According to Article 8 of the Law of Tajikistan on State Awards of the Republic of Tajikistan 2001, “[t]he title of “Hero of Tajikistan”, a high award, is bestowed upon those who have rendered services to the state and the people. These services are often in regard to the fulfilment of a heroic, military and professional deed for the sake of the freedom, independence and prosperity of the Republic of Tajikistan.”356 The appropriateness of these six people to be the Heroes of Tajikistan is above question in Tajikistan. However, some politicians and activists would like to see more Tajiks receiving this highest award. In September 2006 the IRPT requested that President Rahmon posthumously grant Said Abdullo Nuri, the founder of the IRPT, the title of Hero of Tajikistan.357 Said Abdullo Nuri, who died in 2006, was the leader of the opposition during the civil war in Tajikistan in 1992-7. Together with President Rahmon, he signed the peace treaty in Moscow in 1997 that put an end to the Tajik civil war. IRPT deemed that Said Abdullo Nuri deserved credit for the establishment of peace and national unity in Tajikistan. The request went unheeded.
Similarly, the head of the DPT Masud Sobirov requested President Rahmon to acknowledge Qadriddin Aslonov as a Hero of Tajikistan. According to him, “it is gratifying to note that during the [20 years of independence] such outstanding compatriots as Sadriddin Aini, Mirzo
355 Zhamilia Huseinova, "Alisher Rustamov: Razvitiie aviakompanii - eto razvitiie gosudarstva!," Vechernii Dushanbe,
2011.
356 Law of Tajikistan on State Awards of the Republic of Tajikistan, 2001
Tursunzoda, Bobojon Ghafurov, Shirinsho Shotemur, Nusratullo Makhsum and Emomali Rahmon have been conferred with the title of hero of Tajikistan.” However, “it would be fair to give the same title to Q. Aslonov” because there is his signature on the Declaration of the Independence of Tajikistan.358 Aslonov was known as a person who issued orders to demount the Statue of Lenin in Dushanbe and had outlawed the CP in Tajikistan for some time.359 Therefore, it is not surprising that the harshest criticism of this initiative came from the CP of Tajikistan. Ismoil Talbakov, the First Deputy Chairman of the CP of Tajikistan called DPT’s initiative “another intrigue”. According to him, Qadriddin Aslonov has left more “black stains” on the history of the nation than positive deeds.360 Again, there was no any official reaction from the government, though a high-ranking official from President Rahmon’s political party called for the title of “Hero of Tajikistan” not to be devalued by such proposals.361
There were also calls for title of “Hero of Tajikistan” to be awarded to Abdurahim Khojibaev, a political figure from the Soviet past of Tajikistan. During the public event devoted to his 110th anniversary that took place in Khujand city, Khojibaev was remembered as being one of the Tajik statesmen during the early Soviet period, who contributed to the formation of Tajik statehood. There were calls to put him on the same rank as Makhsum and Shotemur.362 One of the participants in the event, Usmonjon Gafforov, argued that Abdurahim Khojibaev’s book entitled Tajikistan was one of two books – the other being Sadriddin Aini’s Anthology of Tajik Literature – that “played a major role in the formation of a separate Tajik Republic at the beginning of the 20th century”.363 These calls largely went unnoticed by the Tajik public and the government.
In 2013, a Tajik journalist Ahmadshohi Komil wrote an open letter to the government of Tajikistan calling for them to recognize Tohiri Abdujabbor – a founding leader of a perestroika- era political movement called “Rastokhez” – as a Hero of Tajikistan.364 According to him, Tohiri Abdujabbor had made an immense contribution to the conceptualisation of national independence. Komil also argued that Tohiri Abdujabbor played an important role in giving Tajik language the status of a state language.365 Previously, Ahmadshohi Komil had issued a brochure, The Architect of Tajikistan’s Independence, which featured a compilation of positive opinions
358 As quoted in Paǐrav Chorshanbiev, "Demokraty predlagaiut prisvoit' Kadriddinu Aslonovu zvaniie geroia
Tazhikistana," Asia-Plus, 11 July 2011.
