VZCZCXRO0119
PP RUEHAG RUEHAST RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLH RUEHLN RUEHLZ
RUEHPW RUEHROV RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHAH #0995/01 2130851
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 310851Z JUL 08
FM AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 1266
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA 4097
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 1912
RUEHKO/AMEMBASSY TOKYO 1777
RUEHIT/AMCONSUL ISTANBUL 2346
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RHMFIUU/CDR USCENTCOM MACDILL AFB FL
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 2743

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ASHGABAT 000995 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR SCA/CEN 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV SOCI SCUL TX
SUBJECT: TURKMENISTAN: DETERMINING CULTURAL HISTORY IN A 
POST-SOVIET COUNTRY 
 
¶1.  (U) Sensitive but unclassified.  Not for public Internet. 
 
¶2. (SBU) SUMMARY:  Cultural identity is illusive in 
Turkmenistan, due in large part both to Soviet Russification 
efforts and the inability of Niyazov's Ruhnama to provide a 
believable and cohesive history.  President Berdimuhammedov 
is beginning to take steps to address the lack of Turkmen 
history and provide a sense of definition to what it means to 
be Turkmen.  However, with the larger question still 
outstanding of whether it is possible to develop a credible, 
unifying history, the president seems to feel the best 
interim solution is to focus most of his efforts on promoting 
a modern Turkmenistan prepared to look safely to the future. 
END SUMMARY. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Former President Niyazov's "Book of the Soul," the 
Ruhnama, was the centerpiece of his cult of personality.  It 
consisted of Niyazov's poetry and musings on Turkmen culture 
and history.  It was also forced on the population and given 
near "scripture" status.  Under Niyazov, it became a major 
part of school curricula, supplanting or reducing traditional 
subjects like math or science.  Almost any government 
activity had to be linked to a quote from this "sacred text." 
 Government buildings and schools were obliged to maintain 
and show off their "Ruhnama rooms" -- shrines to the book's 
"greatness."  All government entities had regular, required 
Ruhnama meetings in order to apply its "wisdom" to their 
work.  Small business owners maintained their own small 
visible shrines to the Ruhnama, in the hope of avoiding 
problems with authorities.  There were nightly readings from 
the book on state television.  The fact that the Ruhnama 
became a primary symbol of obedience to an authoritarian 
leader did not bode well for its general acceptance among the 
population.  However, the recent past and the lack of a major 
alternative view on Turkmen history or identity means that 
the book's ideas do carry some significance; and an 
examination of the book's role is valuable to understanding 
present-day Turkmenistan. 
 
RUSSIFICATION IGNORED TURKMEN HISTORY 
 
¶4.  (U)  During the Soviet era, the version of Turkmen 
history in the official history books amounted to a brief 
description of a nomadic, tribal society that was not 
unified.  Schools primarily educated students on Russian and 
Soviet history.  After the end of the Soviet period, 
Turkmenistan, which did not actively seek independence, had 
to find a way to restore its history and discover some way of 
describing what it meant to be a Turkmen.  The Turkmen people 
did not know their own history. 
 
NIYAZOV'S RUHNAMA TRIED AND FAILED TO PROVIDE A NATIONAL 
HISTORY 
 
¶5.  (U)  After independence, the Ruhnama was former President 
Niyazov's attempt to bring culture and history back to 
Turkmenistan.  The Ruhnama was originally meant to provide a 
starting point to describe what it meant to be Turkmen and to 
provide context for the history of Turkmenistan in the 
post-Soviet era.  Rather than being the starting point for 
the building of a new Turkmen identity, the Ruhnama became 
the basis of Niyazov's cult of personality.  It also was a 
tool for promoting the president's vision of a unified 
identity, rather than one steeped in tribal factionalism.  As 
such, it quickly became the only acceptable history of the 
Turkmen people.  And many Turkmen, including local Embassy 
employees, point to the Ruhnama as the only source for 
information on Turkmen history, even if significant parts of 
it are inaccurate.  There were no other volumes available for 
study. 
 
