetings with George Kennan, a famous American diplomat and Sovietologist. Kennan said that nothing would come of Gorbachev’s ideas because the middle layer of apparatchiks would not let them through. And in this regard, another question is whether we would have been able to get out of totalitarianism without shock therapy, without going too far.

Question: Our most popular philosophers were Berdyaev and Soloviev, who wrote about the uniqueness of Russia’s historical path and its fundamental dissimilarity with all other countries. But now globalization has arrived. How does this fit in with the messianism of Russia?

Answer: Globalization is an objective process when the world expands and general processes take place in all countries. A country that does not want to be left out of progress must be in this flow. But it turned out that globalization does not eliminate the desire for national identity. The founding fathers of European integration dreamed that Europe would become absolutely homogeneous. A lot has been done for this - there are no borders, mobility is high, education is common, money is common, but peoples do not want to lose cultural independence and identity.

Extremely interesting processes are taking place in the post-Soviet space. I speak about this as the chairman of the Association of Directors of Institutes of History of the CIS Countries. We gathered several times, and it is clear that in all countries there is a search for national identity, multi-volume works on history have already been written. The search for a national concept becomes for many historians and politicians the main meaning of their activities. In some former Soviet republics, textbooks say that all evil came from Russia, and the term “colonization” is introduced. It seems to me that it is dangerous to limitlessly strengthen the role of national priorities - you can end up on the global periphery. My position is that the presence of these countries within Russia and the USSR, despite all the difficulties, brought them to a higher economic level and included them in the sphere of big politics. I am an optimist by nature and believe that manifestations of extreme nationalism will become a thing of the past. It must be borne in mind that all nations, being part of Russian Empire and the USSR, experienced the same difficulties. In general, the idea of asserting national identity“at the expense of Russia” seems to me unproductive, contradicts the facts and will lead us all to a dead end.

By the way, many countries are very calm about the periods of their history when they were part of other states. Norwegians and Swedes recall many facts of their common history as a reason for jokes and anecdotes. There is no anti-British syndrome in India or Bangladesh. Not only colonization came to these countries from England, but also technological innovations and cultural achievements. As before, the elite prefer to study at Oxford and Cambridge. It seems to me that it is culture that can become the bonding point that will unite countries in the post-Soviet space.

Question: There is not a person in Russia who does not from time to time ask himself the question whether it is possible to restore the country within its former borders. If there is no such option, then what place should Russia strive to occupy in the post-Soviet space? And how can we build relations with the former socialist camp, where anti-Russian sentiments grow richly?

Answer: No, the old borders cannot be returned. In the countries that left the USSR, a national elite with powerful, diverse interests was formed. I see neither economic nor political ways of returning them to Russia. Some countries have already become part of Europe, but Russia is also part of Europe. And we must not forget that Bulgaria and Ukraine for Western Europe not at all the same as Germany and Holland. We must strive to ensure that Russia is perceived as a friendly partner, cooperation with which is beneficial and inevitable. And here the humanitarian component is important, because for historical reasons the interpenetration of our cultures is so deep that neighboring peoples feel a psychological need for each other. And I am very glad that, for example, we are discussing with colleagues from Tbilisi the project “Cultural ties between Russia and Georgia in the 19th–20th centuries.”

Question: IN last years in the West there is growing criticism that Russia has turned away from the path of democracy and is returning to totalitarianism, albeit in a softened form. You are, as it were, between two fires. On the one hand, you are one of the few holders of the Order of the Legion of Honor in Russia, on the other hand, you are a member of the Public Chamber of the Council under the President of the Russian Federation. Tell me, has Russia changed democracy? Or maybe democracy is contraindicated for Russia?

Answer: I love France very much, and it annoys me that it is in France that such sentiments are strong. I have repeatedly told my Western colleagues: commitment to democratic values cannot be measured by the degree of compliance with Western ideals. A little to the side, a little we go our own way, the vertical of power is built a little stronger - and a verdict is already passed that Russia does not meet democratic standards.

