Introduction

Kazakhs had a great influence on unification and enlightenment within the framework of spiritual rapprochement of the Turkic peoples of Turkestan. While some of the Kazakhs who managed to win the fight against oppression and persecution after the Russian colonization of Turkestan, began to take an active part in trade and economic life, while other Kazakhs showed themselves in the field of education and culture.

The Jadid schools of Ismail Gasprinsky and his newspaper Tarjiman were especially intellectual leaders in the field of public education, which opened the way for people in the field of education. Over time, the increase in the number of Jadid schools led to the development and appearance of many Turkic enlighteners in different areas. Just like Kazakh educators who were educated in Jadid schools, there were Kazakh intellectuals who grew up in Russian schools. Russians began to increase pressure on the Kazakh lands, forcibly take their lands, conduct a resettlement policy of Russian peasants, and among other things, the Kazakh people began to be oppressed in this situation. This situation forced the public to fight against injustice and seek solutions to problems. At the moment when the solution was stopped, the Kazakh people had to resort to armed resistance and protests for the sake of the future. Of course, these uprisings United the masses and forced some political leaders to come to the fore and prove themselves. Among them, we name Turar Ryskulov as one of the intellectual leaders.

During the period of tsarist Russia, it was not possible to unite the Turkic peoples of Central Asia. The tsarist government sought to eliminate national peculiarities by creating a general administrative administration from the territory of the living republics. And the Soviet government granted the right to each Republic to national self-government. And Ryskulov was one of the leaders able to implement this idea in Turkestan. In addition to Ryskulov, in general,before that M. Shokai sought to implement the idea of Turkestan. But Shokai sought to implement ideas of Turkic origin in a radical, aggressive direction. Ryskulov tried to implement it in a compromise, liberal way.

Discussion

The issue of national struggle in Turkestan, especially the topic of Turkism, was not considered in the Soviet literature. It was restricted by the authorities. T. Ryskulov's life and political activities were on the list of "enemies of the people" despite being a prominent communist and the study was banned. Only in 1984 T. Nurtazin published his work "Turar's oath " (Nurtazin, 1984). T. Nurtazin tried to portray T. Ryskulov as a true communist. This issue was widely discussed in the post-Soviet countries only after the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Turkish state, which was the first to establish relations with Central Asia, had a great influence on this. This is because the Turkish state was very interested in the development of the idea of Turkism. Studies on the national struggle in Soviet Turkestan and the role of the idea of Turkism have received considerable support in Kazakhstan among the Central Asian states. Relations between Turkey and Kazakhstan were at a higher level than other countries. Uzbekistan has imposed political restrictions on the issue.

Because until 1991-2017, scientific and cultural ties between Uzbekistan and Turkey did not develop due to political tensions. In Uzbekistan, the idea of the Turkic peoples was viewedas an external threat. In Kazakhstan, this issue has increased its development in the framework of anti-Soviet, anti-Russianpropaganda. In this direction, conclusions were put forward that among the Central Asian countries under the Soviet Union, there are many affected residents of Kazakhstan (famine, war, development of virgin land). Scientists of Kazakhstan opened the doors to Turkish archives and scientific institutions. Scientists from both sides exchanged views on this issue and implemented joint research projects. The first President of Kazakhstan, N. Nazarbayev, also often spoke about the unity and identity of the Turkic peoples. In 2018, the city of Turkestan became a regional center in Kazakhstan, which indicates the progression of the ideology of thePan-Turkism. All of the above factors led to the consolidation of the idea of unity of the Turkic peoplesin Kazakhstan. In Kazakhstan, in the study of the life and political activities of T. Ryskulov, the name of O. Konyratbayev is mentioned. After the collapse of the Soviet Union many secret archival documents were opened and allowed.