¶6.  (SBU)  As a result, for many citizens, official Turkmen 
history starts at the Ruhnama.  Many younger Turkmen look 
blankly at anyone who asks about what type of history they 
 
ASHGABAT 00000995  002 OF 003 
 
 
were taught.  Although they often express doubt about the 
tome's accuracy, they have no other source of historic 
information to which to compare it.  There are those who, 
while acknowledging that the book has flaws, are extremely 
defensive of it as a history of Turkmenistan and symbol of 
the Turkmen identity.  But because of the book's one-sided 
focus, it still does not offer a full sense of what that 
identity is.  Some older citizens mention some oral 
traditions and passing down family history.  Some Turkmen 
tend to identify most with the book's focus on lack of 
rebellion on the part of the Turkmen people (which Niyazov 
emphasized for his own purposes).  One employee said that the 
only time that Turkmen revolt is when the situation is 
completely unbearable; otherwise they suffer and continue to 
move on. 
 
LOCAL LEGENDS ARE NOT REFLECTED IN NATIONAL HISTORIES 
 
¶7.  (SBU)  Although not referenced in official Turkmen 
histories, there is a rich story-telling tradition with 
beautiful and often tragic legends that are recounted at many 
historical sites, some outlining the times past of the 
particular area.  Often, however, such tales are not viewed 
as an "official" part of Turkmen history or as something that 
should be passed down.  But these stories and sites are also 
viewed as "ancient," and there has been little or no effort 
to connect them to modern Turkmen citizens or modern 
identity. 
 
THE EFFECT ON NATIONAL IDENTITY 
 
¶8.  (SBU)  The Ruhnama does not seem to have created a 
lasting or even real national identity.  The current 
government's apparent phasing out of the Ruhnama and the lack 
of a coherent history has left a massive gap in Turkmens' 
cultural identification.  When asked what it means to be 
Turkmen, some citizens -- not sure how to respond -- usually 
talk about family ties and hometowns or areas.  Almost never 
do they reference national events, dress, or other cultural 
or national identity.  One local employee said that the 
Ruhnama and Niyazov will be forgotten by history or 
referenced as a tragedy due to his impact on the education 
system and the creation of a "lost generation" who will have 
few practical skills to offer Turkmenistan. 
 
THE NEW PRESIDENT TRIES TO BRING HISTORY TO THE PEOPLE 
 
¶9.  (SBU)  How to teach a coherent and proud Turkmen history 
remains elusive.  During the last year and a half, President 
Berdimuhammedov has instituted educational conferences that 
seem to be trying to bring some sense of history and 
tradition back to Turkmenistan, and define what it means to 
be Turkmen.  For example, the second conference, which 
occurred this summer, was on the famous Turkmen poet 
Magtumguly, who is widely acknowledged as the most 
influential of Turkmen poets.  The president seems to be 
hoping that this focus on Turkmen culture and society will 
influence development of a new movement into examining 
Turkmen history and focusing on comprehensive histories and 
events that will actually unite the Turkmen people.  There is 
also a slow reemergence of histories that were written during 
Glasnost in the late 1980s and early 1990s.  Niyazov refused 
to acknowledge two fairly comprehensive histories of 
Turkmenistan, but an EmbOff noted that they are starting to 
slowly reemerge in certain circles, especially as the Ruhnama 
begins to fade from sight. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) COMMENT:  Perhaps because of its exclusive, highly 
selective focus, Niyazov's artificial history alienated older 
generations and failed to give enough of a base to newer 
generations to provide a cohesive Turkmen history.  The 
question of what exactly is Turkmenistan's history still 
remains to be answered.  Nevertheless, Berdimuhammedov's 
initial stabs at rehabilitating this issue seem to be more 
 
ASHGABAT 00000995  003 OF 003 
 
 
credible than his predecessor's efforts.  It will be 
interesting to see how the president's efforts to develop the 
past turn out and what other history books emerge in the next 
few years.  However, with the larger question still 
outstanding of whether it is possible to develop a credible, 
unifying history, the president seems to feel the best 
interim solution is to focus most of his efforts on promoting 
a modern Turkmenistan prepared to look safely to the future. 
END COMMENT. 
CURRAN