We must not forget that the idea of statehood has always been strong in Russia. This idea often prevailed over others at all stages of the formation of the Russian state. Karamzin wrote about this, but it is still true today. Therefore, it is impossible to judge unequivocally: if the state vertical is strengthened in Russia, this is bad and this is a betrayal of democracy. Strengthening statehood is a common feature of all political regimes in Russia. And the desire for statehood has been a common feature of the Russian political elite for many centuries. For us, this craving has intensified in recent years. Historically this is inevitable. Why is the idea of statehood so important for Russia? There are many reasons. In the confessional sphere, the roots of Orthodoxy differ from the roots of Catholicism and Protestantism. And there was no religious reformation in Russia. And the Mongols influenced Russia for centuries, and in Europe there were only internal wars, without the threat of cultural enslavement.

The current strengthening of statehood may be a reaction to what happened in the early 1990s, when there were clear signs of instability and weakening of power in the economy and in politics. That is why the desire to strengthen state power received such overwhelming support from the population. But on modern stage development, along with the idea of statehood, there is, although not without difficulties, the process of forming a civil society. By the way, there were certain elements of civil society in pre-revolutionary Russia - zemstvos, business unions.

Question: You said that no amount of globalism can erase national differences in Europe. This means that different European countries treat Russia differently. Where is Russia loved more, where less?

Answer: In surveys where positive attitudes towards Russia were revealed, Spain and Germany lead. We never had any conflicts with the Spaniards. In addition, the memory of children who were raised in the USSR after civil war in Spain. It’s more complicated with Germany, but perhaps they are connected by common blood and common troubles. Moreover, geopolitically, the fate of Europe has always largely depended on the relationship between Russia and Germany.

In relation to Russia, the range of public sentiments in Europe and the United States is diverse. There is the position and sentiment of political elites, there is the opinion of intellectuals, a special place belongs to the media, and, finally, there is ordinary mass consciousness. And all these groups have different opinions and different motivations. The influence of long-term historical traditions and the pressure of the past is of considerable importance. The mentality of the population also affects this.

Italy, perhaps more than other European countries, served as a connecting link for many great figures of Russian culture. There are similarities in the character and temperament of the Russian and Italian peoples. In France, the political and intellectual elite have always considered themselves trendsetters in the field of human rights and preferred to evaluate all countries. As for England, the “chill” in relations between us is often inexplicable, because there are few conflict situations between us. Many thousands of Russian citizens now traveling to Europe feel the obvious sympathy of ordinary Europeans and at the same time face harsh assessments from the media. Despite integration, one cannot discount the tradition of European balance, which was followed by the Austrian Chancellor Metternich and the French politician Talleyrand in the 19th century. They wrote: when Moscow and Paris get closer, Berlin and London begin to feel feverish.

In a renewed Europe, the ideas and practice of European balance have not disappeared and often reappear. At the forefront, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the states of the post-Soviet space are beginning to play a significant role. All this gives European realities a bizarre character. In the system of European interaction, the Russian political elite and our mass consciousness, in which a positive attitude towards Europe clearly outweighs the negative, are of considerable importance. A special issue is Russian-American relations. It has its own traditions and too close memory of the bipolar world.

Question: Alexander Oganovich, your father headed the Lenin State Library for a long time. Your entire life has been spent among books, and your collection of miniature editions is famous among bibliophiles. Our country has held the title of “the most read country in the world” for decades, although it invented and appropriated this title itself. But now the average Russian hardly reads. Is there a threat in this, or can the flow of information enter consciousness in a different, simpler way?

Answer: I am sure that one of our serious problems is that young people read very little. There are explanations for this, and I’m not a retrograde: the Internet appeared, that’s it best works filmed. During exams at the university, I see that even classical works are read by one or two students out of ten, although everyone knows the plot. But if a young man reads Turgenev, his soul will change, he will become more moral, better. I am convinced that reading is not only an information channel. Reading – the best remedy introduction to world culture and the best way to form intelligence. Let's be honest: the vast majority of our contemporaries do not understand the paintings of the Renaissance, and the masterpieces of Titian and Raphael do not tell them anything. However, even in England they complain that young people don’t take Shakespeare into their hands. And in France a national rescue committee has been created French. We have many common problems with European countries, no matter what they say about our differences.