?. Konyratbayev collected archival documents from Kazakhstan, Moscow and Tashkent. He wrote the first scientific works on the life and work of Ryskulov. In 1994, ?. Konyratbayev 's first work "Socio-political and state activity of Ryskulov " (Konyratbayev, 1994). He responded to Ryskulov's contribution to the development of the idea of Turkism in Turkestan and some criticism. It should be noted that among the historians of Kazakhstan and Central Asia there are debates about T. Ryskulov's political views and position. Some nationalists and radical researchers believe that T Ryskulov as a Communist was one of the most reliable people of Stalin.

Many historians consider that Ryskulov was a bright supporter of the ideology of jadidism Konyratbayev seeks to answer these questions in his works. The next researcher of Ryskulov’s activities in the Republic of Turkestan was Ustinov. His monograph"Turar Ryskulov" (Ustinov, 1996) traces the desire to justify and defend the political image of Ryskulov. When he was party leader in Turkestan, Ryskulov was accused by Moscow authorities of being a "nationalist". And V. Ustinov evaluates Ryskulov even if he is a Communist and a nationalist, he putted the interests of the people above all else.

A. Dugalov conducted research on the contribution of Ryskulov to the development of the economy of the Turkestan Republic (Dugalov, 2016). Ryskulov's direct work with Stalin in the 1930s formed a critical view of him. For example, according to the Kazakh historian Hazretali's archival documents, during the Stalinist repression that began in the 1930s, Ryskulov as deputy head of the RSFSR's NarCom, had signed off on the shooting of several nationalist intellectuals. He clearly writes about this in his monograph (Hazretali, 2012). His views have led to controversy not only in Kazakhstan, but also among Turkish scholars studying Ryskulov's life. There was a time when historians in Kazakhstan were divided into supporters and opponents of Ryskulov. This means that Ryskulov is a mysterious, multi-faceted personality.

Kazakhs and Turkish scientists who moved to Turkey contributed to the study of T. Ryskulov's life. In this connection, there is a legitimate question about why the Turkic researchers were interested in the life of T. Ryskulov. Because the Kazakhs who live on the territory of modern Turkey were descendants of Kazakh immigrants who went to Turkey through Pakistan and Iran with the onslaught of the Bolsheviks in 1920-30. They have a negative view of the communist regime and those who served it. What unites everyone in this issue despite T. Ryskulov's communist status, he is a supporter of the idea of Turkism among the peoples of Turkestan. For this work, Turkish researchers try to respect him and focus on his life's work in Turkestan.

In the history of Turkey, the issue of Turkestan began to be considered after the 1990s. It is preceded by Mehmet Saray (Saray, 1995), Ahat Andican (Andican, 2003), Baymirza Hayit (Hayit, 2006), Abdulvahap Kara (Kara, 2002). In his work, M. Saray raises the idea of unification of the Turkic peoples in Turkestan. A. Andican, on the other hand, focused on Jadidism. He notes that Jadidism has stimulated the awakening of national consciousness among the peoples of Turkestan. He claims that under the influence of the idea jadidism the peoples of Turkestan for a long time opposed the principles of Bolshevism. Many local Kazakh, Uzbek, and Kyrgyz intellectuals who served in Turkestan graduated from the Jadid school. According to the author, T. Ryskulov fought against the Bolsheviks.

In his works, B. Hayit analyzes the Soviet efforts to eradicate the idea of Turkism. According to him, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the current process of unification of the Turkish people determine the failure of anti-Turkism in Turkestan. In the works of the researcher A. Kara, the life of T. Ryskulov is considered in detail in the context of Turkestan and its national struggle. According to him, the lack of unity among the local intelligentsia in Turkestan led to the collapse of the Kokand autonomy. He believes that the autonomy of Kokand was the last pillar of the ideas of Turkism and independence.

Azerbaijani researcher Shamil Ali in his work (Shamil, 2013) considered T. Ryskulov as one of the victims of the idea of Turkism.

In general, analyzing the views and opinions of the above authors, we see that Ryskulov sought to implement the idea of Turkism through "soft power". Because, being a true communist, he was positive about the idea of Turkism. In this regard, we assume that in such cases as S. Kozhanov and N. Turekulov, the communists who were trained in jadid schools were also affected. Ryskulov sought to combine the idea of Turkism with the principles of communism. Through Bolshevik rule, effort to develop integration processes that had not been implemented inthe tsarist Russia. He chose the path of cultural and educational struggle of local peoples in Turkestan for independence.