359 Ibid.
360 See Avaz Iuldashev and Pairav Chorshanbiev, "Aslonov ne zasluzhivaiet zvaniia "Geroia Tazhikistana", partii," 11
July 2011.
361 See ibid.
362 Sanavbar Maksudova, "110-letiie so dnia rozhdeniia pervogo Sovnarkoma respubliki " Khovar, 5 May 2010. 363 Ibid.
364 See Ahmadshohi Komil, "Qadrshinosi az Tohiri Abduzhabbor ba tahkimi vahdat mosoidat mekunad," Millat, 22
June 2013.
365 "Ahmadshoh Komilzoda: Ba Tohiri Abduzhabbor unvoni "Qahramoni Tozhikiston" boiad dod"," Asia-Plus, 27 July
about the life and deeds of Tohiri Abdujabbor.366 Ahmadshohi Komil’s proposal met with criticism in the Tajik mass-media367 but did not elicit attention from the government.
So far, the government of Tajikistan has shown little interest in awarding the title of “Hero of Tajikistan” to any new candidate. This implies that the government considers the six Heroes as having in common something special that makes them incomparably high-ranking and exemplary. The government acknowledges that there are plenty of prominent personalities from the distant and recent history of the nation, yet they have not “qualified” to be ranked alongside the Heroes. To them, the government offers other types of acknowledgments. Thus, in 2010 the Directorate of Construction of Governmental Properties under the Executive Apparatus of the President of Tajikistan requested the Ministry of Culture of Tajikistan to compile a list of 44 prominent Tajik personas whose likenesses could be used to fill the public space. The Directorate had a plan to use statues of 22 of them in the foyer of the new building of the National Library of Tajikistan and the other 22 were expected to appear in an alley before the entrance to the National Museum of Tajikistan.
This selection process caused debates within the working group as well as in the media. As the representative of the Ministry of Culture of Tajikistan put it, a group of “famous scholars, cultural practitioners and researchers” worked on the project and “there were a lot of discussions and disagreements while identifying the great sons of Tajik nation, who contributed to its formation and development”368. Khudonazar Kholiqnazarov, Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies under the President of Tajikistan, issued a call to avoid using the word “heroes” for these 44 figures and to instead denote them as “outstanding personalities”.369Abdunabi Sattorzoda, a former politician370, acknowledged that “heroes are necessary, absolutely,” but questioned the selection method and criteria. In his words, “if these criteria are not determined, and everything depends on the opinion of particular people, on their sympathy and antipathy, then, of course, this is not for the benefit of the cause.”371 Using unknown selection criteria, the Ministry omitted the Heroes of the Soviet Union from the list “due to limited space” and promised to create a room in the National Museum of Tajikistan for them and “those famous personalities, who could not make it onto the list.”372
366 Ibid.
367 See, for instance, Hafiz Saifullaev, "Ideia kak Provokatsiia," Narodnaia Gazeta, 28 August 2013., Zhum'a
Murodov, ""Rastokhez" - asosguzori zhangi grazhdani!," Khatlon Press, 10 October 2013.
368 As quoted in "Prikazano schitat' geroiami," Asia-Plus, 24 March 2011 2011.
369 See Anora Sarkorova, "Tazhikistan vybiraiet sebe natsional'nykh geroiev," BBC Russian, 27 December 2010 2010. 370 Sattorzoda headed the Opposition delegation during the Moscow negotiations in 1997 that marked the end to
civil war in Tajikistan. After the civil war, he served as a deputy foreign minister in 1999-2006.
371 Abdunabi Sattorzoda, quoted in Sarkorova, "Tazhikistan vybiraiet sebe natsional'nykh geroiev." 372 As quoted in "Prikazano schitat' geroiami."