Question: Is it true that you participated in writing Gorbachev’s speech, after which he became a prophet of a new vision in the West?

Answer: Can I leave one of your questions unanswered?

S.L.: Yes, I forgot – the most important thing for us is the idea of statehood.

From the book Newspaper Tomorrow 776 (40 2008) author Zavtra Newspaper

Oleg Platonov WIN! The director of the Institute of Russian Civilization "TOMORROW" answers the questions of "Tomorrow". Oleg Anatolyevich, these days we are celebrating the 15th anniversary of “Black October” of 1993, which, without a doubt, became the most important turning point, as they say in systems theory

From the book Comments on works author Gogol Nikolay Vasilievich

ABOUT TEACHING GENERAL HISTORY No handwritten sources of the article have survived. Published according to Ar. The article was written by Gogol in December 1833. Having received a letter from M.A. Maksimovich in early or mid-December, in which the latter informed him of his intention to seek

From the book Articles from "Arabesques" author Gogol Nikolay Vasilievich

ON TEACHING GENERAL HISTORY I. General history, in its true meaning, is not a collection of private histories of all peoples and states without a common connection, without a common plan, without a common goal, a bunch of incidents without order, in a lifeless and dry form, in which very often her

From the book Newspaper Tomorrow 357 (40 2000) author Zavtra Newspaper

ABOUT TEACHING GENERAL HISTORY (Options according to PZHMNP, 1834) Everything that appears in history: peoples, events - must certainly be alive and, as it were, be before the eyes of listeners or readers, so that every people, every state preserves its peace, its colors, to

From the book Essay and Journalism author Delyagin Mikhail Gennadievich

Sergei Glotov, Director of the Institute of Human Rights __ AT THE ELECTIONS IN YUGOSLAVIA, I and two of my comrades from the Russian All-People's Union - Sergei Shashurin and Zigmund Stankevich - were invited by the Socialist Party of Serbia. That is, we were a party delegation and had the status

From the book Newspaper Tomorrow 412 (43 2001) author Zavtra Newspaper

MIKHAIL DELYAGIN Doctor of Economics, Director of the Institute of Globalization Problems. HOW “WELL-BEING” RUSSIA IS DYING OUT. Causes, dynamics, trends 1. KEY FACTORS The extinction of the Russian population continues. Its minimum speed was reached in August 2009

From the book Almanac - December 2013 - January 2014 author Magazine "However"

From the book Almanac - April 2014 - May 2014 author Magazine "However"

From the book Expert No. 31-33 (2014) author's Expert Magazine

From the book Smart Guys (collection) author Leskov Sergey Leonidovich

Sergei Glazyev Academician, Advisor to the President of Russia Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, economist. Advisor to the President of Russia on issues of regional economic integration. How to make a breakthrough Implementation of the Russian economic development strategy requires

From the author's book

Mikhail Delyagin Economist, publicist Born in Moscow in 1968. Doctor of Economic Sciences, Director of the Institute of Globalization Problems. Let's exchange donkeys for horses The current deplorable state of the Russian economy is the result of liberal dogmas

From the author's book

President Wilson and the “new” diplomacy Sergei Listikov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, leading researcher at the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences Following the results of the First World War, the United States became the leading world power, and then President Wilson tried

From the author's book

Academician Alexander Dynkin, Director of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations OIL, DIAMONDS AND BRAINS ARE THE MAIN VALUES AROUND THE WORLD The world, like a digger in a dungeon, has plunged into a global financial crisis. Conflicting forecasts are all over the place

From the author's book

Academician Anatoly Derevyanko, Director of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography WITHOUT STATE POLICY THE YOUNG GENERATION BECOME HOMELESS About the fate of our Fatherland, Russia’s place in modern world, ways of development, traditions and roots of our problems reflects

From the author's book

Academician Abdusalam Guseinov, Director of the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences INTEREST IN PHILOSOPHY IS A CRITERION FOR THE SCALE OF A POLITICIAN Many centuries ago, Plato said that the state should be governed by philosophers. Unfortunately or fortunately, throughout the history of mankind, philosophers of such