Methods

Since T. Ryskulov's life and political career spanned several historical periods, we widely used the method of historical chronology. Analysis of scientific papers on the topic and we used a comparative-historical method to determine the features of Ryskulov's later life in Turkestan. And we alsoused a comparative-genetic method to determine the reasons for Ryskulov's support for the idea of Turkism and its legitimacy. A retrospectively approach was used to reveal aspects of T. Ryskulov's personality in the phenomena of national struggle and the development of the ideology of Turkism in Turkestan.

Results

Turar Ryskulov was born on December 26, 1894 in East Talgar, in the Semirechensk region of Turkestan (Konyratbayev, 1994: 8). Father Ryskul Zhylkaidaruly, who was exiled to Siberia for the struggle and uprising of 1905, directed against the tsarist government of Russia (Konyratbayev, 1994: 8). Ryskulov's educational activities begin with the prison life of his father. Since his father was sentenced to prison for the murder of a foreign intermediary, he was forced to go to prison with his father when he was 11 years old (Kuzembayev, 2004). This event was one of the most important turning points in Ryskulov's life. His life in prison allowed him to get new ideas. The revolutionaries he met in prison influenced his innovative ideas. He also began to study Russian and world culture with great determination. In 1909, he graduated from the Russian-Kazakh boarding school, which he started in 1906, then continued his education at the agricultural school in Bishkek from October 1910 to September 1915 (Tursunov, 1971).

With the outbreak of the First world war in 1914, the Tsarist government declared mobilization. The tsarist administration demanded that the colonial peoples surrender all means of subsistence in favor of the army. In addition, non-Russian peoples were forced to fight on the fronts. Accordingly, about 250 thousand Kazakhs were forcibly involved in the rear work of the Russian army (Saray, 1995). This situation caused discontent of the Kazakh people, which led to an uprising. Turar Ryskulov also joined the great uprising in 1916, after which he was imprisoned (Ustinov, 1996). In the following years, the tsarist administration's lawsuits forced Ryskulov to voluntarily accept the ideas of communism brought by the Bolshevik revolution in 191 (Roy, 2000). The reason for the perception of this idea is the belief in the Bolsheviks, who gave hope of salvation from the situation in which the people found themselves.

After a while, Turar Ryskulov began to take on new tasks. During the rule of the Bolsheviks, on October 21, 1917, he was elected Secretary of the city of Aulie-Ata (Ustinov, 1996).

Two years later, in 1919, he was appointed as the Chairman of the Muslim Bureau of the Communist Party of Turkestan (Hayit, 2006). Ryskulov sought to improve the economic and social life of the Turkic-Muslim peoples and increase the number of local Communists through the Muslim Bureau, which he headed. Since the Soviets did not recognize the national policy, he pinned his hopes on the implementation of his ideas through the Musbureau (Roy, 2000). He showed activity and struggle during the period of leadership. In the same year he was appointed Deputy Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Turkestan Soviet Republic and continued his activities (Devlet, 2011). Ryskulov, who did not renounce the struggle in 1920, was the Chairman of the Muslim Bureau of the Communist party and the Executive Committee of the Turkestan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (Musbureau, 1922). In 1921-1922 he began working in Moscow as a Deputy of the People's Commissariat for nationalities (Central State Archive (Uzbekistan), Fond 17, Opis’1, Delo19, 29).

A year later, after the Soviet authorities strengthened their control over the Turkestan and Idil-Ural regions, he became the Secretary of The people's Commissariat of the Turkestan ASSR and took up a new position (Bakiyev, 2006). After 1924, the Moscow administration considered it necessary to establish surveillance of Turar Ryskulov, who held various positions, as his ideas did not correspond to the ideas of the Soviet government and contained contradictions. To do this, he was appointed Deputy Secretary for Eastern Affairs in the Department of international relations, in order to keep it under control (Hayit, 1995). During this period he also worked as the head of the Comintern of Mongolia (Devlet, 2011). Ryskulov, a Kazakh intellectual who continued his struggle for a long time, ended his career in 1930 after serving as a Deputy to the Council of Ministers of Russia. He was subjected to the repressive policies of Stalinism, was removed from office and executed after a trial (Roy, 2000).