As soon as the Ministry’s list of 44 heroes was released,373 it attracted criticism. Some thought that list was incomplete, while the others believed that the list included persons that did not deserve to be there. The two big questions addressed the creators of the list were: what criteria was the list compiled on and why these issues were not brought up for public discussion before being reviewed in the ministry.374 Sayfullo Safarov, Deputy Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies under the President of Tajikistan, expressed his disagreement with the work of the Ministry saying that “any issue of societal importance should be discussed with the people.”375 A year earlier, though, Safarov was optimistic about the initiative and stated that “We need heroes. Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan have whole alleys of their national heroes, why we do not have them?”376 Kamoludin Abdullaev, a historian, noted that the list would look absolutely different should there have been any polls in this regard. According to him, it was an unsuccessful imitation of the Soviet practice:
When does a state experience a demand for the cult of heroes? We had this during the Great Patriotic War [i.e., Second World War] when the whole Soviet historiography was busy with it upon the direction from the top. In particular, [Sadriddin] Aini wrote the novels about Muqanna and Temur Malik. At that time this was necessary to raise the patriotism at the state level. A debugged machine of agitation-propaganda worked for this purpose, [and] there was a strong political governance, a million strong editions, and qualified cadres. We do not have anything of that. […] We have neither a daily newspaper, nor film production, nor a normal TV, nor money, nor, most importantly, motivation
to “heroize” the mentioned list.377
Opinions were also expressed that none of the personalities, including the “Heroes of Tajikistan,” deserved to be perpetuated. An early example of such position belongs to Olga Tutubalina, a journalist, and blogger at Asia-Plus, an independent news agency in Tajikistan. She argued that “the real national heroes in Tajikistan are neither the classics of literature, poets, and writers nor the Soviet leaders of the state and most importantly not the current leaders.”378 According to her, the real heroes that deserve to be hailed in contemporary Tajikistan are the Tajik labor migrants in Russia, whose money remittance back to the home country makes more than a third of the GDP of the nation. Therefore, she calls to promote their images; “let, for instance, Somon Air [a Tajik air company] depict in its new aircraft the [image of] new hero of
373 Asia-Plus 2011
374 See "Prikazano schitat' geroiami."; Sarkorova, "Tazhikistan vybiraiet sebe natsional'nykh geroiev.", Kamoludin
Abdullaev, "Prikazano Schitat' Geroiami," History of Central Asia since 1860s, 2011, Kamoludin Abdullaev - Historian from Tajikistan., Galim Faskhutdinov, "V Tazhikistane nabralos' 44 geroia," DW, 1 March 2011 2011.
375 As quoted in "V Tazhikistane nabralos' 44 geroia."
376 As quoted in Sarkorova, "Tazhikistan vybiraiet sebe natsional'nykh geroiev." 377 Abdullaev, "Prikazano Schitat' Geroiami.
Tajikistan – some Jamshed from Asht or Suhrob from Kulob”.379 Indirectly, she also implies that President Rahmon does not deserve the title of “Hero of Tajikistan”:
There is a bit of heroism in bringing in peace to one’s own country, but it is impossible to achieve this single-handedly, as it takes at least two heroes for this. The second hero has got “lost” in the annals of contemporary history.
Perhaps this is why the first one also does not look that convincing.380
Overall, the government of Tajikistan has ignored criticism of its hero-hailing politics and has not reacted to any proposals to create more Heroes. While the recommendations regarding the “candidates” are spontaneous, there seems to be a well-thought out and consistent rationale behind the government’s choice of the six people selected to be Heroes. This gives the impression that the group of six Heroes of Tajikistan remains closed, a club of divinity-like personalities. It does not mean, however, that the government has stopped thinking about the hero-hailing aspect of identity politics. The case of 44 “heroes” demonstrated that the government was keen to acknowledge as many “outstanding people” as possible. However, none of the 44 have qualified to join the six Heroes so far. This raises a question. Based on what criteria does the government decide whether a personality deserves to be a Hero or not? As the next section attempts to show, there is a very specific selection criteria.