From the author's book

Academician Valery Tishkov, Director of the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences "MCDONALD'S" AND JEANS AGAINST CULTURE Question: Valery Aleksandrovich, the whole world is talking about globalization. This is an objective vector. McDonald's culture has penetrated all countries, people are watching everywhere

Add information about the person

Chubaryan Alexander Oganovich
Alexander Chubaryan

Other names:	Chubaryan Alexander Oganovich
In English:	Alexander Chubaryan
In Armenian:	Ալեքսանդր Հովհանի Չուբարյան
Date of Birth:	14.10.1931
Place of Birth:	Moscow, Russia
Brief information: Director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Order_“For_Service_to_the_Fatherland”_III_degree.jpg

Order_“For_Service_to_the_Fatherland”_II_degree.jpg

Order_"For_Service_to_the_Fatherland"_IV_degree.jpg

Order_"Badge_of_Honour".jpg

Order_Honour.jpg

Biography

In 1955 - graduated from Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov.

1958-1962 - junior researcher at the Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

In 1960 he graduated from graduate school at the Institute of World History. 1963-1966 - Scientific Secretary for Coordination of the Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences. 1966-1973 - Scientific Secretary of the Department of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

1973-1988 - head of the sector, department of the Institute of General History of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

In 1966-1976 he taught at the Diplomatic Academy.

Since 1988 - Director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Rector of the State University of Humanities (GUHN).

In June 2007, he was included in the Commission on Religious Associations under the Government of the Russian Federation.

Scope of research

History of international relations, history of Europe and the 20th century, developed new methods and approaches to studying the history of the 80-90s. XX century.

Essays

More than 300 scientific works, including 11 monographs published in the USSR (Russia) and abroad, devoted to the study of the history of Europe and the European idea, the history of international relations and foreign policy in the 20th century, among them

Peace of Brest-Litovsk. 1918. M., 1963
European idea in history: Problem. war and peace / A. O. Chubaryan, 350, p. 21 cm, M. Int. relationship 1987
From the Decree on Peace to the Peace Strategy of the 80s, 63, p. 20 cm, M. Knowledge 1987
Europe of the 20s: new realities and development trends // Europe between peace and war. M., 1992
The path to Europe, a view from Moscow // Der lange Weg nach Europa / Hrsg. W. Momsen. Berlin, 1992
Europakonzepte: von Napoleon bis zur Gegenwart. Ein Beitrag ausMoskau. Berlin, 1992
Diplomats of the Lenin school / A. O. Chubaryan, 64 p. 20 cm., M. Knowledge 1982
History of Europe.t.2.Medieval Europe. The science
Alexander Oganovich Chubaryan, A. A. Danilov, E. I. Pivovarov. National history XX- beginning of the XXI centuries Textbook for 11th grade of general education institutions. Education. 2006
Institute of General History RAS, Science. 2009
Alexander Chubaryan. "Modern trends in the development of world historical science." 1st lecture (broadcast December 23, 2010)
Alexander Chubaryan. "Modern trends in the development of world historical science." 2nd lecture (broadcast December 24, 2010)

Achievements

Doctor of Historical Sciences (1970)
Professor
Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences (1994)
full member of the Russian Academy of Sciences (2000)
Foreign Member of the Norwegian Academy of Sciences (1996)
Foreign member of the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia (2000)
Foreign Member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Letters (2013)
Honorary Doctor of St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise (since 2007)

Awards

Order of the Badge of Honor (1976)
Order of Honor (1999, for great contribution to the development of domestic science, training of highly qualified personnel and in connection with the 275th anniversary of the Russian Academy of Sciences)
Order of Merit for the Fatherland, IV degree (2006)
Order of Merit for the Fatherland, III degree (2011)
Order of Merit for the Fatherland, II degree (2016)
Order of Saint Gregory VI (Vatican)
Order of the Legion of Honor (France, 2005)
Officer's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany
Laureate of the State Prize of the Russian Federation for outstanding achievements in the field of science and technology for 2013 (2014)
Certificate of Honor from the President of the Russian Federation (2010)
Winner of the E.V. Tarle Prize (RAN, 2009, for the monograph “The Eve of Tragedy. Stalin and the International Crisis. September 1939 - June 1941”)