Turar Ryskulov's Struggle and Ideas in Turkestan

The people who believed that the Bolsheviks of Russia could rid them of all the bad practices, unfair taxes and inequality policies of tsarist Russia with the help of revolutionary ideationsperformed in 1917, were mistaken in their opinion. The revolution brought to the people a worse form of government than during the tsarist period. As part of collective farm construction, the people were persecuted, their property was forcibly taken from them, and they were forced to move to unfavorable territories. During the period of colonization, Turar Ryskulov at a meeting of representatives of seven regions of the Steppe General government in the Merk of the Almaty region for his speech: "Kazakhs are not obliged to pay compensation for revolts against colonial oppression» (Musbro, 1922)was arrested by the Moscow administration and for some time sentenced to house arrest (Murtaza, 2000). Although the Moscow leadership was already in the Communist spirit, it never stopped looking at the Turkic people with humiliation, as it was in the tsarist period. The Communists wanted to strengthen their influence in such regions as Idil-Ural, Turkestan, and Azerbaijan. The availability of rich natural resources in these regions was one of his priority goals. The Communists considered the Turkic peoples according to the Moscow administration to be servants of the Russian Bolshevik administration (History Essays, 1964).

The continuing colonial practice of the Bolsheviks of tsarist Russia led to the strengthening of the Basmachi movement in 1919. The people of Turkestan, who came out against the injustice and exploitation of the Soviets, rebelled, and the bulk of them started the liberation movement by going to the mountains (Murtaza, 2000). Although the Soviet authorities called the former people "banditry" and equated them with "Basmachestvo", the people who United around "Ergesh Korbashi" later began to be perceived as " the Korbashi Movement (Saray, 1995).

Turar Ryskulov, a high-ranking Soviet official of Turkestan origin, explains the reasons for the growth of the Basmachi movement and links it to the Bolshevik massacre (Duman, 1999) that occurred after the invasion of Kokand. After the occupation of Kokand the Bolsheviks began to plunder cities and kill a large number of civilians (Kon?ratbayev, 1994). Here we see that the Basmachi movement, which did not accept defeat after the looting and massacre of civilians, quickly merged and their number increased. The Basmachi, who counter-attacked after the Bolshevik attacks, managed to capture weapons and ammunition by attacking Andijan (Hayit, 2006). However, the Bolsheviks decided to conduct searches in the old city because they thought that the main reason for the Basmachi attack was the support of local residents and especially the residents of the old city of Andijan. Despite this, the searches that were initiated under the pretext turned into looting, carnage and violence (Hazretali, 2012). This policy not only increased the residents ' hatred of the Bolsheviks, but also increased the number of followers of the Basmachi movement (Kurban 1997). In retaliation for the Bolshevik movement called "Search" in the Old city of Andijan, the Basmachi besieged the Bolshevik garrison. As a result 170 soldiers of the garrison were destroyed (Tacibayev, 2012).

Here we see that the Russian forces began to act after this counter-movement. They sent 250-man red guard units against the indigenous population, which was considered responsible for the destruction of the Bolshevik unit of troops. Russian red guards under the command of Salaev attacked the village of Kishlak and razed it to the ground. Another military unit conducted a military operation in the village of Suzak. Russian troops who came to these villages executed the male part of its inhabitants, claiming that they supported the Basmachi movement. The massacre was carried to such an extent that it was decided to kill even children, with the pretext that the oin in the future may form the force of the Basmachi movement.