Membership in academies and scientific societies

Vice President of the International Association modern history Europe (1973)
Member of the Bureau of the International Committee of Historical Sciences (ICHS) (1990)
foreign member of the Norwegian Academy of Sciences (1996)
foreign member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences
Member of the editorial board of the journal “New and Contemporary History”
The president Russian society historians-archivists
Director of the Russian Center for Humanitarian Education
Deputy Chairman of the National Committee of Historians of Russia

Images

As you know, history is the science that is most dependent on “times and mores.” Those who choose to study it as their life’s work are forced to take this into account. It is especially difficult for scientists whose activities occur during periods of sharp changes in the political and economic course of the state where they live.

One of those who successfully passed the entire test, saving face and the respect of colleagues, including those abroad, is Academician Chubaryan.

Family

Chubaryan Alexander Oganovich was born in Moscow, 1931, into an Armenian family. The historian’s father, Ogan Stepanovich, was a librarian who was famous in scientific circles far beyond Soviet Union. O. S. Chubaryan wrote many books and had a doctorate in pedagogical sciences. For 10 years he served as editor-in-chief of the collection “Libraries of the USSR”, and from 1969 to 1972 he was acting. O. director of the library named after V.I. Lenin. Interesting fact- while being treated in one of the hospitals besieged Leningrad, the young scientist regularly ran away from there to search for information in the library named after him for a couple of hours. M. Saltykov-Shchedrin for his dissertation on the appearance of the first technical books in Russia in the era of Peter the Great.

Studies

In 1955, Alexander Oganovich Chubaryan graduated from the Faculty of History of Moscow State University with honors, and 4 years later he graduated from graduate school at the Institute of History of the USSR Academy of Sciences. For his diploma work and dissertation for his degree, the young scientist chose a topic that revealed some of the details of the signing of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty of 1918.

Career

In 1958, Chubaryan A. O. was appointed to a position at the Institute of History (IVI RAS). He worked there until 2015, i.e. more than 57 years. For the last 18 years, the scientist has been the director of the IVI RAS.

In 1971, Chubaryan became a Doctor of Historical Sciences. His dissertation concerned the study of the role of V.I. Lenin in the formation of Soviet foreign policy.

Among other scientific and career achievements of Alexander Oganovich, one can name his activities as the scientific secretary of the history department of the USSR Academy of Sciences, teaching at MGIMO and the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In 1994, Alexander Oganovich Chubaryan became a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences (academician since 2000).

Social and scientific activities

For many years, the scientist was vice-president of the International Committee of Historical Sciences, a member of the Commission dealing with issues of religious associations, co-chairman of a working group of Russian and Austrian historians, the first rector of the GAUGN, etc.

Books and publications

Chubaryan A. O. is the author of more than three hundred and fifty scientific works. Among them, the books “The European Idea in History in the 19th and 20th Centuries” (published in English and German translations in Great Britain and Germany), “The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk”, “Europe in the 20th Century: History and Prospects”, etc. were of particular interest.

In 2006, a history textbook was published under the authorship of A. Chubaryan, E. Pivovar and A. Danilov. It has become the subject of controversy among educators and public figures. The fact is that some reviewers saw in it a return to the political ideas that emerged in the 1920s. In particular, according to critics of the textbook, one of the authors of which is Alexander Chubaryan, the history of the USSR during the period of the cult of personality is shown in it as the result of class struggle, growing as the country moves towards socialism.

Orders

The scientist’s services to the country and world historical science have been repeatedly recognized with high domestic and foreign state awards. In particular, Alexander Oganovich Chubaryan is a holder of the following orders:

“Badge of Honor” (1976);
French Legion of Honor;
“For services to the Fatherland” (2006, 4th degree);
"Saint Gregory the Sixth" (Vatican);
German Officer's Cross;
(Russian Federation) (1999).