Moving in this way, the red guards took turns capturing villages where local residents were subjected to mass violence and murder. On the one hand, the Russian troops who were taking over the villages began to claim that they wanted to make peace, in order to keep the local residents from joining the Basmachi movement. For this reason, a peace Treaty was signed three times with the Russians. Despite this, it was the Russians who violated the peace Treaty every time. After the red guards retreated, this time the Russian peasants went on the offensive and used various methods of destroying the local inhabitants. Russian graves were used as a result of these attacks, and even those who were burying their loved ones on their graves were massacred by Russian peasants, who convinced the government that the local people were praying. Mass murder of local residents by Russian peasants even increased their reputation in the eyes of Russian commanders. On the one hand these attacks and murders have led to an increase in the number of local residents who join the Basmachi movement (Omarbekov, 2011).

In 1919, a Soviet delegation arrived in the Ferghana region, where the uprising spread, and wanted to investigate and study the movement of the basmachs on the ground (Saray, 1995). The delegation that arrived from Tashkent promised to pay 10 million rubles to farmers and artisans in exchange for handing over weapons to the basmachs, which they refused (Kuzembayev, 2004). As a result of the research, the delegation noted that the Soviet authorities were engaged in mass murder on the ground.

Turar Ryskulov, at that time the head of the Central Executive Committee and the head of Turkestan, issued an order to arrest the authorities who misused or even neglected their duties. But this order was rejected by Ryskulov. Despite the fact that the Commission recognized the mass murder of the peoples of Turkestan by the Soviet troops, they did not accept their proposal for demilitarization. (Hazretali, 2012). After that, Turar Ryskulov returned to Tashkent and openly accused the Soviet authorities inthe excessive violence of the Board,, as well as notified about the loss of confidence of the civilian population who were subjected to mass murder (Ustinov, 1996).

Turar Ryskulov, whose confidence in the leadership was decreasing every day after the Soviet occupation movements began to practice in Turkestan, had the opportunity to clearly Express his ideas at the 3rd international Congress of Communists held in Baku (Bakiyev 2006). Nevertheless, the Soviet government even interfered in the election of delegates who took part in the Congress, in order to establish control over their activities in the Congress (Bakiyev, 2006).

Nevertheless, the Soviet government even interfered with the election of delegates who took part in the Congress in order to control their activities at the Congress (Tacibayev, 2012). The most important reason for Ryskulov's perception of communism was capitalism and its methods, which He considers wrong. For this reason, he made up a significant part of his speech about the national problems and mistakes of the colonial system that capitalism has implemented over the past fifty years (Tacibayev, 2012).

In particular, it showed that capitalist States ignored national problems in order to control economic resources and subjected people to suffering as a result of the centralization of colonies. He argued that the capitalist States had divided the countries of Asia and Africa, and that as a result of this division, groups had emerged that, after some time, had begun hostilities, and that the Soviet government had created a dictatorship of the proletariat in order to eliminate the established regime (Duman, 1999). Nevertheless, Ryskulov said that when the dictatorship of the proletariat began and made decisions on these issues, it failed to eliminate the problems of the Eastern peoples and the consequences of capitalism. At this point, he sharply criticized the authorities for neglecting the Eastern peoples, placing responsibility on the leaders and continuing to protect the interests of European culture.

He stated that although the dictatorship of socialism in Russia succeeded, as a result of which the colonial and land problems had to be solved with their arrival, these problems still continued to exist and the unity of the Eastern workers and peasants still could not be formed due to the inappropriate attitude and behavior of the authorities.

In fact, he believed that this was a suitable environment for unification, a way to achieve the conviction of the people of the errors of capitalism, which could easily be eliminated and diligently overcome. Referring to the destruction of the First world war, Ryskulov drew attention to the fact that with the correct interpretation of the war, the working and peasant classes have opportunities to fight against colonial policy, since it causes poverty, oppression and destruction (Ryskulov, 1926).

He also argued that it was necessary to correctly explain the land problems and the rights of workers, so that the consequences of capitalism could not establish a dictatorship over the East, on the contrary, it was necessary to spread the ideas about the influence of socialism on the Western bourgeoisie through the Eastern countries. For this reason,he stressed the need to conduct an objective policy in the East, which in the future will become an example for Western countries. Nevertheless, Ryskulov, being a clever politician, realized that in a practical sense, the ideas of communism in Turkestan, the Caucasus, and other Soviet colonized countries were wrong. He argued that it would be correct to form a Republic in Turkestan on the basis of national state principles (Tacibayev, 2012).