Today, despite his very advanced age, the scientist continues research work. Unlike most of his conservative peers, he considers the Internet a gift and actively uses this tool. At the moment, his scientific interests include the problems of humanities in our country and the modern world, the project of opening the Central Clinical Research Center, which should unite biologists, psychologists, geneticists, linguists, neurophysiologists and historians, as well as the question of the influence of Europe’s historical past on its future.

Director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Chubaryan became a holder of the Order of the Legion of Honor. One of the highest awards of France was presented by the ambassador of this country in Moscow. Architect Alexander Eiffel, director Steven Spielberg and musician Yuri Bashmet once became holders of the order.

Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, director of the Institute of General History of the Russian Academy of Sciences, rector of the State University of Humanities Alexander Chubaryan arrived at the embassy with a support group. According to the protocol, it is given to everyone whom the President of France honors with one of the highest awards of his country and one of the most famous awards in the world. Colleagues and grandchildren came to share the joy with the scientist.

“You have done a lot to organize historical research in your country and to integrate historians of your country into the international community,” noted French Ambassador to Russia Jean Cadet. In his response speech, the academician recalled his childhood: “When I read numerous French novels, I remember those pages where they talked about how highly those characters who received the Order of the Legion of Honor were appreciated, and how many people strived for this."

“This order is the merit of the entire Institute,” Chubaryan said in the morning at the academic council. “We have a Center for French History, we publish books, publish a yearbook.” After the council - presentation of diplomas to graduates. “My main achievement,” says the director, “is attracting young people to science.” Almost a third of humanities students at the Russian Academy are under 30 years old.

Alexander Chubaryan has been studying history for half a century. Back in Soviet 1988, he headed the institute. Not only continues to lead, but also creates experimental sites on the basis of the Academy of Sciences, where students from the junior year are engaged in research. The most popular - in the field of microhistory - are not general sociological topics, but everyday details, private life. “The Patriotic War. A colossal layer - soldiers’ letters, a completely new slice of history. The Germans started doing this, they published soldiers’ letters. And now we are publishing. There will be several volumes of soldiers’ letters,” Chubaryan promises.

The scientific achievements of Alexander Chubaryan are from the 20th century. There cannot be any fantastic discoveries, says the scientist: almost everything is known. All that remains is interpretation. And in response to the famous saying about unpredictability Russian history smiles slyly: “I have such a seditious thought: what is better to study - the unpredictable or what is laid out on the shelves?”

Alexander Oganovich is working on school textbooks, “declassifying” documents that Stalin signed while on vacation - the so-called “Letters from the South.” Participates in international congresses and calls on the leaders of the former Soviet republics, and now heads of state, to take part in the creation modern history. He doesn’t write only to the Baltic countries. Bye. He is going to offer them the role of observers.

One of the main surprises of the recent meeting of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission, at which Minister Medinsky decided to retain his doctorate, contrary to the recommendation of the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission on History, was the colorful and emotional speech of Academician Alexander Chubaryan. Not being a member of the Commission, he arrived at the personal invitation of its chairman V. M. Filippov to remind those gathered about the danger of some overly principled decisions:

“Do you know what will happen with this precedent of ours? Twenty (sic!) years ago it was impossible to write a dissertation without writing in it that the methodology is the methodology of Marxism-Leninism. So, are we going to cancel these dissertations, or what? Can you imagine where we will end up? Someone here said that we are opening Pandora's box..."

Minister Medinsky himself spoke about this at the beginning of the meeting, saying that taking away his degree for being unscientific would mean “letting the genie out of the bottle.”

Many will probably also want to explain the academician’s indignation by concern for their own degree - Alexander Oganovich defended his doctorate on the topic “V.I. Lenin and the formation of Soviet foreign policy (1917-1922)." However, this explanation seems superficial: in fact, it was, apparently, about a completely different “Pandora’s box.”