This is due to the fact that he constantly emphasizes the elimination of problems in his speeches. Despite this, one can trace his persuasive belief in national communism in the subheadings of his speeches (Omarbekov, 2011). The idea that Ryskulov defended and promoted was called "Ryskulova". It can even be said that despite the fact that he insisted on the need to popularize communism, he took a romantic position or followed the national line (Omarbekov, 2011).

Ryskulov's ideas on this issue are as follows: "...somewhere in the East. In Turkey or elsewhere, the national revolutionary Communist enemies are temporary if they try to create a similar system; they will fall into the hands of the imperialists and will have to turn their weapons against the proletariat, the working people of the East... Long live the Eastern workers, who are now United against capitalism! (Central State Archive (Kazakhstan), Fond40, Opis’ 1, Delo 64, l. 9.).

Turar Ryskulov was a person who aspired to communism with high hopes. But when he realized that his situation was worse than before, the constant promises made by the Bolsheviks that were not realized, the people who had become more enslaved and exploited, he decided to continue his struggle in the center, especially among the Communist parties in his own country (Kon?ratbayev, 1994). Seeing the true intentions of the Bolsheviks, Ryskulov began its struggle through the created Musbureau. Tashkent and Moscow allowed to create Musbureau, to ensure the convergence of Turkestan and the Soviet regime. Thus, the Muslim Bureau considered new means to improve the economic and cultural life of its people. The first conference of the Musbureau was held on may 24-30, 1919, as a result of which the Board of Directors was elected. Becoming the head of Musbureau Turar Ryskulov was to promote the many local national Communists. Ryskulov was one of the leaders who criticized the Soviet policy of nationalities most openly from the first years of the revolution (Andican, 2003). The musbureau competed with the Communist party of Russia and the Communist party of Turkestan. Since Turar Ryskulov decided to go his own way to determine the future order of Turkestan. He aimed to create order in Turkestan with his decisions. Turar Ryskulov made a statement about "National problems and national Communist associations" at the 5th conference of the Communist party of Turkestan, which was held on January 12-18, 1920, and the 3rd conference of the Musbureau, in order to determine the priorities necessary for the future of Turkestan (Konyratbayev, 1994).

Here, he explained the decisions taken that would pressure Moscow, as follows: "the Turkic Republic should be created on the basis of the Union of the Syr Darya, Ferghana, Semirechye, Samarkand and the Caspian sea, which make up Turkestan. Indigenous Kyrgyz, Uzbeks, Tatars, Turkmens, Kazakhs and Karakalpaks living in these regions should constitute the indigenous population of the Turkic state. Russians, Jews, Armenians and Tajiks who live in the region as a result of the migration policy should be considered citizens of this state. All peoples living within the borders of this state should be considered equal. The name of the state to be created should be the Soviet Turkic Republic, and the name of the Communist party of Turkestan should be changed to the Turkic Communist party (Central State Archive (Uzbekistan), Fond 17, Opis’1, Delo19, 25).

Turar Ryskulov wanted to have his own Constitution within the independent state that he wanted to create, as well as his own army, currency, and even trade and financial relations with other States (Kon?ratbayev, 1994). Since he was the head of the Turkestan Committee on national Affairs, he explained the decisions and sent them to Lenin (Tacibayev, 2012). In his letter, he stated the reasons for this decision and openly stated that Turkestan was isolated and its people were subjected to humiliation and mass murder. All the stated ideas of Turar Ryskulov, of course, were not ignored by the Moscow leadership. Even without this, his actions were controlled from above. After receiving the letter Lenin called the Central Committee to a meeting and rejected these decisions by Turar Ryskulov at the suggestion of the commander of the Turkestan front Frunze (Hayit, 2006). Then the Communist party of Russia, established in March 1920, abolished this provision.

In order not to endow Turar Ryskulov with more authority, who was already considered a dangerous man, on September 29, 1921, the Central Bureau of Turkestan of the Central Committee of the CPSU deprived him of representative powers and began to monitor his activities more closely (Murtaza, 2000).

The decision to remove all powers of Turar Ryskulov was out of place and time. When the decision was announced, delegates from Afghanistan, Iran, China, Turkey and India were surprised by this conclusion. The Soviet government, which was trying to prevent Ryskulov's activities and the national revolution it was trying to accomplish, summoned him to Moscow at the end of 1921 (Bakiyev, 2006). The leadership of Tashkent was also concerned about its activities. Meanwhile, Russia intended to establish a Communist regime in Mongolia. Concerned about the actions of Turar Ryskulov, the Soviet government decided to send him to Mongolia to establish a full-fledged regime in Turkestan (Dugalov, 2010). Ryskulov, while working on the prospects of Mongolia, prepared a development plan that was adopted by the Politburo of the Communist party of the USSR (Ustinov, 1996).

At a time when the Jadid movement was on a large scale, a project was launched to send students to Europe. Of course, Germany held leading positions in all countries where students were sent to get knowledge (Ryskulov, 1926). Germany improved its education system, even though it had just come out of the war at the time. As expected, the Soviet leadership began to issue various decrees preventing students from being sent abroad, while establishing surveillance of the organizers of this policy.

In Turkestan the Secretary of the People's Commissariat Turar Ryskulov was responsible for sending students to Germany (Andican, 2003). In early 1923, Turar Ryskulov personally went to Germany to assess the situation of the sent students. Here he published an article entitled "Our students in Germany". In this article, he pointed out that there were no obstacles in the relationship between Turkish students from Turkey and the Soviet Union (Ustinov, 1996). As a result of his research, he also stated that 42 students in Germany were Uzbek, 8 were Tatar, 5 Turkmen, 4 Kazakhs and 1 Jew (Essays..., 1964).

This national intellectual, who continued to fight for the rights of the Kazakhs, who remembered the colonial policy, assiduously demanded from the Soviet government to return the land they had taken. Therefore, he was appointed To the Executive Committee of the Comintern, which seemed to be an overstated position in 1924. Then in 1926 he started working as the Director of the press Department of the Communist party of Kazakhstan (Devlet, 2011). Of course, this attempt was not a promotion for him in the civil service, but only a chosen way to remove him from power in Turkestan and his actions. Gradually, efforts began to be made to eliminate it. After that, the Soviet authorities began to accuse Turkic intellectuals and politicians as "pan-turkists" and " pan-turanists (Tacibayev, 2012). Even if the Russian authorities were guided by the Communist party, they did not support any ideas and personalities that could think of independence of Turkestan. Kazakh intellectuals who criticized the policy of Soviet Russia tried to silence them by accusing them of "bourgeois nationalism"and it was clear that they would not be able to prevent them by such methods, so the Soviet government adopted other repressive methods (Saray, 1999).

Anyone who expressed dissatisfaction with the attitude of the Kazakh people was subjected to reprisals, as a complete dictatorial regime was established in Kazakhstan. Like other Turkic intellectuals, after all his struggle for the Kazakh people, Turar Ryskulov could not save himself from repression (the policy of cleansing) and became their victim (Konyratbayev, 1994). When the Ryskulov struggle began to cause confusion to stalinism he was executed in 1938 as a victim of the great terror (Roy, 2000).

In his struggle, Ryskulov always mentioned that it is necessary to fight for the rights of oppressed peoples. Today the words of the Turkic leader are mentioned in history as follows: "When countries become mutually equal in their daily life, then all problems will be solved (Kak?nç, 2011).