Perhaps the strangest silence in the heated discussion that unfolded around the minister’s dissertation, the circumstances of its defense and approval at the Higher Attestation Commission, is the absence in almost all statements and articles of any mention of the name of the well-known A.A. Danilov, who was deputy chairman of the Expert Council on History at the time when the council was supposed to approve Medinsky’s defense (December 2011). Meanwhile, Professor Danilov, metaphorically speaking, is the main link connecting together the two most notorious dissertation scandals in the modern history of Russia. And both of them, which in itself looks as symbolic as it is unexpected, affected historical science.

The first flared up in November 2012. An investigation into the circumstances of the defense of the dissertation of the director of the SUSC Andriyanov led to the creation of a special commission of the Ministry of Education and Science headed by Deputy Minister Fedyukin, which on January 31 of the following year issued a sensational verdict: the dissertation council D 212.154.01 at Moscow State Pedagogical University, headed by Danilov, was actually recognized as a “factory of fake dissertations”, 17 The commission recommended depriving the “researchers” who defended themselves of their academic degrees. As for Danilov himself, the final report contains an unequivocal recommendation “to consider the issue of the incompatibility of the further work of the chairman of the dissertation council D 212.154.01, Doctor of History, Professor A.A. Danilov both as a member of the expert council of the Higher Attestation Commission on History, and as the head of the dissertation council, as well as the advisability of further holding leadership positions in the system of certification of scientific and scientific-pedagogical personnel.”

Soon after the publication of the report, Danilov was fired from Moscow State Pedagogical University and lost his position as deputy chairman of the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission. He himself, in an interview with journalist Roman Dobrokhotov, stated: “When the commission began its work, I submitted an application to the chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission with a request to remove me from the expert council on history due to a conflict of interest in the subsequent consideration of appeals on works defended in our dissertation council. A copy of this statement was submitted to the commission. In addition, I already had to leave the Higher Attestation Commission due to rotation.”

This statement is strangely reminiscent of the words of the current chairman of the same council, P.Yu. Uvarov, who now denies the obvious connection of his imminent resignation with the conclusion of the Higher Attestation Commission, which did not please the high authorities, about the unscientific nature of Medinsky’s dissertation: “I would have left in any case, simply because four years is the period of my rotation.” However, no matter how you feel about this formula in the latter case, you can definitely say about Danilov: before the scandal, the sacred rotation did not affect him for thirteen years! He became deputy chairman of the Economic Commission for History in 1999.

Dissernet’s study of dissertations defended in council D 212.154.01 at Moscow State Pedagogical University gives every reason to assume that the “factory” began operating not much later than this date: although the commission of the Ministry of Education and Science did not go that far into the past, individual cases attracted public attention thanks to the figure famous politician Oleg Mitvol. His candidate's thesis was defended in 2002, his doctorate in 2004. Both were under the leadership of Danilov and on his council. Both, according to Dissernet, were written off almost entirely.

Moreover, Mitvol, according to the same data, almost immediately became an active employee of the “factory”, and among his “clients” were a number of notable people: already in 2003, S.B. was defending himself under his leadership. Abramov, Minister of Finance, and later Prime Minister and then acting. President of the Chechen Republic; in the same year - the famous businessman Vyacheslav Leibman and the current senator from the Kursk region Vitaly Bogdanov. Also, under the leadership of Mitvol, in the following years, such influential persons defended their defense at MPGU, for example, different time positions of Deputy Minister of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation and Vice President of Alrosa Rinat Gizatulin (in 2006) and Dmitry Belanovich, now head of the department in the Ministry of Natural Resources (in 2008). In the dissertations of all of the above, Dissernet found massive borrowings without references to sources.

Excursion into history early period Danilov’s “factory” is not accidental here: since 1998, when the Higher Attestation Commission was first subordinated to the Ministry of Education, defenses were approved by the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission, and the degree was awarded by the ministry - as it is now.

ES VAK in history in 1999 was headed by none other than A.O. Chubaryan, whose deputy Danilov became. And the Minister of Education since 1998 was V.M. Filippov, now in a new guise as chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission, threw Chubaryan to defend Medinsky’s degree.