Conclusion

Turar Ryskulov, who grew up in difficult conditions from childhood, saw his people crushed and ostracized under the rule of the Russians. The people who thought of a better system with the Bolshevik revolution in Russia were inclined to communism in the face of promises. Tired of the pressure of the colonial Russian administration and the bais, who suppressed the simple Turkic people of Turkestan, considered Bolshevism as a beacon of hope. Like everyone else, Turar Ryskulov turned to national communism as a means of salvation. Realizing the facts at the beginning of the journey, the Turkic people began to speak out against the hatred of communism. The peoples fighting communism, of course, had their drawbacks. They did not have a specific program, they lacked unity and solidarity. In addition, there is the fact that local communities were involved in various movements, making the struggle far from homogeneous. Constant promises, the establishment of a worse system of government than the Tsarist administration, the expropriation of the land of local residents and the system of collective farm construction forced Turar Ryskulov to fight. When he realized something was wrong, he started his fight through the Muslim Bureau. His struggle bothered the Central government. All the activities and struggles that he carried out in the center were perceived by the Moscow leadership as "Turanism and bourgeois nationalism". Ryskulov did not hide his ideas and expressed them openly. On the issue of creating a Turkic Republic, he addressed the leadership many times. He openly expressed his demands at the congresses. When his struggles and activities began to arouse suspicion during the Stalinist period, he was monitored and monitored. Thus he was sentenced to death for independence and freedom of thought.

References

1. Andican, A. (2003). The external turkestan struggle from jadidism to independence. (Istanbul: Emre, 2003).
2. Bakiyev, N. (2006). Enver pasha's testament (translated by Ç. Koçar). Istanbul: Eastern Library.
3. The Struggle for Existence of the Russian Turks in the 1917 October Revolution Between the State, Rare, Nation and Soviet, (Istanbul: Title Publishing Group, 2011).
4. Dugalov, A. (2010). Economic views of turar ryskulov. Almaty: Arys, 144.
5. Smoke, & O?uz, ?. (1999). The east west issue and sultan galiyev. Istanbul: TDAV.
6. Tashkent. (1964). Essays on the history of the Communist party of Turkestan, 128, 129.
7. Hayit, & Baymirza. (1995). History of the national struggles of the turkestan states. Ankara: Turkish History Institution Publications,.
8. Hayit, & Baymirza. (2006). Basmac?lar movement against russians (National Struggle of Turkestan Turkishness). (Istanbul: Bab?ali Kültür Yay?nlar?).
9. Kak?nç, & Halit. (2011). Sultangaliyev, (Ankara: ?mge).
10. Kara, & Abdulvahap. (2002). The life of mustafa çokay and the struggle for the independence of the central asian turkic republics (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). (Istanbul: Mimar Sinan University).
11. Konyratbayev, O. (1994). Socio-political and state activity of T. Ryskulov. (Almaty: Kazakhstan), 203.
12. Kurban, & ?klil. (1997). "Basmac?lar". Journal of Turkic Studies, 4, 125-137.
13. Kuzembayev, E. (2004). Turar. Almaty: Gym. Murtaza, Sh. (2000). Collection works. Almaty: Zhazushy, 440.
14. Tashkent. (1922). Musbro of the RCP(bolsheviks) in Turkestan, 28-37.
15. Nurtazin, T. (1984). The oath of Turar. Almaty: Zhazyshi, 61.
16. Omarbekov, T. (2011). TurarRyskulov saved Kazakhstan from starvation, (Almaty: Rauan,), 154.
17. Roy, & Oliver. (2000). The new central Asia: The creation of nations. (New York: New York University Press), 72.
18. Ryskulov, T. (1926). About the speech of comrade Menitsky. Communist thought, 2, 173.
19. Saray, & Mehmet. (1995). Atatürk and the Turkish World. (Ankara: Turkish Historical Society Publications).
20. Shamil, & Ali. (2013). Victims of Turkism (Kazakhstan). (Baku: Elm ve Tahsil).
21. Tacibayev, & Rashid. (2012). Central Asia in regional and global politics. (Turkistan: Medet), 209.
22. Tursyn, Khazretali, Alash Orda and Turkestan, (Almaty: Zhalyn, 2012), 400.
23. Ustinov, V. (1996). Turar Ryskulov. (Almaty: Kazakhstan), 56.