Such sudden zeal of both learned men, admittedly, suggests that the mentioned “Pandora’s box”, the lid of which was opened by the Medinsky case, is precisely a long-term active work Danilov at the Higher Attestation Commission. For the first time, it opened slightly in 2013, but then all attention was focused on the dissertation council of Moscow State Pedagogical University - however, Danilov’s role as deputy chairman of the Higher Attestation Commission for History could have been much larger, since, as the case of the Minister of Culture showed, the Economic Council at the time of the creation of the Fedyukin commission was clearly covered not only the “clients” of the council D 212.154.01. In the list of doctoral degrees published on the website of the Higher Attestation Commission, approved by one pre-New Year decision of the presidium in 2011, we also find the name of “Danilovskaya” O.V. Balandina, who was deprived of her degree as a result of an investigation by the Ministry of Education and Science, and the name of Medinsky, who defended himself at the RGSU. Even the “handwriting” is similar - the minister, as we remember, in his abstract posted on the HAC website, attributed five monographs to himself, four of which do not exist in nature even by his own admission (they disappeared from the second and third editions of the abstract); Balandina, according to the conclusions of the Fedyukin commission, of the 16 declared articles, 15 were never published.

Now, when, thanks to the testimony of some members of the then ES HAC on history, it became known that the meeting at which Medinsky’s defense was supposed to be approved never took place, and that a number of dissertations, in violation of the legal order, were approved at the very end of 2011 “automatically” “, Filippov’s persistent reluctance to demonstrate to the members of the Higher Attestation Commission the conclusion of the ES on the dissertation of the Minister of Culture appears in a new light. Konstantin Averyanov, now an official representative of Medinsky, claimed at a recent meeting of the presidium that he signed this conclusion as a rapporteur (at the same time, at a TASS press conference on October 18, he avoided answering a direct question whether he remembers the review itself, the fictitiousness of which he was told former colleagues); however, did the chairman of the EC sign it, as required by the regulations?

The chairman at that time was Academician Pivovarov, who stated that he did not remember any approval of Medinsky’s dissertation in the ES. Averyanov questioned his testimony, saying at the same press conference that Pivovarov almost never visited the Higher Attestation Commission. But if this is so, then the deputy chairman had to sign for it - and no one who remembers those circumstances doubts that if the original conclusion is presented to the public, despite Filippov’s resistance, then we will see Danilov’s signature under it.

The Medinsky case, if the materials kept under wraps at the Higher Attestation Commission are published, will inevitably lead to a new investigation into Danilov’s activities - some threads even stretch to the “factory” at Moscow State Pedagogical University: the Fedyukin commission stated in its report that almost a quarter of the dissertation candidates who came to its attention were employees of the Russian State Social University , and the above-mentioned Mitvol at least twice acted as an official opponent at MPGU together with A.A. Korolev, who was also Medinsky’s opponent (defended by E.G. Smirnova and I.B. Shilina in 2008). In addition, Danilov and Medinsky, as well as the latter’s scientific consultant V.I. Zhukov, were elected on June 2, 2011 as co-chairs of the Scientific and Pedagogical Union of Historians of Russia, the founding congress of which.

Did the head of the ES know the Higher Attestation Commission on history in 1999-2007? Academician Chubaryan, that his deputy Danilov all these years obviously covered up the dissertations of the clients of his “factory” in the council? Did Filippov, who was the Minister of Education until 2004, know what was going on in the Expert Council of the Higher Attestation Commission subordinate to him? It is not possible to answer this question precisely, but judging by their behavior in the Medinsky story, both of them really do not want it to be asked publicly. And if Filippov’s decision to call for help an academician who has long had no connection with the Higher Attestation Commission (to whose authority Deputy Minister Trubnikov is now loudly appealing, faced with the indignation of the scientific community after the scandalous meeting of the presidium on October 20) is not a coincidence, then it will be very difficult for both to maintain their good name, when Pandora's box, despite their resistance, will still be opened.

On behalf of Dissernet - the founders of the community Mikhail Gelfand (Member of the Presidium of the Higher Attestation Commission), Andrey Rostovtsev (Doctor of Physics and Mathematics), Andrey Zayakin, Sergey Parkhomenko.